Loading...
CCPC Agenda 09/20/2018 Collier County Planning Commission Page 1 Printed 9/13/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 September 20, 2018 9: 00 AM Mark Strain - Chairman Karen Homiak - Vice-Chair Diane Ebert-Secretary Patrick Dearborn Ned Fryer Stan Chrzanowski, Environmental Joseph Schmitt, Environmental Thomas Eastman, Collier County School Board Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selec ted to speak on behalf of an organization or group are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item if so recognized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the CCPC shall be submitted to the appropriate county staff a minimum of seven days prior to the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners if applicable. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. September 2018 Collier County Planning Commission Page 2 Printed 9/13/2018 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call by Secretary 3. Addenda to the Agenda 4. Planning Commission Absences 5. Approval of Minutes A. August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes 6. BCC Report - Recaps 7. Chairman's Report 8. Consent Agenda A. PUDZ-PL20170001733: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2005-36, the Regal Acres Residential Planned Unit Development, by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 184 to 300; by amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 23.15+/- acres of land zoned rural Agricultural (A) to the Regal Acres RPUD; by revising the development standards; by amending the master plan; adding deviations; revising developer commitments and by approval of an affordable housing density bonus agreement for the added 23.15 acres that will generate 46 bonus units for low or moderate income residents. The property is located on the west side of Greenway Road east of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951), and north of U.S. 41, in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 59.90+/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: C. James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner] 9. Advertised Public Hearings September 2018 Collier County Planning Commission Page 3 Printed 9/13/2018 A. ***This item has been continued from the May 3, 2018 CCPC meeting, May 17, 2018 CCPC meeting, and June 7, 2018 CCPC meeting*** PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map by revising the conditional uses subdistrict to allow for the construction of a church or place of worship. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 6.25 acres; and furthermore, recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Companion to CU- PL20160002577) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] B. ***This item has been continued from the May 3, 2018 CCPC meeting, May 17, 2018 CCPC meeting, and June 7, 2018 CCPC meeting*** PL20160002577: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, providing for the establishment of a conditional use to allow a church within an Estates Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for property located on the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PL20160002584/CPSS- 2017-1) [Coordinator: C. James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner] C. PL20180000038: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element And Future Land Use Map And Map Series by adding 3.40 acres to the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Activity Center #2 and changing the designation of the property from Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict to Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Activity Center #2; and furthermore, recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. The subject property consisting of ±3.4 acres is located on the west side of US 41, approximately 2,200 feet north of 111th Avenue in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is companion to PL20180000037) [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] D. PUDA-PL20180000037: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 99-97, the Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development by allowing automotive vehicle dealers as a principal use, allowing a hotel up to 200 rooms instead of 100 rooms, and by reducing the allowable commercial parcel by 250 square feet for each hotel room instead of 225 square feet and establishing a traffic trip cap for the commercial tract; and by providing an effective date. The commercial parcel, consisting of 3.4+/- acres of the 267.44 acre PUD, is located on the west side of US 41 and approximately 2,200 feet north of 111th Avenue in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is a companion to PL20180000038) [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, AICP, Principal Planner] E. An ordinance providing for establishment of a Water Pollution Control and Prevention Ordinance, providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 87-79, as amended, and Resolution No. 88-311; providing for inclusion in code of laws and ordinances; providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an effective date. 10. New Business September 2018 Collier County Planning Commission Page 4 Printed 9/13/2018 11. Old Business 12. Public Comment 13. Adjourn 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 5.A Item Summary: August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: Operations Analyst – Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Name: Judy Puig 09/13/2018 11:08 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 09/13/2018 11:08 AM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Additional Reviewer Completed 09/13/2018 11:08 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 5.A Packet Pg. 5 August 16, 2018 Page 1 of 38 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, August 16, 2018 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Stan Chrzanowski Patrick Dearborn Diane Ebert Karen Homiak Joe Schmitt ABSENT: Edwin Fryer ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager James Sabo, Principal Planner Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Tom Eastman, School District Representative 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 2 of 38 P R O C E E D I N G S CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Thursday, August 16th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If everybody will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Will the secretary please do the roll call. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. Good morning. Mr. Eastman? MR. EASTMAN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Chrzanowski? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Fryer is absent. Mrs. Ebert is here. Commissioner Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms. Homiak? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: And, Mr. Dearborn? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Glad to be here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Mr. Fryer's absence is excused. He had to be out of the area for a while, so he let me know that ahead of time. Then we'll move to addenda to the agenda. There's no changes that I know of to the agenda. Does staff have any? Ray? You can shake your head. MS. ASHTON: Mr. Chair, while you're talking to Ray, could I just let IT know that my computer's not working, so I won't be able to follow along electronically, which is why I have to get a paper copy, by the way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Do you have any changes to the agenda? MR. BELLOWS: No changes to the agenda. And we have Mike Bosi helping to track down somebody from IT. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I saw Mike Cox here earlier, so hopefully one of them will stop back down. Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting is September 6th. Does anybody here know if they're not going to make it to the September 6th meeting? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That means we'll have a quorum. Okay. That takes us to approval of minutes. The electronic minutes that are sent out were for July 19th, 2018. Are there any changes by the Planning Commission? Corrections? If none, is there a motion to approve? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By Patrick. Seconded by. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Seconded. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Karen. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 3 of 38 COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0 -- 6-0. BCC report and recaps, Ray? They're not here, right? MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. They're still on vacation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So there's no report. That takes me to chairman's report. I've got some discussion that we'll have in front of -- before a couple of our actions today, but I'll wait and discuss that at that point. ***And we'll move into our -- well, there's no consent agenda, so that takes us to our first of four advertised public hearings. The first two are for the same activity. It's called the Seed to Table commercial subdistrict and the Seed to Table CPUD for a parking lot. That location is at Livingston Road and Immokalee Road. I'll read off the numbers. The first item -- and we'll hear them concurrently and vote on them separately. The first is for the small-scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It's PL20170003768/CPSS2018-1, and the other one is PUDZ-PL20170003766. Now, all those wishing to testify on this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. So if there's members of the audience here who are going to speak, please stand up now so that you can be sworn in. You can always decline speaking when we get to that point, but if you think you're going to speak, it would be better to stand up now. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. We'll start with disclosures from the Planning Commission. We'll start with Tom on the end. MR. EASTMAN: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Just staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Which brings it to me. I have had quite a few conversations with various people, some from the neighborhood, and the applicant. I also reviewed the minutes -- the notes from the NIM, and I listened to parts of it. In response to those, I had more meetings with the applicant because some of the things that were pointed out at the NIM needed to be incorporated into the PUD. And they have been -- based on discussions with the applicant, they're going to be talking about those today. One item in particular that I asked the applicant, and they did a good job in changing it, the Traffic Impact Statement that was supplied for this PUD was actually for another PUD. The two PUDs are not connected in regards to how they're being rezoned. And I asked that the TIS, the extracted parts, be made, and we have a TIS dedicated to this PUD. The applicant has done that, and they're prepared to dispense it today. They also got it to our Transportation Department, and Mike Sawyer's here to acknowledge that it meets their requirements and they support it. So with those disclosures, that's it for now. And we'll go to Karen next. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke with Mr. Mulhere. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Patrick? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Oh, and I -- besides the staff, I did speak with Tony Pires as well. Tony had done some request for records from -- or public records request, and I had to participate and supply a bunch of records for that as well. So with that, we'll move into presentation by the applicant. MR. MULHERE: Thank you. Good morning. For the record, Bob Mulhere here on behalf of the 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 4 of 38 applicant. Jim Banks is handing out that information that you referenced, Mr. Strain. With me this morning is Rich Yovanovich and Bryan Milk, and I think Alfie Oakes is on his way, but I don't see him in the audience. I think probably you all know where the subject site is located, but on the northwest quadrant of Livingston and Immokalee, actually just north of Piper Boulevard. As the Chairman indicated, there's two companion petitions. One is a small-scale amendment which covers 6.33 acres. This slide right here shows you the future land-use district that covers that property today, and we're changing that to allow the commercial use of the parking. The other item is, of course, the PUD rezone. This is the language for the Comprehensive Plan amendment that staff has reviewed and, actually, this is the preferred format for that language that staff has prepared, and I am unaware of any changes to that language since that staff report was issued or any need to change that language; however, there are some changes to the PUD that the chairman referred to. And having some discussions with some members of the Planning Commission, a couple of changes were suggested, and we had no objection. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Excuse me, Bob. May I have a copy? Because I'm not seeing this language. MR. MULHERE: I have a copy -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I need a copy of your package. MR. MULHERE: I have a copy of the PowerPoint, if that helps. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Well, I can't read the language from here -- MR. MULHERE: I don't have a copy of the package, so... MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- in the context of how it's going to fit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I can -- that is -- that paragraph that he added was taken directly out of the staff report. I think it was Page 3 or 4 or 5. I gave Bob that information, and that kind of summarizes the accessibility on Piper Boulevard to the CAT bus only coming in as an entry, not an exit. There will be no exiting traffic on Piper. That was committed to in the staff report, and they'll have it incorporated into the PUD. So, Heidi, it's in the staff report. If you've got that, you'll -- MR. MULHERE: Yep. I think Heidi can follow the PowerPoint that I just gave her which has the text of the changes. So on -- under the PUD permitted uses, Tract P, parking, A, it had read, "public parking for uses of the Collier Area Transit "CAT" Park and Ride program. MR. KLATZKOW: You know, this has got to stop. If you're amending a PUD, okay, there's something called email, and there's something called attachments, and you can send it to us, all right. This is not the first time this has happened that we've seen changes, you know, made at the Planning Commission, all right. So as a courtesy, I am asking for the last time, when you are amending a PUD, send us a courtesy copy by email of what you're doing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, out of fairness to the applicant, Jeff, yesterday, late I had a conversation -- MR. KLATZKOW: And that's fine. He could have sent it afterwards. If he had time to do a PowerPoint, he had time to copy and send it to us. That's all I'm saying. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This just -- this was a clarification of issues already presented in the staff report. MR. KLATZKOW: And we're the ones who are signing off for legal sufficiency on all ordinances, all right. What I'm asking, as a courtesy, okay, if you've got time to put it in a PowerPoint, you've got time to send it to Heidi and me. That's all I'm asking. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: And I don't read the staff report as an internal document for clarity and consistency. I'm looking for errors and conflicts in their staff report, but that's their analysis. That's not the official document that's going to become the law. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Bob. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 5 of 38 MR. MULHERE: Once again, I find myself in a position of just accepting that. I appreciate it, and I apologize. This was at the last minute. I don't think they're that substantive, but anyway... Under Tract P, principal uses, we've added that language that you see in red. The buses -- and this just clarifies the operational aspects of the CAT bus. And this came out of the staff report and, as I said, in meeting with some members of the Planning Commission, it was suggested that we put this language into the PUD. It says, "The buses will enter the parking area from Piper Boulevard and through Tract U. The Piper Boulevard" -- I'm sorry. There's a misspelled word there. I'll add the other C. And for some reason it doesn't come up on spell check. But anyway -- "Piper Boulevard access to the parking area will be controlled with a gate system. Only CAT vehicles, county utility vehicles, FPL utility vehicles, and emergency vehicles will be able to access the parking area through Tract U. The CAT buses will circulate to the north end of the parking lot where the Park and Ride pickup is located. The buses will then exit turning right onto Livingston Road southbound." As I understand it, this language was agreed to between a conversation with Mr. Strain and Michelle Arnold, and I was asked to put it into the PUD. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Because they also may be entering and exiting on Livingston Road so, I mean, there's more than one option here. But any -- you know, just saying. MR. MULHERE: Well, we could qualify that saying "with respect to any buses entering off of Piper." MR. KLATZKOW: I'm just going to say this just so everybody understands, okay: This is not happening again. The next time we see changes on the fly like this, we're continuing the hearing, all right? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Jeff, staff sends out the -- (Multiple speakers speaking.) MR. KLATZKOW: No. The next time I see changes -- the next time I see changes to a PUD on the fly like this without my office being copied, we are going to not sign off on this, and we will continue the item. This thing has been going on for months and months and months and months. This is not a new item, Mark, all right, and not for nothing. If you're going to meet the applicant the day before, that's fine. There's no harm in us getting a copy overnight, in the morning, whatever, so we can review it, okay. Our name's going on this, and two years from now if something about this is wrong, none of this conversation that you had with him is going to matter. It's going to be why didn't the County Attorney do a decent job at reviewing the PUD, all right. Not for nothing the public has the right to review the PUD as well as. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if this board from now on needs stipulations and changes, we're supposed to continue -- MR. KLATZKOW: I can do that. I understand that, but this is beforehand. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Last night. MR. KLATZKOW: This is beforehand, all right. And the public -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is something that was problematic for the neighborhood. I wanted it locked in -- (Multiple speakers speaking.) MR. KLATZKOW: Mark, I understand what you're saying. All I needed was an email. All I needed was a courtesy email. Didn't get it, all right. It's not the first time this has happened. This is happening again and again and again, and I'm saying it now stops. This is the last time we're doing this, okay. If there are going to be changes beforehand, we're going to review it. And if we don't get the courtesy of an email on this, we're going to ask that the thing be continued. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, then staff's going to have to figure out a way to get us staff reports before the meetings in a much advanced time frame so that things like this can be caught and fixed, because this is better language than we started with. It was in the staff report. It helps to clarify concerns that -- on Piper Boulevard that the neighborhood had. It's a positive thing, not a negative. The applicant has agreed to it. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 6 of 38 MR. KLATZKOW: It is positive, okay, but this thing's been going on for at least half a year, okay, and I don't -- when this thing comes to the Planning Commission, it should be in a box and a bow, all right. Everything should be fine. The public should have had ample opportunity to review everything, by the way, as well as staff and County Attorney. If the County Commission themselves has concerns on the dais, yes, changes can be made. Same thing with the Board. But it needs to come to you in a box and a bow. This is not a box and a bow. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If we didn't try to make it better, it would have been. MR. KLATZKOW: Then it should have been continued, Mark, all right. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. I'm going to make a recommendation that some language be added. MR. YOVANOVICH: Before you make the change, Heidi, we are not accessing from Livingston Road for the bus system. This language is accurate. This is the language that Michelle Arnold has approved. Access will be from Piper as described here. There will not be buses accessing from Livingston Road which was -- and maybe that's not what the change you were going to make, but that was the question you asked. And that's all I'm up here to say. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Well, unless the master plan was changed as well, the master plan says "exit and entry off of Livingston." MR. YOVANOVICH: We'll fix it. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: But my recommended language would be, "If the CAT buses enter the parking lot from Piper Boulevard," comma, then the rest of the sentence. I mean, is there a reason they're not allowed to access on Livingston Road? MR. MULHERE: I think your change is a good one. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: And then just please correct the typos. MR. MULHERE: Yep. Paragraph B, one word, parking "only" for clarification. This is language on the development and design standards for Tract P. The question was whether the applicant agreed to construct a wall or a fence, and while it was clear that we agreed to construct a wall on the west perimeter boundary, the question was whether we could construct a wall or fence on the other perimeter boundaries. Actually, I think the FPL easement requires a wall. And so this language indicates that we will construct a wall around all perimeters except for entry and exit and pedestrian access points. Paragraph F read, "The parking lot may not be used." We changed that to "shall" so that it is a requirement as opposed to permissive. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Bob, may I get clarity? Is the fence going to go on the perimeter on the parking lot -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- or is it going around the pavement area? MR. MULHERE: It's -- the wall will be located within the landscape buffer around the perimeter of the parking lot. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Okay. MR. MULHERE: And the -- there was some question about maximum height. I had had some discussions with Michelle Arnold with respect to the height of the CAT shade structures or transit stops. And there are some restrictions in the FP&L agreement, so this language reflects that subject to their approval the height for transit shelters shall not exceed 20 feet from finished grade, and really the same for the lighting fixtures. We added this stipulation, which was agreed to at the neighborhood information meeting. "Shift changes for employees using the parking lot shall not occur between 6 a.m. and 8 a.m. or 4 p.m. and 6 p.m." Those are peak hours, peak traffic hours, and we certainly don't want to add to that congestion, so we will -- the applicant will arrange the employee shifts to be outside of those peak hours, and that was something that came up at the NIM, and we agreed to it. It was asked that we delineate all 24 parking spaces on the master plan for Park and Ride. We had only delineated 10 because I guess the plan was changed during the process. But we've now delineated all of the required 24 spaces, which you can see in the larger detail, which is right here. So that's the other 14 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 7 of 38 spaces, and 10 up here. This is the land-use summary. I won't spend any time on that other than to just note that the PUD is 6.82 acres, while the small-scale amendment is 6.33 acres. We did ask for a couple of deviations, which staff is recommending approval for. We did have a NIM. There were about 55 members of the public there. We believe we've addressed the concerns that can reasonably be addressed that were raised there, and we do have a staff recommendation of approval for both petitions. I assume at this point Jim Banks could hand out the -- he did already; okay, sorry. So you may have some questions. I think that's where we're at. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody on the Planning Commission have questions to start with? Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Well, I just would like you to put up the plan for the parking area for the employees and the CAT. I want to see that whole thing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bob, if you want to use the overhead, it's on page -- well, it's the third or fourth page into the TIS. I noticed it this morning. MR. MULHERE: I don't have the TIS. Well, because of the orientation of this master plan, it's a little bit hard to get the whole thing on the visualizer in a scale that you can easily see. But that's the entrance off of Livingston right here, and this is Park and Ride, and these spaces right here are Park and Ride. And then as you go south from there, that's the employee parking area. There are FP&L infrastructure guy-wires and stuff in these two areas where we have dry detention, so we had to avoid putting any parking in those locations. And that's the interface with the utility site right here. And then this is the southern portion of the master plan: Piper Boulevard here, and access to the utility parcel, and then access to the FP&L site. There was a question about this area here which is vegetated and will not be impacted -- I'm sorry; slide that down. This area here, this is 152 feet of width. It's heavily vegetated and will remain so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does that answer your question? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can you tell me where your handicapped parking is? I don't see any on here. MR. MULHERE: There is handicapped parking right here, right there, and also right down here. I'm sorry. I've got to slide that up for you. Right here. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So that's for -- okay. To there. Is that -- MR. MULHERE: In both locations, yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So you're doing four for this whole area? Nothing for the employees across the street? MR. MULHERE: There's handicapped parking on the site across the street. I'm sorry -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: So the employees that need handicapped parking are going to park across the street, which is fine? MR. MULHERE: Well, yeah, they may, but this is sufficient to meet all the requirements for handicapped parking what we have shown on this site. COMMISSIONER EBERT: But your one down here at the parking is for your FP&L people. That's their parking down there. MR. MULHERE: No. FP&L -- we're not doing anything to their site. Their site is over here. Whatever they feel like they need -- they're not using this parking. This is for employee parking of the, you know, Seed to Table facility and also Park and Ride. And utilities will not be using that either. They enter, and they have their own improvements down here. And they'll go through their own Site Development Plan, utilities will, and they have their own requirements in the code. This is only for -- and I think there's one, two -- I believe there's actually four handicapped parking spaces right here. One, two, three, four -- this is, you know, for -- a clear area for ramp parking for handicapped, and these are regular handicapped spaces right here. And then there are several -- one here and one there. So there's at least two more, maybe three more up on the north part. And we're going through a Site Development Plan. So if we don't meet the code, we will, but I believe it does. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 8 of 38 COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Bob, on the -- put that exhibit back up again. MR. MULHERE: Sure. Sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: On the top where it say, "Employee and CAT entry and exit. MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: If that is not a CAT entry, then don't indicate that is a CAT entry. MR. MULHERE: Yeah. I think based on Heidi's recommended change, we can leave that, because in the future, if they do use it, it would be open to be used. And with Heidi's change to the other text, we should be -- that stipulation will only apply to buses using Piper. It doesn't preclude them from using Livingston. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. On the -- regards to the use of this parking lot -- I'm looking for my notes. It's employee parking and it's CAT parking for Park and Ride. So how will you -- explain to me how you're going to control access. Park and Ride, I can just drive in and park my car and then get on a CAT bus, but if I'm an employee, I have to go through a controlled gate? MR. MULHERE: No. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Or do I go through a controlled gate regardless? MR. MULHERE: No. There is no access for any -- I'm looking for my pen. There's no access for any users of this parking area. There is no access through Piper. That's prohibited. That will be controlled gate. That can only be utilized with control, a gate, for -- as the PUD says, for -- I'm sorry. Let me slide it up. I apologize -- for FP&L, county utilities, and emergency vehicles. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And CAT entry. MR. MULHERE: And CAT entry, thank you. Now, everyone else who is using this facility for Park and Ride or for employee parking will enter and exit from Livingston, and that's not controlled. We wouldn't want that controlled because, obviously, that could have the effect of backing up traffic onto Livingston. That's free-flowing like any other parking lot. You pull in; park your car. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So this is for employee parking. How are you -- and you mentioned in the staff report, or it says in the staff report there will be a shuttle service. MR. MULHERE: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: How -- or will there be -- what will you do to control anybody from attempting to cross Livingston? MR. MULHERE: Okay. So the wall will prohibit -- I mean, you know, people aren't going to climb over a 6-foot wall. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So, basically, they'd have to climb the wall? MR. MULHERE: So they're going to be required to cross at the corner, and the site has been designed to cause them to have to go to that corner to cross, if they want to walk. The shuttle will routinely pick up people during shift changes, but there's also a call box. So if someone -- and people will come in off-shift times, then they can just call in for the shuttle to come and get them if they didn't want to walk. It could be raining. You know, it's Florida, in the summer. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So as far as Park and Ride and employee parking, there's no distinction as far as where employees will park versus Park and Ride? MR. MULHERE: These Park and Ride spaces will be signed, I'm sure, and reserved for Park and Ride. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And controlled how? MR. MULHERE: Just by signage. I mean, you put a sign up, reserved for parking, CAT Park and Ride. I mean, it's like handicapped parking or -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's the honor system? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Got it. MR. MULHERE: I mean, we are installing -- as a condition, we are installing security cameras, I 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 9 of 38 think, just to get to this issue as well, which will be monitored. There was a couple of concerns about people hanging out in the parking lot after shift and these kinds of things. And Alfie Oakes has indicated he will manage that, and I'm sure he will. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And it says no overnight parking. How are you going to control that? MR. MULHERE: Well, people will be parking there because there's up to three shifts at the place. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct, but it says specifically there's no overnight parking. MR. MULHERE: Yeah. Well, I think that -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I don't see how that could be controlled. I mean, if people are working or if people are on a CAT bus or whatever, there might be people parking overnight, so how do you make that stipulation when, in fact, it can't be enforced? MR. MULHERE: Well, I think what it was intended to preclude is people who don't have business parking here, are not employees or using the CAT park-and-ride system from simply parking here, you know, on a 24-hour or overnight basis. And we will monitor that and, to the degree that we have to manage it, we will. I don't really foresee that as being an issue. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The only enforcement you have is through the Sheriff's Department then? MR. MULHERE: Yes, like any other parking lot. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I have a question of staff, but I'll wait. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Just a little followup. So if somebody wanted to carpool and meet there, there's no way they'd stop them? MR. MULHERE: I mean, the parking lot will be signed for employee parking only as well as allowing for the county's Park and Ride. So, technically, somebody coming in and parking there for some other reason would not have the right. It's, you know -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Not have the right, but you're not going to have people actively out there enforcing. MR. MULHERE: No, we're not going to have armed security guards. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I think that's where Joe was headed with this. MR. MULHERE: Yeah. We're not going to have security guards walking around. We are going to monitor the site. We do have cameras. I think that would be -- you know, a method of reducing or eliminating some unauthorized use of the place. And if it does happen, we'll be able to see it and take care of it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm going to follow up on Stan's question. Park and Ride typically, and most anywhere else in the country, supports two elements. One is for public transportation, but the other is to do exactly what Stan said: Park the car there, meet up with a carpool, and drive somewhere else. MR. MULHERE: And that's okay. Well, I mean, I'll defer to Michelle on that. I know that the intent was to be able to park your car and take the CAT system. But I don't know if that would matter if someone was carpooling and then leaving their car there. I'll have to defer to Michelle. But I don't imagine that would be an issue. You know, I mean, if you think about a typical Park and Ride in the locations where we're familiar with it, they're at a transit location. People park their car and get on public transit. But carpooling is generally another way of reducing individual trips on the roadway. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, having been many years in Washington, D.C., it's typical, very typical for carpools to meet in a Park and Ride and -- (Multiple speakers speaking.) MR. MULHERE: Probably a question for staff. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. But they also meet at Naples Walk shopping center, and I see them all the time; you know, anyplace there's open parking. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I just have problems with the language when it really can't be 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 10 of 38 enforced. I mean, it's a Park and Ride. It's a Park and Ride. MR. MULHERE: I think -- well, there's a couple things. Number one, I think most -- many commercial -- parking lots associated with commercial activities have signage that says "no overnight parking," and we're enforcing it probably to a greater degree than all those other parking lots because we're going to install security cameras, we're going to have a shuttle bus, we're going to have shift changes. We'll be able to monitor this. Most places aren't really -- they may have cameras, but they're not monitoring it. So as far as the transit end of it, I'd defer to Michelle because I don't want to say something that, you know, I don't have the -- it's not my job to respond to that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just have a question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Karen. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Will the employees have -- be given a sticker for their vehicles to park in there or a hanger or something to -- so it's easy to indicate that they're supposed to be there or not? MR. MULHERE: You know, we didn't have any discussion about that. MR. YOVANOVICH: If it becomes an issue where we have a concern that the general public is somehow using what's supposed to be employee parking -- I was thinking the same thing, perhaps we'd just simply give them a sticker or hang tag or something. It will be easy for us to monitor. Then the question becomes, did someone improperly park in one of the employee parking spaces for CAT. You know, those are -- you know, we're not going to want to immediately tow somebody. Perhaps we give them a little friendly reminder the first time. But I really don't think this is going to -- if this comes to a problem and there's concern about it, we'll be prepared to address and monitor that. But since it is a shared facility for the public to use the CAT system, I really would hate to tow somebody who for that day there was 25 people who showed up for the Park and Ride and they parked in one of the employee parking spaces. So we're going to have to do some -- we may have to do some adjusting in the future if we find that somebody's coming and using this as a carpool area. I'm assuming that any shopping center, if it became a problem, they all probably have their "Only authorized people. Everybody else will be towed." There's a mechanism to enforce that if it becomes an issue, and we're prepared to address that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, I have no problem with people parking there, and then it's a matter of usage. If it's used and it becomes a problem, then I would expect that you would enforce it; otherwise, it's a parking lot. Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. My questions are mostly of staff at this point. So if no other questions of the applicant, we'll move on to staff report. MR. WEEKS: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm David Weeks of the Comprehensive Planning staff to present the staff report for the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Not a whole lot to this one. Staff is recommending approval of it. Our findings and conclusions really summarize our position on this application, and that's found on Page 8, the final page of the staff report. And it's on that page that I want to make one minor correction for the record. COMMISSIONER EBERT: What page? MR. WEEKS: It's Page 8 of the staff report, hard copy. Final page of the staff report. On the top of the page, "findings and conclusions" is the heading, and on the fourth bullet point, the third line, the word "distribution" should be "transmission," and that is referring to the power lines that are overhead on this property as well as to the north and the south, that corridor. That is an FP&L transmission line, not distribution line. The transmission lines are the major lines coming from the power plant down to, say, substations, and then from there the smaller distribution lines are what goes out throughout the community to serve individual neighborhoods and projects. The terminology is correctly used earlier in the staff report. Staff's recommendation is for approval. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 11 of 38 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody? Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Question, David, Page 5, third paragraph, and it says, "Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed GMP amendment to be generally compatible." What do you mean "generally"? Is it or is it not compatible? I have a difficult time understanding what "generally" means. MR. WEEKS: In Comprehensive Planning -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: To me it's sort of nebulous. MR. WEEKS: Our review in Comprehensive Planning is broader than the zoning review. The zoning staff are reviewing the project, taking into account, if there were buildings, the building orientation, the height, the development standards, buffering, open spaces, et cetera. And from the Comprehensive Planning standpoint, we're looking at it from the broader perspective of just, generally, a parking lot at this location. Is that -- from a high-level view, is that compatible or not, and we believe it is. In this particular case, there's major highways on two sides, there's the FP&L transmission line, an undeveloped property to the north that is zoned single-family, but in our view we think it's highly unlikely that a single-family home would be built there. And then to the west we have the FP&L substation, utility site, and pump station. And then before you get to the residential properties, there are about seven or eight single-family homes abutting the larger tax parcel that the county owns. But this parking lot itself is separated from those single-family homes by 125- to 150-foot-wide native vegetation pine flat woods. So we generally find it compatible. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: There's that word again, "generally." Okay. It is compatible. Statement of fact. MR. WEEKS: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else of David? David, you issued a memorandum to James Sabo on July 12th, and just a correction. It says, "The request is to rezone 6.33 acres from RSF3 to commercial Planned Unit Development for parking lot. It's really 6.82 for the rezone. It's 6.33 for the GMP. Is that accurate? MR. WEEKS: That sounds accurate, yes, sir, because the rezone is a larger site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So that's the only -- but that's the only correction I see in your stuff. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. James? MR. SABO: For the record, James Sabo, Zoning Division. The Zoning Division staff recommends approval based on discussions at the meeting today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions of James before we have Mike Sawyer come up? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have another question on the staff report, and I'm looking for it, so stand by. I, unfortunately, didn't tab some of my questions. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mike, would you mind coming up while he finds it? I just need you to acknowledge for the record you reviewed not the -- it wasn't a revised TIS. It was just the one formatted for this property, since that's the only issue of discussion today, and that it meets your criteria and you're okay with it. MR. SAWYER: Certainly. Mike Sawyer, for the record, Transportation Planning. We did look at the TIS that was provided, and it does meet our standards, and we agree with the conclusions that it reaches. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And just for history, the way this happened, the staff report included a TIS for the project across the street. And although it had data in it for this, you had to extract it from that, and that was a TIS for an SDP for across the street which really doesn't stand alone when you look at this project as a PUD on its own. So that's the basis under which I thought we should have a TIS just for this site. I think you're in 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 12 of 38 concurrence with that, and we now have it. Is that a fair statement? MR. SAWYER: I would say that is very accurate, yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions on transportation before I go back to Joe? Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mike. Yeah, I don't appreciate getting this. I have been -- as you know, I did talk to you on this. I don't -- I think maybe I should be -- rather than your portion of it, I suppose I should be asking Mr. Yovanovich. In this report -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's wait for -- let's wait till we get done with staff since we started on staff. COMMISSIONER EBERT: All right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of Mike? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. James, I think -- thank you. I think Joe had a question. He may have found his question now. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Page 8 of the staff report, Finding No. 1, "Zoning staff has reviewed the proposed amendments and believes." Again, I'm going to criticize the use of the word. "Believes" is sort of a weak use. It either concludes or finds or some any -- Stan believes the Earth is flat. I keep on telling him no, but -- but, I mean, is it "believed" -- or "concludes", or is there another word? Next time you write something -- I mean, staff could believe a lot of things. They may not be factual. I would look for a word -- more of a statement of fact again. MR. SABO: Understood, Mr. Schmitt. I do have strong beliefs, and we can change it to "finds" if you're more comfortable. That would be fine. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions of James? If not, Michelle, since you're a member of staff and this is under staff report, could you respond to a question or two that I would like to ask at least about your traffic generation. MS. ARNOLD: Good morning. For the record, Michelle Arnold, Public Transit and Neighborhood Enhancement director. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Was that language that appeared that we moved from the staff report to make it part of the PUD, was that consistent with your understanding of how things will be operating? MS. ARNOLD: Yes. But I agree with Heidi's modification to not restrict access on Livingston Road. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. And I think Bob's already accepted that, too. The staff -- the TIS that was made that was applicable to this property for access onto Piper during p.m. peak hours, it shows one CAT bus. So I don't know how often your buses rotate, but during the peak hour peak time, is that realistic? MS. ARNOLD: One bus per hour? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Per the p.m. peak time. It would be four to six and then -- I mean, six to eight in the morning, and I think it's four to six in the afternoon. Would you have more than one bus an hour come through at that point? MS. ARNOLD: Probably -- it will probably be better to not limit it to one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's not limited. I just wanted to understand for the traffic analysis. MS. ARNOLD: Currently with our headways, it is one; it would be one bus per hour -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MS. ARNOLD: -- during those peak hours. If the usage increases and we can get additional folks using the system, then it could increase to probably a couple an hour. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the basis -- you'd be entering, then, as we've said, from Piper. MS. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're coming down Immokalee, you're taking a left or a right on Lakeland. You're going around, picking up Piper, going down and going in the gate that's going to be 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 13 of 38 accessible only by your people or other county vehicles involved or FP&L for those utility sites. MS. ARNOLD: Correct. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: While you are on the gate issue, is that something you want to identify the location on the master plan? Because I don't see it on the revised master plan that Mr. Mulhere distributed today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We can add it. Bob, can you make an arrow to the -- I mean, the only place they can get on on Piper is where the arrow is on Piper, so that's, I'm assuming, where your gate was going to go. MR. MULHERE: And if there's dual access, there will have to be two gates. So, I mean, it is a condition, but we can certainly add some language to that. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: So it will be on the southern property line. MR. MULHERE: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Go ahead, Michelle. Did you have anything else you wanted to add? I don't have any other questions. MS. ARNOLD: Just to comment about someone coming in and doing a shared ride or something like that; with public transit we're encouraging people to get out of their single-occupancy vehicles and get off the road, so we wouldn't have an objection to that type of -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Good. MR. EASTMAN: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. MR. EASTMAN: Are there facilities to allow someone to bike to this facility and then ride the public bus, and they could lock up their bike or store their bike there? MS. ARNOLD: I believe that there are bike racks that are going to be at that northern location but not lockers or anything like that; just a rack. So if somebody wanted to ride their bike, they can utilize that. We have that at all of our stops currently. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else of Michelle? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Michelle. MS. ARNOLD: Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That is the questions we've had of staff and the applicant's presentation, but Diane had a question of Mr. Yovanovich, so we'll move back to the applicant at this point. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Good morning. I do have a question. On one of the tables in here, the principal use, it says, Albertson's was 61,286 square feet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, no, Diane. That's a different project. That isn't this project. This is a PUD for Livingston and the northwest corner of Livingston and Immokalee. It has -- it is a new PUD, stand-alone. It is not part of that PUD. So the Albertson's has nothing to do with it. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I -- they are taking the spot that Albertson's was in? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. This is a parking lot on the west side of Livingston Road. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I understand that, but -- so we are not going to talk about the building on the other side. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct, we are not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not a part of this PUD. MR. YOVANOVICH: The reason Mr. Strain -- and I agree with him when we met was that we needed to isolate out from the TIS the traffic data that actually applied to the use -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. Then -- MR. YOVANOVICH: -- and that's why we modified that. COMMISSIONER EBERT: -- why are you requesting this parking lot? MR. YOVANOVICH: The purpose of the parking lot, as identified in the backup material, is to provide employee parking for the commercial development that's occurring in the Carlton Lakes PUD and to also provide for a CAT Park and Ride. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 14 of 38 We are not providing any of the required parking for the commercial activity in Carlton Lakes. We are here just simply to get approved an employee parking lot and a CAT Park and Ride. It was confusing in the TIS because -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- it was used for an SDP that talked about employees and the need for employee parking. So we clarified it to take out the extraneous information and focus only on the purpose of this PUD, which is for employee parking. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Well, I understand it's only going to be employee and CAT, but I was wondering why you needed it, because you're saying that this is just a grocery store, and when it went through, why was there not enough parking right at Seed and Table (sic)? MR. YOVANOVICH: There actually is enough code-required parking, but Seed to Table is a different type of concept which requires a lot of employees for purposes of preparing the food and other items that are sold in the commercial activity. So in this particular case, we met the code-required parking. We knew from a practical standpoint that we needed additional parking for employee parking, and that's why we approached the county originally about leasing some of this space under the FP&L easement and going through this process of amending the Comprehensive Plan as well as doing a separate PUD to allow for this employee parking use. We meet the code across the street. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. So did you do a new PUD for the Albertson's site itself? MR. YOVANOVICH: No, because we're not making any changes to the Carlton Lakes PUD. We don't need to make any changes to the Carlton Lakes PUD to address what we're doing today. This is an employee parking lot. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Very confusing. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We've heard from staff and the presentation. We'll now move to public speakers. We'll start by calling the registered public speakers. We ask that you limit your time to five minutes and use either one of the microphones when your name is called. After everybody who has registered has come up, I'll ask if anybody else wants to speak. So if you haven't had a chance to register, we'll make sure we hear you today. So with that, James or Ray, whoever's calling the names. MR. SABO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The first speaker is Alex Chappler. MR. CHAPPLER: Thank you, everyone. I didn't think I'd be the first one up here. My name's Alex Chappler. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell your last name for the record. MR. CHAPPLER: C-h-a-p-p-l-e-r. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR. CHAPPLER: I live in Willoughby Acres. And we've been addressing within the community a few of the issues that have come up, one being the need for an employee parking lot, as you just stated, across the street. The second, it is a residential community. It's a residential zone. They have been -- there are people in the neighborhood that have been looking to develop in this area; the safety and security as well as the environmental impact. The one thing I've not heard today is the environmental impact. We have a very large bear problem. We have recently been having a very large rattlesnake problem. They live on that FP&L line. This is where they've been pushed from Talis Park, from Mediterra. This is what's left for them. There are three commercial zones within a half a mile that are already zoned commercial that could be used for an employee parking lot if it is going to be a shuttled commercial parking lot. Every time this has been brought up they say, no, our people are going to be there. They're going to use these buses. They're not going to be running across the street. You can't stop that unless this is controlled; it is patrolled. There's going to be no stopping an employee who's late to work from flying in 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 15 of 38 there, jumping out of his car, and jumping across Livingston Road. Livingston and Immokalee, if you live in this area, is a train wreck during season. So a half a mile east on Immokalee Road, right next to the car wash -- I've called IPC. They are the owners of that location right now, or the realtors of location right now. They would happily put a parking lot in that location. There are lights. There's Collier Area Transit there already, and they could be transported to and from work on these scheduled times that are being discussed without issue. There are two commercial locations south on Livingston that have a light right next to Collier Regional Park. They are both within driving distance of a bus if that's how these employees are getting to and from work. So I don't understand why we are changing a zoning from residential to commercial with the environmental impacts as well as the safety concerns. Someone can come to this Park and Ride -- which that makes no sense to me. I've used CAT transit for years. I don't use it as a Park and Ride. I walk literally up Piper Road. There is a bus stop right there. If you go across the street on Immokalee, there is a bus stop right there. If you go just down to Airport, there is a bus stop right there. And if you cross again off Immokalee and Piper, there's another bus stop right there. There are five bus stops in that neighborhood that don't require a Park and Ride. I mean, if we're going to start doing transport from Lee to Collier on Livingston, might be a possibility, but that was not in the discussion at all. This is specifically for Collier Area Transit. So the people that use the Collier Area Transit aren't going to be doing a Park and Ride right there. There's too many locations within that neighborhood and across the street that can be used. So I don't understand how that is even factored into this as a community member. Other than that, the safety of it. You have people that can park there. Yes, you say you're going to have cameras. They can walk right around the wall and be in someone's backyard. They're talking about 100 feet, I think I heard, 125 feet of vegetation. After the hurricane, it's just grass. There's a couple trees. There's not much else. So people can walk into your backyard, walk into your house, and now we have a security issue within the neighborhood, which has not been an issue on those cul-de-sacs. It is one of the safest cul-de-sacs all the way up Willoughby Acres. We've had a -- I've looked at the crime reports. We have had things down the center where people have come and robbed homes and stuff like that, but it is very minimal. For a non-gated community, we have very little crime in that area. So with the environmental, the safety, and the security, I don't feel that changing to a commercial property when there are so many around the area is an issue. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And your environmental issues, at least, at some point we'll have the environmental staff come up and comment on those. Thank you. And I noticed, Mike, Summer was here. If she's not coming back, would you ask her to come back. Oh, okay, good. So when we finish with public speakers, Summer, I'd like to ask you to come up. Next speaker. MR. SABO: Next speaker is Gerald Lefebvre. MR. LEFEBVRE: Gerald Lefebvre. And I'll be glad to spell that name. L-e-f-e-b as in boy, V as in Victor, r-e. I am also a resident of Willoughby Acres. And some of the questions I had have been answered here. But I have two main areas I'd like to talk about. One is enforcement of the PUD. It seems like it's almost impossible to enforce some of the provisions of this PUD. The other is, this is not a separate PUD like it's trying to be; trying to separate it. It's tied in directly to the Carlton Lakes commercial PUD. In fact, when the owner came -- or the applicant came initially, that should have been addressed. And when you do your due diligence, you make sure that you can have parking on the property that you're going to be running your business. That's just rule number one; not to come after when you put in millions of dollars, you own the property, and you decide, oh, wait a minute, I'm not going to have enough parking. That's just not acceptable to take this responsibility and put it on a neighborhood that is zoned residential. And there's been concerns from you. I've heard it. But, again, the traffic is just problematic up there. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 16 of 38 And just to put this parking lot here and not try to have it on site, or maybe another site should have been chosen. To come at this point, the 11th hour, and try to force this down and change is just not acceptable. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Next speaker, James. MR. SABO: Next person is Jerry Grandey. MR. GRANDEY: Mr. Chair, Jerry Grandey. It's spelled G-r-a-n-d-e-y. I'll try to keep this to the time limit, and I'll try to address things that have not been addressed, because I think the things that Mr. Chappler and Mr. Lefebvre have mentioned are appropriate. The first piece I'll address is traffic; that there is a new TIS, I understand that it's extracted from the previous one. But I had expressed particular interest in the traffic information at the informational hearing and was sent a copy of the original TIS. I was not notified by anyone that there was going to be any sort of a new TIS now attached to this lot. I would have appreciated getting that information. However, what I did not see addressed in the original TIS, effectively -- and I doubt is addressed in the new one that I have not seen, is the traffic impact that is going to happen to the residential portion of the Carlton Lakes PUD. I am here to represent people who live on the south end of the Carlton Lakes community; Edgewater Homeowners Association is a group of 56 condos. We are directly opposite the entry/exit point that is proposed for this lot. That gives us a lot of interesting perspectives on how this will be operating. There is a traffic component to that. There is a lighting component to that. I've heard nothing addressed about that, even though we brought it up at the informational meeting. And there is also going to be a safety issue partly related to traffic that is not being addressed here because you've separated it from the Carlton Lakes PUD. And I agree with the previous gentleman that this is the wrong place for this, and there are other opportunities for this. I understand that because this is not a traditional grocery store, that this is being used differently. I've seen nothing done to really address that change of use, and that concerns me. When we were at the informational hearing to hear that there are expected to be -- and this is from the applicant himself -- they're expected to be 400 to 500 employees at this site. Well, if I understand, that's three shifts, 24 hours a day. It's going to be three shifts, 400 to 500 split over three shifts. That's a lot of parking you need for those employees. Okay. So I understand that there is a need -- if you're going to provide customer parking at the site, there's a need for more employee parking than might be required by code, and I understand that there's a need from a business standpoint to try to find additional parking and a way to get your employees effectively to and from that parking. I am here to suggest that this is the wrong place for it. And it's interesting to me to hear that someone from the public has done the legwork to find additional opportunities for that. If I have any time left, I'll address these things. First of all, regarding the lighting, this is a 24-hour operation. We know there's going to be lighting there at night. That was discussed during the informational hearing. The commitment was it will be low-level lighting. When asked about that, the response was, oh, it will be low in height, and they'll be shielded. There is nothing shielded. There is nothing that is requiring any of that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, there is, sir. First of all, the FP&L agreement requires no higher than 14 feet. The PUD requires no higher than 20. So they'll be at 14 feet unless the agreement can be changed, but FP&L would be the dominant factor in that. The code requires them to be shielded and directional. So the lighting will be controlled by our code automatically even though it's not in the PUD. I just wanted to let you know that. MR. GRANDEY: Well, I appreciate hearing that, because the history that we've had with the lighting that currently exists on the PUD site is not a good one. We started raising the issue of light intrusion into the Edgewater HOA areas last fall. We addressed it first through our community association; that was ineffective. We addressed it after that with code enforcement; that was ineffective. We addressed it after that with our county commission; that became more effective in the sense that we got the right verbal responses. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 17 of 38 And we got some of the lights that were offending turned off temporarily. There was another one that was, we agreed, a safety concern if it were to be turned off, but the commitment was that that would be shielded immediately. Well, immediately has turned into six months, and it's still not done, and we have continuing conversations about that. So my history with addressing the lighting is not one that gives me confidence. The traffic issue is something that I want to address in two spots. One is the crossover that the pattern of these vans is going to be using in order to access the PUD. Out of -- and I wish the graphic were still up, but perhaps you remember it well enough. The entrance/exit is on the extreme north end of the lot. The pattern -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: James, could you put that map back on for us. Thank you. It will be up there. There you go, sir. MR. GRANDEY: Great. Very good. So as we look at that, the entrance/exit is at the north end of the platted lot. It couldn't go any further north. That's as far as it can be. Now, the traffic pattern that's being described or was described at the hearing, or the information meeting, the vans come out of the parking lot, they cross over all of Livingston to get into the left turn lane to turn into Carlton Lakes Boulevard. That's three lanes that they cross and then go into the left turn lane onto Carlton Lakes Boulevard. They wait there for the appropriate opening, they turn onto Carlton Lakes Boulevard. And what I wish were on this graphic but is not is what they do after that, and that's a separate piece. So the first piece is this crossover. This was addressed in several different ways by several different individuals during the information hearing. How -- it's hard to find the word about how poorly thought out this particular approach is. The idea that even during off season you're going to be able to safely have shuttle vans coming out of here crossing over three lanes of traffic and going into that left turn lane is marginal. If you consider it during season, it's -- again, I struggle to find the word. It's not appropriate. So I find that that part of this design is ineffectual, in addition to which these vans are then going to continue on to Carlton Lakes Boulevard. They go to the far end of the building, and they turn right into the back of the property, go up and drop off their shuttle passengers, and they come back out the same way, come back onto Carlton Lakes Boulevard, go up one-quarter mile to where the U-turn is on the median, and one-quarter mile is adequate, if you're careful, to get across three lanes and into that left turn lane to make a U-turn lane. And then they come back down to enter the parking lot. So I have two problems with that; one of them is this crossover on Livingston that you can see, and the other is the portion that happens on the east end of the actual building. The width of the driveway in that area is not adequate for the kind of use that is being proposed. And I understand that this is outside of the actual PUD that's being proposed here, but because this is causing the impact, I think it needs to be considered. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now, I've got to ask you to kind of summarize up. You've had 10 minutes, so if you don't mind. MR. GRANDEY: Sure. I think the only other thing that I'll say is that I understand that there are many needs here, and they may not all coexist, but I think this is actually a poorly chosen site. And I think, from what I've heard today, there actually are other sites. It also appears to me that there is not an urgency to doing this. I've heard recently that there is potentially another delay in the opening of the facility. That allows more time for a more considered assessment of the need for employee parking and providing it in a different way. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. And when we get rebuttal by the applicant, some of the questions you've raised will be addressed. MR. GRANDEY: Great. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Next speaker, James. MR. SABO: Next person up is Charlie Hirschfeld. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 18 of 38 MR. HIRSCHFELD: Good morning. My name is Charlie Hirschfeld, H-i-r-s-c-h-f-e-l-d. I'm the president of Carlton Lakes Master Association. We've been battling unsuccessfully for many, many years for a traffic light at our north entrance which is also opposite the Delasol community. Now, with this proposed parking lot -- and Mr. Grandey expressed very well as far as the traffic issues coming across three lanes of Carlton Lakes -- Livingston Road to make the left-hand turn onto Carlton Lakes. We have some other serious traffic issues. Number one, another exit out of our community is through the Oakes Farm Seed to Table/Dunkin Donuts entrance and exits which you literally can't get out of in the morning because of all the traffic on Immokalee Road. Those on our south end of the community who currently go out there, with all this increased traffic now for Seed to Table, are probably going to go up to our north entrance. You have six lanes on Livingston Road between north and south. Our north entrance and, again, Delasol, you have traffic crossing three lanes. Mr. Grandey also mentioned that the vehicles that are transporting the people, the employees, when they come out of Carlton Lakes Boulevard have to go up north and make a U-turn. So you have several issues. Number one, that U-turn lane is going to be backed up. Number 2, increased traffic coming out of Carlton Lakes Boulevard at the north end. We need a traffic light there. If a traffic light is put in, it will also give a break for the employee vehicles coming out of the employee parking lot, because traffic has to stop. I think it's a quarter of a mile north or half a mile north of the entrance and exit off of Livingston. So there's a severe traffic problem. There's even a traffic problem now; we're not even in season. So I don't know what we have to do to get a parking lot (sic). Bob, I don't know if you can -- does this go any further north? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, it doesn't. Your question was going to be you don't know what we can do about getting a traffic light up there. We're going to try to find that out for you before the meeting's over. MR. HIRSCHFELD: Okay. Because the other problem we've had is the -- all these GES systems -- GIS systems are bringing 40-foot traffic vehicles into our north end. They can't turn to get out to get back onto Livingston Road. They're backing up into two and three lanes of northbound traffic. Somebody's going to really get seriously hurt. We've had instance -- three of them in the last week where trucks with forklifts and tile backing up into Livingston Road where you have northbound traffic coming. If there's a light there, they can back up without it being a safety issue. So it's bad enough now. When that employee parking lot opens up, it's going to be even worse. And then to have to alter Alfie Oakes' employee hours to accommodate traffic from six to eight and four to six, a light would most likely alleviate a lot of their problems because traffic has to stop. So it's a real issue there. And as the other gentleman said, traffic on Immokalee Road is unbelievable. It's even unbelievable now. So we have 800 homes in Carlton Lakes. I don't know how many are in Delasol. And conversations that I've had with Alfie Oakes, he mentioned if the county would approve a traffic light there, he'd kick in something toward the paying for it. I can get our board to probably kick in something. I tried to get ahold of the president of Delasol, who is a new president; have not been able to reach him. But we need some -- to get everybody together and see if we can get this light in. And now, I think the paper last week, there's 330-some-odd apartments going in at Veterans and Livingston. Now, there's a light there but, again, you probably have another 500 cars. So the traffic is an issue, and it's going to be worse now with this employee lot coming in. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, James. MR. SABO: Next one up is Eric Mogelvang. MR. MOGELVANG: Hi. I'm not used to speaking in public, but I'll give it a shot. My name is Eric Mogelvang. That's M-o-g-e-l-v-a-n-g. I am the manager for the LLC on the very north side of this property right here. We bought this 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 19 of 38 property as a long-term investment with my investors, and we are very concerned on what's happening, especially because I was never notified of any of this. You see I come here with just this because I have never received anything. The only way I found out about this was from my neighbor to the north of me, Wes; I forget his last name. And he made a phone call to me a few weeks ago and said, hey, do you know what they're doing there? And I said, I have no idea what you're talking about. So I'm concerned about that, why I was never notified, because I would have sure loved to have been at the informational meeting. I'd like somebody to maybe even check on who was sent stuff, the list of people who were notified, because if I was notified and I didn't know about it, that's... Some of the points I want to make that I didn't hear about is the amount of parking spaces. I don't know what the square footage is, but I come from a commercial real estate background, and I know the value of a property. One of the approaches to the value is through the income. And I didn't hear anything here today and, of course, it wasn't at the informational meeting, and I have no documents, so I was curious to know how much are they paying? How much are they paying and for how long and is there escalations? Because as a taxpayer, obviously, I would want to know about that. Anytime government and private entities get together, it concerns me. For instance, vendors at public facilities, how they get in. It's an exclusive thing, and those types of situations are concerning to me as a citizen. Not just the property owner to the north. The -- let's see. Some of the other notes I wrote down: Is this an opportunity for me to ask that question while I stand here? Is there an amount -- was there an amount given? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not an issue for this board. We strictly go by the Land Development Code. Land Development Code doesn't regulate leases. That would be something for the Board of County Commissioners. But while you're interrupted -- you interrupted yourself, so I don't think I'm doing it. Do you have that property under a different name than yours? Because I just looked at the list. Your name's not on the list of people who were mailed. MR. MOGELVANG: Okay. The name would be MDLT Holdings, LLC. M as in Mary, D as in dog, LT being -- standing for long-term holdings. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, it was at 2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 106, Naples, Florida. MR. MOGELVANG: Yeah, we never got anything. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it was mailed to you. Now, why you didn't get it, I don't know. But it was -- this is the official mailing list, and it went out to everybody. So at least we cleared that up, so... MR. MOGELVANG: Okay. Like I said, I didn't -- like I said, I never saw it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand. MR. MOGELVANG: The -- so regarding the lease, is there a copy of that lease that I can obtain at some point? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's part of the staff report, so if you contact that gentleman there just to your right, he can give -- leave information how to reach you, he can email you a copy of the lease. MR. MOGELVANG: Okay. Because the value of the property, like I say, could be related to that income approach which may have -- my thing is, I'm not a resident there, but I do care about the value of the property because that's my job, as for the investors. A gentleman earlier said it was unlikely a home will be built, but he doesn't know us. He never spoke to us. And the reality is, that is exactly what is going to be done with that property in the future, most likely, is to build a couple of homes either as custom homes or for spec. I am unsure what it will do to the value of our property to have buses coming and going, shuttle buses, at all hours of the night. I can only imagine that it's going to crush the value of the spec homes or custom homes that I build there in the future, and that concerns me greatly. Another point I heard Ms. Ebert brought up was why it was necessary, and another gentleman brought up how did it come up so late in the game. And both of those are great points that I would like to stress again coming from a commercial real estate background. I know that my clients and the buyers that I was in conjunction with in purchase and sales would never take steps forward to invest so much without having these problems figured out already. And, 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 20 of 38 certainly, that is odd, to say the least. And to choose a property owned by the county, it just doesn't seem like -- something's funny going on there, and that concerns me. I think that's about all I have to say. And I will be trying to get that lease to -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We take a break at 10:30. At that time, if you approach James, he can get his card to you. MR. MOGELVANG: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Next speaker, James. MR. SABO: Next up is Anthony Pires. MR. PIRES: Mr. Strain, members of the Planning Commission. My name is Tony Pires. I live in Willoughby Acres, and I'm here representing myself today. I echo the concerns expressed by Mr. Chandler and Mr. Grandey, and I have a couple of other concerns, comments, or questions. One thing I think is important, the Comprehensive Plan in Section 6 point -- 5.6 of the Future Land Use Element requires that new development shall be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses as set forth in the Land Development Code. "Complementary to" means it enhances and supports the surrounding neighborhood, which you have an adjacent residential, well-established community in Willoughby Acres. There's no indication, there's no testimony, no evidence, there's no analysis -- and this has been, I guess, my concern for years as to the new development being complementary to the adjacent or surrounding land use, and I think that's the first predicate of a flawed analysis as to the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, I don't know, and there's been no indication, as to the maximum number of employee parking spots. Interestingly enough, the only TIS the public had available until today shows 237 parking spots for employees and 10 for CAT. Now -- and we've been talking 24 for CAT, but no indication of how many for the employees. So I think that's an issue that really needs to -- we need to have that information. And along the lines of -- I understand that Mr. Yovanovich is trying to separate this from the property to the east; however, what I find interesting is that the county and the developer of the Albertson's property entered into a landscape maintenance agreement, an extensive part of Livingston Road right-of-way between the store, the new store, and the paved surface to put enhanced landscape buffer. I question whether any analysis has been performed as to how many parking spots for employees could have been placed on that site, because that would have been part of the parking spots that are already there. I'll make part of the record and hand out to you -- it's an insubstantial change to SDP00017 that shows the detailed landscape plan and the area encumbered by it. It doesn't give the acreage, but it's an extensive area. If I may hand it to Jeff. Is that okay, Jeff, or -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you have enough copies for everybody? MR. PIRES: I only have one. And I'm sorry of this, but if I could -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What you might want to do is, if you're going to use it for discussion -- are you going to use it for discussion, or do you just want to pass it on for the record? MR. PIRES: Pass it on for the record and also review by the members. And I guess the question -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, then you might want to use the overhead and use that microphone. And then after it's finished, we need to give a copy to the court reporter. MR. PIRES: Thank you. I think it would be important to have an analysis of the acreage involved and a calculation of how many employee parking spots could be placed at that location. That may obviate 30, 40, 50 parking spots on this side and reduce the impacts to the neighborhood and to this area. Additionally, I think a number of prohibitions need to be placed here. I appreciate the efforts made by the staff and Mr. Strain to further refine this to -- if it's going to be approved. But one thing that troubles me, initially one of the accessory uses that was listed was temporary parking and structures approved with an approved temporary-use permit. And that's no longer in the proposed document, but I'd like to have a pro -- I think the public is well served by having a prohibition against temporary uses for anything involving 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 21 of 38 anything off site, because the initial indication was the county wanted to use this for parking for special events. There's a discussion about farmers markets or other marketing events. I recognize it's been taken out of the accessory uses; that was an initial draft. But I think a prohibition would be appropriate so there's no squabbling or no concern in the future as to what is absolutely allowed and what is absolutely prohibited in this area. With regards to the proposed uses and the prohibitions, I appreciate the efforts made, again, to clarify, and I didn't have the benefit -- and I know we will if it goes to -- continued to the next meeting to make sure language is correct, but I think, F, the change today was the parking lot shall not be used by customers. I think it means customers or vendors. It doesn't prohibit vendors at the present time. It just says in G, the site will not be used for truck or tractor trailer unloading or parking, deliveries, off-site storage, or overnight parking. I think it needs to provide in F, the parking lot shall not be used by any person except the employees and shall not be used by any customers or vendors. I think that's really important. I think an additional prohibition needs to be added to the development and design standards. The parking lot may not be used for any off premises events or activities. Again, to shut the door on this becoming a farmers market once a month or every now and then, because that could be a temporary-use permit, and no temporary events should be allowed. With regards to -- I guess, a fundamental question, we talk about a gate at Piper Boulevard. I really appreciate also the applicant eliminating Piper Boulevard as an ingress/egress point for the employees. That's a substantial concession, and I appreciate it as a long-term resident of that area. But I'd like to make sure it's a gate, not a gate arm. We all know how people can get around gate arms, and I think it needs to be a gate. We talked about a double gate. I think that needs to be very, very clear. With regards to this issue about the lease, Mr. Mogelvang raised a question -- I have a copy for him if he wants to. And one of the concerns I have -- and Jeff and Heidi will probably disagree with me extensively on this, but I'm concerned fundamentally that this is contract zoning at its worst, quite frankly. The lease agreement -- there's a ground lease by and between Collier County and Oakes Farm, Inc. And in a zoning process, as you all know, it's a quasi-judicial process. It could be a legislative process. It requires substantial competent evidence. And in the lease agreement, Paragraph 4, it says that lessee, which is Oakes Farm, Inc., shall pay all costs to design, construct, and maintain an employee parking lot, which lot shall be subject to approval by Collier County, which it sounds good so far, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. So the county has already contractually obligated itself, I'd say improperly, to not unreasonably withhold the approval of this rezoning, which I think is problematic and is a fundamental issue that we have with regards to the lease and this whole process. I request that -- again, that this be denied. There's been no analysis of it being complementary to the surrounding land uses. The size and magnitude of the requested employee parking hasn't really been articulated except in the TIS, which I find odd, and that TIS is wrong as to the CAT numbers. And, again, if they were to use the landscape area to the east as opposed to landscaping it, they could have had, I'd submit, more employee parking on the east side adjacent to their current parking lot and part of that parking lot. Maybe they thought they would have to amend the Carlton Lakes PUD to do that and didn't want to incur the wrath of the neighbors for that -- I don't know -- or didn't want to open that door. I'd request then that, respectfully, that even with all these new additional provisions, that the rezoning of this property be denied. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: As an aside, no zoning may be unreasonably withheld. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Next speaker, James. MR. SABO: The last -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're going to have -- okay. Then we'll take a break. We'll come back after break after the next speaker. MR. SABO: Very good. Last one, Mara Marzano. MS. MARZANO: My name is Mara Marzano. I've been a resident of Collier County for 18 years, 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 22 of 38 and through that -- through the whole 18 years -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell your last name, too? MS. MARZANO: M-a-r-z as in zebra, a-n-o. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MS. MARZANO: For my entire time I have lived in the proximity of the Immokalee and Livingston Road intersection. It is an untenable position to put the entry onto Livingston Road and have that bus go across the three lanes of traffic and try to get into the parking lot there. There was a death, I believe, last year at the north gate of Carlton Lakes. It is such a dangerous intersection. It is an intersection in which it, entering season, if you're heading northbound during rush-hour traffic, traffic is at a standstill all the way to -- Immokalee and Livingston to Bonita Beach Road. It is a dangerous, dangerous thing that is being proposed here. And I would just like to say that I entirely support Mr. Pires' position, the positions of my neighbors -- my neighbor, Mr. Grandey, and Mr. Hirschfeld. I am the vice president of the Edgewater Association. We are Cobble Creek Court. We back directly to the building itself for Seed to Table, and we'll be affected across the street now from this particular parking lot. Once upon a time I served on a school board where they wanted to put a building in the wrong place. No doubt the building was needed, but it was the very wrong place. If you put this parking lot here and there are traffic fatalities that occur as a result of it or serious injury, that is something that you're going to have to live with. I don't know how many of you have ever bothered to go out there and drive or try and exit the Dunkin Donuts parking lot, try and exit Carlton Lakes Boulevard at the south or the north end and actually seen what is going on there in terms of traffic and safety. It is not a safe proposal, and it will come back to haunt you. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And with that, we are going to take a break till 10:40. We'll resume at 10:40 and I'll, at that time, ask if there's any other people who have not spoken that would still wish to speak. Thank you. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If everybody will take their seats, we'll resume the meeting. Okay. Well, we took our break. We left off with the end of the registered public speakers. And I'd like to make sure that everyone who wanted an opportunity to talk on this matter did so. So is there anybody here who has not registered and who has not spoken who would like to speak? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Seeing none -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: He raised his hand. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, sir, come on up. I'm sorry; I didn't see you. You'll need to identify yourself and spell your last name. MR. BOVE: My name is John Bove, B-o-v-e. And I just want to make two points about the traffic and also about the use of the building currently. The question I have is the use of the first -- the use of the building currently. Is there a TCO or ability for approval for commercial use of the building right now? Because there is baking and trucks coming out of the building. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But that -- sir, that whole issue's outside the scope of today's meeting. I can't answer that. MR. BOVE: Okay. And the second is, there has been two deaths related to the north side entrance on Livingston Road from our community and with the existing traffic. It is about eight-tenths of a mile from Immokalee Road, so it is at a distance that is in need with two communities on either side of Livingston that needs a traffic light very badly. The traffic going north is extensive in the evening, in the rush hours in the evening, starting at 3:00, 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 23 of 38 and certainly in the morning starting by 6 o'clock going south, people coming to and from work, school, and so on and so forth. So the need for a traffic light for public safety is so important, if all this particular parking is improved -- is approved, but -- because it is a tremendous high-volume area. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've spoke with transportation during break. They're going to come up and address that issue when we finish with public speakers. MR. BOVE: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else who has not spoken that would like to speak? No, you've -- we've already heard from you, sir. MR. MOGELVANG: Yeah. I only did four minutes. Can I do one more minute? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. Sir, we've already heard. You had your opportunity. We'll move now to staff responses to some of it. And I'd like to start with our environmental staff, because the first gentleman up had environmental issues which he questioned, and Summer Araque is here to address them. MS. ARAQUE: Summer Araque, environmental planning. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, did you hear the first gentleman who spoke today from the neighborhood explaining the black bear issue and other environmental issues he was concerned about on the property? MS. ARAQUE: Yes. So we require a black bear management plan for any areas at time of Site Development Plan where black bear are present in the area. Will there be any garbage on this facility? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I imagine there will be litter baskets, but to the effect that people or someone would be throwing stuff out of their car, there's no structures on the property. MS. ARAQUE: So, I mean, that would be addressed at time of Site Development Plan. We would request that they're bear proof. That's all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But your environmental review of this property, did it show any issues with species such as bear or anything else on the property where the parking lot's going itself? And if not, what about that wooded area; do you see that being changed at all? MS. ARAQUE: No bear on the property, but the bear points are always going to be basically nuisance calls, when we have a bear point. So you wouldn't have a nuisance call here because there's nobody living here; however, there have been reports of bear in this area. We've -- I think they've been in Delasol and probably Carlton Lakes and in this corridor. So we would just say, really, the issue would be the garbage. So make sure that those are bear-proof containers or resistant containers. And then in regards to the vegetation on the property, the entire property that we -- that is the PUD is an FP&L easement, so it's not subject to the preservation for the few pines that are on the property. So that, basically, covers the vegetation and the listed species. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Anybody have any -- go ahead. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. The gentleman also mentioned rattlesnakes. I haven't seen a decent-size rattlesnake in two decades, and I used to see them all the time. But are there an abnormal amount of rattlesnakes up there? MS. ARAQUE: I would have to look into that. What was the statement about the rattlesnakes? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: He said that there were rattle -- there's a big rattlesnake problem. That's what I thought I heard. MS. ARAQUE: I believe there's some gopher tortoise on the property. Those will need to be relocated, and the rattlesnakes could possibly be addressed during that time. When they go in for the parking lot, probably things like rattlesnakes may move off, but I can take a look at that to see how that can be addressed. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'm always curious when -- I could see out in Golden Gate where you've got a lot of wildlife corridors, but I'm always curious how bears get into heavily built-up areas like this. What, do they come down the Mirasol flowway or slough or something, or how do they get all the way in across Livingston Road and across all these big roads, or do they just live in there? MS. ARAQUE: I think they probably come from the east, but I don't think that they live in those particular areas. You know, like we've had them in Berkshire and so forth, but I think they just kind of 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 24 of 38 wander in every now and then. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Do they commute? Come in, go out, and -- MS. ARAQUE: Yes. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Park and Ride. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Park and Ride. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Summer. Appreciate it. Mike, if you could -- Mike Sawyer, if you could address the transportation issue, in particular the traffic light that we've heard a couple -- testimony -- some testimony about. MR. SAWYER: Again, for the record, Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. I guess, first off, staff is very concerned about any type of safety-related transportation issues that come up, and we would share concerns that the neighborhood has. I can also tell you that this particular intersection is definitely on our radar from an operational standpoint. There have been some incremental improvements done both with the signal itself as well as extending some of the turn lanes. As a sideline, this is one of the intersections that actually has an interesting aspect to it in that in the p.m. peak hour, Immokalee actually goes east to west. So p.m. peak, if you go east, the primary direction of the traffic is going east. If you head west, the primary traffic p.m. peak is going west. So it actually splits at this particular location at Livingston. So that can also cause a bit more conflict points when you've got traffic going in opposite directions like that. What I would like to do, certainly, is take and get email addresses so that I can follow up on this. We do have, when it comes to signals -- just to let you know, and I think we've talked about this at other times. We do have a signal warrant process. It is a national and state program that everybody follows. Basically, there's 12 different criteria that you go through to determine if a signal is warranted. The particular intersection I believe that they're talking about is the one that's shared with Carlton Lakes and Delasol. It is currently a very wide, full opening which, again, when you've got full openings on a divided six-lane roadway, you are going to have a lot of inherent conflicts with those, especially with a new use like this actually coming in, that would probably also be a good opportunity for when that is operational to do studies possibly before and definitely afterwards. So what I would like to do would be to get some email addresses from the residents and then follow up with them on that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because if you could help them move forward in determining whether or not the county would even allow a light at that intersection, I think that would be a big help, in seeing this maybe come out; at least help that one issue. So the gentlemen -- first two gentlemen here in this row were the ones that were mostly concerned in getting it. I think he's got a card for you. So when we finish, maybe you could grab his card and follow up. MR. SAWYER: That would be great. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions of Mike? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I thought the way you spoke that you think there might be a good idea having a light at this intersection. MR. SAWYER: At this point I haven't studied it at all. We do -- you know, as far as those warrants goes, there's 12 different ones, and there are -- as the chairman pointed out, there are limitations as far as distances from between signals as well as major intersections. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It's a little morbid, but we used to joke about deaths being a warrant. Is there a warrant for so many deaths? MR. SAWYER: Honestly, that is one of the criteria. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And what is it? MR. SAWYER: I will also tell you that because you've got a full opening, a signal isn't necessarily the only possible solution. There is an opportunity where perhaps a different solution would be possible to do something with that median as far as a modification. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: You mean close the median? MR. SAWYER: Partly close the median would be a part -- would be one solution, yes. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 25 of 38 COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: That's never a good idea. Okay. Just curious. MR. SAWYER: If it's a safety issue, it may be an alternative that you would want to look at. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I live in -- I live near Vanderbilt and Airport. I pick up my grandkids at those two schools up there on a regular basis in the middle of evening rush hour, and I never had a problem. I mean, of course, I'm retired. I'm not in a hurry to go anywhere. But, you know, it's -- I don't see a whole big issue. It's just traffic. Traffic moves slowly. But the people who live in that area might have other opinions. MR. EASTMAN: Stan, both of those schools would have traffic lights you could utilize to get to and from. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But I have to go through this area that they're talking about to get to those schools from where I live, and I, you know -- and that Dunkin Donuts, I use that all the time. And I just never have problems, but maybe I'm just there -- I'm there at evening rush hour, and I, you know, just -- it moves slow, but I don't consider it being dangerous. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mike? MR. SAWYER: That's why we do studies. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Mike. I don't think there's anything else. Nope. Now, there's -- some questions were posed by various members of the public, so before you get into rebuttal, I'd like to focus on the questions first, then whatever other time you want for rebuttal, we'll let you have that time you normally are allowed. The first one is the use of Carlton Lakes Boulevard and how the buses will interact. I didn't know that -- I thought you were going to go down Immokalee Road and make a U-turn or a left turn. I didn't know you were going to use Carlton Lakes Boulevard. Has someone taken a look to see if that is a public or private road or how that all operates? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I personally haven't but, yes, we've looked at and coordinated with county staff for the ability to do that. I just think it's important to understand the history of the shuttle bus concept in the first place, and perhaps it's no longer necessary because we're now doing a wall concept along Livingston Road. It was actually county's transportation operations who said we don't want people just jaywalking, if you will, across Livingston Road. Would you provide a shuttle bus to take them to and from your parking lot over to the business across the street, and we, of course, said, sure, no big deal. We'll do that. Now that we have a wall concept, I think it's much easier to funnel people down to Livingston Road and Immokalee Road, and they can simply walk in the identified crosswalk area. I'd like to go back and talk to transportation operations to see if that will resolve their concern about people crossing mid street. But that was the history of the shuttle requirement in the first place. It was in response to that concern. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: So if we could eliminate the shuttle, I think then the comments about using Carlton Lakes Boulevard resolves itself. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. On that -- and I'm not familiar with transportation's position on that, so we might have to ask them to re-explain that. The drop-off point if the shuttles came in would be further down Carlton Lakes Boulevard which, again, raises a question: Is that a Carlton Lakes maintained and operated road, or is that one -- I don't understand the ownership of that road, and I'm just wondering how -- if you had looked at it to determine -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I have not. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- you had that right to do even what you're suggesting. MR. YOVANOVICH: I haven't. I'm going to do something I try never to do, but I'm going to assume that the general public is using that now as well as -- we've heard testimony from Carlton Lakes saying how they're using the Dunkin Donuts parking lot to get to Immokalee Road. It's not a typical gated road that's private. It may be privately owned but open to the public. I don't know the answer, Mr. Strain, to that question. We have that situation probably throughout Collier County where you have -- you have roads that are maintained by a property owners association or an HOA, but they're open to the general public. I don't 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 26 of 38 know the answer. But I've not been provided any information that would prohibit the use of that road for the employee shuttle buses, and I don't think anybody's testified to that public use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I was just -- like I said, I had not -- I didn't know you were going to use that particular road. I thought you were going to Immokalee, so never did the research on Carlton Lakes Boulevard either. The question was asked how many employee spaces are left after the CAT spaces are removed. Can someone just tell us that answer? MR. YOVANOVICH: I was afraid you were -- do we know the answer? 222. Wow, 222. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Someone just asked for the amount, and I just -- that takes care of that. Do you have any objection to restricting -- a restriction against any special events or special-event parking? MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't believe so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Wait a minute. I can't say that, can I, Mr. Schmitt? I don't think so. No. Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that's -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You can say it for that, though. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I don't believe so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And do you have any objection to restricting vendors from using any of the parking? The intent is employees, so -- MR. YOVANOVICH: It was never intended for vendors, and I think that language is -- it already says it's employee parking, and the typical interpretation has always been if it doesn't say you can do something, that means you can't, but we'll put that language in to -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, it doesn't hurt to state it. MR. YOVANOVICH: We'll do it again. MR. KLATZKOW: The PUD language is the sole use as an employee parking area, right? MR. YOVANOVICH: That's what it says, but we'll go ahead and put that language in. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, a vendor might be a contract employee. I don't know. I'm just suggesting, though, that if any people are vendors, they -- it's not going to hurt to add the language, Jeff. MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It just makes it cleaner. And the other question I'm going to have of Michelle is the type of gate; had a question raised, too. I don't think you can answer that, so... MR. YOVANOVICH: I cannot answer that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then, when she finishes, if there's no other questions, we'll ask -- it will be rebuttal, and we'll wrap it up. Michelle? There you are. MS. ARNOLD: I can't answer what type of gate we're going to be doing at this point. We're coordinating with the Public Utilities on that and FP&L to figure that whole thing out. I really -- I can't answer that question at this point. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you'll have it at the time of SDP? MS. ARNOLD: Yeah. We'll know that by then; we should know that by then. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The question was asked. I don't have an answer either, so I thought you might have; that's why I was asking. MS. ARNOLD: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And then with that, Rich or Bob, whoever's going to -- you have a rebuttal opportunity if you'd like. MR. YOVANOVICH: Just real briefly. I mean, we obviously have -- we've submitted our application materials. Your staff has found them sufficient for purposed of review for the criteria that apply 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 27 of 38 for both the Comp Plan amendment as well as the rezone request. Your staff has found that we meet all of the criteria. Mr. Mulhere, who's a professional planner, has provided testimony through written documents and through today that we meet all of the criteria. It would be unreasonable to deny a rezone that meets all of the applicable criteria. We would request that the Planning Commission, with the modifications that we've made today, forward a recommendation of approval. In my professional opinion, this is not contract zoning. We still have to meet the criteria. If we don't meet the criteria under the lease, the county can say no and would not be in violation of the lease. It's not -- there are other instances where the county owns property that it has contracted to sell or lease, and it's gone through the same type of analysis that we're going through today. It's not contract zoning just simply because the county is the owner of the property. We are still obligated to meet the criteria, we've met the criteria, and we request that the Planning Commission forward both applications to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. And before we close the public hearing -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Could I ask one question? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Go ahead. Stan. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And I know this is about the parking lot and not the store. But is the store just a bigger version of the one Oakes Farm has on Davis Boulevard? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I don't believe so. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Different concept totally? MR. YOVANOVICH: But I don't know because I haven't been to the store recently on Davis, so I can't provide any factual testimony. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Honestly, that's getting off topic -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I know. I'm just curious. I know this doesn't involve the store. I'm just curious. MR. YOVANOVICH: We'll be happy to talk to you outside of this venue to fill you in on the details. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Never mind. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That would be a better opportunity, yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: And then that way I make sure I don't misspeak since it's not really relevant to what we're here for today. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question, and you might not like it. But I'm bringing the store back. How can you not -- how can you get an okay to build Oakes Farm and not contain everything on Oakes Farm? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Rich, you don't have to answer that. And I'd like to turn the County Attorney's Office. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Jeff -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're getting off -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Now, wait a minute. Why -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane, the store is not part of -- COMMISSIONER EBERT: If you're in Carlton Lakes but you don't have enough parking, you go to some other place that's residential. This is not right. And you're saying that Seed to Table is less space than what Albertson's has. That's not true. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane, this is about the PUD for the parking lot. That's all it is. There's not structures on it. Now, your desire to bring in another PUD, I understand that. But this isn't the Board to do it at. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Well, too bad. It's still all related. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 28 of 38 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It is related only to the extent that it's limited to employee parking. The operations of that store have nothing to do with this parking lot. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I saw it done once before. There was a nursery on Davis Boulevard where Crown Pointe is now, and they put parking in the FP&L easement, and that's how I got familiar with the fact that FP&L generally pays enough for their easement to buy the land, but they don't want the land because then you have maintenance and liability headaches. So we went through exactly the same thing there. And they were allowed to park on the FP&L easement for the nursery. It's about 25 years ago, but -- and eventually that all went away, but I've seen it done before. MR. YOVANOVICH: Not to get into the other property, but if you actually read the FP&L documents, we are not allowed to have any required parking for another project's use on this property. This is a stand-alone employee parking lot. It has nothing to do with legal requirements for a totally different piece of property. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'm not -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Did you finish your rebuttal? MR. YOVANOVICH: I thought so. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I believe you did. Anybody else have any questions before we close the public hearing? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we'll close the public hearing, and we can start with discussion and then move into a motion if there's some discussion. Does anybody have any discussion? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I do. I will not be approving this, and I'll tell you why: It is because this is so separate when it really should be all connected. I don't know when you came in front of us for an okay for Oakes Farm. I have no idea when that was brought in front of us. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I can tell you if you'd like, Diane. It was Carlton Lakes PUD, and it was done -- it was started in 1988, and it was revised in 1992 and again in 1994, '95, and '99. So '99 -- so it was before your time on this board. So that's just to let you know. COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's fine, but it's -- this store is bigger than what Albertson's is, and you're supposed to be able to keep everything on your own property, and you're taking the Carlton Lakes and you're putting it over in Willoughby Acres. It is not right. I will not be approving this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Any type of review for the store will still have to meet the parking requirements for the store, period. It has to. It's the -- they have to design the parking lot based on the requirements of the square footage of the store. So this has nothing to do with that. If that's an SDP that comes in for approval, they have to have all the required parking because it's a separate entity. They have to have the required parking for handicap. So this does not waive or alleviate any of the on-site requirements at Carlton Lakes. It does not. It's an addition to as far as parking, but it doesn't relieve them any of the requirements. Is that -- I believe that's correct. MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Schmitt, you may be correct. I'd like to hear staff say that, though, whether or not staff's going to include this as part of the calculations or, as you said, this is just in addition. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I anticipated that question. Staff had already responded to me on that question. And now we'll get a response for the record. MR. McLEAN: Matt McLean, director of Development Review. Yes, that's correct, Mr. Schmitt, as you described. The property where the Seed to Table store is has to meet all of the requirements of the Land Development Code on its site and has done so through site development permitting. MR. KLATZKOW: So this is just additional parking. It will not be viewed in the context of the Site Development Plan approval? MR. McLEAN: That's correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's the way I interpreted it. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Code is one thing. The real world is something else. Most 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 29 of 38 of the time we have people put in so many code spaces that they're not used. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And here we have -- we realize that these people might have more need for parking than the code calls for. Code is one thing; the real world is different. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Matt? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Diane. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'm going to ask a question of Matt. Matt, is the extra parking needed because of the occupancy load of Seed to Table? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It cannot be. MR. KLATZKOW: No. By definition, this additional parking is not needed. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Additional parking is not needed? MR. KLATZKOW: By definition. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've reviewed the SDP at two different stages, and I can assure you at the last stage I reviewed it the number of parking spaces were -- on the other side were in excess of the required number of parking. I think it was 267 was required, and they have 280, if I'm not mistaken. MR. McLEAN: That's correct. It's about 15 or so that's more. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So not only have they met the requirements on the site they're operating on for that, but they've exceeded it. This, again, is a parking lot for employee-only parking; very limited. Anybody else have any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I -- just a few statements to make. I tried to review this. When it first came in, there were things that I felt weren't properly addressed in response to the neighborhood information meeting. I went through it very carefully. I asked the applicant in a meeting to make some changes that would tighten it up, especially the use of Piper Boulevard. I also asked for the distance of that forested piece to make sure it was substantially wide enough to be a decent buffer even if they hadn't put the buffer in they're intending to. The buffer they're putting in includes a masonry or concrete masonry wall around the entire -- I don't know if it's masonry -- concrete wall around the entire facility, with gates. So, I mean, this is as tight as I can expect to get it with the exception of some of the changes we discussed today. The changes the applicant put on record, the new TIS, the options of the shuttle for Carlton Lakes Boulevard -- and I would like to suggest, Richard, you had -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know if it's appropriate. I didn't speak to the gentleman from Carlton Lakes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you can resolve it now, then that might save a stipulation. MR. YOVANOVICH: And if I get this wrong, please correct me. We actually pay to use that road. We pay the association to use the road, so that's why we have the right to use the road. So I didn't know that, obviously; else I would have said it. But this gentleman who does know corrected me and told me, and I hope I said it right on the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So I guess that answers the question. Then the other two things were special events. They've agreed to a limitation of special events and parking for special events, and they've agreed to adding that no vendors will be using the parking lot. Other than what was already changed today and with those stipulations, I don't know how to make this any tighter. It is a parking lot. There are uses that could be put next to residential that are far more intense than parking lots. This is going to have lighting that's much lower than code generally allows. It will be shielded. The hours of operation and change of shifts are off peak. I drive that intersection all the time, and I can tell you I empathize with anything you have to do on Immokalee Road, but I don't think this one is going to cause, off peak, that much of a disturbance. So I would suggest that this is the best we can do, or at least I think we can do at this point. And with that, is there a motion by anybody on the Planning Commission? 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 30 of 38 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I make a motion that we approve PL2017003768. That's the Comprehensive Plan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: CPSS2018-8, and the item is the PUD-PL20170003766. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The first motion, though, will be just for the small-scale plan amendment; is that okay? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Small-scale plan amendment for the first motion, and I also -- then I'll make a motion for the other one as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So that's a motion to recommend approval? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Subject to the stipulations we discussed: The additional language in the PUD regarding -- that was introduced at today's meeting, and the stipulations of no vendors and special events. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now, not all those will end up being in the small-scale plan amendment side of it, but the intent is clear. With that, is there any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I do, and the reason for it is if you have enough parking over in the Carlton Lakes in that parking lot with 280, let the employees park there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the motion carries 5-1. With that, Mr. Schmitt, did you want to make the second -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. I'll make a motion for the complementary item, at least. It's the PUD zoning, PUDZ-PL2017003766, and that's the PUD amendment. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With the same stipulation added to it that you -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Same stipulation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- reiterated in the first one? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Subject to the stipulation that -- of the language as introduced today that made the changes to the use: No vendor uses and no special events. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick (sic), seconded by Patrick. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 5-1. Thank you, all. ***That will take us to the next item on today's agenda. This is a continued item from last -- or two 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 31 of 38 meetings ago, I believe. It's called the White Lake Corporate Park Planned Unit Development. It's PL20170004428. All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Disclosures? We'll start with Tom. MR. EASTMAN: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have talked to the applicant, the utility staff, the staff, gone through a lot of the files, got some cleanup language that came through, and I think there's even more as a result of utilities review that might be put on the overhead today. Diane (sic)? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Or Karen. I'm sorry. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Patrick? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Just discussions with staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Whoever's going to make the presentation. MR. VANASSE: Good morning. My name is Patrick Vanasse. I'm a certified planner with RWA. Happy to be here today to discuss this PUD amendment to the White Lake Corporate Park. Joining me this morning is John Agnelli, who is in the audience who's representing the applicant. I've got a brief presentation. I know you've got the information in your packet. I can forego the presentation. I know everybody wants to get to lunch at some point. So at your discretion I can walk you through our request or just go to questions, comments, and talk about the substantive issues that have been changed since the initial application. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think you ought to just run through the changes since the last Planning Commission meeting so the record's clear, and then we'll -- and any other issues we have, we'll get into them with you. MR. VANASSE: Okay. So we continued the last hearing two weeks ago because a few comments came up. There was discussion with staff about those issues. The first one was this conversion ratio that was part of our request. The existing PUD has a conversion ratio in there. There's a commercial tract with a square-footage limitation associated with commercial space. The conversion ratio says that if you want to build hotel rooms, a commensurate amount of commercial space is deducted from that total. Recently the county has heard certain other petitions where the conversion ratios were getting very complicated, very confusing, so we were asked to go back, and instead of just doing a very quick version analysis that we provided to staff, to do a full TIS and, through that TIS, come up with a trip cap for the commercial component. And that's what we did. We worked with staff. We did a full TIS. That should be part of your packet. Staff reviewed it. Staff supported it. And we now have the trip cap identified in two sections. The PUD -- I'll put that on the illustrator. One is Section 4.2. And as you can see, the portion that is underlined is the new language. And we capped the trips associated with p.m. peak hour. The other place where the cap is identified is in the PUD commitments under 5.5. And, again, that p.m. peak-hour cap is reiterated in that commitment. Another issue that came up was associated with an existing condition in the PUD for internal utilities looping. I think I'm going to have to provide a little background information to address this issue. The White Lake PUD was initially approved 29 years ago. One of the first parcels to develop within that PUD was the Shaw Aerospace parcel. I'll pull up the PowerPoint, because I've got an exhibit of that; it will be easier to follow along. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 32 of 38 Can you switch over to the -- okay. This is the PUD where my cursor is, is the northernmost -- this large parcel was where Shaw Aerospace was located. And when they went in and built and obtained their permits, they sized their utility lines only for their project, and they didn't stub out those lines to allow for this internal looping. So we were asked by staff, as part of this amendment, please address this condition of internal looping. Let's change it, and let's make sure that it's not something that hangs over this PUD moving forward. So, as mentioned, this project has been in operation for 29 years. The utility service provided with those existing utilities is excellent. There is no issue. There is no need for the looping to make the system work. So the language was changed to address that and to address any concerns with the adjacent property owners if they wanted to connect to our system. And what was clarified in there was that we shall provide utility easements for any connection from the adjacent properties. I think through the discussion with Commissioner Strain and staff, the concern was we just need to make it very clear in that language that for some reason should anybody within the White Lake Commerce Park request external looping, the cost to do that would not be borne by the county, by the county or public utilities. So we have made some changes to that condition. I have that with me. I will put that on the illustrator and pass out some copies. We've met with staff, the utilities staff, to go over that condition. We have also met with the County Attorney's Office. Everybody is in support of the proposed language. And I just need this -- to find this in my paperwork here. Can we switch over to the overhead? The section highlighted in yellow is that new language that would not be part of your packet but, again, that we've worked with Utilities Department, we've worked with the County Attorney's Office. Everybody is in support of this language and, basically, the language makes it very clear that any cost, should internal or external looping ever be requested, shall not be borne by the county. So with that said, that -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: So the language is in your package. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Pardon me? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: The language is in your package. This language did make it. MR. VANASSE: Okay. That is -- it did make it? Sorry. Well, I did make it, so you do have it in your packet. That concludes the changes that were made since the initial packet was sent out, and I can answer any question you may have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just real -- just a quick question, I think. Let's see. No, I don't -- did this make it into the -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Yeah, it's in my packet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. SABO: Supplemental report. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, okay. Now I've got it. Anybody have any questions of the applicant? Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: As far as the design requirements, you still have to comply with all of the requirements as specified in Activity Center No. 9? MR. VANASSE: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, okay. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It's been a long time since I saw this project. There's -- is there a reason they didn't loop -- they didn't stick a stub-out of the road out of Shaw Arrow? This -- usually you would see a loop road around the whole project, but this one -- Shaw Arrow is like a cul-de-sac, and there's a cul-de-sac coming from the other end, and that's it. Like it was never intended to tie together. MR. VANASSE: My understanding is, it wasn't. I don't have that full history. I've been on this project in recent years, but dating back 30 years... 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 33 of 38 COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I think you'll see my name on some of that stuff from 30 years ago, and I'm trying to remember exactly why we did that, and... MR. VANASSE: I don't have the answer. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: John? MR. VANASSE: John may know. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I don't think John even knows. I was just curious if anybody remembered, because my memory's a little fuzzy. Old age. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There is one change to the language that you've added here that is not in the version that was sent to us. In the version that's in the PUD in front of us, Page 7 of 8, the fifth line up from the bottom says, "Land acquisition, piping, and other utilities/infrastructure." What you've got here is land acquisition, engineering, permitting, and construction costs for piping or other utility infrastructure." So I think you've enhanced that a bit from what's in the PUD I've got in front of me, and I don't know if I've got the most current one. I believe that came as a request of utilities. They added some of that to make sure the construction costs and everything else were included. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: That's correct. It's not in the version you have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So this does need to be entered into the PUD. So you do need to put your highlighted language in there. MR. VANASSE: Yep. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: It's just not the whole thing. It was just the engineering permit. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. You'll make the corrections? MR. VANASSE: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I don't have anything else. With that, we'll go to staff report. James? MR. SABO: James Sabo, for the record. Staff Zoning Division recommends approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there any members of the public here to speak on this matter? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, we will close the public hearing and entertain a motion. Anybody on the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'll make a motion that we approve PUDA-PL20170004428, White Lake Corporate Park. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With the subject change that was introduced? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: With the language that was introduced, yes. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and seconded. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 34 of 38 (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0. Thank you. MR. VANASSE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ***Next item up, and last one for today, is 9D. It's PL20170001326. It's the Esperanza Place RPUD located on the north side of Immokalee Drive. All those wishing to testify on this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Disclosures: We'll start with Tom. MR. EASTMAN: None. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I spoke with the applicant's representative, Mr. Arnold, and went through the various records that I could find in the file system. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Karen? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I asked Wayne Arnold two questions just prior to the meeting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Patrick? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, Wayne, it's all yours. MR. ARNOLD: Great. Good morning, Chairman and Planning Commission members. I'm Wayne Arnold, certified planner with Q. Grady Minor & Associates. With me today is Dotty Cook, who is with Rural Neighborhoods and part of the ownership team; I have Matt Hermanson from Q. Grady Minor & Associates who's assisting on the engineering aspects of the project; David Corbin is the project architecture that's representing the shelter component of the project; and Jim Banks was our traffic engineering component. We're all here to answer questions that you may have. We want to give you as much information as you may need to hopefully support the project. Esperanza Place is a partially developed what is currently a residential only PUD in Immokalee off of Immokalee Drive. There are a series of multifamily buildings that have been constructed, and the intent of the amendment is to take part of what is known as Tract A and allow for group housing use for the emergency shelter and transitional housing component that we're proposing. That, of course, displaces an area that could be used for more of the housing. So we're having a reduction in the overall density to account for the area that is proposed to be developed for the shelter. You can see the bottom left of the exhibit where the existing multifamily homes have been built, some of the water management system's in place, and then part of the internal street infrastructure has been constructed. That is the existing master plan. You can see that it depicts on the left side of the project the series of multifamily buildings, some of which have been constructed. The northern part of Tract A is where the group housing component is proposed to be, and that results in a modification to the master plan that looks like this. And you can see we've taken out the series of buildings to the north. So Tract A would allow continuation of the multifamily buildings; it would allow for the group housing. We also added "single-family" reference because the emergency shelter may, in fact, build some transitional housing that would be separate cottage-type structures. So we would put those in as a single-family type residence, similar to what the local shelter has completed already. We've, obviously, added group housing development standards, and we added reference to the childcare center that could be a component of not only the multifamily residential but part of the shelter itself where they would have some childcare services. That, in essence, are the changes that we're proposing. I do have a correction in the PUD document, 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 35 of 38 Mr. Chairman, which is Exhibit A to the ordinance. The lead-in paragraph under the residential component still references the old density of 8.2 units per acre. We're, obviously, reducing the number of units. It now equates to a density of about 5.03 dwelling units per acre. You were provided with the affordable housing density bonus agreement in your package. I understand you-all don't take separate action on that. But there probably will need to be an adjustment in there, too, to reflect a percentage change that Cormac pointed out to me this morning. It's a minor edit. It doesn't affect the density. This project was previously approved and needed the eight units per acre. We now need the density of five. So we're asking for a bonus density of -- effectively of one dwelling unit per acre. Your staff has found it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have. David Corbin's here that's been doing work. If you have more specifics about the shelter component, he's got a floor plan and things of that nature if anyone cares to see that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions of the applicant? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne, I've just got one question, so just two points. At two different locations, when you said single-family, you said "single-family detached dwelling units," but yet in your standards table you've got "detached and attached." Why don't you just say "single-family dwelling units"? What does it matter whether it's detached or attached in these parcels since they can -- most of them had them originally anyway? MR. ARNOLD: So just to be clear, Mr. Strain, under the Exhibit A, 1A. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 1B. MR. ARNOLD: One B, where it says "detached," you're suggesting just to simply strike and just say "single-family"? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: "Single-family dwelling units," like you say ahead of it "multifamily dwelling units." I'm not sure why anybody would care. And you say that you have a similar reference on Tract C on Page 3 of 11 under 1B. MR. ARNOLD: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So, I mean, it doesn't really make a difference. MR. ARNOLD: It doesn't to me. I know that Tract C was unique because it was going to be truly a single-family detached residence. But I'm happy to strike the reference. I don't think it changes anything of substance. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't think it does either, so I would suggest that. Other than that, there wasn't anything else that I saw I had any questions on. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there a staff report? MR. SABO: Yes, Mr. Chairman. James Sabo, for the record. Zoning Division reviewed the petition and recommends approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Any questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, are there any registered public speakers, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: No speakers have registered. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any members of the public wish to speak on this issue? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, we will -- MR. STONE: Chairman Strain? Scott Stone, for the record. Just for clarification, the affordable housing agreement will not be part of the PUD document, so when it goes to the Board, they're going to be separate agenda items. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good idea. Thank you. Okay. With that, we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion. The only change would be the change -- or striking of the word "detached" in two locations and then separating out the affordable 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 36 of 38 housing and those corrections that Wayne noted for the record. MR. ARNOLD: You need to correct the density to be 5.03 instead of 8. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 5.03, okay. Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To recommend approval subject to the changes discussed? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there -- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Second by Karen. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 6-0. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you very much. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that gets us through today's agenda. And it takes us -- there's no new business listed. There's no old business listed. Is there any public comment? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I have a question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I like this new system where I can get online and look at the packet, except what I get is a link to something, and every page is consecutively numbered. I can't access an individual piece of it. Like, if I want to access this last one, I have to go through it all, find what page it's on, write the page down, and keep that in there. Is it functioning like that for everybody -- COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Yes. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: -- or am I the only one that's -- that just -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You guys that use Microsoft, that's Microsoft. That's -- yes. That's why I don't use Microsoft. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: You know, I might go back to the thumb drive, because the thumb drive I would get it, and I could access each individual piece. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I think what you do is download it, and it downloads to a PDF, which is what you got on your thumb drive, correct? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And you're reading it through a PDF reader. You can make notes on it or other -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So if I download to a PDF, it will have individual sections on it? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You download -- no. It's still a merged PDF document. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Then I don't like it. I'll live with it, but I don't like it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You would have to then refer to your notes. How does it -- you can -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Apple has built-in programs where you can separate it all out, yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, you could go to a PDF reader and separate, but -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah, but it's difficult to get it the different one -- you know, 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 37 of 38 when I'm at home and I've got all the time in the world, I can go page after page and scroll and scroll, and all of a sudden I'm at Page 329, and here I mark it, it's the second item. But when I'm in here, that's -- it's difficult to move around the document. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I agree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know, it might help if you went back and -- I mean, I'm sure Judy, if she's watching, is probably cringing under her desk now. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Hi, Judy. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you might want to just get the flash drives, because they worked for you, didn't they? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: They worked fine, yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You might want to just ask Judy to give you a flash drive from now on. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'm thinking of going back to that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To me -- I didn't initiate what you're dealing with. And that's one reason -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: See, I thought we'd get a system like when you get into the Board agenda, you can pop things up and get to individual items, and they all have their own individual sections in there. You can move around easily -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Maybe that's possible -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: -- but our agenda's not set up like the Board agenda. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I believe that's possible. When they load it into the -- would you check, Ray -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I think it does work that way. I'm looking at it on a phone, and it's pulling up the staff report independently, the PUD ordinance independently. So it should work. I'm on the Accela link. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. So I'm doing something wrong, you're telling me? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, I believe you are. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: You know, I'm going to go with the thumb drive. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Have your grandchildren show you how to use it. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I have three grandchildren. I will bring them to the meeting if I can get them out of school up there on Immokalee Road, because it's so hard to travel up Livingston Road this time of day. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you go to the thumb drive, to save Judy a lot of work, would you just bring your computer to Ray one of these days and ask him -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: It's here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- to show you? Well, maybe you can do it while we're here today after we finish. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: He showed me last time -- MR. BELLOWS: Keep playing with it. COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: -- and I got it up, but it's the same thing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, I take my -- I'll make it into a PDF so I can make notes on the document. Once you do that, it's one single PDF document unless I go in and flag it with the -- COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'm going to go with the thumb drive. Could I get a thumb drive next time? MR. BELLOWS: I'll talk to Judy, and we'll -- but I think you still should play with it, because I think it is very useful. I find it very useful. COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Stan? COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'm too old to play with it, Ray. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think we've had enough public comment. Is there a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by? All of us. We're out of here. Thank you. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) August 16, 2018 Page 38 of 38 ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:37 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION _____________________________________ MARK STRAIN, CHAIRMAN ATTEST CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER These minutes approved by the Board on ____________, as presented ______ or as corrected _____. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. 5.A.1 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: 8-16-2018 CCPC Minutes (6723 : August 16, 2018 CCPC Minutes) 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 8.A Item Summary: PUDZ-PL20170001733: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2005-36, the Regal Acres Residential Planned Unit Development, by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 184 to 300; by amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 23.15+/- acres of land zoned rural Agricultural (A) to the Regal Acres RPUD; by revising the development standards; by amending the master plan; adding deviations; revising developer commitments and by approval of an affordable housing density bonus agreement for the added 23.15 acres that will generate 46 bonus units for low or moderate income residents. The property is located on the west side of Greenway Road east of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951), and north of U.S. 41, in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 59.90+/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator: C. James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: James Sabo 09/11/2018 3:17 PM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 09/11/2018 3:17 PM Approved By: Review: Zoning Michael Bosi Review Item Completed 09/11/2018 3:40 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/12/2018 8:11 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 11:46 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 2:54 PM Zoning Judy Puig Review Item Skipped 09/13/2018 9:56 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 09/13/2018 10:10 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 8.A Packet Pg. 44 PUDZ-PL20170001733, REGAL ACRES RPUD September 10, 2017 MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20170001733, PUDZ REGAL ACRES The CCPC heard petition PUDZ-PL20170001733, for the Regal Acres RPUD on September 6, 2018. The CCPC voted 6-0 to approve the petition subject to the following revisions to the PUD Document and the CCPC voted to bring the petition back on the consent agenda at the September 20, 2018 hearing: • The denial of deviation #3 related to trees • Reduction in the preserve uses • Addition of the minimum width of preserves to the PUD master plan • Showing locations of the 8-foot wall • Articulation of the proposed buffers as discussed • Addition of an 8-foot security fence along back of lots between preserves • To permit only fee simple single-family detached houses • Addition of a detailed buffer exhibit • Relocation of the recreation area to the hammerhead road area • Addition of a reference to the recreation area location under 3.3.E The above revisions have been incorporated into the PUD Document. Please see the attached strike thru and underline PUD Document and Exhibits. 8.A.1 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: MEMO to CCPC 9-20-18 (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Revised June 28, 2005 September 10, 2018 Strike-through is text deleted Underline is text added REGAL ACRES RPUD A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND SUPPORTING CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN GOVERNING REGAL ACRES, A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DESIGNED PURSUANT TO APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. PREPARED FOR: HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY, INC. 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST NAPLES, FLORIDA 34113 PREPARED BY: COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC. 3106 South Horseshoe Drive 2350 Stanford Court Naples, Florida 34104 34112 Tel. 239-643-2324 (239) 334-0046 Fax 239-643-4364 (239) 334-3661 vcautero@cecifl.com Date Reviewed By CCPC Date Reviewed By BCC Ordinance Number 2005-36 Amendments and Repeal 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) ii Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF EXHIBITS STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SECTION III RESIDENTIAL AREAS PLAN SECTION IV PRESERVE AREAS SECTION IV DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS SECTION VI DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC PAGE ii iii 1 2 3 5 8 7 11 16 10 17 22 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) iii Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" LIST OF EXHIBITS RPUD MASTER PLAN – PARCEL A RPUD MASTER PLAN – PARCEL B PARCEL OWNERSHIP 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 1 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 36.75 +59.9 acres of property in Collier County, as a Residential Planned Unit Development to be known as the Regal Acres RPUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The +59.9 acre property is comprised of two development parcels. Development PARCEL A is +36.75 acres approved by Ordinance #05-36. Development PARCEL B is +23.15 acres. The residential facilities of the Regal Acres RPUD will be consistent with the objectives and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) for the following reasons: 1. The subject property's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services permits the development's residential density as described in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element. 2. The project development is compatible and complimentary to surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. 3. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable sections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. 4. The project development is planned to protect the functioning of natural drainage features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as described in Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Stormwater Management Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 5. The project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, on the Future Land Use Map. The project is designated as an Affordable Housing Density Bonus project. The Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreements for PARCEL A and PARCEL B are is a companion documents to this RPUD document. The projected density of 5.00 dwelling units per acre across the total RPUD area of +59.9 acres is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan based on the following relationships to required criteria: PARCEL A Affordable Housing Project Within the Urban Residential Subdistrict Base Density 4 dwelling units/acre Traffic Congestion Area -1 dwelling units/acre Affordable Housing Density Bonus +2 dwelling units/acre Maximum Permitted Density 5 dwelling units/acre Requested gross density Maximum permitted units Requested dwelling units = 5.0 dwelling units/acre = 36.75 acres x 5 dwelling units/acre = 184 units = 184 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 2 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added PARCEL B Affordable Housing Project Within the Urban Residential Subdistrict Base Density 4 dwelling units/acre Coastal High Hazard Area -1 dwelling units/acre Affordable Housing Density Bonus +2 dwelling units/acre Maximum Permitted Density 5 dwelling units/acre Requested gross density = 5.0 dwelling units/acre Maximum permitted units = 23.15 acres x 5 dwelling units/acre = 116 units Requested dwelling units = 116 TOTAL DWELLING UNITS FOR PARCEL A & PARCEL B = 300 units 6. In accordance with the Land Development Code and the Impact Fee Ordinance, the purchasers of the subject homes in PARCEL A shall qualify as low-income buyers and the purchasers of the subject homes in PARCEL B shall qualify as low or moderate- income buyers. 7. All final local development orders for this project are subject to Section 6.02.00, Adequate Public Facilities requirements, of the Collier County LDC. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 3 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name of the Regal Acres RPUD. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION – PARCEL A The +59.9 acre property is comprised of two development parcels. PARCEL A is +36.75 acres approved by Ordinance # 05-36, and the legal description is as follows: THAT PART OF THOSE LANDS AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1689 AT PAGE 832 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12, N00°1 l '20"E, 2,743.15 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12, N00°27'50"E 894.35 FEET FOR A PLACE OF BEGINNING; THENCE N89°56'55"W 1,361.53 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE N00°34'06"E 490.98 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE S89°56'55"E 1,360.64 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 12 S00°27'52"W 490.97 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING; BEING IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINS 15.34 ACRES MORE OR LESS. LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 2052 AT PAGE 812 OF SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12, N00°11'20"E, 2,743.15 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SECTION 12, N00°27'50"E 894.35 FEET FOR A PLACE OF BEGINNING; THENCE N89°56'55"W 443.00 FEET; THENCE N00°34'06"E 490.97 FEET; THENCE S89°56'55"E 443.00 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 12 S00°27'50"W 490.98 FEET, TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. BEING IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 4 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINS 5 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. AN EASEMENT FOR UTILITIES AND FOR ROADWAY INGRESS AND EGRESS IS RESERVED OVER AND THROUGH THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET OF THIS PROPERTY BY THE GRANTEES, THEIR HEIRS AND ASSIGNS IN PERPETUITY. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. AND TOGETHER WITH THE SOUTH HALF (S-1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (LESS THE EASTERLY 30.00 FEET THEREOF) AND THE SOUTH HALF (S-1/2) OF THE SOUTH HALF (S-1/2) OF THE NORTH HALF (N-1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (LESS THE EASTERLY 30.00 FEET THEREOF) CONTAINS 26.41 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION – PARCEL B The +59.9 acre property is comprised of two development parcels. PARCEL B is +23.15 acres, and the legal description is as follows: PARCEL No. 00737760008 & 00741080606 (ORB 3959, PG 3581) THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, EXCEPTING THE NORTH 30 FEET THEREOF, WHICH IS RESERVED FOR ROAD PURPOSES, AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, EXCEPTING THE NORTH 30 FEET THEREOF, WHICH IS RESERVED FOR ROAD PURPOSES, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. TOGETHER WITH THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: PARCEL No. 00738280008 (ORB 4467, PG 1397) NORTH 1/2 OF THE SW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TRACT 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 E. PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY TAX DEED OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 875, PAGE 445, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TOGETHER WITH THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: PARCEL No. 00737720006 (ORB 5083, PG 657) THE WEST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONTAINING TEN (10) 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 5 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added ACRES, MORE OR LESS, EXCEPTING THE NORTH 30 FEET THEREOF, WHICH IS RESERVED FOR ROAD PURPOSES. TOGETHER WITH THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL: PARCEL No. 00741100104 (ORB 5441, PG 1850) (PER TITLE COMMITMENT) THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 (NW 1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 (NE 1/4) OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS AND EXCEPTION THAT PORTION LYING IN THE WEST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4. ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE EAST 1,018.64 FEET OF THE NORTH 30 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The northern portion (26.75 +/- acres) of the subject property is owned by Habitat for Humanity, Inc., a Florida Corporation, 11145 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida 34113. The remaining southern portion (10.00 +/- acres) is owned by Mr. Eugene U. Frey, 4101 GulfShore Boulevard North, Naples Florida 34103. After all approvals for development have been granted, Mr. Frey will donate his portion of the subject property to Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc.. The ownership of PARCEL A and PARCEL B is provided in Exhibit C. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA A. The subject property is located on the west side of Greenway Road, approximately 3½ miles east of Collier Boulevard (C.R.951) and approximately one mile north of U.S.41. B. The entire project site currently is was zoned RSF-5(3) and is proposed to be rezoned to RPUD. PARCEL A is zoned RPUD pursuant to Ordinance # 05-36. PARCEL B is zoned Rural Agriculture (A) and is proposed to be rezoned RPUD. 1.5 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A The project site is primarily located within the Coastal Drainage Basin according to the Collier County Drainage Atlas. Storm water runoff from the proposed home sites and roadways will be 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 6 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added directed to two surface water management lakes for storage and water quality treatment. The lakes will discharge to the canal to the west side of the property as mandated by the County. The average ground elevation is 6.0 NGVD. The water management system of the project will consist of a perimeter berm with crest elevation facilities set at or above the 25-year, 3-day peak flood stage. Water quality pretreatment will be accomplished in consist of an on-site lakes with and landscape buffer areas. The water management system will be permitted by Collier County. All rules and regulations of SFWMD will be imposed upon this project including but not limited to: storm attenuation, minimum roadway centerline, perimeter berm and finished floor elevations, water quality pre- treatment, and wetland hydrology maintenance. The surface water management system for PARCEL A is permitted through the South Florida Water Management District under Environmental Resource Permit No. 11‐03051 and includes two wet detention lakes discharging to the Collier County Canal System at the Greenway Road swale. PARCEL B Stormwater runoff will be collected by a series of swales and inlets and directed to a proposed water management lake which will be connected to the PARCEL A lake system. The outfall location for the RPUD will remain unchanged, but the outfall structure will be modified to accommodate the new flows. Due to the interconnected nature of the project, the minimum road and finished floor elevations in PARCEL A and PARCEL B are anticipated to be the same. The system’s lakes will provide the detention volume required to meet the South Florida Water Management District’s treatment and attenuation requirements. The system will attenuate the runoff from PARCEL B to the allowable discharge rate of 24 csm (cubic feet per second per square mile) for Belle Meade in the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. According to the Collier County Soil Survey prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), four soil map units are present on the RPUD site. These common soils are #2 Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum, #3 Malabar fine sand, #20 Fort drum and Malabar high fine sands, and #27 Holopaw fine sand. 1.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Regal Acres RPUD is an approximately 59.9 acre project comprised of two (2) development parcels delineated in the PUD Master Plan as PARCEL A and PARCEL B. PARCEL A is approximately 36.75 acres and is built-out with 184 multi-family dwelling units, accessory recreational facilities, and supportive infrastructure. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 7 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added Site Data – PARCEL A ACRES PERCENT Infrastructure and Roads 2.41 6.6 Residential Roof & Driveway 9.50 25.8 Lakes 5.63 15.3 Flood Plain Compensation 2.98 8.1 Residential Open Space 9.91 27.0 Other Open Space 6.32 17.2 TOTAL PARCEL A ACREAGE 36.75+ 100.0 PARCEL B is approximately 23.15 acres and will develop as a residential community with a maximum of 116 dwelling units, accessory common recreation space, preserves, pathways, and supportive infrastructure. a maximum of 184 residential units. These units are intended to be developed as a duplex project. This is an affordable housing project and an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement is a companion document to this RPUD document Site Data – PARCEL B Data is approximate and subject to change. ACRES PERCENT Infrastructure and Roads including Sidewalks & Pathways (maximum) 2.77 12.0 Residential Roof & Driveways/Parking 3.28 14.2 Lake 1.00 4.3 Preserve 5.62 24.3 Residential Open Space (minimum) 2.02 8.7 Other common Open Space 8.46 36.5 PARCEL B ACREAGE 23.15+ 100.0 A children's playground/tot lot area will be provided prior to, but not later than, when certificates of occupancy are issued for 35% of the units for this project. Residential land uses, recreational uses, and signage are designed to be harmonious with one another in a natural setting by using common architecture and quality screening/buffering whenever feasible. 1.7 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "Regal Acres Residential Planned Unit Development." 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 8 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of the Regal Acres RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Document, RPUD - Residential Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County LDC and GMP in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements, such as, but not limited to final subdivision plat, final site development plan, excavation permit and preliminary work authorization. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the Collier County LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. C. All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the Regal Acres RPUD shall become part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the RPUD site may be developed. D. All applicable regulations unless specifically waived through a variance or separate provision provided for in this RPUD Document, shall remain in full force and effect. E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Section 6.02.01, Adequate Public Facilities requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USES The Regal Acres RPUD consists of 59.9 acres with a proposed maximum of 300 dwelling units (5 dwelling units per acre). As further described below, PARCEL A consists of +36.75 acres and is previously approved by Ordinance #05-36 for a maximum of 184 affordable residential dwelling units (5 dwelling units per acre). PARCEL B is +23.15 acres proposed for a maximum of 116 affordable residential dwelling units (5 dwelling units per acre). 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 9 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added PARCEL A A maximum of PARCEL A has a maximum of 184 affordable, residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the residential areas of the project. The gross project area for PARCEL A is 36.75± acres. The gross project density shall be is a maximum of 5.0 units per acre. All of the maximum 184 units must be are developed in accordance with the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement adopted by Collier County at the same public hearing as part of the PUD rezone approval. If for any reason affordable housing units are not provided for this project, density shall be limited to a maximum of 110 units. PARCEL B A maximum of 116 affordable residential dwelling units shall be constructed on PARCEL B. The gross project area for PARCEL B is 23.15± acres. The gross project density shall be a maximum of 5.0 units per acre. All of the maximum 116 units must be developed in accordance with the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement adopted by Collier County at the same public hearing as the PUD rezone approval. If for any reason affordable housing units are not provided on PARCEL B, density shall be limited to a maximum of 69 units on PARCEL B. 2.4 RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS A. The general configurations of the land uses are illustrated graphically on Exhibits "A" and “B”, RPUD Master Plan, which constitutes the required RPUD Development Plan. Any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the RPUD Master Plan, the Subdivision section of the Collier County Land Development Code, and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. The provisions of Section 10.02.03 of the Collier County LDC, when applicable, shall apply to the development of all platted tracts, or parcels of land as provided in said Section. C. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. D. A portion of the lots which will be platted in PARCEL B may extend into PARCEL A as shown by the Overlap Area on the Master Plan. If this overlap occurs, the replat of Tract C-1 of the Regal Acres subdivision recorded in Plat Book 49 Page 87 shall be approved and recorded prior to the recording of the plat of the applicable PARCEL B lots. The PARCEL B development standards will apply to those platted lots that extend into the Overlap Area. 2.5 MODEL UNITS AND SALES FACILITIES A. In conjunction with the promotion of the development, residential units may be designated as models. Such model units shall be governed by Section 5.04.04 of the LDC. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 10 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added B. Temporary sales trailers and construction trailers may be placed on the site after site development plan approval and prior to the recording of subdivision plats, subject to the requirements of Section 5.04.03 of the LDC. 2.6 PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL The excavation of earthen material and it's stock-piling in preparation of water management facilities, or to otherwise develop water bodies, is hereby permitted. Off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions: A. Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "development excavation" pursuant to the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, whereby off-site removal shall be limited to 10% of the total volume excavated but not to exceed 20,000 cubic yards. B. All other provisions of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances shall apply. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 11 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION III RESIDENTIAL AREAS PLAN 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the Residential Areas as shown on Exhibits "A" and “B”, RPUD Master Plan. 3.2 MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS The maximum number of residential dwelling units within the RPUD shall be 184 300 units. A maximum of 184 dwelling units are permitted within PARCEL A, and a maximum of 116 dwelling units are permitted within PARCEL B. 3.3 PERMITTED USES No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. PARCEL A Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Two-family dwellings units. B. PARCEL A Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Customary accessory uses and structures including carports, garages, and utility buildings. 2. Recreational uses and facilities including swimming pools, tennis courts, volleyball courts, fishing docks, walking paths, tot lots, picnic areas, recreation buildings, basketball/shuffle board courts, and similar uses. 3. Manager residence and office, temporary sales trailer, and model units. 4. Essential services as defined in Section 2.01.03 of the LDC, including interim and permanent utility and maintenance facilities. C. PARCEL B Permitted Principal Uses and Structures: 1. Single family detached dwelling units. 2. Zero lot line, detached dwelling units. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 12 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added D. PARCEL B Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Fences and walls. 2. On-site signs. 3. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in this land tract including swimming pools, spas, screen enclosures, private garages, and recreational uses. 4. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals of Hearing Examiner pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). E. PARCEL B Permitted General Uses and Structures: 1. Streets, alleys, water management facilities and structures, utilities and other infrastructure improvements are generally permitted anywhere within this RPUD except for in the Preserve Area. 2. Recreational facilities and structures to serve the PUD as located on the Master Plan (Exhibit B), including clubhouses, health and fitness facilities, pools, meeting rooms, community buildings, boardwalks, playgrounds, playfields, tennis courts, and similar uses intended to exclusively serve the residents of the PUD and their guests. 3. Gatehouses and other access control structures. 4. Mail kiosks. 5. Any other related use that is determined to be comparable to the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals of Hearing Examiner pursuant to the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within PARCEL A of the Regal Acres RPUD. Front yard setbacks in Table I shall be measured as follows: 1. Corner lots shall be considered as having only one front yard for the purpose of designating front and side yard setbacks. Front yard shall be designated as the side with the garage. The other front yard shall be considered as the side yard. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 13 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added STANDARDS Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width TABLE I – PARCEL A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TWO FAMILY DWELLING LOTS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 3,750 Sq. Ft. 35 ' Interior Lots 35' Corner Lots 25' Cul de sac Minimum Front Yard Setback (1) Minimum Side Yard Setback (2) Interior Common Wall Minimum Rear Yard Setback Comer Lot Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side Yard Setback Abutting Roadway Interior Minimum Rear Yard Setback Minimum Lake Setback (3) Minimum Distance Between Structures Maximum Number of Stories: Maximum Height: Minimum Floor Area 25' (Principal Structures) 7.5' (Principal Structures) 0’ (Principal Structures) 20' (Principal Structures) 25' (Principal Structures) 12.5' (Principal Structures) 7.5' (Principal Structures) 20' (Principal Structures) 20' (Principal Structures) 15' (Principal Structures) 2 (Principal Structures) 35' (Principal Structures) 1,050 Sq. Ft. 25' 7.5' 10' 25' 12.5' 7.5' 10' 20' 15' 1 20'(4) Notes: (1) Garages shall be located a minimum of 23 feet from the back of the sidewalk, except for side load garages, wherein a parking area 23 feet in depth shall be provided to avoid vehicles from being parked across a portion or all of the referenced sidewalk. (2) Where fee simple lots are created for each dwelling unit, side yards are measured from the outside wall of the principal structure. (3) Lake setbacks are measured from the control elevation established for the lake. (4) 20 feet except for screen enclosure structures, which may be the same height as the principal structure, but in no event greater than 35 feet. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 14 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added B. Table II sets forth the development standards for land uses within PARCEL B of the Regal Acres RPUD. Front yard setbacks in Table I shall be measured as follows: 1. Corner lots shall be considered as having only one front yard for the purpose of designating front and side yard setbacks. Front yard shall be designated as the side with the garage. The other front yard shall be considered as the side yard. TABLE II – PARCEL B RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED and ZERO LOT LINE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED RECREATION AREA PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES Minimum Lot Area 1,600 sf 900 sf N/A Minimum Lot Width 32’ 18’ N/A Minimum Floor Area per Unit 1,000 sf 1,000 sf N/A Min. Front Yard Setback (1) 12’ 12’ 15’ Min. Side Yard Setback 5’ ZLL: 0’ and 10’ 0’ or 5’ for end units 5’ Min. Rear Yard Setback (2) 5’, or 20’ along an alley 5’, or 20’ along an alley 10’ from perimeter Min. Distance Between Structure and Lake 20’ 20’ 20’ Min. Distance Between Structure and Preserve 25’ 25’ 25’ Min. Distance Between Structures 10’ 10’ N/A Max. Zoned Building Height 35’ 35’ 35’ Max. Actual Building Height 40’ 40’ 35’ ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Min. Front Yard Setback SPS SPS 10’ Min. Side Yard Setback SPS SPS SPS Min. Rear Yard Setback 5’ 5’ 5’ Min. Lake Setback SPS SPS SPS Min. Preserve Setback 10’ 10’ 10’ Maximum Building Height SPS SPS SPS SPS: Same as Principal Structure N/A: Not Applicable SFA: Single Family Attached LME: Lake Maintenance Easement ZLL: Zero lot Line Notes: 1. Front yard setbacks shall be measured from ROW line and shall allow a 2- foot separation from the from the structure to the Public Utility Easement. 2. Alley setback shall be measured from easement line. Parking may be accessed from alleys at the rear of the property provided there is a 5-foot clearance from the vehicle to the edge of pavement. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 15 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added C. Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth in Tables I and II shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners’ association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. D. Landscape buffers and lake maintenance easements shall be platted as separate tracts at time of subdivision plat approval. E. Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements: Parking shall be as required by Section 4.05.00 of the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. C. F. Open Space Requirements: A minimum of sixty (60) percent open space, as described in Section 4.02.01.B. l of the LDC, shall be provided on-site for any residential project. D. G. Landscaping and Buffering Requirements: Landscaping and buffering shall be provided per pursuant to Section 4.06.00 of the Collier County LDC. Buffering shall be consistent with Exhibit B-5, “Buffer Enhancement Plan.” Supplemental plantings of native plant materials shall be installed in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07 if needed to satisfy the commitment to provide buffering equivalent of 80 percent opacity from ground level to six feet in height within one year. If supplemental plantings are needed along the Preserve to the south, the supplemental plantings may be located in a minimum six-foot wide planting strip along the PUD perimeter or on the development side of the Preserve. If supplemental plantings are needed along the Preserve to the west or north, they shall be located in a minimum six-foot wide planting strip on the development side of the Preserve. E. H. Architectural Standards All buildings, lighting, signage, landscaping and visible architectural infrastructure shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified in PARCEL A and in PARCEL B. Said unified architectural theme shall include: a similar architectural design and use of similar materials and colors throughout all of the buildings, signs, and fences/walls to be erected on all of the subject parcels. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout PARCEL A and throughout PARCEL Bthe subject site. F. I. Signs Signs shall be permitted as described within Section 5.06.00 of the Collier County LDC. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 16 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION IV PRESERVE AREAS - PARCEL B 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for the Preserve Areas as shown on Exhibit "B", RPUD Master Plan. 4. 2 PERMITTED USES A. Principal Use: Preserve B. Accessory Uses: Wildlife sanctuaries for indigenous free roaming wildlife and stormwater in accordance with LDC Sections 3.05.07.H.1.h.i(f). and 3.05.07.H.1.h.ii. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 17 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION IV V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of this project. 5.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development plans, final subdivision plans and all applicable State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this RPUD, in effect at the time of final plat, final site development plan approval or building permit application as the case may be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of the County LDC shall apply to this project even if the land within the RPUD is not to be platted. The developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. Which commitments will be enforced through provisions agreed to be included in the declaration of covenants and restrictions, or similar recorded instrument. Such provisions must be enforceable by lot owners against the developer, its successors, and assigns, until of turnover of the property to any property or homeowners' association. The developer, his successor or assignee, shall follow the RPUD Master Plan and the regulations of this RPUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, any successor in title or assignee is subject to the commitments within this Agreement. Pursuant to the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances and the LDC as it relates to the discovery or accidental disturbance of historical/archaeological site and properties during construction. If any significant historical or archaeological artifact is found, work will temporarily cease and the County will be notified in order to take the necessary precautions to preserve the artifact. An attached, one-car garage shall be constructed per each dwelling unit in PARCEL A. 5.3 RPUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibits "A" and “B”, RPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed area, utilities, road design, structure sizes and designs, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 18 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas in the project. 5.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENT/PUD MONITORING REPORT A site development plan shall be submitted per County regulations in effect at time of site plan submittal. The project is projected to be completed in one or two phases, with build out estimated in 2009. A. The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits pursuant to Section 10.02.13.D of the LDC. B. Monitoring Report: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 10.02.13.F of the Collier County LDC. The monitoring report shall be in the form of an affidavit and shall be executed by the property owner or its authorized agent. C. Recreation Facilities: Most recreation will be passive, such as, hiking. A children's playground/tot lot area will be provided prior to, but not later than, when certificates of occupancy are issued for 35% of the units for this project. A. One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval dated__________2018, the Managing Entity is Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. 5.5 ENGINEERING A. This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 19 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added B. Except as noted in this RPUD Document, all project development shall be consistent with Chapters 4 and 10 of the LDC. 5.6 WATER MANAGEMENT A. An Excavation Permit will be required for the proposed lake(s) in accordance with Subsection 4.06.04.A. l .a.iii of the Collier County LDC and SFWMD Rules. B. The project must demonstrate compliance with all storm water management requirements as part of its site development plan review procedures. 5.57 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and. maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 01-57, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. A 40-foot by 60-foot County Utility Easement for a well site will be dedicated to Collier County and the Collier County Water Sewer District subject to compensation for fair market value of the land or equivalent impact fee credit pursuant to Code of Ordinance Section 74-205 at time of plat or Site Development Plan permitting. The conveyance will be free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. The location indicated on the RPUD Master Plan is approximate and subject to change provided it will be a minimum of 1,000 feet from the existing Naples Reserve well site easements. Within 90 days of completion of the County improvements within said County Utility Easement, the County must visually screen the improvements from the residential land uses within this RPUD with a visual barrier that exceeds 80% opacity at the time of installation. 5.68 TRAFFIC A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the Collier County Land Development code (LDC) B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO). C. Access points, including both driveways and proposed streets, shown on the PUD Master Plan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 20 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Res. 01-247), as it may be amended from time to time, and with the Collier County Long-range Transportation Plan. The number of access points constructed may be less than the number depicted on the Master Plan; however, no additional access points shall be considered unless a PUD Amendment is to be processed. D. Site-related improvements (as apposed to system-related improvements) necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. E. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 01- 13, as amended, and Division 3.15. LDC, as it may be amended. A. The Regal Acres development is part of the US 41 Developers Consortium for the US 41 widening and intersection improvements at the CR 951 and US 41 intersection as referenced in the TIS provided at the time of rezone. Pursuant to the Developer Contribution Agreement (OR 4408 PG 2880), improvements consisted of improvements at the intersection of CR 951 and US 41, six-lane road improvements from the intersection of CR 951 and US 41 to Henderson Creek, and four-lane road improvements from Henderson Creek to 0.25 miles east of Naples Reserve Blvd. Pursuant to the Impact Fee and Anticipated Advancement of Road Impact Fee table included in the Developer Contribution Agreement, road impact fees in the amount of $1,445,967.60 has been paid for the existing Regal Acres 184-unit subdivision (PARCEL A), and $471,511.20 has been paid for 60 of the 116 additional dwelling units associated with proposed PARCEL B development. F. All work within Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a Right-of-way Permit. G. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution 01-247), as it may be amended, and the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this PUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. H. B. The Regal Acres RPUD shall be limited to a maximum of 241 two-way unadjusted PM Peak Hour trips. This is the aggregate of 121 two-way unadjusted PM Peak Hour trips pursuant to the TIS associated with Regal Acres PPL for PARCEL A and 120 two-way unadjusted PM Peak Hour trips per the TIS associated with PARCEL B rezoning. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right in/right out condition at any access point. Neither will the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, shall be the basis for any 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 21 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. I. C. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier Country shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. J. D. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County right- of- way or easement, compensating right-of-way, shall be provided without cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement. K. E. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way or easement is determined to be necessary, the pro rata share of the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. F. The developer will participate in the steps that are outlined in the Collier County Neighborhood Traffic Management Program to further support traffic calming initiatives along Greenway Road consistent with the procedures and criteria of that program. L. No development order(s) will be approved by the County until such time as there is adequate transportation infrastructure capacity for the intensity or density of development that would be authorized by approval of such development order(s), as determined by the County's Concurrency Management System. 5.79 PLANNING A. Pursuant to Section 2.03.07.E of the LDC, if during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 5.810 ENVIRONMENTAL A. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by the Environmental Services Review Staff. B. All agency permits shall be submitted prior to final Plat/Construction plan approval or SDP approval 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 22 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added C. This RPUD shall comply with the environmental sections of the Collier County LDC and GMP in effect at the time of final development order approval. D. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic free) plan for the site shall be submitted to Environmental Services Department Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. A. E. The subject property PARCEL A consisted s of an old agricultural field with no native vegetation as required by the GMP and LDC. For PARCEL B, a minimum of 25% of the existing viable naturally functional native vegetation onsite shall be retained. The minimum required vegetation is 5.62 acres, which is provided on PARCEL B. B. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic vegetation removal in accordance with LDC section 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings of native plant materials shall be installed in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07 if needed to satisfy the commitment to provide buffering equivalent of 80 percent opacity from ground level to six feet in height within one year. If supplemental plantings are needed along the Preserve to the south, the supplemental plantings may be located in a minimum six-foot wide planting strip along the PUD perimeter or on the development side of the Preserve. If supplemental plantings are needed along the Preserve to the west or to the north, they shall be located in a minimum six-foot wide planting strip on the development side of the Preserve. C. A management plan for the entire PARCEL B project area shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not limited to Black Bear, and Florida Panther. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the PARCEL B development. 5.11 IMPACT FEES The petitioner agrees to pay: impact fees and, in addition, connection fees, up to a maximum of $7,250 per house, for water and sewer connections for the homes in existence on June 25, 2002, which would be required by County Ordinance to connect to the lines along Greenway Road. The petitioner shall work with the Collier County Public Utilities Division to provide an installment payment plan for affected homeowners for costs in excess of $7,250. 5.12 POLLING PLACES Pursuant to Section 4.07.06 of the Land Development Code shall be made for the future use of building space within common areas for the purposes of accommodating the function of an electoral polling place. An agreement shall be recorded in the official records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County, which shall be binding upon any and all successors in interest that acquire ownership of such common areas, including, but not limited to, condominium associations, 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 23 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added homeowners associations, or tenants associations. This agreement shall provide for said community recreation/public building/public room or similar common facility to be used for a polling place if determined to be necessary by the Supervisor of Elections. 5.9 AFFORDABLE HOUSING A. As documented in the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement for Parcel A approved on June 28, 2005 in Ord. No. 05-36, the developers agreed that all of the maximum 184 units constructed will be owner-occupied units for residents in the low income category (51-60 percent of County median income). B. As documented in the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement for Parcel B approved on __________[date of approval], the developers have agreed that all of the maximum 116 units constructed will be owner-occupied units for residents in the low to moderate income category (60-80 percent of County median income). 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 24 Strike-through is text deleted September 10, 2018 Underline is text added SECTION VI DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, “Street System Requirements,” which calls for minimum local street right-of-way width of 60 feet. This request is to allow for a 55-foot right-of-way minimum width for a limited section of the private street network, extending for a length of approximately 350 feet and terminating in a hammerhead or Y configuration, provided that the water main will be centrally located in the 10’ space between the on-street parking and the Right of Way line. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, “On-Premises Directional Signs,” which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10 feet from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation requests a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of private roadway/drive aisle. Deviation #3 is withdrawn. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, “Fences and Walls” which calls for a maximum fence or wall height of 4 feet and 6 feet in residential components of PUDs. This deviation requests allowance for a maximum fence or wall height of 8 feet measured from nearest finished floor elevation for buffering along the external PUD boundaries and for protection from the drainage ditch to the south. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, “Dead End Streets”, which calls for dead ends streets to terminate in a cul-de-sac. This deviation requests the ability to end one of the street segments within the PUD with an alternate configuration such as a hammerhead or Y configuration. 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) EXHIBIT A PARCEL A - MASTER PLAN 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) OVERLAP AREA SECTIONTYPICAL RESIDENCE/EXISTING LAKEN.T.S.REGAL ACRES RPUDEXHIBIT BRPUD MASTER PLANPARCEL BRESIDENTIALSINGLE FAMILYPRESERVE AREAWATER MANAGEMENT AREAPUD BOUNDARYRIGHT-OF-WAYADJACENT ZONING CLASSIFICATIONADJACENT LAND USEPUDLUCLEGENDLAND SUMMARY USECATEGORYACREAGETOTAL SITE AREAMAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS300 D.U. (5 D.U. / AC)184 D.U. (5 D.U. / AC)116 D.U. (5 D.U. / AC)REQUIRED / PROVIDED PRESERVENATIVE VEGETATION CALCULATIONSMHPUDPUDARESIDENTIALMOBILE HOMEPARKRESIDENTIALSINGLE FAMILYVACANTPRESERVEAAAVACANTARESIDENTIALSINGLE FAMILYPARCEL BPARCEL A512244#PUD DEVIATION(TYPICAL)4HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTY8.A.2Packet Pg. 74Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) TYPICAL STREET SECTIONTYPICAL ALLEY SECTIONTYPICAL PRESERVE SECTIONREGAL ACRES RPUDEXHIBIT B-2RPUD MASTER PLAN - PARCEL BCROSS SECTIONSHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTY8.A.2Packet Pg. 75Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) REGAL ACRES RPUDEXHIBIT B-3MASTER UTILITY AND DRAINAGE PLANPARCEL BHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTYMHPUDRESIDENTIALMOBILE HOMEPARKPRESERVELEGENDPRESERVE AREAWATER MANAGEMENT AREAPUD BOUNDARYADJACENT ZONING CLASSIFICATIONADJACENT LAND USEFUTURE SANITARY SEWERFUTURE WATER MAINPERIMETER BERMFLOWPUDLUCPARCEL BPARCEL A8.A.2Packet Pg. 76Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) REGAL ACRES RPUDEXHIBIT B-4EXISTING AND PROPOSEDPUD BOUNDARYHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTYPARCEL BPARCEL A8.A.2Packet Pg. 77Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) XXXX X X X X X X X X X X X XX BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANEXHIBIT B-5MHPUDPUDARESIDENTIALMOBILE HOMEPARKRESIDENTIALSINGLE FAMILYVACANTPRESERVEAVACANTARESIDENTIALSINGLE FAMILYPARCEL BPARCEL A5122#PUD DEVIATION(TYPICAL)HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTY·Type B landscape buffer per Land Development Code Section 4.06.02·8' wall·Supplemental landscape plantings consisting of a mix of palms and shrubs to be planted with anaverage of 9 palms and 15 shrubs per 100 LF. Plantings may be clustered to enhance screening effectTYPICAL PLAN VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEETTYPICAL ELEVATION VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEETTYPICAL PLAN VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEETTYPICAL ELEVATION VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEETTYPICAL PLAN VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEETTYPICAL ELEVATION VIEW: 100 LINEAR FEET·Type B landscape buffer per Land Development Code Section 4.06.02·8' wall·Type B landscape buffer per Land Development Code Section 4.06.028.A.2Packet Pg. 78Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL A Ownership List January 2018 Page 1 of 6 REGAL ACRES RPUD – EXHIBIT C Parcel List and Ownership PARCEL A Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 69060900026 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 69060900068 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10325 MAJESTIC CIR 69060900084 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10351 GREENWAY RD 69060900107 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 69060900149 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10291 MAJESTIC CIR 69060900165 BOYER, BEAUDELINE 10231 KINGDOM CT 9/30/2010 69060900181 SINEUS, WILLY=& DOMINIQUE 10235 KINGDOM CT 9/30/2010 69060900204 BENAVIDES, JACINTO 10239 KINGDOM CT 10/20/2010 69060900220 EDMOND, IMMACULA 10243 KINGDOM CT 2/23/2011 69060900246 NORVILUS, ROCHEMOND 10247 KINGDOM CT 10/22/2010 69060900262 AUDIGE, CHIMENE A 10251 KINGDOM CT 12/20/2010 69060900288 FORESTAL, MARIE Y 10255 KINGDOM CT 11/12/2010 69060900301 CHARLES, MENARD 10259 KINGDOM CT 2/23/2011 69060900327 GARCIA, JESUS 10263 KINGDOM CT 12/22/2010 69060900343 NOEL, RICHEMOND 10267 KINGDOM CT 11/29/2010 69060900369 ENAMORADO, RAMON FONSECA 10271 KINGDOM CT 6/20/2016 69060900385 LORCY, BERNITE 10275 KINGDOM CT 6/21/2011 69060900408 LACOSTE, JEAN B 10279 KINGDOM CT 3/3/2011 69060900424 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CC 10283 KINGDOM CT 5/24/2017 69060900440 PREVILON, JONAS 10287 KINGDOM CT 12/11/2015 69060900466 LACROYANCE, CEFRANCILE 10291 KINGDOM CT 12/29/2011 69060900482 CHARELUS, MYRIELLE 10295 KINGDOM CT 6/30/2011 69060900505 JACQUES, CHRICITA 10299 KINGDOM CT 12/2/2011 69060900521 LOUIS, JUDE 10303 KINGDOM CT 6/14/2011 69060900547 THOMAS, MARIE M 10307 KINGDOM CT 6/14/2011 69060900563 PERO, ANDREA N 10311 KINGDOM CT 12/15/2011 69060900589 ALCIUS, JEAN SERGO 10315 KINGDOM CT 4/15/2011 69060900602 JOSEPH, SHAILAJA V 10319 KINGDOM CT 6/15/2011 69060900628 RAMIREZ, WALTER CRUZ 10323 KINGDOM CT 3/18/2011 69060900644 JOSEPH, ADIENS=& MARYSE 10327 KINGDOM CT 4/21/2011 69060900660 NELSON, DAVID 10326 KINGDOM CT 4/8/2011 69060900686 SORIANO, HUGO A 10322 KINGDOM CT 3/17/2011 69060900709 FAIFE, JOSE A RODRIGUEZ 10318 KINGDOM CT 5/9/2011 69060900725 FERNE, ESHEDDLLING 10314 KINGDOM CT 5/10/2011 69060900741 ABRAHAM, KERLANGE 10310 KINGDOM CT 7/14/2011 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL A Ownership List January 2018 Page 2 of 6 Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 69060900767 ETIENNE, JOSE YOLDA 10306 KINGDOM CT 11/11/2011 69060900783 GERMAIN, SYLVIE F 10302 KINGDOM CT 11/15/2011 69060900806 CLEMONS. DONNA L 10298 KINGDOM CT 2/16/2012 69060900822 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10294 KINGDOM CT 69060900848 EGALITE, GULDINE 10290 KINGDOM CT 2/21/2012 69060900864 LAFONTANT, ALINE 10286 KINGDOM CT 4/26/2012 69060900880 ALVARADO, IDALIA C 10282 KINGDOM CT 8/16/2012 69060900903 DERVIL, JULIEN 10278 KINGDOM CT 11/15/2012 69060900929 SAINTUS, MARIE D 10274 KINGDOM CT 5/18/2012 69060900945 THERESIAS, JEAN C 10270 KINGDOM CT 4/27/2012 69060900961 GEUS, AMONCIA JEUNE 10266 KINGDOM CT 6/4/2012 69060900987 VIEITES, BLANCA L 10262 KINGDOM CT 6/11/2012 69060901009 SAGESSE, MERASSAINT 10258 KINGDOM CT 5/31/2012 69060901025 JEAN, MARTINE 10254 KINGDOM CT 6/19/2012 69060901041 KEY, KRYSTAL LYNN 10250 KINGDOM CT 5/18/2012 69060901067 MONTES ROMERO, ANTHONY DAVID 10246 KINGDOM CT 5/3/2012 69060901083 DURAN, MANUEL 10249 EMPEROR LN 6/5/2013 69060901106 HERNANDEZ, JESSICA R 10253 EMPEROR LN 6/11/2012 69060901122 PERIERA, SANDRA Y 10257 EMPEROR LN 6/8/2012 69060901148 MELERO, ISABEL LOPEZ 10261 EMPEROR LN 6/16/2017 69060901164 BASTIEN, VIOLINE 10265 EMPEROR LN 6/5/2012 69060901180 BELDOR, YANICK 10269 EMPEROR LN 9/14/2015 69060901203 VIZCAYA, CECILIA AVILA 10273 EMPEROR LN 6/8/2012 69060901229 OLVERA, MELINA 10277 EMPEROR LN 6/11/2012 69060901245 MCDONALD, CLAYDER HIDALGO 10281 EMPEROR LN 6/8/2012 69060901261 SANCHEZ, GEILIS 10285 EMPEROR LN 6/8/2012 69060902600 BUCHHEIT, DIANA LEE 10328 MAJESTIC CIR 3/28/2014 69060902626 RICO, MARTIN AVILA 10324 MAJESTIC CIR 3/28/2014 69060902642 WILLIAMCEAU, ELVITA 10320 MAJESTIC CIR 3/28/2014 69060902668 ALCIME, MARIO 10316 MAJESTIC CIR 3/28/2014 69060902684 PIERRE, RONALD CHARLES 10312 MAJESTIC CIR 11/8/2013 69060902707 CAMIL, BETTY 10308 MAJESTIC CIR 11/21/2012 69060902723 DIAZ, ALEJANDRA 10304 MAJESTIC CIR 10/23/2013 69060902749 SOLIS, FLORIBERTO 10300 MAJESTIC CIR 12/6/2013 69060902765 LOPEZ, VICKY ROSANNA 10296 MAJESTIC CIR 6/20/2012 69060902781 ROLLE, JANET 10292 MAJESTIC CIR 7/26/2012 69060902804 MORGAN, TONICIA DENISE 10284 EMPEROR LN 6/27/2012 69060902820 DELISCA, MYRTIL 10280 EMPEROR LN 11/22/2013 69060902846 FORTUNA, MARISENA 10276 EMPEROR LN 6/19/2012 69060902862 PLANTIN, MAXO 10272 EMPEROR LN 6/19/2012 69060902888 INGUNZA, FELIZ 10268 EMPEROR LN 6/29/2017 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL A Ownership List January 2018 Page 3 of 6 Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 69060902901 PIERRE, VILASON 10264 EMPEROR LN 11/22/2010 69060902927 MATOS, MARIBEL 10260 EMPEROR LN 10/15/2010 69060902943 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CC INC 10256 EMPEROR LN 11/20/2017 69060902969 CLERCIRA, SAINNITA 10252 EMPEROR LN 9/30/2010 69060902985 PLANTIN, JUNIOR=& WILSIE 10248 EMPEROR LN 9/30/2010 69060903007 GASPARD, RONALD 10244 EMPEROR LN 10/20/2010 69060903023 PEREZ, MARIA D 10240 EMPEROR LN 9/30/2010 69064000029 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 69064000045 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 69064000061 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10407 MAJESTIC CIR 69064000087 OJISMA, EDAIN 10329 MAJESTIC CIR 6/20/2014 69064000100 GAETAN, MARIE NANJIE 10333 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2014 69064000126 LOUIS, LUCRECE PIERRE 10337 MAJESTIC CIR 6/27/2014 69064000142 MASSENAT, JEAN F 10341 MAJESTIC CIR 6/27/2014 69064000168 PENA, YENNY 10345 MAJESTIC CIR 7/11/2014 69064000184 SOLIS, OSIRIS MEDINA 10349 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2014 69064000207 BARROSO, ENRIQUE E DINZA 10353 MAJESTIC CIR 7/9/2014 69064000223 HATCH, SIMONE 10357 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2014 69064000249 BRIZUELA, ERNESTO 10361 MAJESTIC CIR 9/15/2014 69064000265 PRIETO, MIGUEL OCEGUERA 10365 MAJESTIC CIR 4/28/2015 69064000281 LEANDRE, BOURGEOT 10369 MAJESTIC CIR 11/19/2014 69064000304 CANDELARIO, IVELKA O 10373 MAJESTIC CIR 10/30/2014 69064000320 HUTCHINS, DORREL I 10377 MAJESTIC CIR 11/25/2014 69064000346 TORRE, ROBERT V 10381 MAJESTIC CIR 11/18/2014 69064000362 GERBIER, WOUILNA 10385 MAJESTIC CIR 12/12/2014 69064000388 MARSAINVIL, YVENER=& EDILIA 10389 MAJESTIC CIR 12/12/2014 69064000401 POULARD, JENNY A 10393 MAJESTIC CIR 12/12/2014 69064000427 MONDESIR, GARY 10397 MAJESTIC CIR 11/20/2014 69064000443 GAYO, MARLENE 10401 MAJESTIC CIR 12/12/2014 69064000469 BAUTISTA -CRUZ, V BENITO 10405 MAJESTIC CIR 12/12/2014 69064000485 DAMAS, DIEUNYTHA 10409 MAJESTIC CIR 3/20/2015 69064000508 CADET, JACQUELINE 10413 MAJESTIC CIR 4/3/2015 69064000524 MARTINEZ, MARGARITA 10417 MAJESTIC CIR 4/7/2015 69064000540 LARA, EDIDT M 10421 MAJESTIC CIR 3/27/2015 69064000566 SAINT JEAN, MASSILLON 10425 MAJESTIC CIR 4/7/2015 69064000582 GONZALEZ, LUIS A 10429 MAJESTIC CIR 4/8/2015 69064000605 MORALES, MIGUEL GOMEZ 10433 MAJESTIC CIR 5/15/2015 69064000621 CASIMIR, YVONNE 10437 MAJESTIC CIR 4/15/2015 69064000647 ALCE, JEAN J=& MARIE M 10441 MAJESTIC CIR 4/8/2015 69064000663 ORANTES, VANESSA 10445 MAJESTIC CIR 5/1/2015 69064000689 CIVIL, ALIX 10449 MAJESTIC CIR 4/24/2015 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL A Ownership List January 2018 Page 4 of 6 Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 69064000702 LOUIS, ONEL JN 10453 MAJESTIC CIR 6/5/2015 69064000728 OROZCO, JOSE M=& MARIA H 10457 MAJESTIC CIR 5/12/2015 69064000744 VILLAFUERTE, JOSE M GUERRERO 10461 MAJESTIC CIR 5/12/2015 69064000760 GARCIA, YSMAEL PEREZ 10465 MAJESTIC CIR 6/15/2015 69064000786 GONZALEZ, MISHAEL 10469 MAJESTIC CIR 5/15/2015 69064000809 MARTINEZ, ISMAEL C=& ROSSI 10473 MAJESTIC CIR 5/22/2015 69064000825 PRUNIER, JUDE=& JOCELYN 10477 MAJESTIC CIR 5/22/2015 69064000841 BOYER, GERLANDE 10481 MAJESTIC CIR 6/15/2015 69064000867 GRESSEAU, PIERRE 10485 MAJESTIC CIR 6/5/2015 69064000883 LINDOR, COULANGE MARIE 10489 MAJESTIC CIR 5/28/2015 69064000906 JONES, ANDREA 10493 MAJESTIC CIR 5/15/2015 69064000922 SEVA, JUDITH 10497 MAJESTIC CIR 6/19/2015 69064000948 BARKER, TRENT ANTHONY 10501 MAJESTIC CIR 6/1/2015 69064000964 CIBRIAN, NOHEMI DE JESUS 10505 MAJESTIC CIR 7/6/2015 69064000980 AZOR, FLORENCE 10509 MAJESTIC CIR 6/15/2015 69064001002 CASTELLAN, JUAN CARLOS 10513 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064001028 DIAZ, AGNIESKA MAYOL 10517 MAJESTIC CIR 6/19/2015 69064001044 MATOS, RICARDO GAMEZ 10521 MAJESTIC CIR 6/12/2015 69064001060 TREVINO, RAUL 10525 MAJESTIC CIR 6/12/2015 69064001086 ROJO, VIRGINIA LOPEZ DE 10529 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001109 DIMAS, ADRIAN ASCENCIO 10533 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001125 AUGUSTIN, JIMMY 10537 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001141 ANTOINE, JN DAVID 10541 MAJESTIC CIR 8/28/2015 69064001167 CESAR, DIEUSEUL=& ISMELA 10545 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001183 CODIO, LUC 10549 MAJESTIC CIR 8/24/2015 69064001206 LOUIMA, MANESE 10553 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001222 PERALTA, DELMIRA A VIDAL 10557 MAJESTIC CIR 8/31/2015 69064001248 ROBLES, IVAN A MEDINA 10561 MAJESTIC CIR 6/5/2014 69064001264 SARDUY, JUAN E 10565 MAJESTIC CIR 6/27/2014 69064001280 PRUDHOMME, EASLANDE 10569 MAJESTIC CIR 4/17/2014 69064001303 ST VIL, CLAIRMIL 10573 MAJESTIC CIR 4/21/2014 69064001329 NAZIEN, QUEENIE WORTH 10577 MAJESTIC CIR 4/17/2014 69064001345 LAITIL, GUERDA 10581 MAJESTIC CIR 4/17/2014 69064001361 GUZMAN, JESUS G FIGUEROA 10585 MAJESTIC CIR 6/20/2014 69064001387 VIZCAYA, ERASMO AVILA 10589 MAJESTIC CIR 5/23/2014 69064001400 SOLORIO, JUAN M 10364 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2014 69064001426 DIEUJUSTE, MARIE NICOLE 10368 MAJESTIC CIR 6/20/2014 69064001442 BONILLA, JESSICA 10372 MAJESTIC CIR 12/15/2014 69064001468 MAREUS, MILER 10376 MAJESTIC CIR 12/22/2014 69064001484 SALOMON, IDOVY 10380 MAJESTIC CIR 12/22/2014 69064001507 ALEXANDRE, SOUZIE RAICHAFFEN 10384 MAJESTIC CIR 12/22/2014 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL A Ownership List January 2018 Page 5 of 6 Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 69064001523 COLLAZO, YASNOVY CACERES 10388 MAJESTIC CIR 12/22/2014 69064001549 VILLARD, ANSCE=& ANNETTE 10396 MAJESTIC CIR 12/22/2014 69064001565 ULYSSE, WILBERT JEAN MARIE 10408 MAJESTIC CIR 12/29/2014 69064001581 GUSTAVE, ROSELINE 10412 MAJESTIC CIR 12/29/2014 69064001604 GELIN, FRIDA 10416 MAJESTIC CIR 2/27/2015 69064001620 GASPARD, JEAN H 10420 MAJESTIC CIR 1/30/2015 69064001646 GONZALEZ, IRIS A 10424 MAJESTIC CIR 2/27/2015 69064001662 MENDEZ, CARMEN HURTADO 10428 MAJESTIC CIR 10/10/2016 69064001688 SAINT CIR, EMALEINE 10432 MAJESTIC CIR 3/13/2015 69064001701 MICHEL, JEAN VILET 10436 MAJESTIC CIR 3/2/2015 69064001727 ORTIZ, CHRISTIAN J RODRIGUEZ 10440 MAJESTIC CIR 3/20/2015 69064001743 GRIFF, DOUGLAS L=& SARA C 10444 MAJESTIC CIR 4/6/2015 69064001769 DAVIS, ERICAKA ANDREA 10448 MAJESTIC CIR 3/20/2015 69064001785 GONZALEZ, CARLA E ANDRADE 10452 MAJESTIC CIR 4/6/2015 69064001808 REYES, YURIDIA RAMIREZ 10484 MAJESTIC CIR 6/19/2014 69064001824 SANTOS, FERNANDO FUENTES 10488 MAJESTIC CIR 6/19/2015 69064001840 RODRIGUEZ, GEISY 10492 MAJESTIC CIR 6/12/2015 69064001866 MEJIAS, RAUL A SUAREZ 10496 MAJESTIC CIR 6/12/2015 69064001882 SEVILA, WILLIAN OCHOA 10500 MAJESTIC CIR 6/29/2015 69064001905 BEAUPLAN, ELIPHEN 10504 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064001921 HERNANDEZ, ZYNNIA E 10508 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064001947 MEJIA, FRED CASTILLO 10512 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064001963 HILL, ROSE M 10544 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064001989 CORDEIRO, ASHLEY M 10548 MAJESTIC CIR 6/30/2015 69064002001 ARCAS, DOHANNYS L=& ALINA 10552 MAJESTIC CIR 7/13/2015 69064002027 HERNANDEZ, ARTURO PINA 10556 MAJESTIC CIR 7/31/2015 69064002043 GALDAMEZ, ZONIA P JANDRES 10560 MAJESTIC CIR 5/23/2014 69064002069 SENDEJAS, JAVIER=& MARIA M 10564 MAJESTIC CIR 5/23/2014 69064002085 JOSEPH, MIREILLE 10568 MAJESTIC CIR 6/6/2014 69064002108 DEMOSTHENES, MANOUCHECA 10572 MAJESTIC CIR 5/23/2014 69064002124 PERRIER, ROSE LAURE 10576 MAJESTIC CIR 6/27/2014 69064002140 METELUS, MICHELOT 10580 MAJESTIC CIR 6/23/2014 69064002166 PADRON, DENIS 10584 MAJESTIC CIR 6/5/2014 69064002182 JASMIN, BRASELYE=& JACQUELINE 10588 MAJESTIC CIR 6/27/2014 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) Regal Acres RPUD - PARCEL B Ownership List January 2018 Page 6 of 6 REGAL ACRES RPUD – EXHIBIT C Parcel List and Ownership PARCEL B Parcel # Owner Name Street Address Purchase Date 00737720006 GHU, LLC Ronald Monachino Newell Creek, LLC 8654 Camelot Dr Chesterland, OH 44026 09/10/2014 00741100104 Habitat for Humanity 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 10/18/2017 00737760008 Habitat for Humanity 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 12/26/2005 00741080606 Habitat for Humanity 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 12/26/2005 00738280008 Habitat for Humanity 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 07/20/2017 8.A.2 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: 09-10-18 - Revised Ordinance PUD Doc - Regal Acres (Highlights) (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 8.A.3 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Public Correspondence (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 8.A.3 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Public Correspondence (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 8.A.3 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Public Correspondence (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 8.A.3 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Public Correspondence (6652 : PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres) 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A Item Summary: ***This item has been continued from the May 3, 2018 CCPC meeting, May 17, 2018 CCPC meeting, and June 7, 2018 CCPC meeting*** PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map by revising the conditional uses subdistrict to allow for the construction of a church or place of worship. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 6.25 acres; and furthermore, recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Comp anion to CU- PL20160002577) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 08/31/2018 8:07 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 08/31/2018 8:07 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Marcia R Kendall Review Item Skipped 08/30/2018 10:05 AM Zoning Marcia R Kendall Review Item Skipped 08/30/2018 10:05 AM Growth Management Department David Weeks Additional Reviewer Completed 08/31/2018 9:56 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/05/2018 3:15 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/05/2018 4:12 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 09/06/2018 10:08 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 09/07/2018 9:45 AM 9.A Packet Pg. 89 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARINGS) PROJECT/PETITION: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [COMPANION TO PL20150002577] CCPC: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [continued from May 3, 2018; May 17, 2018 & June 7, 2018] BCC: NOVEMBER 13, 2018 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: CCPC GMPA COVER (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) TABLE OF CONTENTS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN - SMALL SCALE GMP AMENDMENT PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [ADOPTION HEARING] CCPC SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [DUE TO A 2ND NIM THIS MEETING WAS PREVIOULSY CONTINUED TO MAY 3, 2018, MAY 17, 2018, AND JUNE 7, 2018 - & CONTINUED FURTHER DUE TO A 2nd NIM] 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENT: Revised CCPC Staff Report: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 2) TAB: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text (and/or maps): PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 3) TAB: Project PL20160002584/ DOCUMENT: Petition Application Petition CPSS-2017-1 4) TAB: Correspondence DOCUMENT: For and Against Letters & Emails from the Public and Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association 5) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Legal Ad 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: GMPA_CCPC Table of Contents (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 11 REVISED STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 (originally heard May 3, 2018, but eventually continued indefinitely) RE: PETITION CPSS-2017-01/PL20160002584, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to CU- PL20160002577) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN NOTE: This petition was originally heard by the CCPC at Transmittal Hearing on May 3, 2018 and, eventually continued indefinitely. Due to proposed changes pertaining to the companion Conditional Use (CU) petition, the petitioner held a second NIM for both petitions. All revised areas of this Staff Report subsequent to the May CCPC meeting are highlighted for convenience of the reader. AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Josh Fruth, Jessica Harrelson, Anna Weaver, Derek Burr, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Applicant: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 Owner: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises ±6.25-acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876) and Collier Blvd. (CR951), in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East (Urban Estates Planning Community). 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 11 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a small-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), specifically to amend the text of the Estates Mixed Use District – Conditional Use Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria, to add the subject site as an exception for a church or place of worship. The applicant also proposes to create a new map (“Conditional Use Subdistrict: Golden Gate Boulevard & Collier Boulevard Special Provisions”) in the Future Land Use Map series of the GGAMP, which will identify the newly created area in the revised Subdistrict. The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted, and is also reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A). 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates-Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 3. 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: Proposed Project Site 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 11 a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** d) Transitional Conditional Uses: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (see map titled Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan Amendment is to create text and a map for an additional location under the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Estates designation in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The Conditional Uses Subdistrict is scattered about different locations throughout the 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 4 of 11 Estates Mixed Use District. The acreage for the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria Subdistrict will increase by the amount (±6.25-acres) of this additional location. The GGAMP amendment is necessary in order to allow a church/place of worship use at this location in the Estates designation. A new map will be created of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria and included in the Future Land Use Map Series of the GGAMP. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The +6.25-acre subject site is zoned Estates Zoning District allowing uses of low density residential development (1 DU per 2.25 acres or per legal non-conforming lot) with limited agricultural activities; the Estates district is also designed to accommodate conditional uses, development that provides services for and is compatible with the low density residential, subject to locational criteria in the GGAMP. The Land Development Code lists churches as permissible as a Conditional Use for the Estates Zoning District. The Future Land Use designation of Estates is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses including conditional uses and essential services, (except as prohibited in the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict). Parks, group housing, schools, family care facilities, care units, and nursing homes are permitted uses. Estates zoning district conditional uses are subject to locational criteria as contained in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately adjacent to the north (across Golden Gate Blvd) are a mix of residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a utility property fronting on the east side of Collier Blvd. owned by FPL approximately 1,000 feet north of the subject property. Further to the north, up to Vanderbilt Beach Road, are more residential single-family units and a few undeveloped lots, which are zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. South: Immediately adjacent to the south lies 1st Ave. SW and beyond are residential single- family units and a few undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Across Collier Blvd. (CR951) on the west side of the road, and approximately ½ mile south of the subject site there are two places of worship: Iglesia Cristiana La Roca (Rock Christian Church) and the Haitian Bethesda Baptist Church. Further south on the east side of Collier Blvd. at 15th Ave. SW, there are two other places of worship: Bethel Christian Church and Unity Faith Missionary Baptist. There is a commercial planned unit development (Brooks Village) approximately 1 mile south of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. and on the south side of Pine Ridge Road; this area is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. There are also 2 parcels zoned C-3 Zoning District and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict on the west side of Collier Blvd. on the north side of Pine Ridge Road. 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 5 of 11 West: Immediately adjacent to the west (across Collier Blvd.) are residential single-family units and undeveloped lots, zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Directly across from the northern parcel of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. (CR951) are two County owned parcels with a water retention pond. These two parcels make up the northwest and southwest quadrants of the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. Further to the west are additional residential single-family units and a few zoned Estates, and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a property with agricultural uses on Mahogany Ridge Road approximately 1 mile to the west of the subject site. East: Immediately adjacent to the east lies one single family residence abutting the subject site (in the NW corner of Weber Blvd. and 1st Ave. SW), and Weber Blvd., a local road that runs north/south (parallel with Collier Blvd.); Weber Blvd. serves as a collector for four local streets north of Golden Gate Blvd. and four local streets south of Golden Gate Blvd. To the east of Weber Blvd. are residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Approximately 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile east from the subject site and fronting on Golden Gate Blvd., there are two places of worship: Estates Naples Kingdom Hall and Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church; a county park (Max A Hasse Jr. Community Park); and Big Cypress Elementary School. This area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations: The applicant is proposing a Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to allow a conditional use for a church/place of worship to be located at the southeastern corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR951) and Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876). The site consists of ±6.25-acres and is comprised of two tax parcels. The northern parcel is wooded and undeveloped and the southern parcel contains a single-family home and is heavily wooded. Although the northern parcel is located at the intersection of an arterial roadway (Collier Blvd.) and a collector road (Golden Gate Blvd.), as identified in the Transportation Element of the GMP, no development has been previously approved and constructed. The applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, purchased this property in November 2016 and is the owner of this site. The congregation has been holding services (sharing with another congregation) at the First Baptist Church of Naples on Orange Blossom Drive. Although the project is to be for a congregation of less than 300 people (seats), they want to worship in their own church. Their services will be conducted in Romanian. This petition and the companion Conditional Use application are for church-use only – not to accommodate a day care or any other community functions such as Boy/Girl Scouts or Alcohol Anonymous meetings, etc. The GGAMP provides that various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estate s zoning district within the Golden Gate Estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following sets of criteria must be met: Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions, Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions, and Transitional Conditional Uses, and Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. The applicant has requested a conditional use 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 6 of 11 under the last criteria, Special Exceptions. In reviewing the surrounding area, 6 churches are located within a one mile radius of the subject site. Previously, in 2007 and 2008, the two existing churches near Max Hasse Park were approved via the Transitional CU provision. Other churches in the surrounding area were granted provisional uses in the 1980’s , prior to adoption of the GGAMP. Previously, only two churches were approved under Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: a church on Immokalee Road and a church on Santa Barbara Blvd. Compatibility (including appropriateness of the location) for this project is identified by staff as the potential main area of concern to address. Compatibility: The surrounding area (at least 1 mile in any direction from the subject site) is entirely designated as Estates. This designation is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Typical lots are 2.25 acres in size. Residential density is limited to a maximum of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guesthouses. The range of uses in the area surrounding the subject site include mostly residential single-family units, with a small mix of churches scattered throughout the area, as well as a park, a school, two commercial sites, and a couple of utility sites. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future no n-residential uses, including: conditional uses, subject to locational criteria, and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code. This amendment is proposing a land use that is in keeping with the surrounding area and the companion conditional use is an appropriate vehicle for obtaining permission for this use (the other means is through a rezoning). Historically, churches have been located within residential neighborhoods. Generally, these churches were not megachurches with significant activity on site every day of the week, rather were small with primary activity on Sunday. Neither this petition nor the companion CU petition indicate a seating capacity of more than 300 seats. In staff’s view, the impacts from this church appear to be similar to that of the characteristics of churches historically located in neighborhoods. Compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback and buffer requirements, etc. In staff’s opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The agent for the applicant conducted and submitted a data and analysis review as part of the application packet for the GGAMP amendment. The analysis examined the following: • Vicinity to existing local parishioners • Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities • Property availability • Alternative site analysis • Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Vicinity to existing local parishioners: Currently the congregation consists of local residents, with no seasonal impacts to the church population. The applicant provided a map with the locations 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 7 of 11 of the parishioners showing that there are two clusters of existing members in Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The proposed church location would lie between these clusters. There is another cluster of members that live between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road close to I-75. Only a couple of members live outside of these areas. Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities : The proposed church is unique in that it provides services conducted in Romanian. The applicant provided a map indicating where other churches in the state of Florida provided similar denominational opportunities. The closest churches to Naples were located in Hollywood (122 miles) and Lake Worth (132 miles). The only other churches in Florida were located in Seffner (160 miles) and Jacksonville (379 miles). Property availability: The applicant and agent reviewed other properties in the same vicinity that might meet the needs of the church with these key criteria: minimum of 5 acres, maximum of 10 acres, minimum lot width of 330 linear feet, located with frontage on arterial or collector roadway, a maximum of 5 miles east of I-75 and north of Golden Gate Parkway, sale price less than or equal to $135,000. Two properties were identified: (1) Sungate CPUD Tract B (northwest corner of Green Blvd. and Collier Blvd.) and (2) a property on the west side of Collier Blvd. approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Alternative site analysis: The application included a description, map of two alternative sites, plus the proposed location, that were analyzed: (1) The Sungate CPUD - Limits the actual total square feet to 63,000 square feet for Tracts B, C, and D, so another development could cause restraints in the ability for the church to develop and water management facilities for the 1.02 County owned right-of-way might further limit the church’s developable area in Tract B. Also, this site is not currently on the market. (2) Property on the west side of Collier Blvd. north of Pine Ridge Road - Access to Collier Blvd. might also be limited to parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church. Cost of constructing this site might be higher than proposed site due to an 8-foot deep storm water detention pond utilized for the roadway storm water attenuation. This site was also the highest cost per acre. The proposed site - 3899 1st Ave. SW would need a Conditional Use and a GGAMP amendment. This property is owned by the applicant. Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan: The Collier County Community Planning Section is currently conducting a restudy of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. A number of public meetings were held with citizens and developers in Golden Gate Estates in order to have an understanding of what changes in the Growth Management Plan they would like to see. Surveys were used to help indicate what land uses participants would prefer. The surveys indicated that the participants might be agreeable to some additional potential Conditional Use (CU) locations, if limited as to location and type. Between 45% and 50% of participants stated that additional CU’s should be allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads intersected by 4 or more lane roads). There were 5 rural locations and 3 urban locations that were identified as potential sites for Transitional CUs under this description, including Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants). However, the Re-study also limits the size of these CU locations to 2.25 acres to 5 acres or less. Church uses evoked a variety of opinions (both favorable and unfavorable) among the participants. The GMP amendments based on the re-study (recommended for approval by the CCPC) have not yet been heard by the BCC at Transmittal hearing and must be reviewed by various state agencies before being heard at CCPC and BCC Adoption hearings. If the GGAMP Re-study amendments should be approved by the BCC as 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 8 of 11 presently drafted, a Transitional CU at this location would be permitted, if the acreage was between 2.25 and 5 acres. This petition is for a Special Exception to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. [The subject site comprises ±6.25 acres.] (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. [No small scale GMP amendments have been approved in calendar year 2018; a ±5.35- acre small scale petition is scheduled to be considered for adoption by the BCC in May 2018.] (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government’s comprehensive plan, but only pr oposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. [This amendment does include a text change to the Comprehensive Plan and those text changes are directly related to the proposed future land use map amendment.] (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). [The subject property is not located within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (2) Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). [This project will be heard with only one public adoption hearing.] (3) If the small scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. [This amendment does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. [This amendment preserves the internal 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 9 of 11 consistency of the plan and is not a correction, update, or modification of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan.] Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Summer Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist with Collier County Environmental Planning Section has reviewed this petition. The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress, and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use (CU) for the project. The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, completed his review and approved this petition in August 2017. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition, without any conditions, in August 2017. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.03.05 A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on October 11, 2017, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County – Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120 - jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. The applicant’s team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. A total of approximately 9 members of the public along with approximately 4 members of the applicant’s team and County staff signed in at the NIM. The public asked questions about the project details. The consultant explained that there were two separate applications: a small-scale amendment for the Growth Management Plan and a zoning action for a conditional use. One citizen spoke in favor of having this church as a neighbor. Several of the citizens who attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting, voiced concerns over the following transportation issues: additional traffic along Weber Blvd., location of ingress and egress points, County is unwilling to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd., and the trip count was calculated as 183 Sunday peak hour trips. The meeting ended at approximately 6:15 p.m. A second NIM was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on June 25, 2018, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County – Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120 - jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. Fred Hood, agent for the applicant at that time, presented the project with proposed changes, using both a PowerPoint 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 10 of 11 slideshow and an updated list of 21 conditions for the Conditional Use zoning action (list was also a handout) and then answered questions. Approximately 23 citizens, 4 members of the applicant’s team, and the 2 planners from the County attended the NIM. Questions and concerns from the attendees included: • Number of acres for project site? 6.25 acres • Number of square feet of storage shed? 1,800 sq. feet • Types of special events? Not defined yet • Where will special events be held on the site? in the pastor’s residence? Outdoors? If outside, could be in parking area, or in open area, if pastor residence not built. • Traffic is already a nightmare. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Traffic access to site locations. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Could a bridge entrance be constructed over the Collier Blvd. canal? Not possible, since land that would be needed does not belong to church and safe distance from Golden Gate Blvd could not be accommodated. • If an event is held in parking area, where will people park? As part of a special event permit a parking plan is required. • Do not want carnival or revival type events. Agent asked if citizen wanted any other types of events eliminated. • Speeding on Weber Blvd. Citizens need to work with Sherriff’s office. • Have an off-duty officer for traffic control. • Churches do not pay property taxes. • What will be cleared in the preserve area? Only native vegetation would remain. • Dates of Public Hearings. No dates were set yet. Meeting adjourned at approximately 6:08 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • There are no transportation or utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • The use is generally compatible with surrounding development. • The Re-study for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan identifies the eastern quadrants of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. as appropriate for Estates Zoning District CUs with conditions, including a size maximum of 5 acres. • In staff’s opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. • Staff finds that the data and analysis submitted by the petitioner demonstrates a need for the proposed amendment and that this is an appropriate location to fulfill that need. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on April 19, 2018 and August 14, 2018. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map Series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(A)8, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 11 of 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, subject to including in this amendment the addition of the Subdistrict name in the list of maps under the heading “Future Land Use Map Series” at the end of the GGAMP. Prepared by: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: CCSS Staff Report CP-2017-1 Grace Romanian Church 9-20-18 (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: County Attorney Approval of Staff Report (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance_CCPC (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) www.davidsonengineering.com GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH SMALL-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT Prepared For: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34119 and Prepared By: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) www.davidsonengineering.com LIST OF EXHIBITS Application to Amend the Growth Management Plan Exhibit A Professional Qualifications Sheet Exhibit B Proposed SSGMPA Text Amendment Language Exhibit C Location Map Exhibit D USGS Quad Map Exhibit E Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay & Soil Mapping Exhibit F Environmental Data Exhibit G Surrounding Zoning Exhibit Exhibit H Surrounding Future Land Use Map Exhibit I Historical/Archaeological Probability Exhibit J Proximity to Public Services Map Exhibit K Recorded Warranty Deed Exhibit L Letter of Authorization Exhibit M Alternative Site Data & Analysis Exhibit N Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit O Boundary Survey / Legal Description Exhibit P Traffic Impact Statement Exhibit Q Level of Service Comparative Analysis Exhibit R Utility Availability Statement Exhibit S Justification of the Proposed SSGMPA Amendment Exhibit T Planning Communities Map Exhibit U Future Land Use Map Exhibit V Existing Zoning Maps Exhibit W Disclosure of Interest Exhibit X Golden Gate Area Master Plan Inset Map Exhibit Y 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6Packet Pg. 126Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 9.A.6Packet Pg. 127Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church - SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com EXHIBIT “B” PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SHEET Davidson Engineering, Inc. Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner Mr. Hood has a Bachelor’s of Urban Planning from the University of Cincinnati’s College of Design Architecture Art and Planning. He has been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) and has practiced land planning in Southwest Florida since 2006. During his career in urban planning, for over twelve years, Mr. Hood has managed large and small development projects while working closely with a myriad of land development professionals in the physical development and policy adoption of residential, commercial, mixed-use, institutional and industrial projects. Mr. Hood has been tendered and accepted as an expert in land planning in cities and counties throughout Florida as well as being tendered as an expert witness in the area of Urban and Land Use Planning. Mr. Hood continues to attend continuing education seminars to remain current on planning theory and methodologies in an ever-changing regulatory environment. Earth Tech Environmental, LLC Jeremy Sterk Ecologist \ Partner Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. Jeremy holds an active real estate license and his experience in the early stages of property due diligence studies greatly assists clients in making informed decisions. His extensive and varied experience allows him to successfully guide clients through the local, state, and federal permitting maze. This experience includes environmental land use planning, environmental resource permitting, vegetation and habitat mapping, protected species surveys, protected species management plans, environmental impact statements, property use studies, post permit compliance, and GIS \ GPS mapping. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Jeremy is certified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as a Gopher Tortoise Agent. In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co-authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. Jeremy was a member of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee from 2009 to 2014 and is currently a member of the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC). 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church - SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. President Mr. Trebilcock has a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Miami and a Master’s Degree in Engineering, with an emphasis in Public Works from the University of Florida. He is also a graduate of the US Army Engineer Officer Basic Course. Mr. Trebilcock has practiced transportation planning and engineering in Southwest Florida since 1990. Mr. Trebilcock produces plans, designs, and permitting efforts on public works and private sector projects. His primary area of expertise is in transportation engineering, including highway design, utility relocation, drainage design, street lighting, signalization, access management and permitting. He prepares and reviews traffic impact statements and related reports. In addition to being a registered Professional Engineer and holding a certification from the American Institute of Certified Planners, Mr. Trebilcock holds an FDOT Advanced Work Zone Traffic Control Certification. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA is classified as a Small Business Enterprise with the South Florida Management District and the FDOT. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Golden Gate Area Master Plan as of Ordinance No. 2016-12 adopted May 10, 2016 28 Words added are underlined and words struck-through have been deleted 2.ESTATES DESIGNATION ***TEXT BREAK*** A.Estates – Mixed Use Distirct ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(X) 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(VIII) e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: (XIII)(XVI) 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII)2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII)3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. (XV)4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (See map titled ). ***TEXT BREAK*** Grace Romanian Church – SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict March 2018 EXHIBIT C 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAPCR 951PINE RIDGE RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD VANDERBILT BEACH LEGEND SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES MAJOR ROADWAYS COLLIER LEE HENDRY DADE BROWA R D PALM BEACH MONROE . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D (LOCATION MAP).mxd 0 0.5 1MILES 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) GOLDEN GATE BLVD W COLLIER BLVDGrace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida Exhibit E - USGS Quad Map X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO. DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8 1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0 N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 O 0 1,000 2,000500 Feet Subject Property G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\USGS Quad Map.mxd / 1:44:01 PM3/31/17 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace COLLIER BOULEVARDGOLDEN GATE BLVD LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT F.1: AERIAL EXHIBIT . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 600 1,200FEET Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E (AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd Note: 2017 Aerial obtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 624D3.88Ac 1102.27 Ac 7400.08 Ac 7400.01 Ac 7400.01 Ac COLLIER BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W Grace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida FLUCCS Map X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO. DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8 1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0 N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 O 0 200 400100 Feet Subject PropertyFLUCCS Mapping110, Single Family Residential624-D, Pine - Cypress - Cabbage Palm (drained) 740, Disturbed Land G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\FLUCCS Map.mxd / 9:10:20 AM4/12/17 Note:2017 Aerialobtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. EXHIBIT F.2 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 146.25 Ac COLLIER BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W Grace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida Exhibit F.3 - NRCS Soils Mapping X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO. DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8 1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0 N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 O 0 200 400100 Feet Subject Property NRCS Soils Mapping 14, PINEDA FINE SAND, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\NRCS Soils Map.mxd / 11:44:36 AM3/31/17 Note:2017 Aerialobtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL Environmental Data Report Section 11 / Township 49 S / Range 26 E Prepared For: Collier County Growth Management Department Development Review Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Prepared By: April 25, 2017 Updated: Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com Ea r t h Tech Environmental, LLC EXHIBIT G 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Rezone Pre-App Notes & Environmental Checklists APPENDIX B: Staff Qualifications APPENDIX C: Protected Species Survey APPENDIX D: Davidson Engineering Site Plan INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00) for rezone and GMPA of the Subject Property for development as a church campus. This information is in response to the circled items in the Rezone Pre-Application Notes as provided by Davidson Engineering. See Appendix A, Rezone Pre-App Notes & Environmental Checklists, pgs. 17-22. PROPERTY LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located at the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The property is approximately 6.25 acres. See Figure 1, Location Map. Figure 1. Location Map 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST (Numbers match PUD checklist) 2. Who and what company prepared the Environmental Data Report? This Environmental Data Report was prepared by Earth Tech Environmental, LLC. Ecologists Jeremy Sterk and Jennifer Bobka. See Appendix B, Staff Qualifications. 3. Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Based on the FLUCCS system, there are no jurisdictional wetlands present on the property: FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland, but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a ‘drained’ designation. See Figure 2, Aerial with Wetlands Identified. Figure 2. Aerial with Wetlands Identified (No jurisdictional wetlands present). 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 7.Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 8.Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 11. Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCCS Codes identified. See Figure 3, Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Based on the FLUCCS system, the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland, but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a ‘drained’ designation. FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property, this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity, as well as two smaller areas along the north-eastern property boundary. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay 14. Provide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property, along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has not been conducted on the Subject Property. 24. The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project’s compliance with LDC and GMP requirements (LDC 10.02.A.3 f). a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. See companion GMPA application. The project proposes developing the parcel into a church with associated structures. A portion of the existing habitat will be preserved onsite (0.77 acres). There are no wetlands present on the property. Water management facilities will be designed according to SFWMD and Collier County criteria. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See the information provided in this document. c. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan and FLUCCS map in Figure 3. The site totals 6.25 acres. Of that acreage, 6.15 is classified as native vegetation. There is an existing home site on the property that was allotted 1.0 acres of clearing as part of its building permit. 6.15 – 1.0 acres = 5.15 acres of native vegetation present on the property. 5.15 acres X 15% = 0.77 acres of native vegetation required to be set aside as a preserve. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 4. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com d.Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project’s design compensates for wetland impacts. There are no wetlands on the Subject Property and there will be no wetland impacts. e.Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. No listed species were observed. 25. PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document, prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. See this document. ENVIRONMENTAL PUDZ-PUDA CHECKLIST (non-RFMU) 2.Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser’s office) and clearly delineate the subject boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.1. Application Contents #24). FLUCFCS Overlay - P627. See Figure 3, Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Descriptions are found in #11 above. 3.Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as “Preserve” on all plans (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 4.Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on- site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculation (LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.1.d- e). Preserve Calculation - P547. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 5.Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.1.b. Preserve width – P603. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 6.Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4). Preserve Selection- P550. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. The preserve has been provided as a contiguous single area. There are no preserves to connect to offsite. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25’ from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10’ of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination (LDC 3.08.00). Environmental Data Required – P 522. See this document. The site has not previously contained a golf course or farm field. 10. PUD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved (LDC 10.02.13.A.2). Master Plan Contents-P626. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 11. PUD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses, the following is suggested: A. Principal Use: Preserve; B. Accessory Uses: All other uses (list as applicable or refer to the LDC) not in CV Library. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 12. PUD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site (LDC 10.02.13.A.2). Unique Features- P628. No listed species were observed on the property. There are no unique vegetative features. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX A REZONE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLISTS 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX B STAFF QUALIFICATIONS 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com E a r t h Tech Environmental, LLC www.etenviron.com Relevant Experience Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. His varied experience spans marine, upland, and estuarine habitats and includes extensive work with a wide variety of listed species. In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co- authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Early in his career, Jeremy was the principal investigator of a field research project in the Bahamas that utilized telemetry tracking to study the swimming speed of sub-adult lemon sharks. Jeremy’s environmental consulting experience includes: Protected Species Surveys Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Listed Species Management Plans Turbidity Monitoring Vegetation & Habitat Mapping Wetland & Water Level Monitoring USFWS Section 7 & Section 10 Permitting Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) Water Use Monitoring & Compliance Project Management Preserve Management Plans GIS / GPS Mapping & Exhibits Post Permit Compliance Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Land Use Planning Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Native Vegetation Restoration Plans Lake Management Plans Incidental Take Permitting Due Diligence Reports Site and Aerial Photography Wetland Jurisdictional Determinations USFWS Bald Eagle Monitor Bonneted Bat Surveys Gopher Tortoise Surveys, Permitting, & Relocations Mangrove Assessments & Restorations Scrub Jay Surveys Hard Bottom & Soft Bottom Benthic Surveys Burrowing Owl Surveys Artificial Reef Deployments Shorebird Surveys Seagrass Surveys Certifications/Credentials Certified Environmental Professional #1692037, Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent – Permit No. GTA-09-00192 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals – member since January 1995; served on the Board of Directors for the Southwest Florida Chapter from (2008 – 2012). Past Secretary, Vice President, & President. State of Florida Real Estate License (2003 to Present) Appointed by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners to:  Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, Chairman of the Lands Evaluation and Management Subcommittee. (2009 to 2014).  Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) (2015 to Present).  FWC Local Rule Review Committee (Manatee Protection Speed Zones) (2016 to Present). Publications Sundström, L.F., J. Sterk, & S.H. Gruber. 1998. Effects of a speed-sensing transmitter on the swimming speed of lemon sharks. Bahamas J. Sci. 6 (1): 12-22. JEREMY STERK, C.E.P. Partner \ Senior Ecologist j.sterk@eteflorida.com 239.595.4929 Years Experience 22 years Education/Training B.S. Aquatic Biology (1994), St. Cloud State University Professional Affiliations Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals #16992037 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com E a r t h Tech Environmental, LLC www.etenviron.com Relevant Experience Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental LLC in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 5 years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. Her experience includes projects throughout Collier, Lee and Gallatin counties. Her varied experience spans coastal marine, shoreline and estuarine habitats, to upland forests and alpine environments. She has worked with a wide variety of native and invasive plant and wildlife species. She is also an experienced Naturalist and Environmental Educator. As an Ecologist, Jennifer fulfills duties in environmental consulting, wetland & wildlife monitoring, species surveys, invasive species removal, report writing, GIS mapping, and ERP permitting. Jennifer’s work experience in many fields of ecology includes: Wetland Delineation Protected Species Surveys Listed Species Research & Monitoring Turbidity Monitoring Vegetation & Habitat Mapping Bald Eagle Monitoring Gopher Tortoise Surveys and Relocation GIS Mapping Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Invasive & Exotic Species Removal Natural Resource Management Trail Maintenance Mechanical & Manual Forest Fuel Reduction Ecological Restoration Environmental Education Relevant Certifications/Credentials Certified Interpretive Guide Python Responder/Patrol Training USFS Sawyer JENNIFER BOBKA Ecologist jenniferb@eteflorida.com 239.304.0030 Years’ Experience 5 years Education/Training Naturalist II & Environmental Educator (2012-2016) Manatee Research Intern Florida Conservation Commission (2013) AmeriCorps Field Crew Leader Montana Conservation Corps (2010) B.A. Environmental Studies Montana State University (2009) Marine Biology & Coastal Ecology Study Abroad Costa Rica (2007) Professional Affiliations Florida Association of Environmental Professionals League of Environmental Educators of Florida Florida Master Naturalist Program 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX C PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL NAPLES, FLORIDA APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES Prepared For: Prepared By: April 12, 2017 Collier County Engineering & Natural Resources Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Lower West Coast Service Center 2301 McGregor Boulevard Fort Myers, FL 33901 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com Ea r t h Tech Environmental, LLC 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure 1) below for Location Map. Figure 1. Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication “Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida.” This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2 & 3). The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species. The lists were obtained from two agency publications: 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com v A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication “Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists”, Publication Date: October 2016. v A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication “Notes on Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Plants”, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community. See (Table 1) of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary, transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80’s. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately four (4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd. West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property, this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential, Low Density 2.27 624-D Pine – Cypress – Cabbage Palm (drained) 3.88 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: 6.25 Figure 2. Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table 1). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map & Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Table 1. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status FWC/FDA FWS 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus floridanus T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - Snowy Egret Egretta thula T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor T - Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals, Amphibians, Reptiles, & Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - Turkey vulture Cathartes aura DV N - Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV N - Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Gray squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia N, DV N - Armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus OH N Reptiles Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Amphibians Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Plants Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciulata DV N CE * = protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours Task March 23, 2017 2:00 pm 4:00 pm 4.0 (2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 4.0 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6Packet Pg. 194Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace SR 93 / I-75LIVINGSTON RDCOLLIER BOULEVARDPINE RIDGE RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD LOGAN BLVDCR 886/GOLDEN GATE WHITE BLVD VANDERBILT BEACH RD. IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 OAKS BLVD.GREEN BLVD 13TH STREETVINEYARDS BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVD16 TH AVE. SW I-75 ON RAMP IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 23 RD ST. SWI -75 ON RAMP I -75 ON RAMP I- 7 5 O N RAM P I- 7 5 ON RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-7 5 O F F R A M P I-75 N B O F F - R A M P COLLIER BOULEVARDLEGEND DATA & ANALYSIS AREA GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES ZONING DISTRICTS A A-MHO A-PU-c/J A-RFMUO A-ST C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 CF CF, PUD CFPUD CPUD CPUD-SBCO E GC I IPUD MPUD P PUD RMF-12 RMF-12-GGDCCO RMF-12-SBCO RMF-16 RMF-6 RMF-6-GGDCCO RMF-6-SBCO RPUD RSF-2 RSF-3 RSF-3-GGDCCO RSF-4 RSF-4(3) RSF-5 RSF-5(0.4) RT DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIOROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2015) 0 1 2MILES Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-06-20 GR SSGMPA-(ZONING).mxd 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) E 1ST AVE SW COLLIER BLVD3RD AVE NW WEBER BLVD S1ST AVE NWWEBER BLVD N3RD AVE SW GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 1ST AVE NW 3RD AVE NW 3RD AVE SW LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES 300 FOOT RADIUS ZONING DISTRICTS E - ESTATES DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2016) 0 600 1,200FEET Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT H (ZONING EXHIBIT).mxd 300 FOOT RADIUS 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ES 1ST AVE SW COLLIER BLVD3RD AVE NW WEBER BLVD S1ST AVE NWWEBER BLVD N3RD AVE SW GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 1ST AVE NW 3RD AVE NW 3RD AVE SW LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES 300 FOOT RADIUS ES - ESTATES - MIXED USE DISTRICT:RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2016) 0 600 1,200FEET GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT I: SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 VC GMPA-EXHIBIT I (FLUE EXHIBIT).mxd 300 FOOT RADIUS 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph | 850.245.6439 fax | SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239) 434-6060 Email: jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel # 36760720005 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information: This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com EXHIBIT J9.A.6 Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph | 850.245.6439 fax | SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239) 434-6060 Email: jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel # 36760800006 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information: This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Y Y Y Y Y Y Ñ "' Ñ Ñ Ñ Ú Ú nm nmnm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm nm SR 93 / I-75LIVINGSTON RDCOLLIER BOULEVARDPINE RIDGE RDLOGAN BLVDCR 886/GOLDEN GATE GOLDEN GATE BLVD VANDERBILT BEACH RD. WHITE BLVDOAKS BLVD.GREEN BLVD 13TH STREETSANTA BARBARA BLVDVINEYARDS BLVDIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 16 TH AVE. SW23 RD ST. SWIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 COLLIER BOULEVARDSR 93 / I-7 5 LEGEND SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES RADIUS_RINGS nm Schools Ú COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF FACILITY "'Hospital Ñ Medical Y COLLIER COUNTY FIRE STATION FIRE DISTRICT Big Corkscrew Fire East Naples Fire Golden Gate Fire North Naples Fire DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT K: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 1 MILE 2 MILES 0 1 2MILES Oak Ridge - Middle School14975 Collier Boulevard Big Cypress - Elementary School3520 Golden Gate Boulevard W North Naples Fire and Rescue Station 427010 Immokalee Road Laurel Oak - Elementary7800 Immokalee Road Gulf Coast - High School7878 Shark Way Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 7314575 Collier Boulevard Vineyards - Elementary6225 Arbor Boulevard W Physicians Regional Hospital6101 Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 4295 13th Street SW 3 MILES Golden Gate - Elementary4911 20th Place SW Golden Gate - Middle School2701 48th Terrace SW Golden Terrace North - Elementary2711 44th Terrace SW Golden Terrace South - Elementary2965 44th Terrace SW Mike Davis - Elementary3215 Magnolia Pond DriveGolden Gate - High School2925 Titan Way CCSO Golden Gate Substation - Dist.24707 Golden Gate ParkwayGolden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 704741 Golden Gate ParkwayNorth Naples Fire and Rescue Station 463410 Pine Ridge RoadZ:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT K (PUBLIC SERVICES MAP).mxd 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) EXHIBIT L9.A.6 Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) EXHIBIT M9.A.6 Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering   •   Planning   •   Permitting  www.davidsonengineering.com 4365 Radio Road  ∙  Suite 201  ∙ Naples, FL 34104  ∙  P: (239) 434.6060  ∙  F: (239) 434‐6084  1990 Main Street  ∙  Suite 750  ∙  Sarasota, FL 34236  ∙  P: (941) 309‐5180  ALTERNATIVE SITE DATA & ANALYSIS  GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH SSGMPA  CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT  PREPARED FOR:  "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc.  6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84  Naples, FL 34109  and  PREPARED BY:  Davidson Engineering, Inc.  4365 Radio Road, Suite 201  Naples, Florida 34104  March 1, 2018  EXHIBIT N 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Contents Purpose: ........................................................................................................................................................ 2  Physical Description of Subject Property: ..................................................................................................... 2  Data & Analysis: ............................................................................................................................................ 3  Alternative Site Analysis: .............................................................................................................................. 5  Attachments:  Attachment A – Location Map  Attachment B – Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay  Attachment C – Protected Listed Species Survey  Attachment D – Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners  Attachment E – Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities  Attachment F – Alternate Property Map (within Market Study Area)  Attachment G – Parcel 75180000120 Information   Attachment H – Sungate CPUD ‐ Ordinance 09‐06   Attachment I – Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information  Attachment J – Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy – White Paper 2 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 2  Purpose:  The purpose of this data & analysis report is to provide an evaluation for a modification to the existing  Conditional Uses Subdistrict within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; demonstrating a change to the  existing Growth Management Plan (GMP) as warranted.  The proposed conditional use is located at the  southeast corner of the signalized intersection of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West (see  Attachment A ‐ Location Map) and consists of ±6.25 acres of land.  The intent of the Conditional Uses  Subdistrict is to provide specific areas and properties for approved conditional uses within the Golden  Gate Area Master Plan.    The Collier County GMP currently designates the aforementioned property (±6.25 acres) as part of the  Residential Estates Sub‐district within the Estates Mixed Use District of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan.   This designation allows the following uses:  Group Housing, Parks, and Recreational Areas/Open Space,  Single Family Residential (at a density of 1 unit per 2.25 acre), Essential Services, and Nursing Homes.  The  additional development of uses are available through a conditional use application.  The proposal of this amendment application is to identify the location and allowable square  footage/maximum number of seats within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict in order to construct a church  at the proposed location.  Upon final approval and adoption of a Small‐Scale Growth Management Plan  Amendment (SSGMPA), the property will move forward with its companion Conditional Use application  for zoning and a Site Development Plan; meeting the intent of the Land Development Code by identifying  a proposed church facility with allowable accessory uses within the ±6.25‐acre parcel.  Physical Description of Subject Property:  Recently, ecologist Jeremy Sterk of Earth Tech Environmental, LLC, prepared a Florida Land Use Cover  Classifications System (FLUCCS) map and reviewed the potential protected species correlated with the  FLUCCS map for the subject property.  The FLUCCS shows ±6.25 acres as identified with a single‐family  house (2.27 acres), native vegetation (3.88 acres), and disturbed lands (0.08 acres); please refer to  Attachment B.  The potential protected species report advises that there are likely no protected species  on‐site; please refer to Attachment C.  3 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 3  Data & Analysis:  To justify the need for the Future Land Use designation modification, a data & analysis review has been  performed.  This report identifies justifications to demonstrate the requested amendment is warranted.   Criteria for this analysis include proximity of the local church’s parishioners, properties at the intersections  or close to arterial and collector roadways, and existing availability of potential development sites  between 5 and 10 acres from Interstate‐75 (forming the western boundary) to five miles east (eastern  boundary), the border of between Collier and Lee Counties (the northern boundary) and Golden Gate  Parkway to the south (forming the final boundary of the data & analysis study area).  The limiting criteria  were selected based on vacancy, size, current market value of land, and accessibility to parishioners.  The subject property, as well as any alternative sites, have been evaluated to ensure that the existing and  future demographics will support the proposed land use based on the following:  Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners Location of Alternate Facilities Offering Similar Traditional Worship Opportunities Property Availability and Compatibility with the proposed development Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners  Demographic information is an excellent indicator of demand for proposed services that currently do not  exist.  Population statistics for the data analysis were obtained from the Church/applicant; refer to  Attachment D.  In this case, the parishioners are local to the area and as such, there are no seasonal  impacts to the population.  Location of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities  In defining a warranted use for the requested service, locations of existing facilities with identical or similar  services provided were also identified; refer to Attachment E.    The results are listed below, along with the respective addresses and distance from the ±6.25‐acre  proposed location:  1.Grace Romanian Baptist Church 1542 Harrison St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (122.0 mi)  2.New Life Romanian Baptist Church 1950 Van Buren St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (123.0 mi)  3.Betania Romanian Baptist Church 4001 Hendricks Ave, Jacksonville, FL 32207 (379.0 mi)  4.First Romanian Baptist Church 6423 Marbletree Ln, Lake Worth, FL 33467 (132.0 mi)  5.Romanian Baptist Church 5416 County Rd 579, Seffner, FL 33584  (160.0 mi)  4 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 4    Property Availability  Due to the specific nature of the land use proposed, minimum criteria and constraints have been  established in defining potential available sites.  The key criteria for site development are as follows:   Minimum 5 acres in size   Maximum 10 acres in size   Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet   Located with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway   A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate‐/+75, north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County   Sale Price of Less than or equal to $135,000 per acre  In making the decision to proceed with the subject site (±6.25‐acre property), all viable sites that are  available were reviewed and discussed.  Due to the limited amount of undeveloped properties meeting  the criteria (including PUD’s with similar uses and intensities permitted), few options existed; refer to  Attachment F.  Available property includes the following:  Option #1  Folio #’s: 75180000120  Address/Legal: 4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES FL 34116    OR 4468 PG 3302  Parcel Size: 5.17 Acres  Zoning:  Sungate CPUD (Ordinance No. 09‐06; refer to Attachment H)    The site is generally located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard approximately 3.00  miles east of Interstate‐75; refer to Attachment G.    Option #2  Folio #’s: 36618000107, 36618000000  Address/Legal: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W and GOLDEN GATE EST  UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761  Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres  Zoning:  Estates    The site is generally located midblock on the western side Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951).  Approximately  0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road.  Limiting access points are located on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951).     5 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 5    Alternative Site Analysis:  To further identify a need for the Future Land Use Element and Map designation amendment of the  subject property, an alternative site analysis was completed based on the locational and dimensional  features of the subject property; along with the required zoning designations required for future  development of the proposed land use.   The following criteria identify the unique features associated with the subject property to perform a data  and analysis review required to support the Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA).  Within the  analysis, the subject property (±6.25 acres) and the alternative sites were evaluated by their consistency  with the following:   Minimum 5 acres in size   Maximum 10 acres in size   Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet   Located at a corner an arterial or collector roadway with frontage   A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate 75, north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County   Sale Price of Less than or equal to $135,000 per acre  These specific criteria were chosen to identify alternative sites that may be similar to the subject property  to develop and operate the proposed land use.  The property acreage and dimensional criteria have been  chosen to ensure the proposed church will be afforded the same, or better, net developable area the  master concept plan illustrates to develop the proposed mixture of principal and accessory land uses; i.e.  a proposed sanctuary, multi‐purpose fields and support structures as necessary.    Per the current Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy ‐ White Paper, a survey was conducted regarding  the allowance of additional Conditional Uses in the Rural Estates.  Most individuals polled that additional  Conditional Uses should be allowed at more locations within the Rural Estates, and specifically at arterial  intersections. Therefore, the locality of the site on an arterial or collector roadway specifically identifies a  location that is compatible with the present Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy; refer to Attachment  J.  Additionally, the location on an arterial and/or collector road will not only provide better site visibility,  it will provide the proposed development with available transportation conveniences in the forms of  increased vehicular access by comparison to those sites without access to major thoroughfares.   By defining the area of development east of Interstate 75, and north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier  County, a site can be identified that will benefit the existing parishioners commute to the proposed  development and defines an area that meets the requests of the church.    As a final criterion, cost per acre was evaluated. It was deemed a critical component to determining  available property due to the non‐profit business of the church facilities.  Places of worship, specifically  Grace Romanian Baptist Church, does not generate an income that provides the church a profit, therefore  affordability of available property to the applicant is essential.  6 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 6    In making the decision to proceed with future development of the subject property, all viable sites that  are available were reviewed.  It is assumed that all vacant/undeveloped and/or cleared properties adhere  to criteria of availability with the addition of a Multiple Listing Search (MLS) for properties meeting the  identified criterion.  Due to the limited amount of available properties (including PUD’s with Church  Facilities), few alternative option exists.    Proposed Site Location  Folio #’s: 36760720005, 36760800006  Address/Legal: 3899 1st Avenue SW/GOLDEN GTE EST UNT 4 W1/2 OF TR 15 OR 1494 PG 211    GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 4 TR 16  Parcel Size: 6.25 Acres   Zoning:  Estates    The proposed site is owned by the applicant.  It is currently zoned Estates.  Currently, the site is consistent  with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE).  Upon the successful completion of this GMPA application, the  proposed church and accessory land uses will be found consistent and permitted within the Subdistrict  and subsequent zoning.    As noted above, to develop the property for a church, the applicant is required to file a GMPA and a  companion Conditional Use application for the property.  The GMPA’s intent is to justify and permit the  proposed land use at this location based on a thorough data analysis.  A Conditional Use application will  be necessary to develop the site for the church facility.  This site meets all of the stated criteria and is  further justified by the data analysis.  Alternate Site Locations:  Alternate Site #1: Property located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard  approximately 3.00 miles east of 1‐75  Zoning:    Sungate CPUD; Attachment H  Folio #’s:  75180000120; Attachment G  Parcel Size:  5.17 Acres    Ordinance 09‐06 defines the zoning and development control of this property.  These parcels are void of  any development.  The identified site is Tract B within the Sungate CPUD with commercial zoning and is  set to accommodate a total of 63,000 square feet.  Identified in the Future Land Use Map as the Golden  Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict, the GMP does not limit intensity.       It can be argued that this location has the potential of providing more visibility due to its location, although  developable area and available square footage of development limit the site.  Per the Planned Unit  Development Tracts B, C, and D are limited to 63,000 square feet of commercial buildout.  If the available  commercial development is rationed according to site acreage – Tract B would be limited to approximately  50,000 sf of building.  Additionally, per the PUD Ord. 09‐06, Tracts B, C, and D would be responsible for  7 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 7  providing water management facilities for 1.02 acres of County owned right‐of‐way and Tract A (2.04  Acres) further limiting the available developable area within Tract B.  Due to the Commercial Planned Unit  Development zoning on the site, the intensity of the property is limited; thereby inhibiting space for the  proposed use.  When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the  intensity of the site from a zoning standpoint, the proposed site location is more logical and better suited  site than this parcel.  Alternate Site #2: Located midblock on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) approximately 0.13 miles north  of Pine Ridge Road.    Zoning: Estates; Attachment I  Folio #’s:36618000107, 36618000000  Parcel Size:5.00 Acres  The property is currently zoned Estates with a combined lot width of 330 linear feet and acreage of 5.00  available for development.  These parcels are currently void of any development; and were identified  through a MLS as available property.  It can be argued that this location meets all the requested criterion, based on property acreage and  dimensional criteria, location of the site on an arterial or collector roadway within the defined area of and  study.  However, to develop the site as proposed, the property would also require a GMPA and Conditional  Use Rezone.    Additionally, based on existing conditions of adjacent properties, access from Collier Boulevard will be  granted to the site via a single egress/ingress point to the Boulevard; therefore, limiting access to the  parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church.  Additionally, the right‐of‐way directly  adjacent to the property is designed as a ±8‐foot deep storm water management detention pond utilized  for the roadway storm water attenuation; thus, increasing the cost of constructing the proposed access  and increasing the permitting fees.  Furthermore, of the properties analyzed this site demands the highest cost at $138,000.00 per acre.  As a  completely vegetated lot with a number of site improvements that will need to be addressed, to develop  would be too costly for the church to absorb.  When compared to the proposed site location for  compatibility and consistency with the criterion previously identified, the subject property provides more  site accessibility and cost‐efficiency to develop per the wants and needs of the applicant.  In addition, the  proposed property better suits the integrity of the Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan in reference to  conditional use properties within the Golden Gate Area.  8 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Alternative Site Analysis Table  CRITERIA PROPOSED SITE LOCATION  Folio #s 36760720005 &   36760800006  ALT. SITE #1   (SUNGATE CPUD)  Folio # 75180000120  ALT. SITE #2   Folio #s  36618000107 &  36618000000  PROPERTY SIZE OF 5‐10  ACRES ±6.25 acres ±5.17 acres ±5 acres  SALE PRICE LESS THAN  OR EQUAL TO $135,000  PER ACRE Sale Price ‐ $135,000/acre $444,104.13/acre   (currently not on  market)  Sale Price ‐  $138,000/acre  MINIMUM LOT WIDTH  OF 330 LINEAR FEET Yes Yes Yes  LOCATED WITH  FRONTAGE ON AN  ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR  ROADWAY  Yes Yes Yes  MAXIMUM OF 5 MILES  EAST OF INTERSTATE‐75,  NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE  PARKWAY & WITHIN  COLLIER COUNTY  Yes Yes Yes  9 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                           ATTACHMENT “A”  Location Map   10 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA LOCATION MAPCR 951PINE RIDGE RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD VANDERBILT BEACH LEGEND SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES MAJOR ROADWAYS COLLIER LEE HENDRY DADE BROWA R D PALM BEACH MONROE . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D (LOCATION MAP).mxd 0 0.5 1MILES 11 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ATTACHMENT “B”  Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay  12 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 624D3.86 Ac 1102.27 Ac 7400.08 Ac 7400.01 Ac 7400.01 Ac COLLIER BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W Grace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida FLUCCS Map X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO. DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8 1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0 N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 O 0 200 400100 Feet Subject PropertyFLUCCS Mapping110, Single Family Residential624-D, Pine - Cypress - Cabbage Palm (drained) 740, Disturbed Land G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\FLUCCS Map.mxd / 9:10:20 AM4/12/17 Note:2017 Aerialobtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. 13 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace                                   ATTACHMENT “C”  Protected Listed Species Survey    14 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL NAPLES, FLORIDA APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES Prepared For: Prepared By: April 12, 2017 Collier County Engineering & Natural Resources Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Lower West Coast Service Center 2301 McGregor Boulevard Fort Myers, FL 33901 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com Ea r t h Tech Environmental, LLC 15 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure 1) below for Location Map. Figure 1. Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication “Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida.” This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2 & 3). The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species. The lists were obtained from two agency publications: 16 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com v A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication “Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists”, Publication Date: October 2016. v A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication “Notes on Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Plants”, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community. See (Table 1) of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary, transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80’s. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately four (4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd. West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. 17 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property, this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential, Low Density 2.27 624-D Pine – Cypress – Cabbage Palm (drained) 3.88 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: 6.25 Figure 2. Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping 18 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table 1). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. 19 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map & Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. 20 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Table 1. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status FWC/FDA FWS 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus floridanus T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - Snowy Egret Egretta thula T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor T - Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals, Amphibians, Reptiles, & Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - Turkey vulture Cathartes aura DV N - Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV N - Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Gray squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia N, DV N - Armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus OH N Reptiles Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Amphibians Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Plants Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciulata DV N CE * = protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered 21 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours Task March 23, 2017 2:00 pm 4:00 pm 4.0 (2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 4.0 22 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN 23 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE,UTILITY ANDMAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)1212330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)10PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)2720201ST AVE SW121240WATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING132 PARKINGSPACES PROVIDED300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYATHLETIC FIELDGOLDEN GATE BLVD.WEBER BLVD. S.ONE-WAYEXISTING RIGHT TURN LANE0.769 ACRE PRESERVEWATER MANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN24 9.A.6Packet Pg. 228Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                                   ATTACHMENT “D”  Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners     25 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) I 75CR 951IMMOKALEE RD U S 4 1SR 41US 41EVERGLADES BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD AIRPORT PULLINGOIL WELL RD VANDERBILT BEACH GOODLETTE FRANKGOODLETTE FRANKUS 4 1 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXISTING CONGREGATION LOCATION SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-25 GR SSGMPA (MEMBERSHIP LOCATION).mxd Legend DATA & ANALYSIS AREA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES EXISTING CHURCH MEMBER LOCATIONS MAJOR ROADWAYS COLLIER COUNTY BOUNDARY 26 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                                   ATTACHMENT “E”  Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational  Opportunities    27 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 5416 COUNTY RD 579, SEFFNER, FL 33584 1542 HARRISON ST, HOLLYWOOD, FL 330201950 VAN BUREN ST, HOLLYWOOD, FL 33020 6423 MARBLETREE LN, LAKE WORTH, FL 33467 4001 HENDRICKS AVE, JACKSONVILLE, FL 32207 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHES SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-10-12 GR SSGMPA (GR LOCATIONS FL).mxd Legend EXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST DENOMINATION CHURCHES 28 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                                   ATTACHMENT “F”  Alternate Property Map (within Market Study Area)   29 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 75180000120 36618000107, 36618000000I 75CR 951IMMOKALEE RD PINE RIDGE RD VANDERBILT BEACH GOLDEN GATE PKWY GOLDEN GATE BLVDI 75DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAAVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-10-12 GR SSGMPA (ALT. PARCELS ZONING).mxd 2 ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE STUDY AREA - BETWEEN 5-10 ACRES (SEPARATELY OR COLLECTIVELY)- ALONG COLLECTOR OR ARTERIAL ROW'S- ZONING PERMITTING CHURCHES BY RIGHT, REZONE OR CONDITIONAL USE (WITHOUT A GMPA REQUEST) Legend DATA & ANALYSIS AREA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES MARKET STUDY AREA: AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES 30 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                                   ATTACHMENT “G”  Parcel 75180000120 Information   31 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) $ 2,900,000 $ 0 $ 1,352,325 $ 0 $ 1,352,325 $ 1,352,325 $ 1,352,325 $ 1,352,325 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No.75180000120 Site Adr.4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES, FL 34116 Name / Address COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC 1454 MADISON AVE W City IMMOKALEE State FL Zip 34142 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 4B15 646900 B 14B15 15 49 26 5.17 Legal SUNGATE CENTER PUD TRACT B, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 4468 PG 3302 Millage Area 100 Millage Rates   *Calculations Sub./Condo 646900 ‐ SUNGATE CENTER PUD IN UNIT 26 School Other Total Use Code 10 ‐ VACANT COMMERCIAL 5.245 6.4442 11.6892 Latest Sales History ﴾Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality﴿ Date Book‐Page Amount 03/18/14 5020‐3283 10/27/03 3431‐48  2016 Certified Tax Roll ﴾Subject to Change﴿     Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll   32 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 4/25/2017 Collier County Property Appraiser http://maps.collierappraiser.com/Map.aspx?ccpaver=1.9.6&ref=disclaimermaps&msize=L 1/1 Aerial Year: 2017   Sales Year: OFF Aerial Photography: January ­ 2017 [6 inch] ­ 2017 [2 feet] ­ 2016 [2 feet] ­ 2016 [50 feet]  Introduction  Search for Parcels by  Search Results Parcel ID: 75180000120 Name: COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC Street# & Name: 4087 GREEN BLVD  Build# / Unit#: B / 1  Layers  Legend  Print  Home Page  Help 33 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace                                       ATTACHMENT “H”  Sungate CPUD ‐ Ordinance 09‐06      34 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 35 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 36 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 37 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 38 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 39 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 40 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 41 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 42 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 43 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 44 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 45 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 46 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 47 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 48 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 49 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 50 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 51 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 52 9.A.6Packet Pg. 256Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 53 9.A.6Packet Pg. 257Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 54 9.A.6Packet Pg. 258Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 55 9.A.6Packet Pg. 259Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 56 9.A.6Packet Pg. 260Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 57 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 58 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 59 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 60 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 61 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                                   ATTACHMENT “I”  Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information         62 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) $ 300 $ 150,000 $ 0 $ 485,000 $ 43,000 $ 128,673 $ 0 $ 128,673 $ 77,926 $ 50,747 $ 128,673 $ 50,747 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No.36618000000 Site Adr.795 CR 951, NAPLES, FL 34119 Name / Address ARAND CORP ALINE JIDY ALFREDO JIDY PAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOON CIR City SANTA FE State NM Zip 87507 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 4B10 325600 120 04B10 10 49 26 2.37 Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761 Millage Area 100 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 325600 - GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 School Other Total Use Code 0 - VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 6.5246 11.6466 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 07/19/10 4590-3261 04/16/07 4214-758 04/16/07 4214-756 05/04/05 3790-2413 06/01/84 1085-760 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (-) 10% Cap (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Page 1 of 1 10/11/2017http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=611719110&Map=No&FolioNum=36...63 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) $ 300 $ 150,000 $ 0 $ 485,000 $ 134,525 $ 0 $ 134,525 $ 75,756 $ 58,769 $ 134,525 $ 58,769 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No.36618000107 Site Adr. Name / Address ARAND CORP ALINE JIDY ALFREDO JIDY RAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOON CIR City SANTA FE State NM Zip 87507 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 4B10 325600 120 14B10 10 49 26 2.23 Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1759 Millage Area 100 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 325600 - GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 School Other Total Use Code 0 - VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 6.5246 11.6466 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 07/19/10 4590-3261 04/16/07 4214-758 04/16/07 4214-756 05/04/05 3790-2413 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (-) 10% Cap (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Page 1 of 1 10/11/2017http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=611719110&Map=No&FolioNum=36...64 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Page 1 of 1 10/11/2017http://maps.collierappraiser.com/output/Collier_2017_sde0316540545210242.jpg65 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)                     ATTACHMENT “J”  Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy – White Paper    66 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 Attachment "J" 67 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 68 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 69 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 70 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 71 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 72 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 73 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 74 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 75 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 76 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 77 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 78 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 79 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 80 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 81 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 82 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 83 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 84 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 85 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 86 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 87 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 88 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 89 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 90 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 91 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 92 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 93 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 94 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 95 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 96 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 97 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 98 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 99 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 100 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 101 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 102 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 103 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 104 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 105 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 106 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 107 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 108 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 109 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 110 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 111 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 112 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 113 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 114 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 115 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 116 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 117 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 118 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 119 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 120 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 121 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 122 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 123 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 124 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 125 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 126 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 127 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 128 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 129 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 130 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 131 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 132 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 133 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 134 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 135 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 136 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 137 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 138 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 139 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 140 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 141 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 142 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 143 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 144 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 145 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 146 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Appendix A Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Public Outreach Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 81 of 220 147 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 148 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 149 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 150 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 151 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 152 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 153 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 154 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 155 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP)  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 220 156 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 157 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 158 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 159 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 160 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 161 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 162 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 163 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 164 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 165 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 166 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 167 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 168 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 169 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 170 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 171 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 172 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 173 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 174 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 175 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) (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 220 176 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 177 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) (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 220 178 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 179 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 180 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 181 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 182 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • 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 220 183 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 184 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 185 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) (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 220 186 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 187 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 188 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 189 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 190 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 191 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 192 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 193 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 194 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 195 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220 196 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 197 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 198 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 199 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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: $500,000 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 134 of 220 200 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 2 Four-square-mile area of Golden Gate City Replacement and improvements to existing aging infrastructure: Replaced old catch basins with ditch bottom inlets with grates Installation of sumps at catch basins Re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion When you have a moment, would you please provide Kris with the requested map(s) or graphics and any other pertinent project details. Thank you, Michele Michele R. Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Department Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 tel. 239.252.2466 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:40 AM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: GG City improvements Hi Michelle: You mentioned the outfall replacement project for GG City stormwater, ($.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 220 201 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 202 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 203 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 138 of 220 204 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220 205 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 206 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 141 of 220 207 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 142 of 220 208 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 143 of 220 209 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 144 of 220 210 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 145 of 220 211 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 146 of 220 212 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 147 of 220 213 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 148 of 220 214 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 149 of 220 215 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 150 of 220 216 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 151 of 220 217 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 152 of 220 218 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 153 of 220 219 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 154 of 220 220 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace 123456789 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 JMarch 29, 2016 GAC Land SalesPHASEUNITTRACTLEGALACRESOR BK/PG RESERVED FOR PER ACRE APPRAISED VALUE FOLIO NUMBERI781All of Tract 81 9.11 1257/794 Parks and Recreation (3 - 2016)$50,000 $455,500 36915200008I202All of Tract 2 8.78 1257/794 School Board $40,000 $350,800 37590080008I19585All 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 2202219.A.6 Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : 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 220 222 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 223 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 224 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 225 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 226 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 227 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 228 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 229 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 230 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 231 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 232 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 233 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 234 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 235 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 236 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 237 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 238 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 239 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 240 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220 241 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 242 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 243 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 244 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 245 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 246 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 247 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 248 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 249 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 250 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 251 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 252 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 253 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 254 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220 255 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220 256 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220 257 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 10 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 192 of 220 258 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 259 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 260 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 261 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 262 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 466 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 263 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 264 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 265 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 266 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 470 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 267 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 471 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 268 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 472 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 269 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 473 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 270 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 474 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 271 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 272 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 273 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 274 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 209 of 220 275 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 276 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 480 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 277 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 481 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 278 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 482 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220 279 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 483 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 214 of 220 280 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 484 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220 281 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220 282 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 283 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 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 220 284 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 219 of 220 285 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220 286 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE,UTILITY ANDMAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)1212330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)10PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYRECREATION AREAGOLDEN GATE BLVD.RIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' FRONT YARDSETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARDSETBACK50.0' FRONTYARD SETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATER MANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)CANALCOLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) 25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 25' PRESERVESTRUCTURE SETBACK14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN EXHIBIT O9.A.6Packet Pg. 491Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE,UTILITY ANDMAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)1212330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)10PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)2027201ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAY121240WATER MANAGEMENT AREA 0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYRECREATION AREAGOLDEN GATE BLVD.RIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' FRONT YARDSETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARDSETBACK50.0' FRONTYARD SETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATER MANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)CANALCOLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)300'300'300'300'25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 25' PRESERVESTRUCTURE SETBACK14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN 9.A.6Packet Pg. 492Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) EXHIBIT P9.A.6Packet Pg. 493Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 06/26/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31st Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee – $500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee – Small Scale Study – No Fee EXHIBIT Q 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 6 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 11 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 13 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 13 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan .......................................................................................... 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 16 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition .......................................................... 23 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 26 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 4 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection. The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1 – Project Location Map As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for a multi-purpose church related building and accessory recreational area. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2022 planning horizon. The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed trip generation. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5 The associated church multi-use amenities are considered passive incidental to the sanctuary use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Proposed Conditions Church 560 15,000 sf (300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary; sf – square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. Trip Generation The project’s site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions) – Average Weekday Note(s): (1) Sanctuary; sf – square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: sanctuary Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 – Sunday peak hour of generator, the number of seats variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the purposes of this report. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 – Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Note(s): (1) Sanctuary. Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 15,000 sf(1) 137 5 3 8 4 4 8 Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Church 300 seats(1) 92 91 183 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volume (1) Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 35% SB – 1 NB – 1 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 35% NB – 2 SB – 2 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 30% WB – 1 EB – 1 Note(s): (1) Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 8 Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2016), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2016 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2022. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2016 - 2022) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2016 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2022 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2022 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 1,200 2.00% 1.1262 1,352 166 1,366 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 1,867 2.00% 1.1262 2,103 40 1,907 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 1,660 2.00% 1.1262 1,870 0 1,660 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2016 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)6. 2022 Projected Volume = 2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2022 Projected Volume = 2016 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2022 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2016 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 2016 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location Exist Roadway Min. Standard LOS Exist Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Future Project Build out Roadway Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 6D E 3,000 (SB) 6D Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 6D D 3,000 (NB) 6D Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 4D D 2,300 (EB) 4D Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2022 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2016 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2022 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project ** % Vol Capacity Impact By Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 3,000 (SB) SB – 1 1,367 0.03% No No Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 3,000 (NB) NB – 2 2,105 0.07% No No Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 2,300 (EB) EB – 1 1,871 0.04% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report; **2022 Projected Volume= 2022 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Weber Blvd is a 2-lane undivided local street under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 30 mph in the vicinity of the project. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12 Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access – Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 64 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. Site Access – Southbound Weber Boulevard The proposed project is expected to generate 28 vph left-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. It is noted that the Collier County roadway network peaks during a typical work week day. As such, the estimated project’s peak hour traffic occurs on an off peak day. In addition, Weber Blvd. is a low volume roadway serving surrounding residential properties. Based on the fact that the generated traffic is not a high warranting volume and occurs on an off peak day, it is our recommendation not to provide a left-turn lane at this project access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. As part of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection improvements, the Weber Blvd. connection onto Golden Gate Blvd. will be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out access. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13 Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project accesses on Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 14 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15 9.A.6Packet Pg. 508Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 16 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 17 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 18 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 19 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 20 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 21 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 23 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (2 Sheets) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 24 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 26 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits (2 Sheets) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 27 9.A.6Packet Pg. 520Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 28 9.A.6Packet Pg. 521Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com EXHIBIT “R” COMPARATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS The proposed development known as Grace Romanian Baptist Church is a ±6.25-acre property located in Section 11, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is bound by Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) to the south, 1st Avenue Southwest to the west, Weber Boulevard South to the north, and Golden Gate Boulevard to the east. The subject property is currently zoned as Estates. The subject development consists of two properties to be combined with access points on Weber Boulevard South, Golden Gate Boulevard, and 1st Avenue South. For this analysis, the site will be conceptually developed to the maximum standards using the current project zoning and the proposed zoning amendment. The currently zoned lots consist of the following residential uses at build-out: Single Family Residence (1,201 – 2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Single Family Residence (1,201 – 2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Total: 4,500 sf The newly proposed Development (proposed zoning amendment) consists of the following at build-out: Church 300 seats Total: 300 seats The Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan establishes Levels of Service for the following: Arterial and Collector Roads Surface Water Management Systems Potable Water Systems Sanitary Sewer Systems Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Parks and Recreation Facilities Public School Facilities Each of the areas will be examined for the proposed developments in this summary report. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Arterial and Collector Roads Significantly impacted roadways are identified by the proposed highest peak hour trip generation (net new traffic) and is compared with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update Inventory Report, the peak hour for the project’s adjacent roadway network is PM. Therefore, the PM Peak Hour Trips were calculated using gross square footage for the proposed GPMA (Church at 15,000sf) and dwelling unit for the current zoning (Single Family Residential at 2 units) as this represents highest and best use scenario. Table 1 - Project Trip Generation (Net New) – Average Weekday Development PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA (Total non-Pass-By Trips) 4 4 8 Current Zoning (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) 1 1 2 Proposed Net New Traffic (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) Net Increase/(Net Decrease) 3 3 6 Based on the roadway network link analysis result, the proposed development at build-out is not a significant or adverse traffic generator for the existing roadway traffic at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development generated trips without adversely affecting the adjacent roadway network level of service. Surface Water Management Systems Currently, the neighboring sites are developed with single family homes and not permitted with an agency for storm water management. General development will warrant an environmental resource permit (ERP) through South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The District’s requirement for development is to attenuate 1.5 inches over the entire site during a 25-year, 3-day storm event prior to discharging offsite. The post-development discharge rate for this project allows 0.15 cfs/acre. These are minimum requirements despite the type of development proposed; therefore, neither project will pose a significant or adverse effect on the overall storm water management system. Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Currently, the site contains a vacated house with all utilities privately owned and maintained. The proposed non-residential site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Per Policy 1.5 of the Capital Improvement Element section of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the potable water system level-of-service is based on population growth. The proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth; therefore, the proposed use will have no impact on the potable water facility’s capacity. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Solid waste is provided by Waste Management, a private contract provider. Commercial accounts are charged by the service provider directly with rates set by the Board of County Commissioners through contract negotiation with the provider. Parks and Recreation Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Parks and Recreation Facilities. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Public School Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Public School Facilities. The use will not impact school attendance. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by either of the proposed build-outs. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Fire and EMS Facilities The proposed build-out will have no measurable impact on Fire and EMS Facilities. It should be assumed that newer buildings will be constructed to current NFPA and building code standards which may reduce the likelihood of related calls. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out conditions. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) June 16, 2017 VIA: E-MAIL Jessica Harrelson Jessica@davidsonengineering.com Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Water and Wastewater Service Availability Project: Grace Romanian Church Parcel #: 36760800006, 36760720005 Dear Jessica: The subject project is within the Collier County Water-Sewer District’s (CCWSD) water and wastewater service area, but wastewater service is not readily available to the project. Water service is readily available to the project via an existing 36” RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd S. Potable water is available for domestic use, fire protection, and irrigation, subject to the provisions of LDC 4.03.08 C, the Collier County Irrigation Ordinance (2015-27), and other applicable rules and regulations. Connection to the CCWSD’s water distribution system will be permitted only after the GMD Development Review Division’s approval of hydraulic calculations prepared by the Developer’s Engineer of Record in accordance with the Design Criteria found in Section 1 of the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities Standards Manual. Source pressure assumptions for water distribution system design are prescribed in the Design Criteria. If you have any questions, you may contact me at (239) 252-1037 or EricFey@colliergov.net. Respectfully, Eric Fey, P.E., Senior Project Manager CC: Steve Messner, Division Director – Water, PUD/WD; Beth Johnssen, Division Director – Wastewater, PUD/WWD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD EXHIBIT S 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church - SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com EXHIBIT “S” UTILITY STATEMENT The proposed site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES – GIS EXHIBIT 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Narrative & Justification of the Proposed GMPA Amendment EXHIBIT “T” The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. 163.3187 Process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1)A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a)The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: Response: The property for the proposed amendment is ± 6.25 acres in size. (b)The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. Response: The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small-scale amendments adopted by Collier County does not exceed 120 acres. (c)The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government’s comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. Response: The proposed amendment involves a text change that is directly related to a request for the adoption of a small scale future land use map amendment. (d)The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). Response: The subject property is not in an area of critical state concern. (2)Small-scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Response: Acknowledged. (3)If the small-scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. Response: The proposed small scale development does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity. (4)Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. Response: Acknowledged. (5)(a) Any affected person may file a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57 to request a hearing to challenge the compliance of a small scale development amendment with this act within 30 days following the local government’s adoption of the amendment and shall serve a copy of the petition on the local government. An administrative law judge shall hold a hearing in the affected jurisdiction not less than 30 days nor more than 60 days following the filing of a petition and the assignment of an administrative law judge. The parties to a hearing held pursuant to this subsection shall be the petitioner, the local government, and any intervenor. In the proceeding, the plan amendment shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government’s determination that the small scale development amendment is in compliance is fairly debatable. The state land planning agency may not intervene in any proceeding initiated pursuant to this section. Response: Acknowledged. (b)1. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found not in compliance, the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found in compliance, the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the state land planning agency. Response: Acknowledged. 2.If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is not in compliance, the agency shall submit, within 30 days following its receipt, the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is in compliance, the agency shall enter a final order within 30 days following its receipt of the recommended order. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Response: Acknowledged. (c)Small scale development amendments may not become effective until 31 days after adoption. If challenged within 30 days after adoption, small scale development amendments may not become effective until the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission, respectively, issues a final order determining that the adopted small scale development amendment is in compliance. Response: Acknowledged. (d)In all challenges under this subsection, when a determination of compliance as defined in s. 163.3184(1)(b) is made, consideration shall be given to the plan amendment as a whole and whether the plan amendment furthers the intent of this part Response: Acknowledged. Policy 5.3: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map; requiring that any changes to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary; and, encouraging the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County’s Agricultural/Rural designated area, which will better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of agriculture and other predominantly rural land uses, and provide for cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Response: The proposed SSGMPA does not contribute to urban sprawl. The subject property is within the existing urban service area and will not require any special or additional costs to provide necessary services. The property has been contemplated for residential and limited non-residential conditional uses per the existing zoning and future land use. The proposed addition of a religious facility land use (through addition to the Conditional Use Subdistrict) will place no greater burden on community facilities than did prior uses of the property. Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, subject to meeting the compatibility criteria of the Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102, adopted October 30, 1991, as amended. Response: The subject property, and its potential land use, shall be compatible with and complimentary to its surrounding land uses. The proposed Conditional Use Subdistrict is bordered to the north, east south and west by residential land uses and zoning opposite existing right-of-ways. Collier Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, Weber Road and 1st Avenue SW all directly border the subject property. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Response: The proposed SSGMPA will be a companion petition to a conditional use application that will continue to provide appropriate connections and interconnections. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 12 Urban Estates 8 Rural Estates 9 Corkscrew 3 Golden Gate2 Central Naples 1 North Naples SR 93 / I-75LIVINGSTON RDCOLLIER BOULEVARDPINE RIDGE RDLOGAN BLVDCR 886/GOLDEN GATE VANDERBILT BEACH RD. GOLDEN GATE BLVD WHITE BLVDOAKS BLVD.GREEN BLVD 13TH STREETIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 VINEYARDS BLVD23 RD ST. SWIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 SANTA BARBARA BLVD16 TH AVE. SWIMPERIAL STREETLEGEND DATA & ANALYSIS GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES Urban Estates Rural Estates DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USE SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAATTACHMENT U: PLANNING COMMUNITIES . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2016) 0 0.25 0.5MILES Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-ATTACHMENT H (HALF-MILE PLANNING COMM.).mxd 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 12 Urban Estates 8 Rural Estates 9 Corkscrew 3 Golden Gate2 Central Naples 1 North Naples SR 93 / I-75LIVINGSTON RDPINE RIDGE RD COLLIER BOULEVARDLOGAN BLVDVANDERBILT BEACH RD. WHITE BLVD GOLDEN GATE BLVDOAKS BLVD.GREEN BLVD 13TH STREETVINEYARDS BLVDIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 16 TH AVE. SW23 RD ST. SWIMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 SANTA BARBARA BLVDLEGEND DATA & ANALYSIS AREA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES North Naples Urban Estates Central Naples Golden Gate Rural Estates Corkscrew DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT U: PLANNING COMMUNITIES . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 1 2MILES Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT U (PLANNING COMM.).mxd 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) SR 93 / I-75LIVINGSTON RDCOLLIER BOULEVARDPINE RIDGE RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD LOGAN BLVDCR 886/GOLDEN GATE WHITE BLVD VANDERBILT BEACH RD. IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 OAKS BLVD.GREEN BLVD 13TH STREETVINEYARDS BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVD16 TH AVE. SW I-75 ON RAMP IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 23 RD ST. SWI -75 ON RAMP I -75 ON RAMP I- 7 5 O N RAM P I- 7 5 ON RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-75 OFF RAMPI-7 5 O F F R A M P I-75 N B O F F - R A M P COLLIER BOULEVARDLEGEND DATA & ANALYSIS AREA GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES FLUE DISTRICTS/SUBDISTRICTS AG - AGRICULTURAL C - CONSERVATION CD - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ES - ESTATES MUA - MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTERS RFN - RURAL FRINGE (NEUTRAL) RFR - RURAL FRINGE (RECEIVING) RFS - RURAL FRINGE (SENDING) UR - URBAN RESIDENTIAL VANDERBILT/951 COMMERCIAL DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.4365 RADIOROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT V: FUTURE LAND USE . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 1 2MILES 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ZONING MAP: GGE22EXHIBIT W9.A.6Packet Pg. 535Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) SUBDIVISON INDEX ATTEST___________________________CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TWP 49S RNG 26E SEC(S) 9 & 10 MAP NUMBER: BY___________________________CHAIRMAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 109 110 111 112 113 114 9 108 LOT 1 LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 8 23 PALMETTO WOODS DRIVE LOGAN BOULEVARD45 46 47 48 TAMARIND RIDGE DRIVE SYCAMORE DRIVE 2 29 31 44 9 1 30 5 3 4 6 7 26 3228 27 43 33 34 25 24 42 41 101585972738687100 6057 71 74 61 62 56 55 70 75 69 76 85 88 10299 84 89 83 90 10398 10497 LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 49 50 MAHOGANY RIDGE DRIVE 51 14 17 11 9 10 12 13 20 35 22 21 39 40 36 19 18 15 37 16 38 63 64 U32 53 54 67 68 77 78 81 82 91 92 106 105 95 96 V 1 6552 79 66 80 93 10794 10 LOT 2 LOT 1 SUNRISE CT.LOT 3 3 33 3 4 4 44 55 5 5 6 6 6 6 2PUa,b CANAL13 20 29 36 45 52 61 68 77 84 93 100 5TH AVENUE SW 7TH AVENUE SW 17116 32 33 48 49 18 3 2 14 15 19 30 31 34 35 46 47 50 51 9680656481 119 12097 94 95 78 7966 6762 63 82 83 116 117 118 98 99 115 PUa 3,4 3RD AVENUE SW U1 1ST AVENUE SW 21 22 23 5 12 6 7 11 10 28 37 44 53 27 38 26 39 43 54 42 55 2489 25 40 41 56 107 90 91 9276696085 74 757059 58 71 86 87 110 111 112101 108 109102 103 8973577288 106 105104 113 114 9 10 10 109 E E 2 2 1 2 12 2 1 1 COLLIER BOULEVARD (C.R. 951)CANALCASTLE RDCASTLE DR4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.154.8 4.24 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 4.21 LOT 1 EDEN SUB MANURI 77 7 7 LOT 2 LOT 1 LOT 1LOT 2LOT 3LOT 488 8 8 LOT 1 LOT 29 9 99 CU 5 6V LOT 1 LOT 2 LOT 3 SUB 10 10 10 10 LOT 3 LOT 2 LOT 1 1111 11 11 1 LOT 1LOT 212 12 12 1 1 LOT 1 2 13 13 13 13 13 LOT 7V $NO. NAME P.B. Pg.1 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 1 4 73-742 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 32 7 21,223 RUSTLING PINES 22 284 SUNRISE SUBDIVISION 18 145 BELLA WOODS 22 216 MANURI & EDEN II SUBDIVISION'S 19,20 33,447 REPLAT OF TRACT 93 26 458 WHISPERING WOODS 32 389 CHEESER SUBDIVISION 32 3910 MAHOGANY ESTATES 37 22 GGE20 GGE26 GGE19 ZONING NOTES1 5-23-89 SDV-89-1 89-1282 7-13-82 PU-82-10C 82-803 2-14-89 PU-88-21C 89-374 2-13-90 PU-88-21C EXT. 90-705 11-14-00 CU-00-13 00-4196 1-09-01 V-00-24 01-077 3-16-17 VA-PL-16-1264 HEX-17-08 NO. NAME P.B. Pg.11 McCARTHY SUBDIVISION 41 6812 CASTHELY PLACE 50 4513 GRAEVE SUBDIVISION 54 9414151617181920 GGE229608N9608SSCALE 0 800 GGE19 GGE26 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A PAGE OF THEOFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS REFERRED TO AND ADOPTEDBY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO. 04-41 OF THECOUNTY OF COLLIER, FLORIDA, ADOPTED JUNE 22, 2004,AS AMENDED BY THE ZONING NOTES AND SUBDIVISIONINDEX REFERENCED HEREON. 4/24/2017 ZONING MAP: GGE20 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ZONING MAP: GGE21 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Grace Romanian Church - SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com EXHIBIT “X” DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST PROPERTY OWNER: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP: 100% REGISTERED AGENTS: •Adrian Roman – President / Secretary •Adrian Ungureanu – Director •Gheorghe Lup – Director •Mihai Simut – Director •Daniel Pop – Director •Vasile Valean – Director •Vasile Brisc – Treasurer / Director 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD COLLIER BOULEVARDSPECIAL EXCEPTIONS TO CONDITIONAL USE LOCATION CRITERIA - GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE: 4/17 FILE: ADOPTED:XX, XX, 2017 BY ORDINANCE NO. 2017-XX (CP-2017-x) 250 500 1000 SCALE IN FEET N LEGEND CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) NIM INFORMATION 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Published DailyNaples, FL 34110 Affidavit of PublicationState of FloridaCounties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na-ples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.___________________________________________________________Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 1764054 MEETING OCT 11 MEETING OCT 11 Pub DatesSeptember 26, 2017 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis October 04, 2017 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) ACOSTA, ROMO CARLOS ALBERTO DORIS A ACOSTA 13585 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 AJITHKUMAR, ELEZABETH S 510 13TH ST NW NAPLES, FL 34120---5027 AMBROSE, GAYLE L 3815 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W NAPLES, FL 34120---3040 BAZHAW, BRENDA K 3830 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 BORRELLI, JOHN R 201 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 BROUILLARD, JOHN J & ERIN L 13535 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 BUKOWSKI, THADDEUS A 71 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 BUKOWSKI, WANDA VINCENTA BUKOWSKI EST 8380 WHISPER TRACE LN #J105 NAPLES, FL 34114---0000 CLEM, ANDREW & SHAWN 4110 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2635 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 CORDER, MICHAEL A & LAUREN K 3821 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3027 D'AGOSTINI, DOMINICK J MARTHA L D'AGOSTINI 220 PARK AVE SOUTH PLAINFIELD, NJ 07080---0000 DORTA, CHARLES MANUEL JENNIFER DORTA 81 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3037 FERREIRA, OSCAR F & ADELA OSCAR C FERREIRA 6000 COLLINS AVE #527 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140---0000 GARGIULO SR, JEFFREY DEWEY VALERIE BOYD 4055 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 GOLDEN SR, BILLY M & TERESA W 4040 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2600 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH OF NAPLES INC 6017 PINE RIDGE ROAD # 84 NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 HA, CUC 20 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 HALLOCK, SUSAN C 3960 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 HENRY, JEFF 161 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 HICKEY, BRENDAN F 3870 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 J D & R L EDIE JOINT REV TRUST 13555 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 JORDAN, WILLIAM S 4111 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2640 JOSE, ANU JULIA JOY 100 TRAPHILL DR MORRISVILLE, NC 27560---0000 KEEFER, DAVID DEEATRA MARTIN-KEEFER 3898 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3000 KELLY TR, RENATE S RENATE S KELLY REV TRUST UTD 8/06 291 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 KENNEY, JOHN & STEPHANIE 4110 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2641 KLEIN, RICHARD KYLE MARY MARTICA KLEIN 3871 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 LONG, MARIA E 3835 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 LOUISE V TAYLOR REV TRUST 627 GORDONIA RD NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) MARZUCCO, MERISHCA 3791 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3011 MASSARD, RENE J 1460 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 103 NAPLES, FL 34105---3128 MCCANN, JAMES & BEVERLEY 4111 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 MILLER TR, PATRICK K TERRY B MILLER TR UTD 2/2/99 - UTD 2/2/99 210 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3034 MILLER, ROBERT C 40 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---3054 MOUNTAIN, BRIAN J 21 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---3039 ONDERKO, RONALD A & DEBORAH J 4075 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2611 PAULICH IV, JOHN & DANIELLE 260 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 PEREZ, HECTOR & JOHANNA 3980 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 PIDGEON, STEPHEN 3961 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 ROTH, STANLEY F & RUBY J 190 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3036 SEARS, WILLIAM M SONIA E MOLINA 2 PRESTON ST NORTH BILLERICA, MA 01862---2428 SPILKER, CHRISTIAN & KELLI 4035 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 THOMAS, KEVIN J JENNIFER E HITE 3830 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 TOBIAS, DAVID PO BOX 1236 ISLAMORADA, FL 33036---0000 VAN DE WERKEN, GARY 181 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3035 Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association PO Box 990596 Naples, FL 34116 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 September 25, 2017 Dear Property Owner, Please be advised that the Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. has filed formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, we are holding a Neighborhood Information Meeting to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the request. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. Please contact me at (239) 434-6060 ext. 2961, or via e-mail at fred@davidsonengineering.com, if you have any questions regarding the meeting or the proposed project. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Frederick E. Hood, AICP Fred Reischl, AICP Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Davidson Engineering, Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Growth Management 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Phone: 239.252.4211 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 M E M O R A N D U M October 23, 2017 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Fred Reischl, Principal Planner FROM: Jessica Harrelson, Senior Project Coordinator RE: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU - PL20160002577 NIM Meeting Minutes A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. The following individuals, associated with the review and presentation of the project, were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Sue Faulkner, Collier County • Fred Reischl, Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting by marking a presentation, reading the following: • Introduction: o Good evening. My name is Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering and I am the land development consultant representing the applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, o The applicant is seeking both a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment application to be reviewed by Collier County for the development of a church. o Here with me tonight is Jessica Harrelson, the Project Coordinator with Davidson Engineering, and Adrian Roman, the President & Secretary for the Grace Romanian Church. o Fred Reischl and Sue Faulkner, with the Collier County, are also in attendance tonight. They are the reviewing planners for Collier County Growth Management. o Per the land development code, tonight’s meeting will be recorded. At the end of my presentation I will be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the proposed development. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) • Size and Location: o The subject parcel is approximately 6.25 acres and is located at the Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards. • Purpose of the Applications: o Two separate applications I mentioned earlier have been filed with Collier County and are being reviewed by several County departments at the same time. o First, is the application to amend the County’s Growth Management Plan. The County’s Growth Management Plan describes the vision for the future of the County and helps to regulate where particular land uses are developed, and to ensure that those land uses are consistent with the goals and objectives that the County has in place. As the County grows and continues to develop, the Growth Management Plan gets amended from time to time. o Based on the size of the subject property, we have filed a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, or SSGMPA. The SSGMPA will amend the future land use zoning of the subject property from Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict, to the Conditional Use Subdistrict, per the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. o The Estates Zoning District permits churches as a Conditional Use, therefore a second application, identifying all the required elements for a conditional use request, per the County’s Land Development Code, has been filed. This application will also provide more specific details and conditions of approval for the subject property. Examples of conditions can be handled with the Conditional Use request are specific to setbacks, building height limitations, landscape buffers, etc. o The approval of both applications will allow the proposed church to be consistent with both the Collier County’s Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan’s vision for the future. • Details of the MCP o As you can see from the proposed master plan, the applicant is seeking to locate a sanctuary as the only principal building on the property with an accessory recreation field to the south. o The proposed sanctuary and accessory field have been designed and placed as close to the Collier Boulevard right-of-way to provide the most distance from adjacent homes to the east and south. o The building pad is bordered by parking and a circulation drive. o Additionally, to provide the most amount of screening from the adjacent homes, we have placed the property’s proposed water management and preserve areas along the eastern portion of the property. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) o The remaining property boundaries will be subject to the County’s landscape buffer screening requirements between residential and non-residential land uses. o The means of ingress and egress to the property will be along Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South. o Per coordination with County transportation staff, these are the two access locations that have been requested. o We held an informal NIM about a year ago to gauge the community’s feelings about the proposed project. o At that time, the concept plan was slightly different with one more access point to the south along 1st Avenue SW. o Since then, the applications have been reviewed by Collier County and we were asked to remove that access point. o While the application is still in review, additional changes can be made based on the feedback we receive from you all and from Collier County staff. o Although this layout looks official, this is not an approved plan yet. We still must finish our review with Collier County before moving forward. The following concerns were stated and questions were asked: 1. Concerns with the additional traffic along Weber Blvd, with also making the point that there is a nearby park, two existing churches and elementary school in the area. 2. County not willing to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd. 3. Why can’t a bridge be constructed off CR 951 (Collier Blvd) to the site, instead of accessing the property off the residential streets? - Fred Hood replied that this was something that could be considered, but the direction of County Transportation, regarding access points to the site, was followed. 4. What are the trip counts, hours of operation? How many accessory uses/buildings? - Fred Hood replied the design of the site is for a maximum 300-seat sanctuary to house the applicant’s congregation only, with no plans for additional services or to lease out the church to other congregations. Fred noted that the recreational field could be open for the enjoyment of the public’s use and was something that the church was considering offering the community. He also stated that there were no additional accessory uses being considered and the Conditional Use application was to allow for the church-use only. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 5. Concerns of outside services, such as child care and alcoholic counseling services. - Fred stated the outside services brought up were not being considered, and would require a separate application to be filed. 6. The applicant then spoke about the congregation, and why they chose the Estates location. 7. An attendee then spoke in support of the church. 8. Is a PUD being sought? - Fred replied that no, a PUD was not being considered and explained the Conditional Use. 9. When are the services? - Fred and the applicant replied with the services days/times. 10. What is the traffic count? - Fred replied that the Sunday peak-hour was 183 trips. 11. Discussions of traffic, ingress & egress are held. 12. Building heights? - Fred stated the site would conform to the current development standards & went over height and setbacks. 13. Are dark skies proposed? - Fred replied that was something the church would look into and take into consideration. 14. Is there the possibility for the church to expand on this parcel? - Fred went over the required open space, stormwater, parking areas, etc. for the site. 15. More discussions regarding traffic, ingress & egress continued. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:13p.m. End of memo. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 12D Tuesday, September 26, 2017 Naples Daily News + NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: September 26, 2017 ND-1764054 Frederick E. Hood, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Fred Reischl, AICP Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.252.4211 Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net ■ Manage your subscription ■ Find a newsstand to buy a paper ■ 3ODFHDQRELWXDU\FODVVLÀHG ad or press release ■ Submit news ■ Submit a letter to the editor ■ Report a problem www.naplesnews.com/customerservice Boats/Motors/Marine 2018 OUTBOARD MODELS 310, 330, CBR, 350 & 430 www.formulaboatssouth.com 909 10th St. S. Ste 102 (239)331-2104 BOAT AND YACHT DETAIL SeaSide Marine (239) 641-7184 SeaSideMarineFlorida.com CAPTAIN’S LICENSE Naples OUPV-6-pak Oct. 9th 877-435-3187 THE MARINA AT FACTORY BAY Marco Island Slip will accommodate 47’ LOA 19’ Wide; Deep Water Marina, Direct Access to Gulf... No Bridge Issue; Concrete Floating Docks; Water / Electric; Modern Clubhouse; Pump Out. Reduced for Quick Sale $55,000. Call Paul: (239)253-4755 Campers & RV’s WANTED ALL MOTOR HOMES AND CAMPERS. Any cond. Cash Paid. (954)789-7530. Recreational Storage OWN YOUR COVERED RV &/ OR BOAT PARKING SPACE! w ww.hideawayrvcondos.com MIKE PRICE 239-340-0665 Germain Properties of Naples STORAGE: MOTORHOMES RVs, boat, auto. Covered available. (239)643-0447 Transportation Sports and Imports 2014 BMW 320 Black; w/ new wheels; sports package; $19,500. (239) 919-4230 or (239) 298-1656 2017 BMW 640 M Sport Pkg 5K miles; White & black convertible top. $81,000. (239) 919-4230; or 298-1656 Sport Utility Vehicles 2017 INFINITI QX80 Rear wheel drive, loaded; only 800 mi. blue ext/tan int, DVD, $70K obo. (Pd $83K) (239)222-9081 Vans DODGE GRAND CARAVAN 2014. Wheelchair Van with 10” lowered flr, ramp & tie downs. (239)494-8267 Vehicles Wanted A A+ TOP DOLLAR PAID! for Classics Cars, Muscle Cars, & Sports Cars. (239)221-3000 ABSOLUTELY ALL AUTOS - Wanted! Dead or Alive Top $ FREE PICK UP 239-265-6140 CARS, TRUCKS, MOTORCYCLES, TRAILERS. TOP PRICE. (239)682-8687 CORVETTES WANTED Top dollar. Cash today. Call 941-809-3660 or 941-923-3421 STEARNS MOTORS MOST TRUSTED BUYER Since 1977. All Vehicles wanted Rod or Jim (239)774-7360 Vehicles Wanted WE BUY CARS, TRUCKS, SUVS, Etc. Anything from $1,000 thru $100,000. Please call Sam (239)595-4021 Announcements Personals PERSON IN GRAY CAR Involved in accident on 9/21/17 at 41 near NCH, please call (239) 774-0081 Legals Legal Notices LEGAL NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the Naples Planning Advisory Board will hold a meeting beginning at 8:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 11, 2017 in City Council Chambers, 735 Eighth Street South, Naples, Florida, 34102. The public hearings to be considered at that meeting are: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 17-CPA1 Consider an Ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment Petitioner 17-CPA1 to amend the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with Florida Statute Section 163-3191. Petitioner: City of Naples Location: Citywide Agent: City of Naples Planning Department CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 17-CU4 Consider a Resolution determining Conditional Use Petition 17-CU4, pursuant to Section 58-933(7) of the Code of Ordinances, to allow outdoor storage of automobile inventory with screening as an accessory use to the permitted use of indoor storage of automobile inventory, on property owned by TT of Naples, Inc., a Florida Corporation and located at 2725 and 2745 Corporate Flight Drive. Petitioner: TT of Naples, Inc., a Florida Corporation Location: 2725 and 2745 Corporate Flight Drive Agent: John M. Passidomo, Cheffy Passidomo VARIANCE PETITION 17-V6 Consider a Resolution determining Variance Petition 17-V6, pursuant to Section 56-93(c)(1) of the Code of Ordinances, to allow for a dock and boat lift to extend beyond the maximum shore normal dimension of 25 feet for a combined pier and boat lift in the Aqualane Shores subdivision, for property located at 221 Aqua Court. Petitioner: Jeff Hewitt Location: 221 Aqua Court Agent: Kalvin & Calvin Marine Construction, Inc. CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 17-CU6 Consider a resolution determining Conditional Use Petition 17-CU6, pursuant to Section 58-503 of the Code of Ordinances, to allow the retail sale of secondhand merchandise in the HC-Highway Commercial Zoning District located at 866 Neapolitan Way. Petitioner: Paul Scrogham Legal Notices Location: 866 Neapolitan Way Agent: Natascha Bondar- Estrella VARIANCE PETITION 17-V7 Consider a Resolution determining Variance Petition 17-V7 for approval of a variance from Section 56-124 to allow more than 50% of the gross floor area to a service station to be devoted to sales of cold drinks, package foods, tobacco and similar grocery items where less than 50% is permitted, on property owned by 7-Eleven, Inc., a Texas corporation and located at 697 9th Street North & 860 7th Ave North. Petitioner: 7-Eleven, Inc. a Texas Corporation Location: 697 9th Street North & 860 7th Ave North Agent: John M. Passidomo TEXT AMENDMENT 17-T3 Consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 58 Article III Division 4 governing airspace protection and land use compatibility. Petitioner: Staff Location: Airport Overlay District TEXT AMENDMENT 17-T4 Consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Division 4, Design Review Board and Section 16-82, Section 16-116 and Section 16-321 of the Code of Ordinances regarding standards and a review process for historic preservation. Petitioner: Staff Location: Citywide ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO APPEAR AND BE HEARD. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by this Board with respect to any matter considered at this hearing will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard. Any person with a disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may call the City Clerk’s office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days before the meeting date. James Krall, Chairman NAPLES PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Pub: September 26, 2017 NO 1765842 Legal Notice Notice of Intent to Designate Executive Director as Senior Management Service Class Designated Position with the Florida Retirement System: Notice is hereby given that the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District intends to designate the management position of Executive Director as Senior Management Service Class Designated Position with the Florida Retirement System, to be effective upon approval of the Florida Division of Retirement. Comments or questions should be addressed to Chief Financial Officer Becky Bronsdon at (239)-552-1322. Pub: September 26 and October 3, 2017 NO1763491 There’s no place like...here Real Estate Miscellaneous Notice TARPON BAY REALTY NOTICE OF INTENT TO REGISTER FICTITIOUS NAME NOTICE OF ACTION Notice Under Fictitious Name Law Pursuant to Section 865.09, Florida Statutes NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned, TARPON BAY DEVELOPMENT, LLC desiring to engage in business under the fictitious name of TARPON BAY REALTY located at PO Box 1402, in the County of Lee, in Bonita Springs, Florida 34133, intends to register the said name with the Division of Corporations of the Florida Department of State, Tallahassee, Florida. Dated at Naples, Florida, September 18, 2017. TARPON BAY REALTY Pub: September 26, 2017 No. 1763111 Public Notices Notice of Naples Planning Advisory Board Meeting The meeting listed below will be held in the City Council Chamber, 735 Eighth Street South, Naples, Florida. Regular Meeting - Wed., 10/11/17 - 8:30 a.m. Agenda and meeting packet are available from: City Clerk’s Office, City Hall, 239-213-1015 City website, http//www. naplesgov.com NOTICE Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting (or hearing) will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard. Any person with a Public Notices disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may call the City Clerk’s Office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days before the meeting date. Publish: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 NO 1765855 Tax Deed Application NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that LOURDES M OR CHARLES J ALAIMO holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 10-5586 Property ID#: 40690880108 Description: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 77, TR 136 LESS THE E 200FT OF THE N 200FT AND LESS THE S 480FT OF THE E 205FT., said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 8th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1732011 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that FNA FLORIDA LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-4688 Property ID#: 68941840002 Description: QUAIL ROOST UNIT II A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 246, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: RICHARD E GILL EST Tax Deed Application Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 21st day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1732049 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-1 LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-5209 Property ID#: 81320760007 Description: WELLS BLK B LOTS 1-3, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: BRUNO CAMPOS DANNY CAMPOS Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 14th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1731998 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-1 LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-171 Property ID#: 00117400001 Description: 3 47 29 S 118.5FT Tax Deed Application OF N 148.5FT OF E 135FT OF W 330FT OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4 .37 AC OR 764 PG 658, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: BARBARA LEE-THOMAS Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 8th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1731982 There’s no place like here Find yours at Real Estate 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6Packet Pg. 551Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace COLLIER BOULEVARDGOLDEN GATE BLVD LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA EXHIBIT ): AERIAL EXHIBIT . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 600 1,200 FEET Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E (AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd /PUF "FSJBMPCUBJOFEGSPN$PMMJFS$PVOUZ1SPQFSUZ"QQSBJTFS 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE,UTILITY ANDMAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)1212330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)10PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYRECREATION AREAGOLDEN GATE BLVD.RIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' FRONT YARDSETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARDSETBACK50.0' FRONTYARD SETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATER MANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)CANALCOLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) 25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 25' PRESERVESTRUCTURE SETBACK14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN 9.A.6Packet Pg. 553Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 May 10, 2017 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small - Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment Application to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Use Subdistrict Dear Mr. Weeks, Attached, is an application for a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (SSGMPA) and the required submittal information, for the request of an amendment to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Use Subdistrict. The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 July 6, 2017 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small - Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2nd Review Dear Mr. Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. SSGMPA Application 3. Text Amendment Language, as Exhibit “C” 4. Aerial, FLUCCS and Soil Maps, as Exhibit “F” 5. Zoning Maps, as Exhibit “H” 6. Surrounding Future Land Use Exhibit, as Exhibit “I” 7. Public Services Map, as Exhibit “K” 8. Conceptual Site Plan, as Exhibit “O” 9. Boundary Survey, as Exhibit “P” 10. Level of Service Analysis, as Exhibit “R” 11. Project Narrative, Evaluation and Justification Criteria, as Exhibit “T” 12. Planning Communities Map, as Exhibit “U” 13. Future Land Use Map, as Exhibit “V” 14. Future Land Use Inset Map, as Exhibit “Y” Comprehensive Planning’s Comments related to the Application Form: 1. Page 3 III. Description of Property: G. Surrounding Land Use Pattern – Reference is incorrect – not Exhibit ‘O’, but Exhibit ‘I’. Exhibit ‘O’ is a site plan. Response: The surrounding land use patterns are shown on Exhibit “O” with a 300-foot radius of the subject property. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 2. Page 4 IV. Type of Request: C. Amend Future Land Use Map(s) …TO Estates Mixed Use District –Conditional Uses Subdistrict… - Add the “s” to Uses. Response: The application has been updated to add the “s” after Conditional Uses Subdistrict. 3. V. Required Information: A. Land Use – Reference is questionable for “Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s, existing zoning) with subject property outlined - Exhibit ‘V’ is a good map for showing surrounding land use, but Exhibit ‘D’ is listed in the “List of Exhibits” as the ‘Location Map’. Response: The application has been updated to reference Exhibits “D” and “H” for the general location map showing the surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s and existing zoning). 4. V. Required Information: B. Future Land Use and Designation – Exhibit ‘I’ and ‘V’ were referenced for providing a map of existing Future Land Use Designation for subject property and surrounding area with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property, however neither exhibit shows an acreage total. Response: Exhibits “I” and “V” have been updated to include the subject site’s total acreage. 5. Page 5 V. Required Information: E. Public Facilities – Arterial and Collector Roads – Reference is incorrect – not Exhibit ‘R’, but Exhibit ‘Q,’ the Traffic Impact Statement. Response: The Application has been updated to reference Exhibits “R” and “Q”, as both exhibits outline information related to the LOS. Comprehensive Planning’s Comments on Application Backup Documents: 6. Exhibit ‘C’ Proposed GMPA Amendment Language – Add “A. Estates – Mixed Use District” underneath the first “***TEXT BREAK***” and then add another “***TEXT BREAK***” underneath the “A. Estates – Mixed Use District”. Capitalize “Use” in # 5, first line. Add a parenthetical reference to the map exhibit at end of sentence, e.g. “…Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (See map titled ).” Response: The proposed GMPA Amendment Language, as Exhibit “C”, has been updated as requested. 7. Exhibit ‘F-2’ NRCS Soils Mapping – Please add the total acreage of the soil #14. Response: The Soils Mapping, as Exhibit F.2, has been updated to include the total acreage of soil #14. 8. Exhibit ‘H’ Surrounding Zoning Districts - There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property’s boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a ‘s’ on the title for the map to “Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA…” 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Response: Exhibit “H” has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site. Additionally, the title has been updated as requested. 9. Exhibit ‘I’ Surrounding Future Land Designations - There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property’s boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a ‘s’ on the title for the map to be “Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA…” Please modify the legend to show the Estates Designation as ‘Estates – Mixed Use District’. Response: Exhibit “I” has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site and the legend has been updated to indicate ‘Estates – Mixed Use District’. 10. Exhibit ‘K’ Proximity to Public Services - Please add a ‘s’ on the title for the map to be “Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA…”. The word ‘Sheriff’ is misspelled (just one ‘r’) in the legend, please correct. Response: Exhibit “K” has been updated to include the additional “s” and the misspelling of sheriff has also been corrected. 11. Exhibit ‘N’ Alternative Site Data & Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) Two additional sites were reviewed for this analysis: Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) and Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). The Sungate CPUD site can accommodate the church and is approved for this use without further planning action, however, the analysis stated that the proposed location provided more viable accessibility. The analysis also stated that Sungate CPUD lacked immediate accessibility. The Addie’s Corner MPUD site, although it can accommodate the church use, the analysis stated that the intensity is currently limited, and therefore, the MPUD might require an amendment to the existing zoning (to guarantee the intended commercial square footage). The conclusion of the analysis was that the access to both alternative sites does not provide viable accessibility, and therefore, the proposed location best meets the needs of the Church. Staff would like to see further elaboration of the conclusions in this analysis including a provision of a definition of ‘viable accessibility’ and ‘immediate accessibility’. Response: After further review of the subject properties it was determined that access was not a limiting factor for either alternative sites. However, further research identified developer commitment requirements within the Sungate PUD and we have provided additional supporting documentation to ensure the selected site at C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Boulevard is a superior site for the development. These additional items include the limited square footage for commercial use and requirements to provide water management for adjacent properties within the PUD and C.R. 951 right-of-way. Additionally, the Addie’s Corner PUD was eliminated from the analysis due to the recently amended PUD that would limit the commercial space to 4.32 acres, which is less than stated key criteria for the property. The minimum 5.0 acres was selected as a key criterion to ensure the future development would be able to construct a mixture of permitted land uses within the property; for example, accessory uses to the church, and multi- purpose fields. Please refer to the updated Data Analysis Report identifying Sungate as the only alternative site to the C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Blvd property with supporting documentation identifying our selected site as the best choice. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: • In “Contents” – Add an ‘a’ - Data & Analysis • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 1, line 3 – Capitalize and add a ‘s’ – Conditional Us es Subdistrict • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 1, line 6 – “…provide due process …” consider a different word choice. • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 2, line 4 – add ‘dwelling unit’ • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 3, lines 1 & 2 – Reword – the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict • In “Alternative Site Analysis.” Paragraph 2, Line 3 – Change “permittable” to “permitted” • On Attachment ‘D’ Existing Congregation Location – Since you are proposing to build a 300-seat church, where do the rest of the parishioners live? Response: The referenced spelling errors have been corrected throughout the document. 12. Exhibit ‘T’ – Narrative and Justification of the Proposed GMP Amendment 1.c. – In response to Ch. 163.3187 (1)(c), Please revise your response to indicate the amendment does include text change that is directly related to a map change. Though the statutory provision reads, “goals, policies, and objectives”, it is applied as any change to the text of a comprehensive plan. Response: Exhibit “T” has been updated to indicate that the amendment does include a text change that is directly related to a map change. 13. Exhibit ‘U’ Planning Communities – This was incorrectly labeled as Exhibit ‘V’, however the List of Exhibits identified it as Exhibit ‘U’. Please correct the label/title. Response: The Planning Communities Exhibit has been properly labeled has Exhibit “U”. 14. Exhibit ‘V’ Future Land Use – The label/title is missing the ‘V’. Please correct the label. Although there is only one existing future land use on the subject site (Estates), please incorporate a summary table showing the acreage of the Estates within the subject site (see the application V.B.). Response: Exhibit “V” has been updated to be correctly labeled and the summary table also shows the acreage of the subject site. 15. Exhibit ‘Y’ Conditional Uses Subdistrict inset map – Please add a ‘s’ on the end of Uses in the map title. Staff believes the map title ending with “Special Provisions” is incorrect and should be removed from the title. This application is to amend “3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict, e. Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria” – not “3.b. Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions.” Response: The title of the inset map, labeled as Exhibit “Y”, has been updated per the email correspondence with Sue Faulkner on June 28th, 2017. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 16. General Comments: • When uploading documents for submittal in the future, please include each of the Exhibit labels. Staff had to go back and rename each of the documents by adding the Exhibit labels. Response: All Exhibits labels have again been provided for each document being submitted. • Please submit all maps in color for future hard copy submissions. Response: Acknowledged. 17. Environmental Planning Sufficiency Comments : The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use (CU) for the project. A listed species survey was conducted in March 23, 2017. No listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Several wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed in trees on the parcel and will be retained or relocated on site in accordance with the requirements of section 3.04.03 of the LDC. The general provision for protection of listed plants is included in CCME Policy 7.1.6. Letters from the Florida Master Site File dated March 8, 2017, list no previously recorded cultural resources on the subject property. The site will be subject to the requirement of accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by CCME Policy 11.1.3. The provision is also included in LDC section 2.03.07 E. The subject property is not located in any County well field protection zones. The proposed GMP amendment will have no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Response: Acknowledged. 18. Transportation Planning Sufficiency Comments: Please note: This petition request is sufficient for review; however, transportation planning staff is requesting changes to the master plan and CU (Conditional Use) language (the CU language is provided for information not as part of changes for the GMPA). The petition is sufficient for review; however, the number and location of the proposed third access onto 1st Avenue SW needs to be removed. Access onto local roads is limited by Access Management, plus the location at the extreme southwest corner increases the amount of traffic and length on the local road. Please remove this access from your request and the TIS. Informational comment: Provide as part of your CU request (not this GMPA) the following commitment: For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. Response: The third access off 1st Ave SW has been eliminated, and the Conceptual Site Plan and TIS have been updated accordingly. Additionally, the language referenced above will be requested as a Zoning Condition of Approval, within the proposed Conditional Use Resolution. 19. Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Sufficiency Comments: Per GMP/CIE Policy 1.5, the potable water system LOSS is based on population. Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. So, the proposed use will have no impact on potable water facility capacity. Please revise Exhibit “R” accordingly. Response: Exhibit “R” has been updated to state that the proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. 20. Collier County Attorney’s Office Sufficiency Comments: Please provide Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, with subject site shown. This will be an attachment to the ordinance in addition to the text and Conditional use map. If you already provided it, please email it to me. Response: Per correspondence with Sue Faulkner, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, showing the subject property, will be updated and provided by County Staff. The acreage you provided is 6.25. The acreage according to the property appraiser is 6.64 acres. What is the correct number since the survey does not have the acreage on it? Response: The correct site acreage is 6.25 as shown on the survey. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 October 23, 2017 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small - Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict 3rd Review Dear Mr. Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data & Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to comments issued August 18, 2017: Exhibit ‘N’ Alternative Site Data & Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) – One alternative site was reviewed for this analysis: Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). Sungate CPUD’s Ordinance #09-06 does not list churches as a permitted or accessory use, nor are there any conditional uses associated with this CPUD; therefore, the CPUD would need to be amended to permit a church use. There may be other locations that might be able to accommodate a church ‘by right’. Staff feels additional work is still needed with this Exhibit ‘N’. Upon review of your criteria that are being used for the analysis, we have the following comments: • Please consider using additional criteria (such as ‘property must be undeveloped’, specific site dimensions are needed, not just property size in acres, price of the property, etc.) • Since the actual proposed site is not zoned commercial, nor is it proposed, the criterion “Eligible for C-2 or higher zoning” doesn’t seem appropriate • Please consider including non-commercial zoning that might allow a church by right, or with a Conditional Use (properties that would not require a GMPA), such as non-residential uses in an Urban Designated area allows for churches. Also, Agricultural/Rural Designation or Mixed-Use Activity Centers allows community facilities such as churches. • Please explain your reasoning for locating with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway – is visibility important for this church? Response: The Data & Analysis (Exhibit N) has been updated to address the above comments. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: • In “Contents” – Add an ‘a’ – ‘Data & Analysis and Trade Area Analysis’ • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 1, line 6 – “…provide due process…” consider a different word choice. • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 2, line 4 – add ‘dwelling unit’ • In “Purpose and Focus,” paragraph 3, lines 1 & 2 – Reword – the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict • In “Alternative Site Analysis.” Paragraph 2, Line 3 – Change “permittable” to “permitted” Response: Spelling errors have been corrected throughout the Data & Analysis (Exhibit N). If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 March 1, 2018 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small - Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict Dear Mr. Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data & Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to the sufficiency letter issued December 4, 2017: • Please consider creating a map to show the three site locations discussed in Exhibit ‘N’. Response: Please refer to Attachment “F” within the Data & Analysis for the aforementioned site location map. • Please consider creating a table to quickly compare the criteria of the three sites for inclusion in Exhibit ‘N’. Response: A table has been added to the Data & Analysis. Please refer • Please consider elaborating on the sentence in paragraph 4 on page 4 of Exhibit ‘N’ to clarify for readers the “ongoing Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy”. Response: The Data & Analysis has been updated as requested. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 1 Jessica Harrelson From:Fred Hood Sent:Tuesday, April 10, 2018 12:32 PM To:ScottTrinity; Jessica Harrelson Cc:KhawajaAnthony; SawyerMichael; AshtonHeidi Subject:RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Trinity,    Understood. I know this is an important issue for the neighbors in the area. We have provided them with this reasoning  that Weber has not been looked at in the past for traffic calming. We will speak to this again in our presentation at the  CCPC and BCC hearing in the future, but I also wanted to make sure you all were aware that this issue will likely be  discussed by the local residents at the time of hearing.     If you wouldn’t mind, I’d like to set up a quick call (when you have some time) just to go over some specifics that they  (the neighbors) asked us about.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner     Main: 239.434.6060 fred@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL  Disclaimer: This e-mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited.   From: ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>   Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 10:49 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>; KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>;  SawyerMichael <Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>; AshtonHeidi <Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Manual that is utilized by County staff includes a list of roadways in Collier County not eligible for traffic calming. Weber Boulevard is included on that list. Therefore, Weber Boulevard is not eligible for traffic calming initiatives. https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=75968 Please see Exhibit A of the attached document. 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 2 Respectfully, Trinity Scott Transportation Planning Manager Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239.252.5832 Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]   Sent: Monday, April 9, 2018 12:32 PM  To: KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>; ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Thank you, Anthony.    Trinity,    Please let Fred and I know if you would like to set up a call to discuss.      Jessica Harrelson  Senior Planning Technician      ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>   Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2018 8:00 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>; ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>  Subject: Re: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) program is managed by our planning section I copied Trinity  Scott on this email to provide you with a response.    Anthony N. Khawaja P.E.  Chief Engineer of Traffic Operations  Growth Management Division  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 3 2885 South Horseshoe Drive<x‐apple‐data‐detectors://0/0>  Naples, FL 34104<x‐apple‐data‐detectors://0/0>  AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net>  Tel: (239) 252‐8260<tel:(239)%20252‐8260>    On Apr 6, 2018, at 3:21 PM, Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> wrote:    Good afternoon Anthony,    Per the email chain below, can you please confirm if there are any traffic calming options for Weber Blvd?    Thank you.    Jessica Harrelson  Senior Planning Technician    <image001.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL        From: AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net]  Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 3:22 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: KlatzkowJeff <JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>>; KhawajaAnthony  <AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>  Subject: FW: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Fred,    See Mike Sawyer’s email below. I recommend that you contact Anthony Khawaja in Traffic Operations.  He can tell you  whether there are any options for traffic calming on Weber.    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  (239) 252‐8400    From: SawyerMichael  Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 3:13 PM  To: AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 4 Cc: ScottTrinity <TrinityScott@colliergov.net<mailto:TrinityScott@colliergov.net>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Heidi,    Weber does not qualify for our Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) because it currently has a rural  cross section instead of the required urban cross‐section.  Additionally there are no sidewalks on Weber which to a  degree is another consideration in the NTMP program.  Also, there are is no budget/funding for traffic calming in Collier  County.    There are road segments‐streets in the estates which have traffic calming devises however my understanding is that  these were special BCC directed efforts or improvements associated with other roadway improvements projects such as  new bridge construction.    In this case it is possible the Planning Commission could recommend a traffic study be performed by our Transportation  Operations staff regarding excessive speed and trip counts and evaluate any potential improvements.  This study and  improvement evaluation could then be considered by the BCC in their review of this petition with fact/study based  information.    Let me know of follow‐up questions and/or concerns.    Thanks,    Michael Sawyer  Transportation Planning, Principal Planner Collier County Capital Projects, Planning, Impact Fees & Program  Management  2685 South Horseshoe Drive  Naples, Florida 34104  (239) 252‐2926        From: AshtonHeidi  Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 2:37 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Fred,    I did not speak to Fred Reischl.  Traffic calming on public streets is handled by traffic operations, outside of the PUD.  I  will see if I can find out who you should contact.    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 5 (239) 252‐8400    From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 2:16 PM  To: AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  Cc: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Heidi,    This was an issue that was brought up at the NIM. As I recall, Fred R. and myself fielded questions about what could be  done to calm the traffic along Weber Blvd. Members of the public had stated that they weren’t getting anywhere with  the County to install traffic calming measures to curb the speeding up and down the road that they were seeing and  experiencing.    In an email from Fred R. on October 13th, he mentioned that any calming measures on specific streets may be looked  and at discussed at the BCC level and that he had spoken with you about researching whether these were items that we  could add to the CU application; maybe as zoning conditions of approval to be voted on by the CCPC and the BCC. The  thought was to identify some measures that would make the adjacent neighbors feel better about the proposed non‐ residential use being permitted along the Weber Blvd right‐of‐way. This would obviously need to be voted on, but I think  his intent was to see how you felt about this or any other measure being added to the ordinance or the new proposed  subdistrict.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net]  Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 11:05 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>; ReischlFred  <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 6 Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Jessica,    I have been copied on some emails but I am not working on this issue.    Who wants to place traffic calming? What type  of traffic calming?  Has anyone approached Transportation Operations to discuss this?    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  (239) 252‐8400    From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 10:01 AM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; AshtonHeidi  <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred and Heidi,    Have you had the opportunity to research the possibility of adding traffic calming devices, along Weber, in conjunction  with the Conditional Use?    Thank you.      Jessica Harrelson  Senior Project Coordinator    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:41 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>; Fred Hood  <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Not yet… Heidi is out.    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 7 239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 7:17 AM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; Fred Hood  <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    Do you have an update on the research being conducted on the traffic calming?    Thank you.    Jessica Harrelson  Senior Project Coordinator    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:10 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Mike said his preference would be a single access along Weber.    He said chicanes or other horizontal traffic calming would be OK, but they must be authorized by the BCC. Heidi is  researching to see if this can be done in conjunction with the CU.    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:04 PM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 8 Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    I spoke with our client earlier. It’s their preference that we retain two access points. Their reasoning lies in the concern  that we would be creating a bottleneck at the ingress/egress point along Golden Gate Boulevard, and that that may  cause even more of a headache for the traffic flow along the Boulevard.    It’s not a hard no, but it is a concern that they and I share with causing a bigger problem to the Boulevard. Does Mike S.  share any of that concern? I’m sure we can come to some agreement that would be a combination of calming and  access that would make the neighbors happy.    I think we should keep the dialogue open about this issue.    Thanks!    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: Fred Hood  Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:44 PM  To: 'ReischlFred' <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    We’ll reach out to the client and get their feelings on this. It may not be an issue for them, but let us confirm.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9   fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:35 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: Grace Romanian    Hi Fred & Jessica‐  Is one access point (GG Blvd) acceptable to the church?  ‐Fred    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    ________________________________    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.  9.A.6 Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: GRACE ROMANIAN - SSGMPA Adoption Petition (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Hello Ms. Sue Faulkner, I was asked to contact you in reference to this possible amendment located at the property at the corner of Collier Blvd and Golden Gate Blvd. The public hearing request is in reference to the building of a church there. (Please see attached photo below) I'd like to submit this letter, as I cannot personally attend the hearing, as a petition against the building of a church. My family and I live on Weber Blvd South just about a block away from this property. Modifying the amendment to allow the building of a church at this property, which would cause a lot more vehicular traffic, is definitely not what Weber Blvd South needs. Weber Blvd S is already used as a thru street for rush hour traffic Monday through Friday from Collier Blvd morning and evening, as well as for Big Cypress Elementary School Monday through Friday when school is in session, morning and afternoon. During the peak of these times, I refuse to walk on the sidewalk with my children along Weber Blvd S because of the consistent traffic speeding highly above the posted 30mph speed limit. I'm even very nervous about checking my mailbox. The Collier County Sheriff's Office has been requested numerous times to conduct speed enforcement along the road. There is no raised curb along the road and the sidewalk is only just feet away. In addition, recently new traffic patterns at the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S, as well as the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd, have denied traffic from making left turns. The intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S has a raised median in place, but the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd has a painted median which many people consistently violate to make a left turn from Weber Blvd S to travel east on White Blvd. If the building of a church is granted there at that property, there will be an increase of vehicular traffic during church functions as well as on Sunday. That will be an additional day, making it 6 days a week of vehicular that travel on Weber Blvd S. My family and I politely request that this amendment is denied for the building of a place of worship, and to remain for residential structures only. 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) Thank you. The Osbornes 161 Weber Blvd South Naples, FL. 34117 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.7 Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Combined_Letters_Emails_of Objection (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.8Packet Pg. 591Attachment: Combined_Letters_of_Support (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) May 1, 2018 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA & CU To Whom It May Concern: I, Melania Budiu Hotaranu would like to express my support of the proposed the Small -Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (Petition#: SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and the companion Conditional Use applications (CU - PL20160002577) for parcel numbers 36760800006 and 36760720005. I believe the project as proposed by the applicant, and their representatives at Davidson Engineering, is something that I would prefer over commercial or more intensive residential development in this location. I believe that the church and their representatives have been open to conversations about their project and the traffic issues that have been on the minds of other residents in our neighborhood. Please accept this email as support of the Grace Romanian Baptist Church and their proposed 300 -seat church and associated accessory uses. Sincerely, MELANIA BUDIU HOTARANU 3541 1st AVE SW NAPLES,FL 34117 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Combined_Letters_of_Support (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) 9.A.9 Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: GMPA-2584_NDN_CCPC_Ad as posted (6577 : PL20160002854/CPSS-2017-1 Grace Romanian GMP) AGENDA#9A COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARINGS) PROJECT/PETITION: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [COMPANION TO PL20150002577] II PROJECT ,..� LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W as 1st AVE SW CCPC: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [continued from May 3, 2018; May 17, 2018 & June 7, 2018] BCC: NOVEMBER 13, 2018 Clerks Office TABLE OF CONTENTS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN - SMALL SCALE GMP AMENDMENT PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [ADOPTION HEARING] CCPC SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [DUE TO A 2ND NIM THIS MEETING WAS PREVIOULSY CONTINUED TO MAY 3, 2018, MAY 17,2018,AND JUNE 7, 2018-&CONTINUED FURTHER DUE TO A 2"d NIM] 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENT: Revised CCPC Staff Report: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 2) TAB: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit "A"text(and/or maps): PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 3) TAB: Project PL20160002584/ DOCUMENT: Petition Application Petition CPSS-2017-1 4) TAB: Correspondence DOCUMENT: For and Against Letters & Emails from the Public and Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association 5) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Legal Ad CoPr Co-r4.nty REVISED STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 (originally heard May 3, 2018, but eventually continued indefinitely) RE: PETITION CPSS-2017-01/PL20160002584, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to CU- PL20160002577) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN I NOTE: This petition was originally heard by the CCPC at Transmittal Hearing on May 3, 2018 and, eventually continued indefinitely. Due to proposed changes pertaining to the companion Conditional Use (CU) petition, the petitioner held a second NIM for both petitions. All revised areas of this Staff Report subsequent to the May CCPC meeting are highlighted for convenience of the reader. AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Josh Fruth, Jessica Harrelson, Anna Weaver, Derek Burr, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Applicant: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 Owner: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises ±6.25-acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876) and Collier Blvd. (CR951), in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East (Urban Estates Planning Community). Zoning Division •2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 1 of 11 T1Ef JS6t tt (( v a s . vi 'tea ' " / < .ate -.._ _ .. .'n V ry N -.J' i iTlq �)'` roposed iliffeargilliMiaallim .3',W..s. -Xd i•rLr. G�;ex 4Vu lR"':i ` Yl..'T" .# 1'P Fe ., tt )E21 r80 i.it. /1111 r- oss I � d aa.S X :/t . u i , , , a , 014., ,. 4., a _t ..t k - ric .4 -)'3+ J]1. ., r.. .". - sa . , ia }C U 1 t , 1111F,7 5aiL s o }6sE ase yy i � tit f sw '1 161 rte. .... � jJ k REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a small-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), specifically to amend the text of the Estates Mixed Use District — Conditional Use Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria, to add the subject site as an exception for a church or place of worship. The applicant also proposes to create a new map ("Conditional Use Subdistrict: Golden Gate Boulevard & Collier Boulevard Special Provisions") in the Future Land Use Map series of the GGAMP, which will identify the newly created area in the revised Subdistrict. The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted, and is also reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A). 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates-Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 3. 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: Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 2 of 11 a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** d) Transitional a Conditional Uses: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (see map titled Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan Amendment is to create text and a map for an additional location under the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Estates designation in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The Conditional Uses Subdistrict is scattered about different locations throughout the Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 3 of 11 Estates Mixed Use District. The acreage for the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria Subdistrict will increase by the amount (±6.25-acres) of this additional location. The GGAMP amendment is necessary in order to allow a church/place of worship use at this location in the Estates designation. A new map will be created of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria and included in the Future Land Use Map Series of the GGAMP. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The +6.25-acre subject site is zoned Estates Zoning District allowing uses of low density residential development (1 DU per 2.25 acres or per legal non-conforming lot) with limited agricultural activities; the Estates district is also designed to accommodate conditional uses, development that provides services for and is compatible with the low density residential, subject to locational criteria in the GGAMP. The Land Development Code lists churches as permissible as a Conditional Use for the Estates Zoning District. The Future Land Use designation of Estates is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses including conditional uses and essential services, (except as prohibited in the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict). Parks, group housing, schools, family care facilities, care units, and nursing homes are permitted uses. Estates zoning district conditional uses are subject to locational criteria as contained in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately adjacent to the north (across Golden Gate Blvd) are a mix of residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a utility property fronting on the east side of Collier Blvd. owned by FPL approximately 1,000 feet north of the subject property. Further to the north, up to Vanderbilt Beach Road, are more residential single-family units and a few undeveloped lots, which are zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. South: Immediately adjacent to the south lies 1st Ave. SW and beyond are residential single- family units and a few undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Across Collier Blvd. (CR951) on the west side of the road, and approximately % mile south of the subject site there are two places of worship: Iglesia Cristiana La Roca (Rock Christian Church) and the Haitian Bethesda Baptist Church. Further south on the east side of Collier Blvd. at 15th Ave. SW, there are two other places of worship: Bethel Christian Church and Unity Faith Missionary Baptist. There is a commercial planned unit development (Brooks Village) approximately 1 mile south of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. and on the south side of Pine Ridge Road; this area is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. There are also 2 parcels zoned C-3 Zoning District and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict on the west side of Collier Blvd. on the north side of Pine Ridge Road. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 4 of 11 West: Immediately adjacent to the west (across Collier Blvd.) are residential single-family units and undeveloped lots, zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Directly across from the northern parcel of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. (CR951) are two County owned parcels with a water retention pond. These two parcels make up the northwest and southwest quadrants of the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. Further to the west are additional residential single-family units and a few zoned Estates, and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a property with agricultural uses on Mahogany Ridge Road approximately 1 mile to the west of the subject site. East: Immediately adjacent to the east lies one single family residence abutting the subject site (in the NW corner of Weber Blvd. and 1st Ave. SW), and Weber Blvd., a local road that runs north/south (parallel with Collier Blvd.); Weber Blvd. serves as a collector for four local streets north of Golden Gate Blvd. and four local streets south of Golden Gate Blvd. To the east of Weber Blvd. are residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Approximately 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile east from the subject site and fronting on Golden Gate Blvd., there are two places of worship: Estates Naples Kingdom Hall and Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church; a county park (Max A Hasse Jr. Community Park); and Big Cypress Elementary School. This area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations: The applicant is proposing a Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to allow a conditional use for a church/place of worship to be located at the southeastern corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR951) and Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876). The site consists of ±6.25-acres and is comprised of two tax parcels. The northern parcel is wooded and undeveloped and the southern parcel contains a single-family home and is heavily wooded. Although the northern parcel is located at the intersection of an arterial roadway (Collier Blvd.) and a collector road (Golden Gate Blvd.), as identified in the Transportation Element of the GMP, no development has been previously approved and constructed. The applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, purchased this property in November 2016 and is the owner of this site. The congregation has been holding services (sharing with another congregation) at the First Baptist Church of Naples on Orange Blossom Drive. Although the project is to be for a congregation of less than 300 people (seats), they want to worship in their own church. Their services will be conducted in Romanian. This petition and the companion Conditional Use application are for church-use only—not to accommodate a day care or any other community functions such as Boy/Girl Scouts or Alcohol Anonymous meetings, etc. The GGAMP provides that 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 sets of criteria must be met: Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions, Neighborhood -- Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions, and Transitional Conditional Uses, and Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. The applicant has requested a conditional use Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 5 of 11 under the last criteria, Special Exceptions. In reviewing the surrounding area, 6 churches are located within a one mile radius of the subject site. Previously, in 2007 and 2008, the two existing churches near Max Hasse Park were approved via the Transitional CU provision. Other churches in the surrounding area were granted provisional uses in the 1980's, prior to adoption of the GGAMP. Previously, only two churches were approved under Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: a church on Immokalee Road and a church on Santa Barbara Blvd. Compatibility (including appropriateness of the location)for this project is identified by staff as the potential main area of concern to address. Compatibility: The surrounding area (at least 1 mile in any direction from the subject site) is entirely designated as Estates. This designation is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Typical lots are 2.25 acres in size. Residential density is limited to a maximum of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guesthouses. The range of uses in the area surrounding the subject site include mostly residential single-family units, with a small mix of churches scattered throughout the area, as well as a park, a school, two commercial sites, and a couple of utility sites. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses, including: conditional uses, subject to locational criteria, and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code. This amendment is proposing a land use that is in keeping with the surrounding area and the companion conditional use is an appropriate vehicle for obtaining permission for this use (the other means is through a rezoning). Historically, churches have been located within residential neighborhoods. Generally, these churches were not megachurches with significant activity on site every day of the week, rather were small with primary activity on Sunday. Neither this petition nor the companion CU petition indicate a seating capacity of more than 300 seats. In staff's view, the impacts from this church appear to be similar to that of the characteristics of churches historically located in neighborhoods. Compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback and buffer requirements, etc. In staff's opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The agent for the applicant conducted and submitted a data and analysis review as part of the application packet for the GGAMP amendment. The analysis examined the following: • Vicinity to existing local parishioners • Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities • Property availability • Alternative site analysis • Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Vicinity to existing local parishioners: Currently the congregation consists of local residents, with no seasonal impacts to the church population. The applicant provided a map with the locations Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 6 of 11 of the parishioners showing that there are two clusters of existing members in Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The proposed church location would lie between these clusters. There is another cluster of members that live between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road close to 1-75. Only a couple of members live outside of these areas. Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities: The proposed church is unique in that it provides services conducted in Romanian. The applicant provided a map indicating where other churches in the state of Florida provided similar denominational opportunities. The closest churches to Naples were located in Hollywood (122 miles) and Lake Worth (132 miles). The only other churches in Florida were located in Seffner (160 miles) and Jacksonville (379 miles). Property availability: The applicant and agent reviewed other properties in the same vicinity that might meet the needs of the church with these key criteria: minimum of 5 acres, maximum of 10 acres, minimum lot width of 330 linear feet, located with frontage on arterial or collector roadway, a maximum of 5 miles east of 1-75 and north of Golden Gate Parkway, sale price less than or equal to $135,000. Two properties were identified: (1) Sungate CPUD Tract B (northwest corner of Green Blvd. and Collier Blvd.)and (2)a property on the west side of Collier Blvd. approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Alternative site analysis: The application included a description, map of two alternative sites, plus the proposed location, that were analyzed: (1)The Sungate CPUD- Limits the actual total square feet to 63,000 square feet for Tracts B, C, and D, so another development could cause restraints in the ability for the church to develop and water management facilities for the 1.02 County owned right-of-way might further limit the church's developable area in Tract B. Also, this site is not currently on the market. (2) Property on the west side of Collier Blvd. north of Pine Ridge Road - Access to Collier Blvd. might also be limited to parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church. Cost of constructing this site might be higher than proposed site due to an 8-foot deep storm water detention pond utilized for the roadway storm water attenuation. This site was also the highest cost per acre. The proposed site - 3899 1st Ave. SW would need a Conditional Use and a GGAMP amendment. This property is owned by the applicant. Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan: The Collier County Community Planning Section is currently conducting a restudy of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. A number of public meetings were held with citizens and developers in Golden Gate Estates in order to have an understanding of what changes in the Growth Management Plan they would like to see. Surveys were used to help indicate what land uses participants would prefer. The surveys indicated that the participants might be agreeable to some additional potential Conditional Use (CU) locations, if limited as to location and type. Between 45% and 50% of participants stated that additional CU's should be allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads intersected by 4 or more lane roads). There were 5 rural locations and 3 urban locations that were identified as potential sites for Transitional CUs under this description, including Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants). However, the Re-study also limits the size of these CU locations to 2.25 acres to 5 acres or less. Church uses evoked a variety of opinions (both favorable and unfavorable)among the participants. The GMP amendments based on the re-study (recommended for approval by the CCPC) have not yet been heard by the BCC at Transmittal hearing and must be reviewed by various state agencies before being heard at CCPC and BCC Adoption hearings. If the GGAMP Re-study amendments should be approved by the BCC as Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 7 of 11 presently drafted, a Transitional CU at this location would be permitted, if the acreage was between 2.25 and 5 acres. This petition is for a Special Exception to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a)The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. [The subject site comprises ±6.25 acres.] (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. [No small scale GMP amendments have been approved in calendar year 2018;a ±5.35- acre small scale petition is scheduled to be considered for adoption by the BCC in May 2018.] (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. [This amendment does include a text change to the Comprehensive Plan and those text changes are directly related to the proposed future land use map amendment.] (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). /The subject property is not located within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (2) Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). [This project will be heard with only one public adoption hearing.] (3) If the small scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. [This amendment does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. [This amendment preserves the internal Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 8 of 11 consistency of the plan and is not a correction, update, or modification of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan.] Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Summer Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist with Collier County Environmental Planning Section has reviewed this petition. The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress, and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use (CU) for the project. The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, completed his review and approved this petition in August 2017. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition, without any conditions, in August 2017. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.03.05 A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on October 11, 2017, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County—Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120-jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. The applicant's team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. A total of approximately 9 members of the public along with approximately 4 members of the applicant's team and County staff signed in at the NIM. The public asked questions about the project details. The consultant explained that there were two separate applications: a small-scale amendment for the Growth Management Plan and a zoning action for a conditional use. One citizen spoke in favor of having this church as a neighbor. Several of the citizens who attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting, voiced concerns over the following transportation issues: additional traffic along Weber Blvd., location of ingress and egress points, County is unwilling to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd., and the trip count was calculated as 183 Sunday peak hour trips. The meeting ended at approximately 6:15 p.m. A second NIM was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on June 25, 2018, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County — Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120 -jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. Fred Hood, agent for the applicant at that time, presented the project with proposed changes, using both a PowerPoint Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 9 of 11 slideshow and an updated list of 21 conditions for the Conditional Use zoning action (list was also a handout) and then answered questions. Approximately 23 citizens, 4 members of the applicant's team, and the 2 planners from the County attended the NIM. Questions and concerns from the attendees included: • Number of acres for project site? 6.25 acres • Number of square feet of storage shed? 1,800 sq. feet • Types of special events? Not defined yet • Where will special events be held on the site? in the pastor's residence? Outdoors? If outside, could be in parking area, or in open area, if pastor residence not built. • Traffic is already a nightmare. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Traffic access to site locations. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Could a bridge entrance be constructed over the Collier Blvd. canal? Not possible, since land that would be needed does not belong to church and safe distance from Golden Gate Blvd could not be accommodated. • If an event is held in parking area, where will people park? As part of a special event permit a parking plan is required. • Do not want carnival or revival type events. Agent asked if citizen wanted any other types of events eliminated. • Speeding on Weber Blvd. Citizens need to work with Sherriff's office. • Have an off-duty officer for traffic control. • Churches do not pay property taxes. • What will be cleared in the preserve area? Only native vegetation would remain. • Dates of Public Hearings. No dates were set yet. Meeting adjourned at approximately 6:08 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • There are no transportation or utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • The use is generally compatible with surrounding development. • The Re-study for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan identifies the eastern quadrants of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. as appropriate for Estates Zoning District CUs with conditions, including a size maximum of 5 acres. • In staff's opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. • Staff finds that the data and analysis submitted by the petitioner demonstrates a need for the proposed amendment and that this is an appropriate location to fulfill that need. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on April 19, 2018 and August 14, 2018. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map Series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(A)8, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 10 of 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, subject to including in this amendment the addition of the Subdistrict name in the list of maps under the heading "Future Land Use Map Series" at the end of the GGAMP. Prepared by: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 11 of 11 PREPARED BY: �C�.u�- ✓ DATE: 9 _6 -/ CJ SUE FAULKNER, PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: L/0 I DATE: DAVID WEEKS,AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION DATE: t'-G—est MICHAEL BOSI,AICP, DIRECTOR ZONING DIVISION AP VED BY: f �GQ DATE: 7—/ AMES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION Petition Number: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Staff Report for September 20, 2018 CPCC meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2018 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN wr Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104.239-252-2400 ORDINANCE NO. 2018- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY REVISING THE CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20160002584] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. requested an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map to revise the Conditional Use Subdistrict to allow a church or house of worship; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or an area of critical economic concern; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and [17-CMP-00982/1411506/1196 Words underlined are added,words stfusk-through have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PL20160002584 5/7/18 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small scale amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and map amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit "A"and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. [17-CMP-00982/14!1506/1196 Words underlined are added,words stfuele-threugh have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PL20160002584 5/7/18 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2018. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk ANDY SOLIS, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legality: 10 4t \ Heidi Ashton-Cicko, e, Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Proposed Text and Map Amendment [17-CMP-00982/1411506/1]96 Words underlined are added,words strusk-through have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PL20160002584 5/7/18 EXHIBIT A — GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates-Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 3. 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 Boulevard Special Provisions: — *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** d) Transitional Conditional Uses: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Page 1 Row of asterisks (*** *** ***) denotes break in text. 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (see map titled Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions). *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Golden Gate Boulevard/Everglades Boulevard Center Immokalee Road/Everglades Boulevard Center Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Commercial Western Estates Infill Subdistrict Golden Gate Parkway Interchange Conditional Uses Area Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict Mission Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Conceptual Plan Everglades— Randall Subdistrict Southbrooke Office Subdistrict Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions Ex.A_P12016-2584 GacellomChurch GIDE Planning Services\Comprehensivegomp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2017 Cycles&Small Scale Petitions\2017 Small Scale petitions\CPSS-17-I Grace Romanian Church P12016.2584\Exhibit A text&maps revised sal/5-4-18 Page 2 Words underlined are added; words str-usk-through are deleted. EXHIBIT A PETITION PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT: COLLIER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PROVISIONS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA / rl g \ 1 ISLANDWALK CIR AMBROSIA LN VANDERBILT BEACH RD 7TH AVE NW 7TH AVE NW 5TH AVE NW _z 5TH AVE NW CO Ce SUBJECT SITE co 3RD AVE NW CPSS-2017-1 • 1ST AVE NW 1ST AVE NW GOLDEN GATE BLVD W c ST AVE SW 1ST AVE SW C z D_' m Q 0 z _w 3RD AVE SW 3RD AVE SW D- CO CC C 1±11 t 1±3 0 CO Nl 5TH AVE SW LU 5TH AVE SW CO U U W W J 0 U 7TH AVE SW 7TH AVE SW PINE RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD w z ADOPTED-XXX Ord.No.XXX LEGEND PREPARED BY.BETH YANG,NCP CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet FZ�� COLLIER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PROVISIONS FILE:CP8S.2017-1 SITE LOCATION MAP.mxd DATE:32W2018 11411 I III EXHIBIT"A" PETITION PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 AREASIDESBMIA➢DSST TFC DF.. S EXI TURA RURAL DESIGNAT'DN 11 MARC UM SISTRt, SAIF DMIR 9 i1 mg Rw x k- .. n qnn aWnw euwrtn =x ,.Urias'�WWI. OVER AYIANL5P F AT IRFP °° -- .0 oM - ®= _ j GOLDEN GATE AREA 1 �' ML�m �Sin0x�.�.",.et,Sa��" p�`F FUTURE LAND USE MAP O 1110'04'.=:,..:=7"*.'' MN.-=:""'.: DAVIDSON] rac GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH SMALL-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT Prepared For: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34119 and Prepared By: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 www.davidsonengineering.com DE QAY r 9J LIST OF EXHIBITS Application to Amend the Growth Management Plan Exhibit A Professional Qualifications Sheet Exhibit B Proposed SSGMPA Text Amendment Language Exhibit C Location Map Exhibit D USGS Quad Map Exhibit E Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay&Soil Mapping Exhibit F Environmental Data Exhibit G Surrounding Zoning Exhibit Exhibit H Surrounding Future Land Use Map Exhibit I Historical/Archaeological Probability Exhibit Proximity to Public Services Map Exhibit K Recorded Warranty Deed Exhibit L Letter of Authorization Exhibit M Alternative Site Data &Analysis Exhibit N Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit 0 Boundary Survey/Legal Description Exhibit P Traffic Impact Statement Exhibit Q Level of Service Comparative Analysis Exhibit R Utility Availability Statement Exhibit S Justification of the Proposed SSGMPA Amendment Exhibit T Planning Communities Map Exhibit U Future Land Use Map Exhibit V Existing Zoning Maps Exhibit W Disclosure of Interest Exhibit X Golden Gate Area Master Plan Inset Map Exhibit Y www.davidsonengineering.com Cottr County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: Rezone (RZ) Date and Time: 10/5/2016 Assigned Planner: Daniel James Smith Engineering Manager(for PPL's and FP's): ^reject Information Project Name: Rezone/GMPA for a church PL#: PL20160002577 Property ID#: 36760800006;36760720005 Current Zoning: Estates Project Address: 3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL City: State: Zip: Applicant: Waste Management Inc. of Florida Agent Name: Tocia Hamlin - Davidson Engineering Phone: 239-434-6060 Agent/Firm Address: City: State: Zip: Property Owner: Please provide the following,if applicable: i. Total Acreage: ii. Proposed#of Residential Units: iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage: iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: v. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: n Co I ' County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 I Meeting Notes r // 8 ` fie` ,.. . a ,.../r j, , p� r F -1._.,CL�►,.,� c�z� C /il .r ,, . .,, _y 'f. ' • l' -� s ice% r 14. 1 r.. �� �� iii.! 1:16- 5 /6y,'7� � ) Q.,( � + �`�J = f � f . .,4 ,,, - -�� .tip A t i . .i z-,_-� ,c/ O ._. r 4 � . ` . , 1''t( ,u.rrR.'flve kr` rClccf_ (� ( 1 1"c.44-�g-h5 (_ ' R 7)44, �� roa-35e9 oh Gyre.,,?/ / i�,c 1v1,'hi,/1�/� { f vWic hcl,;►.`}• �� ▪ �.A 1 .c.. }4-w.- hew 1.1y ()fryi-t, C 'p 4A .44 5%'�[ -I i. 'N b 1r �t Forcc/7:.,5 G V�✓r-1-,..c/ fir.f..,... 7,fa.*he /Vlt,�reAl if P.711045 ;5ALL, 1•1[ ..,h' -ri;[ e. J 5/;;Iv /r,!/(/' N�iEfre D1 IA APV efrv6eortffk3fhie A(id C1/lc clc-l /5I1. I rcin.51/11.2 -..S -c 4 - �f(7/if.rP el ",n a Vil II -5/ ;1 ( .;- ) - . OCR 6,2 . .L L . - / /SD Lc Di go/s�1-fr, 74nel (((� c.i6 to , .,t-) c,//,ems- AJ r lamer 7j/n.rJ Gni // h 1.e-cc,rile_ a s ri S-l /ni f--:i � rs,l f rs n l� J // J .1 //� ` (I / 1LLI/// � I%/1/IL. - e-die/7 "_' lifer,- i 5�"t '' \ i'i7/a,1 it/i 1 Pe/ A/9. A.6 ,/. ??/ /i . 1114•11 aWW /? a' /./&21 /0 i ill •/ (/�6/Y, 6X 1i/it l T/ a- z- �� . rainy in41Iry Ilipi_ U \ ( -- 7 r srt- c�.d.�r e ss l='LI-u r e ci- ;" �ct11n�tt �C*.'t ,r�i• U ti tc,' . Pl�q Lower County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.cotlierRov.net (239)252-2400 Meeting Notes 1-124it--64ZZI1Cgtbl s iPa a., t.FL.K 144R-41 re-2E4eileti . AtC2i2r . & (-Pr+, 20A) Fi Lbiek.co ro r-Ellt1/4.),Laslezie,c/v b SJits N ttaA, ec4,3 tot a/Q4-t Etar or 6c,r4 -G i9UO e I to ta °Lin rt, er- CaAl 1.4)".1C,1 v 7cc_c-i_oC to, 5 in C.,kJ AL,A, g,c) tr-K-i6r-s 9nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone-Ch,3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD-Ch.3 G.2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTSCOP Es REQUIRED REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of ❑ ❑ why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments H ❑ Pre-application meeting notes ❑ Affidavit of Authorization,signed and notarized 2 Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 Completed Addressing Checklist 2 n Warranty Deed(s) 3 List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2 ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4 Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4 Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser)with project boundary and,if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included 5 ❑ on aerial. Statement of Utility Provisions 4 ❑� ❑ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)packet at time of public hearings.Coordinate with 03 / ❑ project planner at time of public hearings. Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include 4 [12/ ❑ copies of previous surveys. tiphik= Ey/pi/l o:01,K 4,-0 Traffic Impact Study 7 ►4 Historical Survey 4 �.4 ❑ School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 2 .4 . ❑ Electronic copy of all required documents 2 , Li 0 Completed Exhibits A-F(see below for additional information)+ ❑ n ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each(this ❑ .l ❑ document is separate from Exhibit E) Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24"x 36"and One 8 W x 11"copy ❑ ❑ Original PUD document/ordinance,and Master Plan 24"x 36"—Only if ❑ ❑ ❑ Amending the PUD , Checklist continued onto next page... 4/15/2015 Page 11 of 16 S&9ty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru&underlined ❑ 0 0 Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 ❑ 0 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing,include an additional set of each submittal requirement +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: ❑ Exhibit C:Master Plan-See Chapter 3 E. 1.of the Administrative Code ❑ Exhibit D:Legal Description ❑ Exhibit E: List of Requested LOC Deviations and justification for each ❑ Exhibit F:List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use)Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690-3500 for information regarding"Wildfire Mitigation&Prevention Plan." PLANNERS—INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: ❑ School District(Residential Components):Amy 0 Conservancy of SWFL:Nichole Ryan Lockheart O Utilities Engineering:Kris Vanlengen ❑ Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad O Emergency Management:Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑ City of Naples:Robin Singer,Planning Director ❑ Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting:$500.00 _ PUD Rezone:$10,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone:$8,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ P D Amendment:$6,000.00* plus$25.00 an asr ,ction of an acre le omprehensive Planning . • -w .� .j `< . =- - - • Environmental Data Require - s acke*(su. al determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00 ❑ Listed or Protected Species Review(when an EIS is not required):$1,000.00 g Transportation Review Fees: tV Methodology Review:$500.00,to be paid directly to Tra sportation at the Methodology Meeting* SI - MSG 64-035.' ib/' .c'— *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review:$750.00 o Major Study Review$1,500.00 Legal Advertising Fees: At, 17_ZA. cry o CCPC: 8" n o BCC:$500.00 C_ Schoel Concurrency Fee,if applicable: 4/15/2015 Page 12 of 16 CoL = County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.coIUergay.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 o Mitigation Fees,if application,to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County *Additional fee for the 5"'and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20%of the original fee. All checks may be made payable to:Board of County Commissioners 4/15/2015 Page 13 of 16 CoMr Mty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34204 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-635g EXHIBIT A (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part,for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: CONDITIONAL USES(Optional) 1. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the (type of PUD) PUD Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. 4/15/2015 Page 14 of 16 EXHIBIT B (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) TABLE I RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE TWO-FAMILY, CLUBHOUSE/ SINGLE FAMILY MULTI- DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PATIO& RECREATION FAMILY ATTACHED& ZERO LOT UNE FAMILY BUILDINGS TOWNHOUSE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA S.F.PERS.F. PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT UNIT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA S.F S.F S.F S.F./D.U. N/A MIN FRONT YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN SIDE YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN REAR YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN FEET FEET FEET FEET or BH, N/A ,""'N, STRUCTURES whichever is greater MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET EXCEED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FRONT FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET SIDE FEET FEET FEET FEET BH REAR FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET DISTANCE BETWEEN PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO SPS SPS SPS or FEET FEET EXCEED S.P.S.=Same as Principal Structures BH=Building Height Footnotes as needed /**-1 4/15/2015 GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Setback may be either feet ( ) on one side or feet ( ) on the other side in order to provide a minimum separation between principal structures of feet ( ). Alternatively, if the foot ( ) setback option is not utilized, then the minimum setback shall not be less than feet ( ) and the combined setback between principal structures shall be at least feet ( ). At the time of the application for subdivision plat approval for each tract, a lot layout depicting minimum yard setbacks and the building footprint shall be submitted. TABLE II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PRINCIPAL USES ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM LOT AREA Sq.Ft. N/A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH Ft. N/A MINIMUM YARDS(External) From Immokalee Road Canal ROW Ft. SPS From Future Extension of Collier Blvd. Ft. SPS From Western Project Boundary Ft. Ft. MINIMUM YARDS(Internal) Internal Drives/ROW Ft. Ft. Rear Ft. Ft. Side Ft. Ft. MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN Ft.or sum of Ft. STRUCTURES Building heights* MAXIMUM HEIGHT Retail Buildings Ft. ' Ft. Office Buildings Ft. Ft. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA Sq. Ft.** N/A MAX.GROSS LEASABLE AREA Sq.Ft. N/A * Whichever is greater ** Per principal structure,on the finished first floor. 4/15/2015 i I: 30 COL17er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE(Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) ❑ BL(Blasting Permit) ❑ SDP(Site Development Plan) ❑ BD(Boat Dock Extension) 0 SDPA(SDP Amendment) ❑ Carnival/Circus Permit ❑ SDPI(Insubstantial Change to SDP) ❑ CU(Conditional Use) ❑ SIP(Site Improvement Plan) ❑ EXP(Excavation Permit) ❑ SIPI(Insubstantial Change to SIP) ❑ FP(Final Plat ❑ SNR(Street Name Change) ❑ LLA(Lot Line Adjustment) ❑ SNC(Street Name Change—Unplatted) ❑ PNC(Project Name Change) ❑ TDR(Transfer of Development Rights) ❑ PPL(Plans&Plat Review) ❑ VA(Variance) ❑ PSP(Preliminary Subdivision Plat) ❑ VRP(Vegetation Removal Permit) ^. ❑ PUD Rezone ❑ VRSFP(Vegetation Removal&Site Fill Permit) ❑ RZ(Standard Rezone) J OTHER GMPA t REZONE LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties(copy of lengthy description may be attached) SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49, RANGE 26- SEE ATTACHED Golden Gate Estates unit 4 Tr 16 and WFst 112 of TY 15 FOLIO(Property ID)NUMBER(s)of above(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 36760720005 & 36760800006 STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES(as applicable, if already assigned) 38991ST AVE SW • LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way • SURVEY(copy -needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME(if applicable) PROPOSED PROJECT NAME(if applicable) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PROPOSED STREET NAMES(if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER(for existing projects/sites only) SDP - or AR or PL# '~ Cai[ier CoH.nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in,condominium documents(if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Please Return Approved Checklist By: © Email 9 Fax ❑ Personally picked up Applicant Name: TOCIA HAMLIN - DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. Phone: 434-6060 EXT 2985 Email/Fax: TOCIA@DAVIDSONENGINEERING.COM Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number 36760800006 Folio Number 36760720005 Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: ,LCti,,,P n'L•xa,,._ Date: 9/28/16 Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED SmithDaniet From: FeyEric Sent: Monday, October 03,2016 2:40 PM To: Tocia Hamlin Cc: SmithDaniei; LibbyPamela Subject: RE: PL20160002577(REZONE) Tocia, I will not be attending the pre-application meeting on Wednesday and just wanted to let you know about utili availability for this project. Below is a GIS screen shot: tY service 1 , titILL,,,.. ..,,.- - .. _------ -,Amur, -,.-I -. .,. ......... ___ .gr,„,,,-,,,,,4„..... ,...., ,,. , . . , ...., ,„„, . . :....... .,,,....,. _ ..„.....„...„,, ..,.,„,,,._.4 . -„,::„.,,.,, i-7::', t : . .. , c. .. _ ' ' --"--''- ----41!--'-'"------T-E --i.-.. .,,74;,,,„,H;--14- 4.---: .-- -c.'-:------'-'- ---Wif--t -i-1:--1---..!;-- -',----',-'-I-":17t-l7J-!- ---7-*-,-'"'-',11.'-"::::,:::':- :'- - -,.,.., ..„:„........„2,. .. . ........ .-,4:::-•'-':-.--'--Wil-F,i. '-'-'--'-''''A-:-'''.-Li:-----A,----:57-- -;;;:--,-,-- --7---:-.:-:-4--'':--- g x a ' � v -Y -'{i _ . .J.. ,:44.,...i4c*:---41"-,7„."'„-_-----;.-;:..:,....-,- .. -.-4-7-.j.:._#.•;--- , -.44.4. 1';?,.,"'-',""4..,,-,i--,:".-7-,. -.,,,„'","4,02 -::,,,lu-...'-.-:',-.A a0 t41 ' --- ----;.::--;-:'.- 7:::f ..-';'-':--:'-:,-,.---:---::::'ilii1:=4-f-4*--4-- ---=-:.7.:t-1-1:7_::;-' ----,-- -'7;if-$1:-.--- --10 -:1-'-:-:.:::- !;- .:-:_il;:7',:::-7 . . .---4-: % -.- y o 1 7-.4-*:-.) •,-- , `- _..--...--... ..-',4-4:4: ma` � s..'t----:--- -:-1-;--J- .. 3.:W �£ -"":i'„. 't'.7--!;;-44-11- - ' 1 ta r . . `- '' ''' .'7,.-._:::.-:,;:,4-;---.-ii:-.::---,..,-.%_i,...-44 ,..---i.,...,:-..:4l. -:-;:i-*-r:-:i.k--.,-:1=---..-:-''-----.---- -::'t:ii,-,--',"';'-'-'7?--T-• :,.,.e,, ;...„,„..,.",-,-..,..i..,,,..„:::7:.,,- It- -11--''''' -'17-;,,..;-'..,i---.:--:".i.-:., -, -.-:--:,:-'--.- - --4; -* - --'-' :. -----1-;-4,-1.7,7-.4**-1,-.,'''''-...--..-„,-;-,-111::::*, t -. 7sCAYE SW eTh1.- `- • 1 • OA Le eq! .A4 d t1 9 _ . ..- ..- -..*---,..-,-*:- ck in - -a -='---:--',',,..----'"'----4i----:';',''''. "'� '"tel '' `»+ �c a s•�`_ Y *,.. .:-•• "- ' -.1-- _---:,14'4,--. 4$*•,. ..-:1,14''''•••':?' . '--_,--_':.,-.4 ,,,-4,---- - .'''-'-4 -- � *-',--4167-'4,- .. - - �; r. � £'s x - a; 'a �;.- f .;.,;,?"------,".1. -- --';-: ,ter ,... #,:, . 1 - - - 4! -I, -::::.--„=:,:-.E.,,E.:::::::-L.-----.-.-::,-:::,:tii:'-::_„.....„::-....i. ,471!„ ---,T'-- ,-,,,::r4.-A4r..ii-r*:'-7i7i.i-'_'. --,:-:.:..:,:t7.0:!;-,::;;;r,,-'::':---7-,-:,','.,I,7,',_-,z'., :::-----::.::::_:::':--1:-!!'4:;.;r_,.:- ...:-.:-k-',.',:.--- ..' w Ca „,__ -:::-:-.:.;:- --,:---Ir;-7..-".M.,.klte---I-;. ?--::---,t'i:.ii-::--!.E.!::-:--.i:--..---;.tt-:1;- ;-E - .Ztij;::;.:.'',1 ::'..;.-.,.:-;':-:;:`.--:!--: ----4,:ultat,L,. -T.;:::--.,-,..._-''*4-;------':!ilt.;.',--41-4-_,..i.-.:, ,, •-•..T.,„ c t ..,--- *.it;'.. . The purple shading signifies geographic areas excluded from the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance(2001-13). Per that ordinance,this project is not required to connect to the Regional Water System but would be subject to the imposition of impact fees if connection is requested. Water service may be extended from the existing County 10" HDPE water main on the north side and within the median of Golden Gate Blvd,east of Weber Blvd but wastewater service is not available. I am copying Pam Libby for confirmation that we would not allow a new connection to our existinig 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd. Thank you, j ° r Comity 1 Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities Department Planning and Project Management Division Direct: (239)252-1037 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. ----Original Appointment From:PaulRenald On Behalf Of CDS-C Sent:Tuesday,September 27, 2016 2:05 PM To:AhmadVicky;AlcornChris;Amy Lockhart-Taylor(lockha@collierschools.com);AndersonRichard;AnthonyDavid; ArnoidMichelle;AshtonHeidi;AuclairClaudine; BaluchStephen; BeardLaurie; BeasleyRachel; BrethauerPaula; BrownAraqueSummer; BrownCraig; BurtchinMark;CascioGeorge; CondominaDanny; CrowleyMichaelle; David Ogilvie; dfey@northcollierfire.com; DumaisMike; FaulknerSue; FeyEric; FleishmanPaula;GewirtzStorm; GosselinLiz; GundlachNancy; HouldsworthJohn; HughesJodi; HumphriesAlicia;Jacoblisa; inageond@sfwmd.gov;JohnsonEric; KendallMarcia; KurtzGerald; LenbergerSteve; LevyMichael; imartin@sfwmd.gov; LouviereGarrett; MartinezOscar; MastrobertoThomas; McCaughtryMary; McKennaJack;McKuenElly; McLeanMatthew; MoscaMichele; MoxamAnnis; NawrockiStefanie; OrthRichard; PajerCraig; PancakeBill; PattersonAmy; PepinEmily; piimenez@sfwmd.gov; PochmaraNatajie; ReischlFred; RosenblumBrett;SantabarbaraGino; SawyerMichael; ScottChris;Shar Hingson; ShawinskyPeter;Shawn Hanson;SheaBarbara;SmithDaniel;StoneScott;StrainMark;SuleckiAlexandra;SummersEllen; SweetChad;TempletonMark;VanLengenKris;WalshJonathan;WeeksDavid;Wickham Flannery;WilloughbyChristine; tocia@davidsonengineering.com Subject: PL20160002577(REZONE) When:Wednesday,October 05,2016 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (UTC-05:00)Eastern Time(US&Canada). Where:CONF ROOM "C" Planner-Dan Smith Fire District-Golden Gate Fire **************************a*aaaa****aa*a******************a «OLE Object: Picture(Device Independent Bitmap)» «OLE Object: Picture(Device Independent Bitmap) » Project Type: Pre-Application Meeting 3 Project Description: Rezone/GMPA for a church Existing Application Name: Meeting Type: Pre-Application Meeting Preferred Date: next available Unavailable Dates: Location:3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL, Parcel Number:36760800006;36760720005 Full Name:Tocia Hamlin Email:tocia@davidsonengineering.com Company Name:4365 RADIO RD STE 201 Naples, FL 34104 Representing:Davidson Engineering Contact Number:Work:239-434-6060 Thanks 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. 4 Enviromnental Data Checklist Project Name Cfit'/./-/ J C. 1a ./1 ; G'241/06e 't44 The Environmental Data requirements can be found in LDC Section 3.08.00 COProvide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. 0(, �• J WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT? Preparation of `/ Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. Please include revision dates on resubmittals. 1 3. f Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands accordingto the 0 Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval. For sites in the RFMU district,provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores verified by the SFWMD or DEP prior to first development order approval. Where functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff,consistent with State regulation. 4. SDP or final plat construction plans with impacts to five (5) or more acres of wetlands shall provide an analysis of potential water quality impacts of the project by evaluating water quality loadings expected from the project (post development conditions considering the proposed land uses and stormwater management controls) compared with water quality'loadings of the project area as it exists in its pre-development conditions. The analysis shall be performed using methodologies approved by Federal and State water quality agencies,and must demonstrate no increase in nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous)loadings in the post development scenario. 5. Where treated stormwater is allowed to be directed into preserves, show how the criteria in 3.05.07 H have been met. 6. Where native vegetation is retained on site,provide a topographic map to a half foot and,where possible, provide elevations within each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified on site.For SDP or final plat construction plans, include this information on the site plans. GProvide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(Fk'WCC)and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS. Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee, when the project is not reviewed or technical assistance not provided by the FFWCC and USFWS. Additional survey time may be required if listed species are discovered ()rovide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03 9. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed species are utilizing the site or where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLUCFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans.Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 10. For sites orportions of sites cleared of native vegetation or in agricultural operation,provide documentation that the parcel(s)were issued a permit to be cleared and are in compliance with the 25 year rezone limitation pursuant to section 10.02.06. For sites permitted to be cleared prior to July 2003, provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 10 year rezone limitation previously identified in the GMP. Criteria defining native vegetation and determining the legality, process and criteria for clearing are found in 3.05.05, 3.05.07 and 10.02.06. 11. dentify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on-site. Include the above referenced calculations and aerials on the SDP or final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. 12. Include on a separate site plan, the project boundary and the land use designations and overlays for the RLSA, RFMU, ST and ACSC-ST districts. Include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 13. Where off-site preservation of native vegetation is proposed in lieu of on-site, demonstrate that the criteria in section 3.05.07 have been met and provide a note on the SDP or final plat construction plans indicating the type of donation (monetary payment or land donation)identified to satisfy the requirement. Include on the SDP or final plat construction plans, a location map(s)and property identification number(s)of the off-site parcel(s) if off-site donation of land is to occur. 14. {{'rovide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property,along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. /',t Afrr WPit h,• gatte.�_ , 15. Soil and/or ground water sampling shall be required at the time or first development order submittal for sites that occupy farm fields(crop fields, cattle dipping ponds, chemical mixing areas), golf courses,landfill or junkyards or for sites where hazardous products exceeding 250 gallons of liquid or 1,000 pounds of solids were stored or processed or where hazardous wastes in excess of 220 pounds per month or 110 gallons at any point in time were generated or stored. The amount of sampling and testing shall be determined by a registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment and shall at a minimum test for organochlorine pesticides(U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)8081)and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals using Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)soil sampling Standard Operating Procedure(SOP)FS 3000, in areas suspected of being used for mixing and at discharge point of water management system. Sampling should occur randomly if no points of contamination are obvious.Include a background soil analysis from an undeveloped location hydraulically upgradient of the potentially contaminated site. Soil sampling should occur just below the root zone, about 6 to 12 inches below ground surface or as otherwise agreed upon with the registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment. Include in or with the Environmental Site Assessment, the acceptable State and Federal pollutant levels for the types of contamination found on site and indicate in the Assessment,when the contaminants are over these levels. If this analysis has been done as part of an Environmental Audit then the report shall be submitted.The County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. 16. Shoreline development must provide an analysis demonstrating that the project will remain fully functional for its intended use after a six-inch rise in sea level. 17. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. 18. Where applicable,provide evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County. Include all state permits that comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 13,2005. 19, Identify any'Wellfield Risk Management Special "reatment Overlay Zones (WRM-ST)within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat construction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUsprovide a separate site plan or zoning map 1 vit h the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified. 7 20. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 21. For sites located in the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern-Special Treatment overlay district(ACSC- ST), show how the project is consistent with the development standards and regulations in 4.02.14. 22. For multi-slip docking facilities with ten slips or more,and for all marina facilities, show how the project is consistent with 5.05.02.Refer to the Manatee Protection Plan for site specific requirements of the Manatee Protection Plan not included in 5.05.02. 23. For development orders within RFMU sending lands, show how the project is consistent with each of the applicable Objectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. he County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements.(LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f) The following to be determined at preapplication meeting: (Choose those that apply) i/---)- Provide overall description ofproject with respect to environmental and water management issues. k_ " Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the c.cGMP. itAliF cq/m5 6 Di- 7. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. . Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design (I compensates for wetland impacts. Indicate mitigationdicatelloNv thear, ipmropjaeccttsdtcosliiosntemd pminimizes. impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as .,----, 1U1 . . 5. PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) document,prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete.Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. 26. Is EAC Review(by CCPC)required? 190j/1f(.4 ,I/a . 27. Additional Comments ....—. 28. Stipulations for approval(Conditions) Environmental PUDZ-PUDA g lee list(non-REMIT) Project Name t;'lS��//'Ci �i f 6. ��. flt4 ./9V C2("t'/,E/2 I(I1, 1. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays,districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties?(CON, ST,PUD,RLSA,RFMU,etc.)(LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00)Not in CV Library ubmit a current aerial photograph(available from the Property Appraiser's office)and clearlydelineate the subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated,provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory � identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation(Admin.Code Ch. 3 G.1.Application Contents 424). ��FLUCFCS Overlay-P627 3. Clearly/ identify the location of all preserves and label each as "Preserve"on allplans. (LDC �/Preserve Label-P546 3.05.07.A.2). 4. 'rovide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained,the max, amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site.Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations(LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.1.d-e). Preserve Calculation-P547 reated and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.1-1.1.b. Preserve Width-P603 6etah1ed preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors.(LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4) Preserve Selection-P550 ( . Principle structures shall be located a minimum' of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory ^ 7structures and other site alterations,fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve(i.e. stem wall or berm around wetland preserve). Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25'.(LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.) Preserve Setback—New 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required, when so warranted. (LDC 10.02.02.A2.f) Listed Species-P522 ( _y. �'rovide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs off-site `-. preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels,and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course,provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required—P322 (0. tin Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to bepreserved.(LDC 10.02 Master Plan Contents-P626 13.A2) 11. UD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses,the following is suggested: A. Principal Use: Preserve;B. Accessory Uses:All other uses(list as applicable or refer to the LDC) 12. UD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that a N ill be preserved on the site. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2.) Unique Features-P628 Example: A management plan for the entire project shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not limited to Black Bear, Gopher Tortoise and listed birds. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the project. 13. Provide information for GIS? Additional Comments: - C(*er • nty �� COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE . NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 (239)252-2400 Pre-Ao�H�����m ��e�t'---�---------------------- , Meeting Sign-In Sheet ---' --- p1 pL20 160002577 Collier County Contact Information: ---'— /- Name Review Discipline Phone . Email L_____i0 _R________________Ichard Anderson 1 _,__________Environmental Specialist 252-2483 I richardanderson@colliergov.net b David Anthony i Environmental Review 252-24THAavidanthony@colliergov.net i r.___I 0 Summer Araque , Environmental Review I 252-6290 1 summerbrownaraque@colliergov.net I ________________.__T__.._. r 0 Steve Baluch,P,E. Transportation Planning 252-2361 I StephenBaluch@colliergov.net Laurie Beard Transportation Pathways 252-5782 I Lauriebeard@colliergov.net _..,iil Rachel Beasley Planner . 252-8202 rachelbeasley@colliergov.net Li Marcus Berman County Surveyor 252-6885 , MarcusBerman@colliergov.net , F1 Mark Burtchin ROW Permitting 252-5165 markburtchin@colliergov.net Ei George Cascio Utility Billing --- ' ' nem/Ashton[�ko ManagingCounty�---------� 252-5543 ' p^~'°�`e"`ms"c�me!�pv��� )�-~5/ ^FaWk` r -- Asst. 4u«rney � 252'8773 he/d�uhton@�cnUkurg,vnet_ Comprehensive anning - - - � - ~ -/ 25Z�715 su�a m ~� — �t _ I| EncFey P.E.pESitePbns - - ^r 252-2434 er�fev@co|hprgovnetl Paula Fleishman ImpactFeeAdn*n/s�vuon - � - 252-2924 p�« —`—�~'--^ g~~" e<r NancyGund/ao}A]�Ppuu ZoningGem�es 252-2484 »ancy8u»dbch@coUie/Kovnpr_-O SharH�s," - - East Naples Fire District 687-5650 . - - ____-_`-_---- shingsrn@o�co «'U John Houldsworth Engineering Services 252-5757 "hn"vuoswo�»@co/ �,gov.n*tO Jodi Hughes Transportation Pathways252'5744 ]od|huXhes@cnUierguxnetO Alicia Humphries Site Plans Reviewer/ROW 252'2326 Eric aliciahumphries@colliergov.net [] co e�oune� Zoning Services } ]52-29]1 / encjohnsnn@nd)iergm.not . " ^�.'"= Comprehensive Planning 253-2387 ma,ciakendu||@,xoUie,Quvnet l u* Stephen Lenberger Environmental Review 252-29152915 stevelenberger@colliergov.net I Paulo Martins O Thomas—aa-robe�'o UtilitiesFire 25I'4385 pau|oma�ins@coU��ox'nut ) 252-7348 |Jack McKenna, PThomasmastroberto@colliergov.net / 0 � Engineering�enxce� Z62'Z9l � -- z jackmckenna@colliergov.net u MattoWciean' P�[� Principa|Pu4ectK4ana§e~ 252'8279 matthewmc|ean@coUie'°ovn _____ O Gi|be�xxnnc�vaiz _ UU|ity|'npactFees I52'4215 BUbe�muncivaiz@)coUieov' =` O Anniskxoxam '" �net Addressing 252-5519 annionoxan"@^coUier8mv.net 0 Stefanie 3tef nieNawrock. Planning and Zoning 252-2313 StefanieNawrocki@colliergov.net- ___ U Kaham0che|tree Graphics 252'2315 mariamocheltree@cpUienqnvoet~~~~ 0 _uranuy�t�n _ --_ Transit ___ 252.5859 , brandynteno��EoUienOovoet |� County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE www.colliernov.net NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239)252-2400 �,r� 252-6237 brandipoHard@coliiergov.net ❑ Brandi Pollard Utility impact fees X Fred Reischl,AICP ZoningServices 252-4211 fredreischl@colliergoV:net ❑ Stacy Revay Transportation Pathways 252-5677 stacyrevay@colliergov.net cY y@calliergov.net ❑ Brett Rosenblum,P.E. Utility Plan Review 252-2905 _ brettrosenblum@colhergov.net 9 Michael Sawyer ZoningServices 252-2926 michaelsawyer@colliergov.net ❑ Corby Schmidt,AICP Comprehensive Plannin $ 252-2944 corbyschmidt@collergov:net ❑ Chris Scott,AICP Planning and Zoning 252-2460 chrisscott@colliergov.net J Daniel Smith,AICP Landscape•Review 252-4312 danielsmith@colliergov.net ❑ Ellen Summers Planning and Zoning 252-1032 EllenSummers@colliergov.net — Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-8400 scottstone@colliergov.net 0 Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 252-4446 markstrain@colliergov.net _❑ Kris Vanlengen Utility Planning 252-5366 krisvanlengen@colliergov.net ❑ Jon Walsh Building Review 252-2962 jonathanwalsh@colliergov.net 4' David Weeks,AICP Future Land Use Consistency 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net 0 Kirsten Wilkie Environmental Review 252-5518 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net ❑ Christine Willoughby Planning and Zoning 252-5748ChristineWillou ChristineWilloughby@colliergov.net g y@colliergoy.net ...--, Additional Attendee Contact information: T -(red 6dAvia Son ,nee 'ria Name Representing Phone �pp Email it't uY.ri .• -- Li (rill.li J r Pc ar+a a.�� � G� {5rr.�sr', i er; Is C C( 3 1 1,31-£o60 A,,L,.v 6/4le,:ryst,1e tht 4 L'il ii 61 visa u ' 01 "�►tuls r1sJ}s,,,, 5l` i a, Cj vim MB ZSL7 Attlei,w Jl+tls446Risciti•O jff pixie aew amiwrv' e coat. 2s3 Bi%l g As ' "' E \fjBifl `A ` APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE October 5, 2016 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Company "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Address 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34119 Phone Number 239.398.2527 Fax Number N/A B. Name of Agent * Josh Fruth, Jessica Harrelson, Anna Weaver, Derek Burr, AICP • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Davidson Engineering, Inc. Address 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34104 Phone Number 239.434.6060 Fax Number 239.434.6084 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Address 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34119 Phone Number 239.398.2527 Fax Number N/A D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL,Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 1 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock "Grace"Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 100% 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34119 C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest e1 D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE,with an individual or individuals, a Corporation,Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership 2 Date of Contract: F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired Subject property was purchased November 28,2016. See Exhibit"L"for the warranty de( If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached Boundary Survey and Legal Description, as Exhibit "P" B. GENERAL LOCATION Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards,within Collier County, Naples, Florida C. PLANNING COMMUNITY D. TAZ 241 E. SIZE IN ACRES ±6.25 acres F. ZONING ESTATES G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Please see Exhibit "I"for the surrounding land use patterns. H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Estates Mixed Use District- Residential Estates Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element 3 Capital Improvement Element CCME Element Future Land Use Element Exhibits"C"and"Y" Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 28 OF THE Golden Gate Master Plan AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strikc through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to • identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: This amendment will affect Policy 1.1.2.A.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by allowing a Conditional Use for a church, religious facility,or place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4. Please see Exhibit"C"and Exhibit"Y". C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Estates Mixed Use District Residential Estates Subdistrict TO Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict. (See Exhibit"C"and Exhibit"Y") D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) An Golden Gate Area Master Plan Inset Map, including the subject parcels, has been created and included as Exhibit"Y". E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit H&D Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit F Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit H&I Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibit I&V Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands,with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibits F&G Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE:THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exhibit G Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or 4 archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: NO Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-1 1.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. YEs Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity SEE EXHIBIT„N„ to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). _ If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-1 1.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: EXHIBIT R&S Potable Water EXHIBIT R&S Sanitary Sewer EXHIBIT Q Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS • X Drainage The proposed project will provide water management design consistent with SFWMD criteria. X Solid Waste The subject property shall be served by the existing solid waste provider serving the area(Waste Management). N/A Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2.Exhibit K Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e.water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3.Exhibit R Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire 5 protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: ZONE AH &X500 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION N/A $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) INCLUDED $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) EXHIBIT L Proof of ownership (copy of deed) EXHIBIT M Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) INCLUDED 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of$250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 6 DAV�c�IDSON e� ccr �=- EXHIBIT "B" PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SHEET Davidson Engineering,Inc. Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner Mr. Hood has a Bachelor's of Urban Planning from the University of Cincinnati's College of Design Architecture Art and Planning. He has been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) and has practiced land planning in Southwest Florida since 2006. During his career in urban planning, for over twelve years, Mr. Hood has managed large and small development projects while working closely with a myriad of land development professionals in the physical development and policy adoption of residential, commercial, mixed-use, institutional and industrial projects. Mr. Hood has been tendered and accepted as an expert in land planning in cities and counties throughout Florida as well as being tendered as an expert witness in the area of Urban and Land Use Planning. Mr. Hood continues to attend continuing education seminars to remain current on planning theory and methodologies in an ever-changing regulatory environment. Earth Tech Environmental, LLC Jeremy Sterk Ecologist\Partner Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. Jeremy holds an active real estate license and his experience in the early stages of property due diligence studies greatly assists clients in making informed decisions. His extensive and varied experience allows him to successfully guide clients through the local,state,and federal permitting maze. This experience includes environmental land use planning, environmental resource permitting, vegetation and habitat mapping, protected species surveys, protected species management plans, environmental impact statements, property use studies, post permit compliance, and GIS\GPS mapping. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Jeremy is certified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as a Gopher Tortoise Agent. In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co-authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. Jeremy was a member of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee from 2009 to 2014 and is currently a member of the Development Services Advisory Committee(DSAC). Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com " E DAVIDSON c' r . Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Norman J.Trebilcock,AICP, P.E. President Mr. Trebilcock has a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Miami and a Master's Degree in Engineering, with an emphasis in Public Works from the University of Florida. He is also a graduate of the US Army Engineer Officer Basic Course. Mr. Trebilcock has practiced transportation planning and engineering in Southwest Florida since 1990. Mr. Trebilcock produces plans, designs, and permitting efforts on public works and private sector projects. His primary area of expertise is in transportation engineering, including highway design, utility relocation, drainage design, street lighting, signalization, access management and permitting. He prepares and reviews traffic impact statements and related reports. In addition to being a registered Professional Engineer and holding a certification from the American Institute of Certified Planners, Mr. Trebilcock holds an FDOT Advanced Work Zone Traffic Control Certification. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA is classified as a Small Business Enterprise with the South Florida Management District and the FDOT. Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan as of Ordinance No.2016-12 adopted May 10,2016 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION EXHIBIT C ***TEXT BREAK*** A. Estates— Mixed Use Distirct ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(X) 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(VIII) e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: (XIII)(XVI) 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII) 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII) 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. (XV) 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (See map titled ). ***TEXT BREAK*** Grace Romanian Church—SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict March 2018 28 Words added are underlined and words struck through have been deleted Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG1Pianning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D(LOCATION MAP).mxd _.) N I 1 s VANDERBILT BEACH 1-1 1 - - I MEN J") GOLDEN GATE BLVD J m - _ - __,- II Z7) 11111 PINE RIDGE RD INIIIII V 1 r 1. < < 1 Ill 1 i 1 5 LEGEND 1 -SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES — MAJOR ROADWAYS ' 0 0.5 1 SOURCES:'CO ER COUNTY'GEOGRAP IIC'INFORMATION'SY STEMS'(2017) f _ MILES, IV‘t , ,A .. A HEND- �x:. ris PAL :EACH sir iLii , it a 1 eR. . D I IVN --� •�if% �w�1�1. DADE DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVNDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAP ■ iz > 3 r p • a Q a, ,: o ct V i • Cl- ti v il U z."., Q N i ■ t r co • a • oz it :r 1 t w ■ II 3 ) ■ I W re o . I,> ) ,- F 5` W Q ■ it CO ■ C el ■ • co i Q 11 C7 • I I ' B =X ■ ■ 4 i I ■ • ■ ■ 4 ■ I� 3 ■ 1 ly n • ■ O ■ W • F! a a /' * c4 i9 �.- ...��Rp F S l � LL r• • li I. 2 • OS ti, ii +raia.4 1R�1 • QAI8 21flITIO3=a*wr 4----71111.c z p,6�o f U m adi jI p 1 ~cam la ! ,y,aO p II • e w! z o f • r B d I gi • �q • y E Y ; AN* W a • • • • ■ • 1 i�'� 0 • q • Y N Ct SaJ7 • = 4_, • • f i I U w • • ■; + I lz " ct o U I a ll cl.) o 1:1 G i o _ ■ ., _ I ii Wd 10.44,l/Pxw'deW pen0 SOSf\SIO\Iao-ed LS6 b0 PMS OD\4PJny0 ueIuewob aoeJ0\23311100\S103f02id\sluawn000 nu313\:0 Z:\Active Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511OWG\Planning\GIS\2017.04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E(AERIAL PdS �EXHIBIT(. ',,,1 ' : 4, ! ETmxd if ii ti s ,E !. sem - 4 - . 7 '; i r p. < GOLDEN GATE BLVD .: - `s2 i r,j,,. _. p . ` mssW , & }�' f �} =4 .<.•<.<-:"-f-t:<';4-:71t1-- -<.:7C*""--.-*--<'-'71.7."- j"--,,, ";---":o7-44 z. ,�,E 1"=x Vt,t 1 e irr+15Z,47,:kriiiiri 'k 1 .t fir - i ceg.,1 *. LEGEND ' .. ' ' .„ ' GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT - �„ .' ° •= .X ©PROPERTY:6.2ACRES -E,:_::0!-:::"'"'44 " '` 4.- _ ,: ,3,' 1, y #' 0 x` 600, x �� E- �',�"�. � - 1 200 SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM,S(2017) z FEET #..,.. tee.,'i"E---... t 4s a.3 '`a"' �illl $: _ i`.',vow .�! 4,.: ' ( a.. ,. e .. �_v. m DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH E4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDESON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT F.1: AERIAL EXHIBIT ENGINEERING Note: 2017 Aerial obtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. ., 2e i --';',#* 741:: '''.1 ' ' :' 3 E w ¢ To g 0 sz a., cd .3. 03O a c m U = Z a U E a � a o w = LLID w co w a) .=le im p� o 0 � w w ° J 0 X V siigi 4 61, V. Ji S. 141,1 OS- 0 1 a L -a 1.d k# . om, �s 44 II 0 ✓.. �� `� U1�:a II� N, 2 _..wde0WW L a t,— di- ., of x r W a$ n "'. . 1� . ,H rr * ' a# . ^ 4ic • ,..4„, � •' may. t � �, n y w u r � e m m cd ma m- N nE. 000 zcvo_ Wb OZ 01.6/Pxw.e141 Soo(lld\SIDUepied l96 213 PAVE!JJ\U0Jny0 ueluewoy a°2'°\8911 A631319 SM. cn czt ..,tri;."-!-:, ...0*Iikt m D cnz i �. CD U --e , 4e''4 A--4!-- ' --' '—' • ...-, ;jottio •-----.;. 2 rk z o rn s.- � � • �m Q f e a -- IT- • pit t �r 7'-'' 4 3 " 'p 0 i W M F .i 4 ‘ . _ i 9' )_ - a.> a ' ' k-, c � a „.'''4,.,. � '^'t - -4:&;',,' rig ate, ,� _ _ g X a w' w .# I • 6, 4.t ; ZOIC» • a k� . ' Amo - waff d. _ W,'II J Z mea© AFI a,4ax f <. f- 0 u 216_,- V z 11 k. ;.:# as m •7775 . T. on ad rh U `m ,. , , ..;e1;04,. . .sitti, , '-'44-.--kit: :TT; 3 --,-,- '; ,' - -- ' . WH 9£:1717:I-I-/pxw-•eynl slloS S3 \SID\leoJed 1.96 bO PnIB O9\43my3 ueluewoa ea0J0121311103\S1031O2id\s1uawnaoa nu3131:J x , x EXHIBIT G GRACE ROMAN4 44P IAN CHURCH PARCEL $ Environmental Data Report ' ' k. Section I I / Township 49 S / Range 26 E z � ,' Prepared For: '-'7" 4\ i 4: ir 444E'\' ' Ct, 0' Collier County Growth Management Department rtfi2 �►' Development Review Division _...+� 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive ler Naples, FL 34104 �-. Prepared By: 4 th Tech Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, suite 8 Naples, FL 341 10 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com l= . Environmental,LLC April 25, 2017 �. Updated: ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Rezone Pre-App Notes & Environmental Checklists APPENDIX B: Staff Qualifications APPENDIX C: Protected Species Survey APPENDIX D: Davidson Engineering Site Plan INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00)for rezone and GMPA of the Subject Property for development as a church campus. This information is in response to the circled items in the Rezone Pre-Application Notes as provided by Davidson Engineering. See Appendix A, Rezone Pre-App Notes& Environmental Checklists, pgs. 17-22. PROPERTY LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located at the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The property is approximately 6.25 acres.See Figure I, Location Map. /'—\ E . t � � w•, orArpLE SITE LOCATION \ . I L I — • EARW T R W/DERRAI BEACH RD EXT .� a neaerBEACH __ I 7,, • PETERSBURG TRO--- NW _ QsrHAVEnw ' 0H."Mt 6i ♦n �1 I II ;I a caro vramt�+ AOAVEH'' ,,l �o 1---� it ii Ei 1 Ij TIJ111 ; TEAK wawoB 1srAVEHw 1�� ea6oEk'r,AiEButiw __ S ja �. bKNOG.AHY RODE OP a i _. yioAVEBN' F BTNAVE SW F$. >k CAPE CORAL !R AVE Sm ' _ ...Nov� �. CC RAL SPRINGS ,._. TCH AVE SW ® 7THAVE 6Y/ � I� ICl/. ..•`. • j a }uy...'�`u.�._- a #� y�4ip•s•-1.r,-OKE PINESHOLLYWOOD _ Wein BLVD-1 1'4_21 I "4, r. O PW�E'RODE RD E%i Ig* g ' 4,0.4,4**,, . LE AH - 111HAYEBW - • 11lHAVE 3W _ ._ �- ZIHAVE SW ..- =i -. 13THAVE SRI 1RR..E SW _ H, 1 1,711,_±_ t_E E t amAVE sw �f I IY 15rHAVE SW tsnAY� I _ GREER BLVD--- 5I 1' iS111fyR ,_ -/- -1--,v, , > ^-it� �,Tv R* 111,4 1,.g 1v1HAVESW _ 1_ , O P"1 Figure I. Location Map Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST (Numbers match PUD checklist) 2. Who and what company prepared the Environmental Data Report? This Environmental Data Report was prepared by Earth Tech Environmental, LLC. Ecologists Jeremy Sterk and Jennifer Bobka. See Appendix B, Staff Qualifications. 3. Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Based on the FLUCCS system,there are no jurisdictional wetlands present on the property: FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland,but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a 'drained' designation. See Figure 2,Aerial with Wetlands Identified. n^x:.rzx.s,x »w.u- GOLDEN GATE BIND AA '""« r No SFWMD J0614405040 Mtuw u .a `t � 4 t ft— r,'" Q 3ubjeU Prcp., 81 , LUCCS Mapping 0cz, ® ito-S Fan*Res,den al met• r e 624-0.Rare•Cypress•Cabbage Palm IE' nedl 2017 AUSUN&nd nm,ce.,e c.ny T4b,"'bed taal __ Figure 2.Aerial with Wetlands Identified (No jurisdictional wetlands present). Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflondacom ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT 7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 8. Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. I 1.Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site,according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCCS Codes identified. See Figure 3,Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Based on the FLUCCS system,the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland,but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a 'drained' designation. FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities.On the subject property, this area consists of a small,unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity,as well as two smaller areas along the north-eastern property boundary. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com � ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT s.l } .. + �� Via. GOLDEN GATE BLVD W ' ate ' �, ate_ ° .i 0 n rte, •' .. ( --,:ft--'ate , . ti, E, Or sun� woPeny FLUCCS Mappinp 0 CI : .7. 110.SiEgla Family ftealtltnila� ase " ? B2+-0,Paw=Cypress-Ceciage p.m, a? lstain0) .mar ;um r,o..�� .. 740,D o1ost d lama Figure 3.Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay 14.Provide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property, along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has not been conducted on the Subject Property. 24.The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements (LDC I 0.02.A.3 f). a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. See companion GMPA application. The project proposes developing the parcel into a church with associated structures. A portion of the existing habitat will be preserved onsite (0.77 acres). There are no wetlands present on the property. Water management facilities will be designed according to SFWMD and Collier County criteria. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See the information provided in this document. c. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan and FLUCCS map in Figure 3. The site totals 6.25 acres. Of that acreage, 6.15 is classified as native vegetation. There is an existing home site on the property that was allotted 1.0 acres of clearing as part of its building permit. 6. 5 — I.0 acres = 5.15 acres of native vegetation present on the property. 5.15 acres X 15%=0.77 acres of native vegetation required to be set aside as a preserve. The proposed site plan is1 shown in Figure 4. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorda.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design compensates for wetland impacts. There are no wetlands on the Subject Property and there will be no wetland impacts. e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. No listed species were observed. 25.PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document, prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. See this document. ENVIRONMENTAL PUDZ-PUDA CHECKLIST (non-RFMU) 2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser's office) and clearly delineate the subject boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.I. Application Contents #24). FLUCFCS Overlay - P627. See Figure 3,Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Descriptions are found in #I I above. 3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as "Preserve" on all plans (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on- site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculation (LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.I.d- e). Preserve Calculation - P547. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.I.b. Preserve width - P603. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors (LDC 3.05.07.A.I-4). Preserve Selection- P550. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. The preserve has been provided as a contiguous single area. There are no preserves to connect to offsite. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations,fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination (LDC 3.08.00). Environmental Data Required - P 522. See this document. The site has not previously contained a golf course or farm field. 10.PUD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved (LDC I0.02.13.A.2). Master Plan Contents-P626. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. I I.PUD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses, the following is suggested: A. Principal Use: Preserve; B. Accessory Uses: All other uses (list as applicable or refer to the LDC) not in CV Library. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 12.PUD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site (LDC I0.02.13.A.2). Unique Features- P628. No listed species were observed on the property. There are no unique vegetative features. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 v,�ww.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT GOLDEN GATE BLVD 1N f 'i WHIM _� dELt:l Illi @ 5 9, woad pippeetr 4 JtM 411tP"•i,i A0c -Pna Pi.. 2117Ak4iM110YtlReeG6Mfe h •[- ." +'- dYiFFiE. FN Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan. /'" Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX A REZONE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLISTS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 341 10 www.eteflonda.com Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: Rezone (RZ) Date and Time: 1 0/5/201 6 Assigned Planner: Daniel James Smith Engineering Manager(for PPL's and FP's): Project Information Project Name: Rezone/GMPA for a church PL#: PL20160002577 Property ID#: 36760800006;36760720005 Current Zoning: Estates Project Address: 3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL City: State: Zip: Applicant: Waste Management Inc. of Florida /-N Agent Name: Tocia Hamlin - Davidson Engineering Phone: 239-434-6060 Agent/Firm Address: City: State: Zip: Property Owner: Please provide the following, if applicable: i. Total Acreage: ii. Proposed#of Residential Units: iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage: iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: v. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: • Co I ,. County ti.. COLUER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colllergov.net (239)252-2400 IMeeting Notes ,,---- , ,A...,i.i, a (-1-7 i)4. ,....-- , 4ti '.!'(‘- 4---. %. — ....--- . PIA.A - NI ft_h; eta_ a,f5 I EL?)• 3/-77 1 (0 ..470 (et) 2 . it ,--P A i ---. C. /2 ..—.:..-4.-1fr. .e7;9- --2--"1-C.--- ----, 4..j i r in „Lk .: - , ,.,17 ,...._", ..7r...L.0.,__. , . , 1 / ,..7 , 7 e , k7 wi, -.( ti-,„r, ilLgoL-f/Le C 1.;t ri?) e ct. ,---"\ 7- .!'c44•4 0 hs CC-0mq R Z 4.0 be ?r0a5,5S Oh arre.#044 ;„,,i 1,V ha/1///ii 4, ?viii'c Alf,;h 43, (Jft 4,t-ici 4,11Y1,,11 ciie 4 i `tit i•ht q fi,hityi:.-,f-774-a 4 V 1-0(4'1)P.4( Cr,4-..• .- .-. NeeisvipilVis kee17...irs 4-4...0641t 4,i-oi, cs...1 pi,„;,3_iii,div,fit, ''' '''' 5 li:7" etoditofrixtefrhoe 194 0 ,4 1.f/0 fix/ /feafift,3074.4fe ( 1Ot',') c Acc A--i /s 71-f 4 f ran.5 PJ fi-..Sec./c'&...,ailL4 - 7,--opif.i i-e 0_r/ r---.0/-2 a 12/ " .-5 iet,..4 4 /c...1 cd) - _ ,. Or..,,O'a . L De_ - / -/-ii.s6 4,),IA. (7_.6/737/r-t, „ e-,n ec.,//,c.,-/cl)c, 6 Air] - /i_1 r.&.r-- /1)//ifri a , // lav-r_ iyi e 0 g: rid 4)- 1 nj r-3-A] 1.5,, -21.- es/7 1 ( M LM1711 KI a h/1/4 --- 6o/et e t7 ..t_41 i9-1 e is,-- 1175kt- I Pa' A ivii Pe A9gi_1, ./ A1 /Le L.-,a-1 -_.1y. Wii all icti //z)ot/ /9 / A 614 I di6fr;bit it/:-/t- h i ri 4-2 frIA ki.17 1. ...I er IL2X23 L.c. ..--t4 , r la.‘A;1-k_s ,:--:_• ! c• et_ 11-4-u./.7 1),1e-,: -e- 6.R ": - 0 ,. .-1 !„____.> Lk,3 41 i ki- 01 !,••-• • 1 01, (-.Li ,) . ( otryk 7. F - /- Iff Co I County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.coitiergov.net (239)252-2400 Meeting Notes •11 2 a .. am" - w, 'Y 1 ' ._ 41 -1 /( I • s CO • r ►z .ar}', 1-6 1,0{x e r ! ._c,_� i* (fir, i �y `>�c�t,,�, .. . . c+ i /tic. 'kr:" '1%) f1=v1 h L,1 .,s et...y3�- r.x.t,n 1,... 70/41/4) I F4 al LibAcx) Ls -,41 ro r-v-i-vota:Ezie.A3 4.47)y) 54..)rB N c ttek-4, ei4,3 n or. -1 Etter or 1 r..r -Ree--44-)T e4bir f Ca 47) W . - We-0r p Ar_c-t....10 wci te, '' r1]Lt ccL. Z e"-"jr — 5 tic)kj �iu -�i" v def- Co F " ,r County COLUER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: 0 PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD-Ch.3 G.2 of the Administrative Code n PUD to PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of ❑ ❑ why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments ❑ ❑ Pre-application meeting notes E21 ❑ Affidavit of Authorization,signed and notarized 2 ❑ Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 ❑ Completed Addressing Checklist 2 ❑ Warranty Deed(s) 3 ❑ List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2 ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4 0 Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4 ❑ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser)with project boundary and, if vegetated,FLUCFCS Codes with legend included 5 IV ❑ on aerial. Statement of Utility Provisions 4 Epa/ ❑ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4 0 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)packet at time of public hearings.Coordinate with 03 V 0 project planner at time of public hearings. Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include 4 ❑ copies of previous surveys. £4l,,'L #6,41,643".401471C M7 9 Traffic Impact Study 7 ► 0 Historical Survey 4 W School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 2 v..4 ❑ Electronic copy of all required documents 2 0 Completed Exhibits A-F(see below for additional information)+ ❑ ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each(this ❑ 111 ❑ document is separate from Exhibit E) Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24"x 36"and One 8%2" x 11"copy ❑ ►:i ❑ original PUD dc./!!rcn t,/c.rdinance,and Mrrt"r l'!Fn 24"x 36"—Only if Amending the PUD El Li ❑ 1 Checklist continued onto next page... , 4/15/2015 Page 11 of 16 Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.collierRov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru&underlined 0 0 ❑ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 0 0 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing,include an additional set of each submittal requirement +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: ❑ Exhibit C:Master Plan-See Chapter 3 E.1.of the Administrative Code ❑ Exhibit D:Legal Description ❑ Exhibit E:List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each ❑ Exhibit F:List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use)Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690-3500 for information regarding"Wildfire Mitigation&Prevention Plan." PLANNERS—INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: ❑ School District(Residential Components):Amy ❑ Conservancy of SWFL:Nichole Ryan Lockheart ❑ Utilities Engineering:Kris VanLengen ❑ Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad „„0-\ ❑ Emergency Management:Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑ City of Naples:Robin Singer,Planning Director ❑ Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting:$500.00 PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone:$8,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ P D Amendment: $6,000.00* plus$25.00 an a —• c ion of an acre r omprehensive Planning .. }t�." a► +►'�'zay._ , •1 ---- - -----:::—.7, Environmental Data Require - .,t. •ac e s ; -al determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00 ❑ Listed or Protected Species Review(when an EIS is not required):$1,000.00 g Transportation Review Fees: X Methodology Review: $500.00,to be paid directlytoTTrraesp�tion at the Methodology Meeting* SIS / *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review:$750.00 x o Major Study Review$1,500.00 Legal Advertising Fees: . r2-2-6- O CCPC: $92588' o BCC:$500.00 L School Concurrency Fee,if applicable: 4/15/2015 Page 12 of 16 veer • my COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT • J NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2 I FAX:(239)252-6358 o Mitigation Fees, if application,to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20%of the original fee. All checks may be made payable to:Board of County Commissioners 4/15/2015 Page 13 of 16 Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.collierRov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 EXHIBIT A (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part,for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: CONDITIONAL USES(Optional) 1. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the (type of PUD) PUD Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. Page14 of 16 4/15/2015 r. EXHIBIT (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) TABLE I RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE TWO-FAMILY, CLUBHOUSE/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY PATIO& MULTI- RECREATION FAMILY ATTACHED& ZERO LOT LINE FAMILY BUILDINGS TOWNHOUSE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES i 1 MINIMUM LOT AREA S.F.PER S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F. PER f UNIT UNIT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA S.F S.F S.F S.F./D.U. N/A MIN FRONT YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN SIDE YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET . N/A MIN REAR YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN FEET FEET FEET FEET or BH, N/A STRUCTURES whichever is greater MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET EXCEED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FRONT FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET SIDE FEET FEET FEET FEET BH REAR FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET I FEET { FEET FEET DISTANCE BETWEEN PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO SPS SPS SPS or FEET FEET EXCEED S.P.S.=Same as Principal Structures BH=Building Height Footnotes as needed 4/15/2015 GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Setback may be either feet ( ) on one side or feet ( ) on the other side in order to provide a minimum separation between principal structures of feet ( ). Alternatively, if the foot ( ) setback option is not utilized, then the minimum setback shall not be less than feet ( ) and the combined setback between principal structures shall be at least feet ( ). At the time of the application for subdivision plat approval for each tract, a lot layout depicting minimum yard setbacks and the building footprint shall be submitted. TABLE II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PRINCIPAL USES _ SES MINIMUM LOT AREA Sq.Ft. N/A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH Ft. N/A MINIMUM YARDS(External) From Immokalee Road Canal ROW Ft. SPS From Future Extension of Collier Blvd. Ft. SPS From Western Project Boundary Ft. Ft. MINIMUM YARDS(Internal) Internal Drives/ROW Ft. Ft. Rear Ft. Ft. Side Ft. Ft. MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN Ft.or sum of Ft. STRUCTURES Building heights* MAXIMUM HEIGHT Retail Buildings Ft. Ft. Office Buildings Ft. Ft. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA Sq. Ft.** N/A MAX.GROSS LEASABLE AREA Sq.Ft. N/A * Whichever is greater ** Per principal structure,on the finished first floor. 4/15/2015 •-• Co ger County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE(Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) ❑ BL(Blasting Permit) ❑ SDP(Site Development Plan) ❑ BD(Boat Dock Extension) ❑ SDPA(SDP Amendment) 0 Carnival/Circus Permit ❑ SDPI(Insubstantial Change to SDP) 0 CU(Conditional Use) 0 SIP(Site Improvement Plan) ❑ EXP(Excavation Permit) ❑ SIPI(Insubstantial Change to SIP) ❑ FP(Final Plat ❑ SNR(Street Name Change) ❑ LLA(Lot Line Adjustment) 0 SNC(Street Name Change—Unplatted) ❑ PNC(Project Name Change) ❑ TDR(Transfer of Development Rights) 0 PPL(Plans&Plat Review) ❑ VA(Variance) ❑ PSP(Preliminary Subdivision Plat) 0 VRP(Vegetation Removal Permit) ❑ PUD Rezone ❑ VRSFP(Vegetation Removal& Site Fill Permit) ❑ RZ(Standard Rezone) D OTHER GMPA/REZONE LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties(copy of lengthy description maybe attached) SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49, RANGE 26- SEE ATTACHED Golden^Gate Estates Unit 4 Tr 16 and• Wes.t 1/2 of Tr 15 FOLIO(Property ID)NUMBER(s)of above(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 36760720005 & 36760800006 STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES(as applicable, if already assigned) 38991ST AVE SW • LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way • SURVEY(copy -needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME(if applicable) PROPOSED PROJECT NAME(if applicable) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PROPOSED STREET NAMES(if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER(for existing projects/sites only) SDP - or AR or PL# Cor County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE www.colliergov.net NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in,condominium documents(if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Please Return Approved Checklist By: fJ Email ❑ Fax D Personally picked up Applicant Name: TOCIA HAMLIN - DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. Phone: 434-6060 EXT 2985 Email/Fax: TOCIA@DAVIDSONENGINEERING.COM Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number 36760800006 Folio Number 36760720005 Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: .,a--;,a mom,, _ Date: 9/28/16 Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED SmithDaniel From: FeyEric Sent: Monday, October 03, 2016 2:40 PM To: Tocia Hamlin Cc: SmithDaniel; LibbyPamela Subject: RE: PL20160002577(REZONE) Tocia, I will not be attending the pre-application meeting on Wednesday and just wanted to let you know about utility service availability for this project. Below is a GIS screen shot: '..,.,?-4--V .-,.. ,......„„...., ,, ; 4.-„, i / . .., ._, # , 4 y'ms's ... ,. _ t Ow .. , r ,�: t . ; .... .r ., f .,. ,, -. .. 4 II * t .e . 44... ..t.„,.,5-*:.-44:„ 0 : 40..„- : -„. , ; ....„. -,,,,,,..„. ' *- 7, ,04* yire , .4,,, • At*. e , - 4,1/klir• *11,FIL*''', it y i a ` - ..*A.,.. , - 4,..3 , '' '4. fit � 1't4: 4.. :-7� <x ,. • ;4. A eh . ,eg *=4 F,U fie' .-t r - t-Ir.- ' .'4*,p04.0..-* t.. # :' ' - - -.:-,;itt,t), ,- " -- , ' -'-'''''- + ' a r .11' ,,,t„t 4. „, - =t:;;, r- % 4.#' . - r'-.4:'- t $v F L ^fl - - Y ' " 4 S 4 L. 13tAV : ;:ipirwir ,.,,,.. 4..,,dik..44,, ..,- E SW 1 th 2 „ im „. .. ► x. ::''_' .... Pt t--.4.:.,:::: ''',:,,,,,,--,-._-,-,i'.-:::.4:4-----:: b.+ ..7 ...t.„„ :- ', r::::*ii:7*.'L .:`� 5 ,' yc� 'S� - _a=te ,mss-- a <i -. si,::i..,,r::7**':,.., I y -:'i *-: _�agaM • - S OA1B JagOPyl> aaat >.aBre x a g - : ;` Ohd'SSE co ca C yi-” t tea. !tr s 1r ,,, v , • 4b,,„.: , : --- 4.- X. vi , . t. is + `d ._.,,, %, .. 4 i -. t 't 6 w $ lip a. -.- - fix- - .x•.+w .., ..,. t a OA713 J0/11°3 i1 _ �..£ The purple shading signifies geographic areas excluded from the Consolidated impact Fee Ordinance200 - ordinance,this project is not required to connect to the Regional Water System but would be subject to the i of impact fees if connection is requested. Water service may be extended from the ( 1 13) Per than-� main on the north side and within the median of Golden Gate Blvd,east of Weber Blvd but wastewater existing County 10" HDPE water mposotoR available. i am copying Pam Libby for confirmation that we would not allow a new connection to our ex st nig 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd. Thank you, t, County Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities Department Planning and Project Management Division Direct: (239)252-1037 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. ----Original Appointment From:PaulRenald On Behalf Of CDS-C Sent:Tuesday,September 27, 2016 2:05 PM To:AhmadVicky;AlcornChris;Amy Lockhart-Taylor(lockha(B coliierschools.com);AndersonRichard;AnthonyDavid; ArnoldMichelle;AshtonHeidi;AuclairClaudine; BaluchStephen; Beardlaurie; BeasleyRachel; BrethauerPaula; BrownAraqueSummer; BrownCraig; BurtchinMark;CascioGeorge;CondominaDanny;CrowieyMichaelle; David Ogilvie; dfey(a northcollierfire.com; DumaisMike; FaulknerSue; FeyEric; FleishmanPaula;GewirtzStorm; GosselinLiz; GundiachNancy; Houldsworthlohn; HughesJodi; HumphriesAiicia;JacobLisa; inageond@sfwmd.gov;JohnsonEric: KendailMarcia; KurtzGerald;LenbergerSteve; LevyMichael; lmartin@sfwmd.gov; LouviereGarrett; MartinezOscar; MastrobertoThomas; McCaughtryMary; McKennaJack;McKuenElly; McLeanMatthew; MoscaMichele; MoxamAnnis; NawrockiStefanie; OrthRichard; PajerCraig; PancakeBill; PattersonAmy; PepinEmily;piimenez@sfwmd.gov; PochmaraNatalie;ReischlFred; RosenblumBrett;SantabarbaraGino; SawyerMichael;ScottChris;Shar Hingson; ShawinskyPeter;Shawn Hanson;SheaBarbara;SmithDaniel;StoneScott;StrainMark;SuleckiAlexandra;SummersEllen; SweetChad;TempletonMark;VanLengenKris;Walshlonathan;WeeksDavid;WickhamFlannery;WilloughbyChristine; tocia(B davidsonengineering.com Subject:PL20160002577(REZONE) When:Wednesday, October 05,2016 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (UTC-05:00)Eastern Time(US&Canada). Where:CONF ROOM "C" Planner-Dan Smith Fire District-Golden Gate Fire «OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)» «OLE Object: Picture(Device indeperi:,' :lt 3itrnap)» Project Type: Pre-Application Meeting 3 Project Description: Rezonef6MPA for a church Existing Application Name: Meeting Type: Pre-Application Meeting Preferred Date: next available Unavailable Dates: Location:3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL, Parcel Number:36760:•* *6;36760720005 Full Name:Tocia Hamlin Email:tocia@ciavidsonengineerimcom Company Name:4365 RADIO RD STE 201 Naples, FL 34104 Representing:Davidson Engineering Contact Number:Work:239-434-6060 Thanks Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want youre-mail address released h response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. Environmental Data hecklist Project Name C (/ - E , 6. i / / / CAOd/ti a/ The Environmental Data requirements can be found in LDC Section 3.08.00 6) Provide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. 0[ 1. WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA�/ Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared REPORT? individual Preparation of academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. Please include revision dates on resubmittals. 1 g to the 3. J Identify on a current aerial, the Iocation and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) andinclude this information on the thee SDP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval. For sites in the RFMU district,provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores verified by the SFWMD or DEP prior to first development order approval. Where functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff,consistent with State regulation. 4. SDP or final plat construction plans with impacts to five(5) or more acres of wetlands shall provide an analysis of potential water quality impacts of the project by evaluating water quality loadings expected from the project (post development conditions considering the proposed land uses and stormwater management controls) compared with water quality`loadings of the project area as it exists in its pre-development conditions. The analysis shall be performed using methodologies approved by Federal and State water quality agencies,and must demonstrate no increase in nutrients(nitrogen and phosphorous)loadings in the post development scenario. 5. Where treated stormwater is allowed to be directed into preserves, show how the criteria in 3.05.07 H have been met. 6. Where native vegetation is retained on site,provide a topographic map to a half foot and,where possible, provide elevations within each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified on site.For SDP or final plat construction plans, include this information on the site plans. 1 )Provide a wdlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biolo 'cal communities similar to those existing on site.The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS. Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee, when the project is not reviewed or technical assistance not provided by the FFWCC and USFWS. Additional survey time may be required if listed species are discovered ()rovide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03 9. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed spc..eieg are utilizing the site cr where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLUCFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans.Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 10. For sites or portions of sites cleared of native venetation or in agricultural operation;provide documentation that the parcel(s)were issued a permit to be cleared and are in compliance with the 25 year rezone limitation pursuant to section 10.02.06.For sites permitted to be cleared prior to July 2003,provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 10 year rezone limitation previously identified in the GMP.Criteria defining native vegetation and determining the legality,process and criteria for clearing are found in 3.05.05,3.05.07 and 10.02.06. 11. dentify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified.Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on-site. Include the above referenced calculations and aerials on the SDP or final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. 12. Include on a separate site plan, the project boundary and the land use designations and overlays for the RLSA, RFMU, ST and ACSC-ST districts. Include this information on the SDP or fmal plat construction plans. 13. Where off-site preservation of native vegetation is proposed in lieu of on-site,demonstrate that the criteria in section 3.05.07 have been met and provide a note on the SDP or final plat construction plans indicating the type of donation(monetary payment or land donation)identified to satisfy the requirement.Include on the SDP or final plat construction plans,a location map(s)and property identification number(s)of the off-site parcel(s) if off-site donation of land is to occur. 1 . , ovide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property,along with a narrative of the remediate if required byFDEP. r measures needed to q ,��. �' ct/1v�1� �v,�ji/ /E,(� �/�r 15. Soil and/or ground water sampling shall be required at the time or first development order submittal for sites that occupy farm fields(crop fields, cattle dipping ponds,chemical mixing areas),golf courses,landfill or junkyards or for sites where hazardous products exceeding 250 gallons of liquid or 1,000 pounds of solids were stored or processed or where hazardous wastes in excess of 220 pounds per month or 110 gallons at any point in time were generated or stored.The amount of sampling and testing shall be determined by a registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment and shall at a minimum test for organochlorine pesticides(U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) 8081)and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)8 metals using Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)soil sampling Standard Operating Procedure(SOP)FS 3000, in areas suspected of being used for mixing and at discharge point of water management system. Sampling should occur randomly if no points of contamination are obvious.Include a background soil analysis from an undeveloped location hydraulically upgradient of the potentially contaminated site. Soil sampling should occur just below the root zone, about 6 to 12 inches below ground surface or as otherwise agreed upon with the registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment. Include in or with the Environmental Site Assessment, the acceptable State and Federal pollutant levels for the types of contamination found on site and indicate in the Assessment,when the contaminants are over these levels. If this analysis has been done as part of an Environmental Audit then the report shall be submitted.The County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. 16. Shoreline development must provide an analysis demonstrating that the project will remain fully functional for its intended use after a six-inch rise in sea level. 17. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. 18. Where applicable,provide evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County. Include all state permits that comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C.,as those rules existed on January 13,2005. 19. Identify any Welifield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones(WRM-ST)within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat constniction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUs. provide a separate site plan or zoning map with the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified. 7 v 20. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 21. For sites located in the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern-Special Treatment overlay district(ACSC- ST),show how the project is consistent with the development standards and regulations in 4.02.14. 22. For multi-slip docking facilities with ten slips or more,and for all marina facilities, show how the project is consistent with 5.05.02.Refer to the Manatee Protection Plan for site specific requirements of the Manatee Protection Plan not included in 5.05.02. 23. For development orders within RFMU sending lands, show how the project is consistent with each of the applicable Objectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. ( he County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's----- \....„_) compliance with LDC and GMP requirements.(LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f) The following to be determined at preapplication meeting: (Choose those that apply) k3EProvide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. xplain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the 0c. GMP. t C4/f C I S 0 Di- 7. ,•.-.--- Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC.. d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design compensates for wetland impacts. i°' e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. ?5. PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package 0 applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) document,prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. 26. Is EAC Review(by CCPC)required? ppA4 f1 9 1/a i". 27. Additional Comments 28. Stipulations for approval(Conditions) Environnjehtal PUDZ-PITAA Clieehlis non-RFMLT) •-• Project Name cI/kik// Al 6'. 6 i j9 f -//) Cot(la /rr© 1. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays,districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties?(CON, ST,PUD,RLSA,RFMU, etc.)(LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08;4.08.00)Not in CV Library C )ubma current aerial photographPry Appraiser's it (available from the Pro e A raiser's office)and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines.If the site is vegetated,provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland,wetland and exotic vegetation(Admin.Code Ch. 3 G.1.Application Contents#24). OC FLUCFCS Overlay-P627 learly identify the location of all preserves and label each as"Preserve"on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.A.2 . Preserve Label-P546 ) 4. 'rovide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained,the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site.Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations(LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F;3.05.07.11.1.d-e). Preserve Calculation-P547 reated and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.1-1.1.b. Preserve Width-P603 6. etained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors.(LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4) Preserve Selection-P550 Principle structures shall be located a minimum25' of from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory ( 0 structures and other site alterations,fill placement,grading,plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve(i.e. stem wall or berm around wetland preserve).Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25'.(LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.) Preserve Setback—New 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required,when so warranted.(LDC 10.02.02.A.2.f) Listed Species-P522 ( .)Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials.consistency determination w=ith the GMPs,off-site preserves,seasonal and historic high water levels,and analysis of water quality.For land previously used for farm fields or golf course,provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required—P 522 l 0. LTD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved. Ma Plan Contents-P626 (LDC 10.02.13.A.2) ster. lw, 11. UD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses,the following is suggested: A.Principal Use:Preserve;B.Accessory Uses:All other uses(list as applicable or refer to the LDC) l?.� UD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that C will be preserved on the site. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2.) Unique Features-P628 Example: A management plan for the entire project shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not limited to Black Bear,Gopher Tortoise and listed birds. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the project. 13. Provide information for GIS? Additional Comments: Co County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE www.colller ov net NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Sign-In Sheet P1#'PL20160002577 Collier County Contact Information: Name Review Discipline Phone IIIIIIIIIIMMIIMIIIINI ❑ RichardAnderson Environmental Specialist Mil❑ David Anthony richardanderson@colliergov.net Environmental Review MI davidanthony@coiliergovnet ❑ Summer Araque Environmental Review 252-6290 summerbrownaraque@colliergov.net 0 Steve Baluch,P.E. Transportation Planning A Mil Laurie Beard StephenBaluch@colliergay.net INEEMIMINITransportation Pathways REM Lauriebeard@collier.ov.net Planner 252-8202 rachelbeasley@colliergov.net Ll Marcus Berman County Surveyor 252-6885 MarcusBerman@colliergov.net II Madelin Bunster _ IMESMEREE � madeHnbunster@callier_ov.net I ROW Permitting 252-5165 markburtchin@colliergov.net rJ George Cascio Utility Billing 252-5543 I Heidi Ashton Cicko Managing Asst.County AttorneyMEI Beargecascia@coiliergov.net ,0""'"heidiashton@colliergov.net miLIMEMINIE Comprehensive Planning MENI suefaulkner@colliergov.net I 1 Eric Fey,P.E. Site Plans Reviewer — 252-2434 ericfey@colliergov.net I Paula Fleishman Impact Fee Administration i 252-2484 Wane fl252-2924 @ Nancy Gundiach,AICP, PLA Zoning Services ygund ch@ ollier8 r ov,n tt II C7 Shar Hingson East Naples Fire District 687-5650 shingson@ccfco.org ill John Houldsworth Engineering Services 252-5757 johnhouldsworth@colliergov,net I� ❑ Jodi Hughes Transportation Pathways Y 252-5744 jodihughes@colliergov.net CI Alicia Humphries Site Plans Reviewer/ROW 252-2326 aliciahumphries@colliergov.net Johnson,AICP,CFM phnes@colliergov.net Zoning Services 252-2931 ericjohnson@colliergov.net farrarcia Kendall Comprehensive Planning 252-2387 marciakendall@colliergov.net Stephen Lenberger Environmental Review 252-2915 stevelenberger@colliergov.net ❑ Paulo Martins Utilities 252-4285 paulomartins@colliergov.net ❑ Thomas Mastroberto Fire Safety 252-7348 Thomasmastroberto@colliergov.net ❑ Jack McKenna,P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jackmckenna@colliergov.net ❑ Matt McLean, P.E. Principal Project Manager 252-8279 matthewmclean@coliier_ov.net ❑ Gilbert Moncivaiz Utility Impact Fees 252-4215 gilbertmoncivaiz@colliergov.net ❑ Annis Moxam Addressing 252-5519 annismoxam@colliergov.net ❑ Stefanie Nawrocki Planning and Zoning 252-2313 StefanieNawrocki@coiliergov.net ❑ Mariam Ocheltree Graphics 252-2315 mariamocheltree@colliergov.net BrandyOtero I _ �-- i Transit 252-5859 ' brandyotero@colliergov.net Co 1 -r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAP S,NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES,APLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239)252-2400 � 252-6237 brandipoRard@colliergov,net ❑ Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees ,l\ Fred Reischl,AICP Zoning Services 252-4211 fredreischl@colliergov.net ❑ Stacy Revay Transportation Pathways 252-5677 IstacYreva t y@colliergov.net❑ Brett Rosenblum,P.E. Utility Plan Review 252-2905 I brettrosenblum@rollier ❑ Michael Sawyer .gov.net Zoning Services 252-2926 i michaelsawyer@colliergov.net ❑ Corby Schmidt,AICP Comprehensive Planning 252-2944 corbyschmidt@colliergov.net ❑ Chris Scott,AICP " I Planning and Zoning 252-2460 chrisscott@colliergov.net _E Daniel Smith,AICP Landscape Review 252-4312 1 danielsmith@colliergov.net ❑ Ellen Summers Planning and Zoning 252-1032 EIIenSummers@colliergov.net Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-8400 scottstone@colliergov.net ❑ Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 252-4446 markstrain@collier-gov.net ❑ Kris Vanl-engen UtilityPlanning g 252-5366 krisvanlengen@colliergov.net ❑ Jon Walsh Building Review 1252-2962 jonathanwaish@coliiergov,het #'_-' David Weeks,AICP I Future Land Use Consistency 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net 1 ❑ Kirsten Wilkie I Environmental Review 252-5518 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net ! ❑ Christine Willoughby I Planning and Zoning I 1 ChristineWilloughby@colliergov.net � g y@colliergov.net Additional Attendee Contact Information: -!red 6()layid cotie LPln e Emailc cam Name Representing Phone yVJ Cztz.t. . t, rC»sC {z { Al J' jY ✓rit/lel [ er n= ll a ' I l `131-t06,0 4 lhoir 67 A I,j Anel lam , ,�� IA .�I f41 N'�' +'1911!' l�i4 � J��, �, � �� __, - /,,, C>tu 398 2527 tirhRiAN X91.0046 .0g4 . .i,/,/ EQ 7,fei aim al n r .5 4M3a ,r,6c4. litk-ift Ji ti k, s (Vie) 1 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX B STAFF QUALIFICATIONS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com JEREMY STERK, C.E.P. Relevant Experience Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on rt FL r 1 Senior Scofictslst projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. His varied experience spans marine,upland,and estuarine habitats and includes extensive work with a wide variety of listed species. j.sterk@eteflorida.com9 In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co- 239.595.4929 authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers(RCW)and Florida panther on the same property. Years Experience In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water 22 years Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Education/Training Early in his career,Jeremy was the principal investigator of a field research project in the Bahamas B.S.Aquatic Biology(1994), that utilized telemetry tracking to study the swimming speed of sub-adult lemon sharks. St.Cloud State University Jeremy's environmental consulting experience includes: Protected Species Surveys Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) Professional Affiliations Listed Species Management Plans Turbidity Monitoring Academy of Board Certified Vegetation&Habitat Mapping Wetland&Water Level Monitoring Environmental Professionals USFWS Section 7 &Section 10 Permitting Environmental Impact Statements(EIS) #16992037 Water Use Monitoring&Compliance Project Management Preserve Management Plans GIS/GPS Mapping&Exhibits Florida Association of -Post Permit Compliance Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Professionals Environmental Land Use Planning Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Native Vegetation Restoration Plans Lake Management Plans Incidental Take Permitting Due Diligence Reports Site and Aerial Photography Wetland Jurisdictional Determinations USFWS Bald Eagle Monitor Bonneted Bat Surveys Gopher Tortoise Surveys,Permitting,& Mangrove Assessments&Restorations Relocations Scrub Jay Surveys Hard Bottom& Bottom Benthic Surveys Burrowing Owl Surveys Artificial Reef Deployments Shorebird Surveys Seagrass Surveys Certifications/Credentials Certified Environmental Professional#1692037,Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent— Permit No.GTA-09-00192 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals—member since January 1995;served on the Board of Directors for the Southwest Florida Chapter from(2008—2012). Past Secretary, Vice President,&President. State of Florida Real Estate License(2003 to Present) Appointed by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners to: • Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee,Chairman of the Lands Evaluation and Management Subcommittee.(2009 to 2014). • Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee(DSAC)(2015 to Present). • FWC Local Rule Review Committee(Manatee Protection Speed Zones)(2016 to Present). stth Te0h Publications Sundstrom, L.F.,J.Sterk,&S.H.Gruber.1998.Effects of a speed-sensing transmitter on the swimming speed of lemon sharks.Bahamas J.Sci.6(1):12-22. Environine ,LLC 239.304.0030 I www.eteflorida.com .m�. JENNIFER BOBKA Relevant Experience Ecologist Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental LLC in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 5 years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. Her experience includes projects throughout Collier,Lee and Gallatin counties.Her varied experience spans coastal marine,shoreline and estuarine habitats,to upland forests and alpine environments. She has worked with a wide variety of native and invasive plant and wildlife species. She is also an experienced Naturalist and Environmental Educator. As an Ecologist,Jennifer fulfills duties in environmental consulting, wetland &wildlife jenniferb@eteflorida.com monitoring,species surveys,invasive species removal,report writing,GIS mapping,and 239.304.0030 ERP permitting. Years' Experience Jennifer's work experience in many fields of ecology includes: 5 years Wetland Delineation Education/Training Protected Species Surveys Naturalist II & Environmental Listed Species Research&Monitoring Educator Turbidity Monitoring R012-2016) Vegetation&Habitat Mapping Manatee Research Intern Bald Eagle Monitoring Florida Conservation Gopher Tortoise Surveys and Relocation Commission GIS Mapping (2013) Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) AmeriCorps Field Crew Leader Invasive&Exotic Species Removal Montana Conservation Corps Natural Resource Management (2010) Trail Maintenance Mechanical&Manual Forest Fuel Reduction B.A. Environmental Studies Ecological Restoration Montana State University Environmental Education (2009) Marine Biology&Coastal Relevant Certifications/Credentials Ecology Study Abroad Costa Rica Certified Interpretive Guide (2007) Python Responder/Patrol Training Professional Affiliations USFS Sawyer Florida Association of Environmental Professionals League of Environmental Educators of Florida Florida Master Naturalist Program earth Te0h 239.304.0030 1 www.eteflorida.com Enviro , LLC www.etenvimn.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX C PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY • Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 v,�ww.eteflondacom -x ''y Alit At- r yr PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY iipi - GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL 1 NAPLES, FLORIDA •X14 _ t APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES 3 . Prepared For. 1‘ i:i +; i � � Collier County Engineering& +!,' ,r % Cder CocsmJ' Natural Resources eprtment t 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 * llii South Florida Water Management District ' is 1. (SFWMD) 1 Lower West Coast Service Center if . 7 2301 McGregor Boulevard " Fort Myers, FL 33901 ' Prepared By: A` �acNaples th Teo Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 6 1455 Rail, FL Head341I 0 Bouleva0rd, Suite 8 ' '� _. 239.304.0030 4 Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com 1 - „ _ April 12, 2017 Protected Species Survey "^1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure I) below for Location Map. •JA•KSONVILLE litillii,, doi 4lip . ii, A TLAN: 4 L \ ( :! ..._, _ .., ! V 1" i i T �e 'SA7+T R '1 I TANDERBILT BEACH RD ~ERBLTBEACH RD EJCT — `A�' ,.7PE ERSBURG t TIHAVE NW 7TRAVERW T!+ z �£ b __ SIN AVE NW1t STRAW NW ' 9RpAVENW _ �• V �.. �\ CORALWOOD INR MDR/ERIN _ Fu :. i n i 1 N TEAS WOW DR 1ST AVE NW _ _ TS `{ ..En,bATE BL W Y W V .- YRDGEOR .1,,-.DAVESW i ,r� CAPE CORAL . ORDAVESW STRAYS SW STHAVE'SW R1 V. is A •4,1 • •RAL SPRINGS TTHAVESW 71.HAVE SW_ 1 _ 11 000e.-s's•� y ♦♦��►� 4804.1 1--OKE PINE OLLYWOOD Q VMRE BLVD� '� I °ssi ssOsi s"s' S PINE RODE RD1EXT rrTr 11.:*: : i. EH 11TH AVE SW- 9ITHAVE SW=l = ZTNAVE SW -i 1STHAVE SW u; t9THAVESW 3 THAVE SW 15THAVESW E', ISR HAVE SW % ../ '7,y mar BLVD "r STN4Sri i 17THAVE SW � r i'pr'„>;T S:r7."_l, ,GTHAVE SW Figure I. Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida."This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2& 3).The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species.The lists were obtained from two agency publications: Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ❖ A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication "Florida's Endangered r"'"'"•\ Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists", Publication Date: October 2016. ❖ A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants", Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community.See(Table I)of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary,transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80's. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately four(4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) �1 details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd.West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre.This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50%and included Brazilian pepper,ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine /- needles and other duff. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www,eteflonda.com Protected Species Survey FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities.On the subject property,this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential,Low Density 227 624-D Pine—Cypress—Cabbage Palm(drained) r 3.88 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: 6.25 ;< .g GOLDEN GATE BLVD Wbris Q Subject Property FLUCCS Mapping 0 CD En 110,Single Family Residential Neat624-1),Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) Y ASoblaamffrom Coffer Canty - ; 740,Disturbed Land PmWNAPHai.w• Figure 2.Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 vwww.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 740 08 Ac 740 01 Ac 624D 88 3.88 Ac 740 01 Ac 0 110 227 Ac to w 0 0 Q Subject-Property FLUCC$'MapPing 110,5ingNFan ily Residential 9 499 tor, 624-0:Pine-CYWess-Cabbage 1'W,,(drainad) h _. 1 740,Drewrbed Land Foe Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table I). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey x GOLDEN GATE BLVD W q 740 .. t .DBAC - 740 '; 624D e s:aeAc e j r 740 , _ ivtix, ,. 110 z27 417. 1:3s.11,..,PmPY FLUCCS Mapping 110,Single Family Residential 624-D,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) , 740,Disturbed Land 2017Mrialvtained frwn ,<, , �.\ i:oYacenny PmpeayA ever • .� .,. Ct3 Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map&Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculate) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. ,•"\ Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 sww.eteflorida.com /"N Protected Species Survey Table I. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status FWC/FDA I FWS 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus flondonus T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron ( Egretta caerulea T Snowy Egret Egretta thula T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor Abbreviations: Ar?endes FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=FIonda Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds,Mammals,Amphibians, Reptiles,&Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N I - /�. Turkey vulture Cathartes aura DV ..--_----_. �--- N Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV N - Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) Gray squirrel Sciurus niger ovicennia N,DV N - Armadillo Dosypus novemcinctus OH __ N Reptiles Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) None I None I NA NA - Amphibians Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? ( Status (Y/N) None None NA NA Plants Common Name Scientific Name ( Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) Wild Piney Tillandsia fasciulota DV N CE *=protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=FIonda Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service /0.."\ Status E=Endangered Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time I End Time 1 Man Hours Task March 23,2017 2:00 pm 14:00 pm 140(2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 4.0 —� " 1 1 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 7,r<wa P0,eee\0wR6c7 imwuw+417x:7-00 116*10.6\Re.an2\201e-06-27 000-4651 on 3uvw.a.o(CWl Manaoe.07 27.20,8-1.222,4 ESTATES ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY 0 ,< F. g O o� mR1>? 03• (nm Dy�m COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY -I 0O m $ (PLAT BOOK 4,PAGE 79) m m m z g$17 i, xim C))� p N00'19'1("E 680.00'(P) X _—.I 000.28'331W 68000'(5) 1 r><__ - 330.00(rl ^ �1�� — - \ _ 70000)0) 17,Nr.) _YY�i G6J'/ICIVtlSiC - — . c ( I p n n nI m 0 �v I_I LJ L 1 voo rt<1 rr- 0) __-i__ - x g O -13 0 " m -- Z-0 0 9T_J�C m m m c o a z c 11 2,0 v p D m �, 3 p D p . a Hg$ p co �y .x apo 00 200 (.0 0. �zmm i my Z m�D mxi y m0 T-0 m-(mD< m MI cn XIm ' i v C 0 y Ie. ' ✓ '8 sc m z ,� .moi €: Z . j *W '1'11 1 z 5 O O B m lm1 ,p \ Ip w60 -< rn` — Nm',a1 im0(5I — 1 — , fn m Z rn 7J(n ) k_g, O z 5 N00'28'48'W 330.09'(0) { D D * C I O 71 ) O I WZOD (NJ1�� In'r1m im I 03(71 p mz m n�`m r �O 30 >i m oW C m y yD zsI 0 (. CO Z=::. < mTI m �m-10 I mm� < v 1 m m Do< m I m "� o m O m XA -m.� - // cl) T m m O p 10'PRESERVE .OD SITE ALTERATION — i m 0) mo m( SETBACK p Z cn z e co(n co r-030 m Z r 125'PRESERVE 1 T Z D o S o r w> ST UCTUR RFTRAf:K I m r Umi y-+ fag m-i t c 1« I. Xm mD c� mmn D� ( gym f--••{{ pDm< E Kr wo I y E(A Xl Cn XI m } 4 • m4C m (z 0 • • 4f4 CO « « « « .z m m 0 « « ` ` ` ` zO (C,n .� ' m>« « 4 « «D • -1 4 4 4 4 4 b gni > r 75'FRONT YARD 7,..,1' ,r,41 ., ««4'«`.` 4 SETBACK oi a f o6 . « « « ( MMM���elll mm $. o 275 ar(P) -4.44'44 j 275.07(S) 75.00(P) ,J';l-75.00(5) - _''. N00°1910E 33000P _ C V .9() 'n N00°7910•E 350.0O)P) 800-2747W 350.001S) RIGHT-OF-WAY -11 0404OA ^ o -m-m A?v UC 60602 P mmrT mG $ -0r r rn Z O O m�m v cya v 0 m m �mm « « 0 O p mNm Z y (0 cn 8wz c)m z z `mow N x01p m1 y--44 >--1 oo >u $CC)G)01m 5-,mmx om C �� () MN srn tn oOmm 80 -474 >mom2 .�- M < p-g zj-Im-IA mtimo6) 0f. m L m m zZ� omZZmzoKm <Omm�� y< m top co 03 iq n�� o mm5 a�om� "' (n m I� f m mC `2>- (� >Z—< rNmpm m --1i Z Z -II- mx<-103M m73Co L7 D I- 23 O D 0n 19Pm <"x1> 0 Z ,P.m.) F3 -i 3o>i Z 9,' Zm _iJmZ m PROJECT, w REVISIONS ` - q GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DESIGNED.74. r. 11� DE GRACE ROMANIAN Dw.ws 6r: ° DAVIDSONCHURCH AER ENGINEERING SST TITS 6017 PINE RIDGE RD.,A64 DIG..57: -- 6365 Radio Rom.Suite ml NAPLES,FL 36119 , Req..Rion.PPM CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN PROJECT R0.: - --- -- P.269.406.6060 P 269.494.6061 180103 Z:\Active Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-06-20 GR SSGMPA-(ZONING).mxd 11 Nn LEGEND , i _,DATA&ANALYSIS AREA 4.4 ;;„ / GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES = ZONING DISTRICTS 1 =A L -A-MHO si A-PU-c/J gm A-RFMUO -A-ST 1,\-, N I .„C-1 i [ - C-2 MN , C-3I , j C-4-Z_ is CF▪ F, PU Li" DG aO� I I IMMOKALEEIRD/CR 846 : I IL Up h 2V ®CPDDj( I 11. IG'I ` p I t1.CPUD-SBCO _ Y J a z I11A PUD I NM MPUD ' P ,! .,0 VANDERBILT BEACWRD. = � - mv a --* "�'' �. PUD 1 i I RMF-12 O v 3� 1 ' I RMF-12-GGDCCO ,—(4) p I I RMF-12-SBCO 4 .- .s J... ------ I RMF-16 mI aGOLD JRMF6 O *! � I RMF-6-GGDCCO __ Jm I RMF-6-SBCO .„.....t RPUD Q.- Z,-.` RSF-2 rt. RSF-3 4�a2 �RSF-3-GGDCCO iQ`� `I -PINE RIDGE RD---1:1 3� WHITE BLVD RSF4 I �_c rA7--% _ .CO I RSF-0(3) . 4 . 0 1.0 1 1 - ----- p 'U) RSF-5 yQ I� RSF-5(0.4) q g. i 1 GREEN BLVD ` I� RT 1, inwl if re � � BCW P- '-,=,,,,, No 1 t wit 4 re.•-_I 1,-, ,9 ::, zailiA it4 ddi p. 0 a t Q .,,,x ,,,,,x,,. _.!.—,._. ,,-',,,„---.7,. ,,,,„..,, CR 886/GOLDENGATE m I '`` AtA 9 Q _ il .; to Ill — ��.r.� ; :,1111. W SOURCES:COLLIER,COUNTY GEOGRAPHICIINFORMATION`Sl STEM �15).C. DEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH NAP ESRADIOROAOD,SUITE 201, FL CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA PHONE: 239-434-6060 ENGINEERING EXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS DAVIDSOND Z:\Active Projects\G1GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBITH(ZONING EXHIBIT i, , - Iz In �r ` i i ?-: a 3R., D AVE NWW � B ` I - --11 S 3RD AVE NWS: , t. K yr f„=:" ° sfi "": �" a a .;_ ' � 951 Z i - a f � a * ire' `..�,,.,* -*:$*''''t el' ''4 A"iillir *t ,,*!:''''? :';1' ;if -k. , f„. -, . _ , - , -...., , c. 1ST AVE NW = �`` 1ST AVE NW r.. . „..„, ,..,..,)..t v-_;;;,,,1 l'" -!;,:t.,1,: t'v-L'-2-1---- ''',. :-'-',V..r..".- v - , 300 FOOT RADIUS P ��•��.>•mi==w•% " 1 /I. ® j GOLDEN GATE BLVD W r7/77 ,- .) / t....,.s 1ST AVE SW I I ♦ t. s� �® owosestfr Cr)CI 9CI CO 031CewCe UJ 03 O w 3RD AVE SW U 3RD AVE SW LEGEND r , GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES (_i300 FOOT RADIUS ., ZONING DISTRICTS 0 ®E-ESTATES 600 1,200 FEET SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2016) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE 4NAP365 LESRADIOFL RO34104 AD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS ENGINEERING Z:1Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 VC GMPA-EXHIBIT I(FLUE EXHIBIT).mxd grADnNg c� ; ate cad S CCI W CO LU ggFCSS@ 300 FOOT'• � "`�� �` GOLDEN GATE BLVD Q J G Ca -J ceW Ca o W C LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPASUBJECT PROPERTY:625ACRES y_'300 FOOT RADIUS 173 ES-ESTATES-MIXED USE DISTRICT: RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT '' 00 600 � r 1,200 . p ,,.,rte - .,'°11W SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY oINF.ORMATIONL�� ;, � � DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAYNDSRON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT I: SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS EXHIBIT J This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a STOPJ project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master / Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8,2017 —Florida Master Jessica Harrelson Site f�lu�r File Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239)434-6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel#36760720005 When interpreting the results of this search,please consider the following information: ® This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites,historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. ® Federal,state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws,you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 500 South Bronough Street• Tallahassee,FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph I 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a STOP project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 =Florida 4.f Master Jessica Harrelson Situ Senior Project Coordinator ; File Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 Phone (239)434-6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08,2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel#36760800006 When interpreting the results of this search,please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures n or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Federal,state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws,you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 500 South Bronough Street• Tallahassee,FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph I 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us Z:IActive Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWGIPIanning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT K(PUBLIC SERVICES MAP).mxd ^.) LEGEND =SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES i IRADIUS_RINGS : Schools * COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF FACILITY 0 Hospital North Naples Fire and Rescue Station 42 17010 Immokalee Road IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 3 MILES + Medical ,®. —���r ��.. _` 0 COLLIER COUNTY FIRE STATION : �Gulf'C'oast-High School FIRE DISTRICT a)..%).a)..%).1.7878 Shark Way 4.k.I BigCorkscrew Fire Laurel Oak-Elementary [ 7800 Immokalee'Road : I I East Naples Fire Oak Ridge-Middle School > ,/ 14975 Collier Boulevard I I Golden Gate Fire CO I 2 MILES I I North Naples Fire el 1. Y i 'fir �� .,Ie 0 �• �♦ / Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 73 • ' t 14575 Collier Boulevard ♦ •♦ VAN DERBILT BEACH RD. 1 MILE •♦ . rl ; ; up ,Vineyards-Elementary� ♦ , sr 6225 Arbor Boulevard W • 1 c , m cn z ii 1 m I 4. d I GOLDEN GATE BLVD ' H to o Golden Gate'Fire and Rescue Station 42 1 w J Big Cypress-Elementary School ` 95 13th Street S\N < m 3520 Golden Gate Boulevard W / s E.-o O Q� EC C7 , i W m e 1 i i LU rCL PINE RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD / co * Z M Physicians Regional`H so pital / co ii! / N 61 1% Pine Ridge Road �/ cn / r •zz ♦ GREEN BLVDBl > II c� 161TH AVE.SW ` ,, we �� --, co z0° 7 I. N w Golden Gate-Elementary lit -' 4911 20th Place SW 0 II I'; `��'GGSOGolden Gate Substation Dist2��' Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 70 4707 G1den Gate'Parkway 4741 Golden Gate Parkway/I: I Golden Terrace North-Elementary :2711 44th Terrace SWI N CR 886/GOLDEN GATE Golden Gate®Middle School Golden Terrace South-Elementary 270,1 148th Terrace SW 2965 44thtTerrace SW Q r S m : Mike Davis-Elementary Golden.Gate--•High•School 3215 Magnolia Pond Drive W—.014--E '^ < 2925 Titan Way ,-, 5 0 1 2 0 S MILES SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) R93�/?S DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 341 NAPLES, FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDS Ai PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT K: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES ENGINEERING INSTR 5339200 OR 5337 PG 3573 RECORDED 11/30/2016 9:06 AM PAGES 2 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA EXHIBIT L DOC@.70 $4,725.00 REC $18.50 CONS $675,000.00 i Prepared by: Bradley D.Bryant Bryant Law Office 4851 Tamiami Trail North Suite 300 Naples,FL 34103 239-566-1001 File Number. Grace.MDLT.BB Consideration.:$675,000.00 ` Prepared without examination or opinion of title [Space Above This Line For Recording Dawl Warranty Deed This Warranty Deed made this 28th .f '. 11?G' MDLT Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited liability company whose post office addr € Golden Gate ' . i uite 106,Naples,FL 34105,grantor, and "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church o ,Inc.,a Florida not for •t t rporation whose post office address is 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84,Naples, 34,11$,gcaute ' J r (Whenever used herein the terms"grantor"a d" ;t, ude •'-,a ..w'- , th. '.1 t and�\•he heirs, legal representatives,and assigns of �` individuals,and the successors and assigns of orpoor '•i. r• -- �j ‘ 111 Witnesseth,that said grantor,ford c•. • `..•. o t -f..t of 0100 DOLLARS ($10.00)and other good and valuable considerations to A�,,",�_ .. .r in han' paid.y gram-•, pt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted,bargained, and sold to " grantee, and grantee's i forever, the following described land, situate,lying and being in Collier Co , rids to-wit: 0 The West half of Tract 15,Gol ( a states Unit No.4c g to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4,Page 79, 'Tic -t)i ,Florida. AND All of Tract 16,Golden Gate Estates Unit No.4,according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4,Page 79,Public records of Collier County,Florida. Parcel Identification Number:36760720005/36760800006 Together with all the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. To Have and to Hold,the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land;that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances,except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31,2015. In Witness Whereof,grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year fust above written. DoubleTimes *** OR 5337 PG 3574 *** Signed,sealed and delivered in our presence: MDLT H. ,,'..gs,LLC,a lorida Ii..*ted liability company (16114.47Z ,. .' 4 N. By: --..46...- --iik Witness Nam : --. ...-i. t le. -.., Erik E.Mogel • \ (Corporate Seal) 1 . ) 4 ] " .. -- Ile: Nik6lina Dimitrova DwAITRoVA N'EotitlA i • ' • NOTARY PUBUC , -..Li- STATE OF"DMA Cn""" 18 __„,,,_ .., _, ,..„„,• 123120 EICOMS 3 State of Florida 'S.,ij-.11`--(4,-,)11.1.. •'-. The foregoing instrument was aclaiowSdged*foraitte- ' 28thdak,,pf Nov .,. r, 01.6 by Erik E.Mogelvang,Manager of MDLT Holdings,LLC,a Florida limited li‘abiliiSktbinTny..g,,n be_ f the c.... ;on. He u is personally known to me or[X]has produced a driver's license'as isiecntaftcatiop,,„„. \ ...,, 1 1 -,, -i a 1.1_, t,"..,...if [Notary Seal] r) ---4.\\,-.-.2.-- ..'... ' .0, 't ', / irk ......4 1 .--..,, v 4, Prina*e:, ,:....,.,i Nikolina Dimitrova My Co ii,i, tres. 3/23/2018 Warranty Deed-Page 2 DoubleTimee EXHIBIT M LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Davidson Engineering, Inc. (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property i c entitled in this Application. Signed: Adrian Ro an, President/Secretary,"Grace"Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Date: NAV \ t04-A I I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the forgoing application,and that the application is true,correct and complete to the best of my knowledge Si•n=cure of Applicant k\oC\ekts Ztresr\ \( kC Name-Typed or Printed STATE OF (kko ) COUNTY OF f CaQ•S Sworn to and subscribed before me this � day of V , 11-__2011 b MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: �� 0 Notary ublic CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: X who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and sooiv,44,,4 4ESSICA HARRELSON did take an Oath 'riA Notary Public•Slag of Florida did not take and Oath s•• Commission M FF 854332 1 - My Comm.bpi*May 18,2020 I ��� NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: `*4•;.�A.° Bonded through National Notary Assndlowirmiriwifirmiimormirwitr . Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in wilting with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 7 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION I,Adrian Roman(print name), as President and Secretary,(title,if applicable)of Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc., (company, if applicable),swear or affirm under oath,that I am the(choose one): The owner X applicant contract purchaser_and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches,data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application;and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. Well authorize Richard Yovanovich, Esq. to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. 6. Applicant is the owner of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed submittal; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of Applicant's knowledge and belief; and that if Applicant is not providing an attorney's opinion of title,that the information Applicant provided to the surveyor is sufficient to prepare an accurate boundary survey for this application, and is honest and true to the best of Applicant's knowledge and belief. 7. Applicant understands that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed, shall not be altered. Applicant further understands that if Public Hearings are required,they will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. *Notes: If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp.pres. or v.pres. •If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company(L.L.C.)or Limited Company(L.C.),then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's"Managing Member." •If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. •If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the"general partner"of the named partnership. •If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". •In each instance,first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust,partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury,I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts stated in it are true. 7/23/18 Adrian Roman, President and Secretary, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Signature _ _Print dls1 e/Title JESSICA HARRELSON STATE OF Florida '�, , = Notary Public-State of Florida • Commission*FF 954332 COUNTY OF Collier ;a My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 �..� ' .'` Bonded through National Notary Assn. s \ ` f The foregoing instrument was sworn to(or affirmedrand s'ub'scribed before me orl,,t,+. 4 , 0L (date)by drian Roman(name of person providing oath or affirmation),as President and Secretar,who Is personally known to me. 1404— STAMP/SEAL OSSTAMP/SEAL Sig ature of Not Public EXHIBIT N DECivil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com ALTERNATIVE SITE DATA & ANALYSIS GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH SSGMPA CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT PREPARED FOR: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34109 and PREPARED BY: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 March 1, 2018 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 Contents Purpose: 2 Physical Description of Subject Property. 2 Data &Analysis: 3 Alternative Site Analysis: 5 Attachments: Attachment A—Location Map Attachment B—Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay Attachment C—Protected Listed Species Survey Attachment D—Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners Attachment E—Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities Attachment F—Alternate Property Map(within Market Study Area) Attachment G—Parcel 75180000120 Information Attachment H—Sungate CPUD-Ordinance 09-06 Attachment I—Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information Attachment J—Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy—White Paper Purpose: The purpose of this data & analysis report is to provide an evaluation for a modification to the existing Conditional Uses Subdistrict within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; demonstrating a change to the existing Growth Management Plan (GMP) as warranted. The proposed conditional use is located at the southeast corner of the signalized intersection of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West(see Attachment A - Location Map) and consists of±6.25 acres of land. The intent of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict is to provide specific areas and properties for approved conditional uses within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. The Collier County GMP currently designates the aforementioned property (±6.25 acres) as part of the Residential Estates Sub-district within the Estates Mixed Use District of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This designation allows the following uses: Group Housing, Parks, and Recreational Areas/Open Space, Single Family Residential(at a density of 1 unit per 2.25 acre), Essential Services,and Nursing Homes. The additional development of uses are available through a conditional use application. The proposal of this amendment application is to identify the location and allowable square footage/maximum number of seats within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict in order to construct a church at the proposed location. Upon final approval and adoption of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (SSGMPA), the property will move forward with its companion Conditional Use application for zoning and a Site Development Plan;meeting the intent of the Land Development Code by identifying a proposed church facility with allowable accessory uses within the±6.25-acre parcel. Physical Description of Subject Property: Recently, ecologist Jeremy Sterk of Earth Tech Environmental, LLC, prepared a Florida Land Use Cover Classifications System (FLUCCS) map and reviewed the potential protected species correlated with the FLUCCS map for the subject property. The FLUCCS shows ±6.25 acres as identified with a single-family house (2.27 acres), native vegetation (3.88 acres), and disturbed lands (0.08 acres); please refer to Attachment B. The potential protected species report advises that there are likely no protected species on-site; please refer to Attachment C. 2 Data &Analysis: To justify the need for the Future Land Use designation modification, a data & analysis review has been performed. This report identifies justifications to demonstrate the requested amendment is warranted. Criteria for this analysis include proximity of the local church's parishioners,properties at the intersections or close to arterial and collector roadways, and existing availability of potential development sites between 5 and 10 acres from Interstate-75 (forming the western boundary) to five miles east (eastern boundary), the border of between Collier and Lee Counties (the northern boundary) and Golden Gate Parkway to the south (forming the final boundary of the data &analysis study area). The limiting criteria were selected based on vacancy,size,current market value of land, and accessibility to parishioners. The subject property,as well as any alternative sites, have been evaluated to ensure that the existing and future demographics will support the proposed land use based on the following: • Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners • Location of Alternate Facilities Offering Similar Traditional Worship Opportunities • Property Availability and Compatibility with the proposed development Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners Demographic information is an excellent indicator of demand for proposed services that currently do not exist. Population statistics for the data analysis were obtained from the Church/applicant; refer to Attachment D. In this case, the parishioners are local to the area and as such, there are no seasonal impacts to the population. Location of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities In defining a warranted use for the requested service,locations of existing facilities with identical or similar services provided were also identified; refer to Attachment E. The results are listed below, along with the respective addresses and distance from the ±6.25-acre proposed location: 1. Grace Romanian Baptist Church 1542 Harrison St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (122.0 mi) 2. New Life Romanian Baptist Church 1950 Van Buren St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (123.0 mi) 3. Betania Romanian Baptist Church 4001 Hendricks Ave,Jacksonville, FL 32207 (379.0 mi) 4. First Romanian Baptist Church 6423 Marbletree Ln, Lake Worth, FL 33467 (132.0 mi) 5. Romanian Baptist Church 5416 County Rd 579, Seffner, FL 33584 (160.0 mi) 3 Property Availability Due to the specific nature of the land use proposed, minimum criteria and constraints have been established in defining potential available sites. The key criteria for site development are as follows: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Maximum 10 acres in size • Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet • Located with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway • A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate-/+75,north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County • Sale Price of Less than or equal to$135,000 per acre In making the decision to proceed with the subject site (±6.25-acre property), all viable sites that are available were reviewed and discussed. Due to the limited amount of undeveloped properties meeting the criteria (including PUD's with similar uses and intensities permitted), few options existed; refer to Attachment F. Available property includes the following: Option#1 Folio#'s: 75180000120 Address/Legal: 4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES FL 34116 OR 4468 PG 3302 Parcel Size: 5.17 Acres Zoning: Sungate CPUD(Ordinance No.09-06; refer to Attachment H) The site is generally located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard approximately 3.00 miles east of Interstate-75; refer to Attachment G. Option#2 Folio It's: 36618000107,36618000000 Address/Legal: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W and GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates The site is generally located midblock on the western side Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951). Approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Limiting access points are located on Collier Boulevard (C.R.951). 4 Alternative Site Analysis: To further identify a need for the Future Land Use Element and Map designation amendment of the subject property, an alternative site analysis was completed based on the locational and dimensional features of the subject property; along with the required zoning designations required for future development of the proposed land use. The following criteria identify the unique features associated with the subject property to perform a data and analysis review required to support the Growth Management Plan Amendment(GMPA). Within the analysis,the subject property (±6.25 acres) and the alternative sites were evaluated by their consistency with the following: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Maximum 10 acres in size • Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet • Located at a corner an arterial or collector roadway with frontage • A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate 75, north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County • Sale Price of Less than or equal to$135,000 per acre These specific criteria were chosen to identify alternative sites that may be similar to the subject property to develop and operate the proposed land use. The property acreage and dimensional criteria have been chosen to ensure the proposed church will be afforded the same, or better, net developable area the master concept plan illustrates to develop the proposed mixture of principal and accessory land uses; i.e. a proposed sanctuary, multi-purpose fields and support structures as necessary. Per the current Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy-White Paper,a survey was conducted regarding the allowance of additional Conditional Uses in the Rural Estates. Most individuals polled that additional Conditional Uses should be allowed at more locations within the Rural Estates,and specifically at arterial intersections.Therefore,the locality of the site on an arterial or collector roadway specifically identifies a location that is compatible with the present Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy; refer to Attachment J. Additionally,the location on an arterial and/or collector road will not only provide better site visibility, it will provide the proposed development with available transportation conveniences in the forms of increased vehicular access by comparison to those sites without access to major thoroughfares. By defining the area of development east of Interstate 75,and north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County, a site can be identified that will benefit the existing parishioners commute to the proposed development and defines an area that meets the requests of the church. As a final criterion, cost per acre was evaluated. It was deemed a critical component to determining available property due to the non-profit business of the church facilities. Places of worship, specifically Grace Romanian Baptist Church,does not generate an income that provides the church a profit,therefore affordability of available property to the applicant is essential. 5 In making the decision to proceed with future development of the subject property, all viable sites that are available were reviewed. It is assumed that all vacant/undeveloped and/or cleared properties adhere to criteria of availability with the addition of a Multiple Listing Search (MLS) for properties meeting the identified criterion. Due to the limited amount of available properties (including PUD's with Church Facilities),few alternative option exists. Proposed Site Location Folio#'s: 36760720005, 36760800006 Address/Legal: 3899 1st Avenue SW/GOLDEN GTE EST UNT 4 W1/2 OF TR 15 OR 1494 PG 211 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 4 TR 16 Parcel Size: 6.25 Acres Zoning: Estates The proposed site is owned by the applicant. It is currently zoned Estates. Currently,the site is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Upon the successful completion of this GMPA application,the proposed church and accessory land uses will be found consistent and permitted within the Subdistrict and subsequent zoning. As noted above, to develop the property for a church, the applicant is required to file a GMPA and a companion Conditional Use application for the property. The GM PA's intent is to justify and permit the proposed land use at this location based on a thorough data analysis. A Conditional Use application will be necessary to develop the site for the church facility. This site meets all of the stated criteria and is further justified by the data analysis. Alternate Site Locations: Alternate Site#1: Property located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard approximately 3.00 miles east of 1-75 Zoning: Sungate CPUD;Attachment H Folio#'s: 75180000120;Attachment G Parcel Size: 5.17 Acres Ordinance 09-06 defines the zoning and development control of this property. These parcels are void of any development. The identified site is Tract B within the Sungate CPUD with commercial zoning and is set to accommodate a total of 63,000 square feet. Identified in the Future Land Use Map as the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict,the GMP does not limit intensity. It can be argued that this location has the potential of providing more visibility due to its location,although developable area and available square footage of development limit the site. Per the Planned Unit Development Tracts B,C,and D are limited to 63,000 square feet of commercial buildout. If the available commercial development is rationed according to site acreage—Tract B would be limited to approximately 50,000 sf of building. Additionally, per the PUD Ord. 09-06, Tracts B, C, and D would be responsible for 6 providing water management facilities for 1.02 acres of County owned right-of-way and Tract A (2.04 Acres)further limiting the available developable area within Tract B. Due to the Commercial Planned Unit Development zoning on the site,the intensity of the property is limited;thereby inhibiting space for the proposed use. When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the intensity of the site from a zoning standpoint,the proposed site location is more logical and better suited site than this parcel. Alternate Site#2: Located midblock on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951)approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Zoning: Estates;Attachment I Folio#'s: 36618000107,36618000000 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres The property is currently zoned Estates with a combined lot width of 330 linear feet and acreage of 5.00 available for development. These parcels are currently void of any development; and were identified through a MLS as available property. It can be argued that this location meets all the requested criterion, based on property acreage and dimensional criteria, location of the site on an arterial or collector roadway within the defined area of and study. However,to develop the site as proposed,the property would also require a GMPA and Conditional Use Rezone. Additionally, based on existing conditions of adjacent properties, access from Collier Boulevard will be granted to the site via a single egress/ingress point to the Boulevard; therefore, limiting access to the parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church. Additionally, the right-of-way directly adjacent to the property is designed as a±8-foot deep storm water management detention pond utilized for the roadway storm water attenuation;thus, increasing the cost of constructing the proposed access and increasing the permitting fees. Furthermore,of the properties analyzed this site demands the highest cost at$138,000.00 per acre. As a completely vegetated lot with a number of site improvements that will need to be addressed,to develop would be too costly for the church to absorb. When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the criterion previously identified,the subject property provides more site accessibility and cost-efficiency to develop per the wants and needs of the applicant. In addition,the proposed property better suits the integrity of the Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan in reference to conditional use properties within the Golden Gate Area. • 7 Alternative Site Analysis Table CRITERIA PROPOSED SITE LOCATION ALT.SITE#1 ALT.SITE#2 Folio#s 36760720005& (SUNGATE CPUD) Folio#s 36760800006 Folio#75180000120 36618000107& 36618000000 PROPERTY SIZE OF 5-10 ACRES ±6.25 acres ±5.17 acres ±5 acres SALE PRICE LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO$135,000 $444,104.13/acre Sale Price- PER ACRE Sale Price-$135,000/acre (currently y not on $138,000/acre market) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 330 LINEAR FEET Yes Yes Yes LOCATED WITH FRONTAGE ON AN ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR Yes Yes Yes ROADWAY MAXIMUM OF 5 MILES EAST OF INTERSTATE-75, NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE Yes Yes Yes PARKWAY&WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY ATTACHMENT "A" Location Map Z:\Active Projects\G1GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D(LOCATION MAP).mxd ___) N 1 —, W��- F I S VANDERBILT BEACH n I I L GOLDEN GATE(BLVD 1 » 1 nI co PINE RIDGE RD : ilv Il l Ott S . LEGEND �. _� � I I III SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES -MAJOR ROADWAYS 1 I 0 0.5 1 SOURCES'COD2(RR'COUNTY'GEOGRAP�IC'INFORMATION'SYSTEMS'(2D17) . MILES_ • a��, REND PAL :EACH cipp_v,..101.... tw 411 COLLIER rffn 0 Kall MN off o' " weipunk DADE I DEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT "B" Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay /".1 e tfL , . _ ' r rn GOLDEN GATE BLVD W ` 510 0.08Ac apD r., n p ; 624D gg= 3:86 Ac N r v -, a t f_.,.. ...aa a:.',,X2144ata..:;'," I:,,. R LI: — - - - - t# , • Ilitim — ' '-''' '''''': ''''''' '''''''''''''' '''' '''''''''''''' 17'. '''' ' -' . o. J O U U m c U I 5 n Q Subject Property i FLUCCS Mapping ht - € 0 CD E CD ,110,Single Family Residential 'ti Note ' ,:,624-D,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) 2017 Aeralobteined hom Colter Ceun O H 740,Disturbed Land ' Properly AppraiserODD Si E girthTeo� EAR.T;H FECH. ENVIRONMEN,TA4, LLC A FLUCCSMaGrace Romanian Church -5.': RAIL MEAD @LVD, SL11TE i h NAPL SS, FLORIDA 34-1,1;0 L":',.. Collier County,Florida EnWromueLl,LLC PHONE (234),. l(144.033, FAX (234); 3.29.-Q1).0 4 '""r" X 0004/12/17 �noPROJECTN/A AS SHOWN 13 ATTACHMENT "C" Protected Listed Species Survey r, K PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY y GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL 1., NAPLES,!!-:4-::'!....,'.,-, - :1.....1"...4-1,-;1:7;\ FLORIDA "` • APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES Prepared For. 4^u r + �ig Collier County Engineering& .1 ! C4►+LJ` Natural Resources Department i. r 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 4south FloridaWaterManagement District ` (SFWMD) Lower West Coast Service Center ' 230 McGregor Boulevard ' ,. Fort Myers, FL 33901 n.. Prepared By: ,, , est m, Earth Tech Environmental, LLC —'...t• 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Su to 8 Naples, FL 341 10 lir 7 239.304.0030 N. =` ,°" www.eteflorida.com Ewironmental.LLC i d 3 g h � , ifSii April 12, 2017 '� Protected Species Survey INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure I) below for Location Map. 1 ,.. Lai P".KSONVILLE T.S Will +� .... IA 44pL , SITE LOCATION xrt� • ' bit e* 4 iii,..„, fV35 0. E ♦ reA 1 t r N* •�EARWAT R MNDERELTEEACHRDEXT •` WNDERBILT�ACHHD ., TP ERSBt1R0 7TH AVE NW TMAVE NW �, (TlIAVtw ' 42/ E:: E ;oWL! +A{W/ q \ DANY.RIDGE DR- 3110AVESW,� .DAVE SW L P CORAL srrAVE'SW 5TH AVE SW 'A � iv. ♦. • •RAL SPRINGS ID Thom nil AVESW _ = tt e`%�e�.•f� • z •.•�1:-OKE PINE OLLYWOOD VAiTEeLVO S ail_ ca�i.v-•. ♦���•••` EAH P' "ARD E%T �+w—w— 1�•�4.444 � _,lmAVESW ¢ 1nTAVESW ',� . 27HAUESW 73T„A s :o.I 13THAVE SW % - _����_��� m THAVESW 15T�LVO tSTHAVESW �� ,�. 111 641,FL-S GREE1 r>tv .1 TrTHAVE SW R- ♦� `y. J al-11= „Tµ 1SrXAVESW._ 1 4 ... ✓ Figure I.Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida.”This methodology is as follows:Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2& 3).The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species.The lists were obtained from two agency publications: "''1 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ❖ A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication "Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists", Publication Date: October 2016. ❖ A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants", Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community.See(Table I)of this report forthe species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary,transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80's. Cloud cover was absent. t"1 Approximately four (4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd.West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre.This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50%and included Brazilian pepper,ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com /"'"N Protected Species Survey FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities.On the subject property,this area consists of a small, unfinished tumoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential,Low Density — 2.27 624-D Pine—Cypress—Cabbage Palm(drained) 3.88 A� 740 Disturbed Land I 0.10 Site Total: I 6.25 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W Me E #9r•a Q Subjeet Property FLUCCS Mapping V ED 4 110,Single Family Residential Nabs 624-0,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) 2017 Jerreldblasrd prom Caner Casty 6' 740,Disturbed Lend A i Prepare cPexm. �'*+afn Figure 2.Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping ""1 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 740: 08A 740 01Ac 188B888 Ac r40 .O1'Ac 110 ro 2.27 Ac w II 0 U iiSubjec Prdpany FLUCCS Mapping 110,Single Family Resden8e3 a np :a 674-0,Plna-Cypress-Cabbage Perm 1844446 740,Di 1urt d land rea Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table I). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida,com Protected Species Survey GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 740 oeAc 740 Az • ., '.'/If�' , 1a6Ae � '=.1 z, :Tao� � � d i `AlAc, . , Ii4, e°< 110 ! '• Lt.4 227Ac ,„,. , . ..,,,,, . i„,, .... ,. _4,.,,,,..„., -- „., ,,, _ :,-. .,— „.. . ,,,,,--„,„..„ --.,,,- ---, V ... , ems,.,..,p Y µpoinnbe msgrie¢sway rrenseas FLUCCS Mapping 110,Single Famliy Residential Maw 834-D,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm idrained) t _ 740,Disturbed Land 0 m =mod A owm®a aan ED fff- $a co'i,r carry proper4 APP..' � b Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map&Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculota) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 vvww.eteflodda.com Protected Species Survey Table I. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category r FLUCCS IPotential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status i 1 FWC/FDA FWS [ 624 ! Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus floridonus T 1 - i Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E 1 E Little Blue Heron — i Egretta caerulea T - I Snowy Egret Egretta thula T - Tricolored Heron EEretta tricolor T - Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals,Amphibians, Reptiles,&Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status I — —— — (Y/N)— j Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - I -- — — 1 Turkey vuR — ure � Cathartes aura DV N - I i Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV N Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) Gray squirrel I Sciurus nigeravicennia N,DV N - j Armadillo � Dasypus novemcinctus � OH N N_-_ Reptiles Common Name I Scientific Name T Observation Listed? Status — —I— f_ (Y/N) None I None I NA 1 NA - Amphibians Common Name T Scientific Name Observation T Listed? Status , (Y/N) i 1 C None I None I NA I NA I - Plants Common Name I Scientific Name Observation —1-Listed? Status /N Wild Pine' ! Tillandsia fasciulata DV I N I CE *=protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 91 Protected Species Survey T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours Task March 23,2017 2:00 pm 4:00 pm 4.0(2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 4.0 /—"N Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 901451 ` BR:!WWM I., 701,41.3N21a NY1d 311S 1V111d3ON00 93L'E'14.Yej.A1 6114E1i'S31dtlN 191 wre'obe W.V. .03103X0 469"OL 30OItl 31,1Id 1103 al.1.3315, raziv Vd a3V HOtll1H0 O J.3NMvao MONVWOH 30VilO I6av HO111H01SI1dV8 NVINVINOa 30V2JO 1 3 a u,..l- "O1 :41903161.530 / SNOISIA36 :1,4911P :LWOW C.1' m 'or w mO 4- Zy �pW C Z =CnZ =Q MM W O rmiV F Z Qco}W O 1--O W y(a=gy O Z F wa C y> W w W Z N Z p J 2 q F QUw U • Pa Q Q © I7fi 2 W r aZ-O L WQo7 ZC=LLI tr. Z F- d ~ WW WmaN mz<2-q aQ3 O 0 F.d- w Cl) >cn y>Wo> �LuZzWa 1- CO 2 Id W y V) d as gw<mK W w W o z0 W0 2' 2' 4 J CRp � WU0? ZCOwa WLL1YaCcy Wfn (. U V>- W c0 P-, Paw Zcgmzwoo a>Vo La w J X w.=, W LL, ' wi=000 0_rQui I-Q r Q co D Q\ wrQaoo.. Q CDZ>aa4 wz?M I-J I-J C I-w w c,1. n1. W Z u“.9 I O ui-X CO JU' w U) Cl) 0 Z ww w ❑111 ❑ ui ❑ o.a O O 11 W LL$o >J J 1 °o W > a1. W . • 316 wmm Dix 0 0 At g 0 Pt (s),00Ost 9A.94,9Z.00N 13 9..° 0 LLi AtlM d01H�JIa (s).si 0CC M 94.ez.00N Z (d>AOrose 3.01..61-00N I- S'04119 a393M (a).00'osC 3A1bL.00N X o� <- (S)AO'SL l''- (S).00'SLZ p Il! __ rc , .,,..; Po . • •{•a•:• • •'g ..1 g. NOV813S 3 y n^. •. . •G..n z d Oa VA 1NOad,5L Q ) _ r • • • • • (r w• a I��1�"1 a i r .wU ..n, R I ❑ Z > }I ..1.> U • • • • .cep• Q m o w �' w1�• 1 Wm W m ;xi 'N� 1 e c1.y ❑W C W wv• mN > W "g • • • ,<L th w J rLL p ..1 w J QW `?cnw� W� W� aW _I ••N:)VLI13S at 1S • • , • ) �W .� 88�g QW W •i , ••, •i••••+ • J W C7 rw /� z 3A�i3S3ad 5Z7 J m m m W p to CO JIOV813S CO ❑ FO W J1 NOI1tl8311V 3115 U. w p 1 3Aa3S3ad AL 0 ❑ O0 a W Q (j/ W m~ cc W mC W , ❑ ❑ rr Y 1 r W m a.r w m 0 0_ W �E m !ate F-Q j r • W�,[�Q� yW W 0 6 LIJQ ' 1.o 0W---1 W W Q W W ZIi s.0) in / i r w 3. C LL w -0 7 O N 4 I Q¢¢ I ° 1 (S).60'OCC M.94.9Z.00N 1 _( W R r Q `n a j a w U) - - �-'TJw 1u.L uASL9u4iv - - ____/ } o= } I I, 2YuWjL1 ism a z r " ~_ to �i } W�- 3 w ce' W oQ Uo _.) -gw c1.; } ce - �/ r❑}W ft yW Zce LU a r o -J co 2a• w. wZQOO W03 w w KS' Rte, Q Q w EEv� ¢rc ,t1020--,I.0 0 LO LU co rt a OU 00 m U EDI U N gaiw g ❑Q0 �W 0)F' 0 2m W pato o It 0 C a Z 0 W yFa FF 1 O 18 �___�yI- I O 111 _ 1N .4 W O w N n 1T },- ��(M1)py/r > W Ngo ",I \�\ ` I� U U r y[ d—\\\\\ /y w W ^a i 1 0 p ay 1 I _ (J).00'OSS / (SLnS'st * I �\ _ (0).00099 M.CC.9Z.0ON 1.;)E I U (.).00099 3.OL,)L.00N W CO 'it,' N Z m a-LL (6L 3EJVd'b>10081V1d) zu w o W 3 AVM-d0-1H0I8 1VNVO AINI100 -H Ia w(/) C m asaLo z§ in❑ 4-C AVM-d O-1 H e I1 O VA31 11 0 8131110 0 (1N31A130VNVW 131VM 03d013A3a) (1VI1N301S31 A1IWVd 319NIS a3d013A30) S31V1S3 S31V1S3 ATTACHMENT "D" Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners Z:1Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG1PIanning\GIS12017-04.25 GR SSGMPA(MEMBERSHIP LOCATION).mxd ■ ■ ■ I ■ ■ I I■ I II II I ■ I ,i s 1 (OIL WELL RD o. i ' IMMOKALEE RDcm I Z • • COw 1 • ■ .LL • 1 J VANDERBILT BEACH i II cc ■ 0 GOLDEN GATE BLVD laW • ` I I • • M PINE RIDGE RDI • i • • 1 • Ce 0 in 1 I . iiM z a' •a' IIa a 0 1 ii LL • w • • W :1 o p RADIO RD ■ 0 I wr _ ......... ■- DAVIS BLVD • iii ■if 14 : G Legend s t vT _1 DATA&ANALYSIS AREA • i',/r I—I SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES •\ ,i • EXISTING CHURCH MEMBER LOCATIONS MAJOR ROADWAYS COLLIER COUNTY BOUNDARY `URCES:COLLIER COUNTYLGEOGRAPHIC?INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXISTING CONGREGATION LOCATION ATTACHMENT "E" Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities 0'7 Z:Wctive Pro"ects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG1PIannin•1GIS12017-10-12 GR SSGMPA GR LOCATIONS FL.mxd MIK ,......., raaralliarmir *01 4001 HENDRICKS-AVE JACKSONVILLE\FL 32207`, . 1 Illt . 1 L i ..,, 41, 11-; it_ \, 4111, -() -1141k • - .7 . vist - _, N, is . t0,, , u,..., : 1111b.,...1 , ,. 'i 5416 COUNTY RD 579, SEFFNERIFL 33584 \\ A. lipt, ii..*, •411611M _ :A. t I ri 6423 MARBLETREE LN, LAKE WORTH, FL 33467 j/ 1542 HARRISON ST,HOLLYWOOD;FL 33020 1950 VAN BITJRENIST, HOLLYWOOD, FL 33020, t r 4 fr Legendr EXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST DENOMINATION CHURCHES • •.AL:a• • f ia. URCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 111 - 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVNDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHES t•••\ ATTACHMENT "F" Alternate Property Map (within Market Study Area) 29 Z:\Active Pro ects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Plannin.1GIS\2017-10-12 GR SSGMPA ALT.PARCELS ZONING.mxd S PR o PE' IESLfC,LL STUDY AREA o aiJQ (SEPARATELY O COLLECTIVELY) LONG o LLECTOR'OR ARTERIAL ROW'S QZONING NaraultinACHURCHES DVIAr=REZONE CONDI ONAL_ (WITHOUTQGMPA REQUEST) '' - * '' r:„—-..,_,,,s.„ _ IMMOKALEE M ' GOLDEN GATE BLVD 3.66480.00407 3.66480.0.0.00.0 MA RIDGE OD • , , ii 1 �, . a Legend " td DATA&ANALYSIS AREA --' � .' ;,^ 4 SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES GOLDEN GATE PI—1 ''RCES!COLE R COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ' DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES,FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVNDSEERON PHONE:239-434-6060 AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES ,n ATTACHMENT "G" Parcel 75180000120 Information 31 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary Parcel No. 75180000120 Site Adr. 4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES, FL 34116 Name/Address COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC I 1454 MADISON AVE W 6 _ _ ___-----d i ! City IMMOKALEE State FL I Zip 34142 i Map No. ! Strap No. Section ( Township I Range i Acres *Estimated 9 4B15 646900 B 14B15 15 49 I 26 5.17 , Legal a SUNGATE CENTER PUD TRACT B, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 4468 PG 3302 1---- Millage Area 0;100 Millage Rates iii *Calculations !_ a .4 .__. Sub/Condo `646900- SUNGATE CENTER PUD IN UNIT 26 School Other Total ! Use Code 0 10-VACANT COMMERCIAL 5.245 6.4442 11.6892 Latest Sales History 2016 Certified Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) Date Book-Page I Amount Land Value $1,352,325 03/18/14 5020-3283 $2,900,000 ' 0.) Improved Value $0 I 10/27/03 3431-48 1 $0 (_) Market Value $ 1,352,325 (_) Assessed Value $ 1,352,325 s (_) School Taxable Value $1,352,325 (_) Taxable Value $1,352,325 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll /'''Sk 4/25/2017 Collier County Property Appraiser Collier County Property Appraiser FEMI h'Ff S'.c_ 8MA„i YEI UNI WOF itEp Ors , 4�4 4Ty ` °kr ,: ZoomOut etoeae $ :; +�Introduction e Search for Parcels by Search Results �° Fin county till111026) Parcel ID:75180000120 :. Vmw Narne:COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC z t _ , - �, Previous Street#8 Name:4087 GREEN BLVD Builtl#/Unit#:B/1 `s } View " - Zoom To i.- _. :. Selected lit Layers =. Cleartdap It Legends a' ",: Graphics r • +�Print ® F7 Ove view �� di Home Pae }} 9 i#; Aerial Year: 4 Help ' h 017J !OFF 1 ,-*---,:,,:l sal - ' ' 111 . ,,.r 'sem § , E - tel Pana F�1� fi •-• ,,,,....L �r CawCp_ Ymal�9s*[6:: ra t_ a2 Aerial Photography:Jarwary-2017 I6 mch]-201712 feetl-201612 feet]-2016150 feet] http//maps.collierapp aiser.com/Map.espx?ccpaver=1.9.6&ref disclaimermaps&msize=L 1/1 33 ATTACHMENT "H" Sungate CPUD - Ordinance 09-06 • c ', („<;•---1139 tlr Z' ORDINANCE NO. 09 -06 .�� VW@ Pi? "' `AR 2009 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY 6:"'• <",-; t " 4' ,w COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ``�' e, " AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS 4 4. ;':' ,A: :. AAMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND Aly peer DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) FOR THE SUNGATE CENTER CPUD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF GREEN BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, .-. CONSISTING OF 10.0k ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 95-42, THE FORMER SUNGATE CENTER PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Robert J. Muffler; AICP of RWA, Inc. and R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. of Roetzel and Andress, LPA, representing Wynn Properties, Inc., and R. Bruce Anderson, Esq., representing Carbone Properties of Naples, Inc.,petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to be known as the --. Sungate Center, PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Page 1 of 2 Revised 1-05-09 Sungate Center CPUD in accordance with the CPUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 95-42, known as the Sungate Center PUD, adopted on June 20, 1995, by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida, this ag4hday of ab{u&iy , 2009. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGIzT E.,BROCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA G 4r rid BY: �. . 'it %Clerk DO A FIALA,CHAIRMAN Will SS.1: -910 tionatvei,foriqe Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T.Williams Assistant County Attorney Project History: Ordinance Number 95-42 This ordinance filed with the 5ecrftary of . th tote's Office e tai doy of Marc , and acknowledgement of that Sungate Center,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Page 2 of 2 filing received this _ day Revised 1-05-09 °f�r-S 0 n c By Deputy ct.ek SUNGATE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR: Wynn Properties,Inc. 9220 Bonita Beach Road Suite 200 Bonita Springs,FL 34135 PREPARED BY: _ON$t.:L lA Zt. VY1 . . Robert J.Mulhere,AICP 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34109 8 R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire Roetzel &Andress 850 Park Shore Drive Trianon Centre-Third Floor Naples,FL 34103 PREVIOUS ZONING APPROVALS ORDINANCE 92—93 ADOPTED 11/24/1992 ORDINANCE 95—42 ADOPTED 06/20/1995 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC .24.2pvq ORDINANCE NUMBER 2.00q—D AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL 04-41 , q5-qa Sungate Center PUB,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 37 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Exhibits and Tables i Statement of Compliance Section I Property Ownership,Legal Description 1-1 Section II Project Development Requirements 2-1 Table I 2-1 Table II 2-2 Section III Commercial Development Standards 3-1 Table III 3-4 Section IV Development Commitments 4-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT"A" CPUD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT"B" CONCEPTUAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT"C" UTILITY FACILITIES & OFFSITE INTERFACE EXHIBIT EXHIBIT"D" PLAN SHOWING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION EXHIBIT"E" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 0.96 ACRE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE EXHIBIT"F" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1120(09 39 SUNGATE CENTER CPUD STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 10.00 acres of property in Collier County, Florida as a Commercial Planned Unit Development(CPUD)to be known as the SunGate Center. The CPUD shall comply with the goals, objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan(GMP). The project is proposing a Commercial Planned Unit Development located within the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill (GGECI) Subdistrict, as identified on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map(GGEFLUM),in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan(GGAMP). 1. The subject property is located on the west side of C. R. 951 between 15th Avenue S. W. and Green Boulevard and is fi:rther described as Tracts"A","B","C",and"D",a replat shown on the plat of SunGate Center CPUD, as recorded in Plat Book 27, pages 1 and 2 of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 2. Allowable uses set forth herein are consistent with the commercial use limitations set forth in the GGECI Subdistrict,which reads as follows: Commercial uses shall be limited to: Low intensity commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and intermediate commercial uses, in order to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, and Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C-1, C-2, C-3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102), adopted October 30, 1991. 3. As encouraged in the GGECI Subdistrict,the requested rezone is in the form of a CPUD. 4. Shared parking and access shall be provided for within this project. 5. The project does not provide for direct access to Collier Boulevard. 6. The development will be compatible and complementary to existing and planned surrounding land uses. 11 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 SECTION 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION,PROPERTY OWNERSHIP,GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND SHORT TITLE 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed for development under the project name SunGate Center Commercial Planned Unit Development. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tracts "A", "B", "C",and "D", a replat shown on the plat of SunGate Center PUD., as recorded in Plat Book 27,pages 1 and 2 of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP Tract "A" is owned by Carbone Properties of Naples, Limited Liability Company, an Ohio limited liability company, 5885 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 110,Cleveland,Ohio 44124. Tracts "B", "C", and "D" are owned by Wynn Properties, Inc., 9220 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 200, Bonita Springs,FL 34135. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION The property consists of approximately 10.00 acres of land located in the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida. Presently, +/- 2.04 acres are developed with a United States Postal Services Annex,and 0.91 acres along the northern and southern boundaries of the site fall within right-of-way easements(providing a portion of the 15th Avenue Southwest and Green Boulevard rights-of-way,respectively). The remaining+/-7.05 acres are undeveloped. 1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is the intent of the developer to convey +/- 0.51* of the +/- 7.05 undeveloped acres to Collier County for the expansion of Green Boulevard and to develop the remaining, undeveloped +/- 6.55** acres of the subject property with commercial uses and related accessory uses and structures consistent with the provisions set forth in the GGAMP GGECI Subdistrict, and the applicable provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC). *The total"R-O-W Conveyance"to County will be 0.96 acres,but 0.45 acres of that number lie within the"right-of-way easements" already accounted for, in Paragraph 1.4 above, as reducing developable area. **Last digit affected by rounding. 1.6 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "SunGate Center Commercial Planned Unit Development Ordinance". 1-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1120/09 41 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the SunGate Center CPUD,as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Development of the SunGate Center CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Ordinance and applicable sections and parts of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order, such as,but not limited to final subdivision platfinal site development plan(SDP),excavation permit, and preliminary work authorization,to which such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the SunGate Center CPUD shall become part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the CPUD site may be developed. 2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PLAN AND LAND USE TRACTS A. The project Master Plan, including land uses for the various tracts is illustrated graphically by Exhibit"A,"CPUD Master Plan. LAND USE SUMMARY PARCEL PROPOSED USE ACREAGE Tract"A" Existing Commercial +/-2.04 Tract"B" Commercial +/-5.19 Tract"C" Commercial +/-0.79 Tract"D" Commercial +/-0.57 ROW Easements ROW +/-0.45 Current Roadway Dedications ROW +/-0.96 TOTAL +/- 10.0 TABLE I:Land Use Summary B. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown on Exhibit"A", such easements as necessary(utility, private, semi-private) shall be established within or along the various tracts as may be necessary. 2-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 2.4 DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY The project's commercial intensity is set forth in Table 2,below. PARCEL PROPOSED USE INTENSITY ACREAGE (SQ.FEET) Tract"A" Commercial 20,000 +/-2.04 Tract"B,C,and D" Commercial 63,000 +/-6.55 Right-of-way Easements& Right-of-way N/A +/- 1.41 Current Roadway Dedications Table II: Development Intensity 2.5 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County GMP, and the Collier County LDC, a minimum of 15% of the existing native vegetation on-site is required to be retained or replanted. The site is partially developed with a postal annex and water management facilities. The site is almost entirely cleared; however,there are some existing trees. At the time of issuance of issuance of the first development order(SDP/PPL) 10% of the native trees shall be required to be retained or replanted with mitigation-sized native canopy trees in the landscape buffer.No preserve management plan or conservation easement will be required. 2-2 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 43 SECTION III COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses within areas designated as Tracts A, B, C,and D on Exhibit"A",CPDD Master Plan. 3.2 MAXIMUM COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET Commercial square footage shall be limited to a maximum of 20,000 square feet on Tract A and 63,000 square feet in aggregate on Tracts B, C, and D, for a total maximum square footage of 83,000 square feet. 3.3 PERMITTED USES',2 No building or structure,or part thereof,shall be erected,altered or used, or land used in whole or in part,for other than the following: A. Principal Uses 1) Accounting,auditing and bookkeeping services(group 8721). 2) Amusements and recreation services(groups 7911,dance studios and schools only, and group 7993). 3) Apparel and accessory stores(groups 5611-5699). 4) Auto and home supply stores(group 5531), 5) Automobile parking(group 7521),garages-automobile parking,parking structures. 6) Barber shops(group 7241),except barber schools. 7) Beauty shops(group 7231),except beauty schools. 8) Business services (groups 7311, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7361-7379, 7384, 7389 except auctioneering service, automobile recovery, automobile repossession, batik work, bottle exchanges, bronzing, cloth cutting, contractors' disbursement, cosmetic kits, cotton inspection, cotton sampler, directories-telephone, drive-away automobile, exhibits-building, filling pressure containers, field warehousing, fire extinguisher, floats-decoration, folding and refolding, gas systems, bottle labeling, liquidation services, metal slitting and shearing, packaging and labeling, patrol of electric transmission or gas lines, pipeline or power line inspection, press clipping service,recording studios, repossession service,rug binding, salvaging of damaged merchandise, scrap steel cutting and slitting, shrinking textiles, solvent recovery, sponging textiles, swimming pool cleaning, tape slitting, texture designers, textile folding,tobacco sheeting,window trimming,and yacht brokers). 9) Child day care services(group 8351). 10) Civic,social and fraternal associates(group 8641). 11) Depository institutions(groups 6011-6099). 3-1 Reference Executive Office of the President,Office of Management and Budget,Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987 Edition 2 No permitted use(whether principal or accessory)shall allow for or a sexually oriented business or use,as defined in the Collier County Code of Laws or LDC. Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006 AR-10325 Revised 1120/09 12) Eating places(group 5812 only), 13) Food stores(groups 5411, including convenience stores with fueling and accessory car wash, 5421-5499). 14) Funeral service(group 7261 except crematories). 15) Gasoline service stations with accessory car wash (groups 5541 subject to LDC Section 5.05.05). 16) General merchandise stores(groups 5331-5399). 17) Hardware stores(group 5251). 18) Health services(groups 8011-8049, 8082). 19) Home furniture, furnishing,and equipment stores(groups 5712-5736). 20) Individual and family social services (group 8322 activity centers, elderly or handicapped; adult day care centers; and day care centers, adult and handicapped only). 21) Insurance carriers,agents and brokers(groups 6311-6399,6411). 22) Legal services(group 8111). 23) Management and public relations services(groups 8741-8743, 8748). 24) Membership organizations(groups 8611-8699). 25) Miscellaneous repair services (groups 7629-7631, 7699 bicycle repair, binocular repair, camera repair,key duplicating, leather goods repair, locksmith shop,picture framing,and pocketbook repair only). 26) Miscellaneous retail (groups 5912, 5932-5960, 5963 except pawnshops and building materials, groups 5992-5999 except auction rooms, awning shops, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths). Drug stores may have drive-through facilities. 27) Museums and art galleries(group 8412). 28) Nondepository credit institutions(groups 6111-6163). 29) Offices for engineering, architectural, and surveying services (groups 0781, 8711- 8713). 30) Paint,glass and wallpaper stores(group 5231). 31) Personal services(groups 7212,7215,7216 nonindustrial dry cleaning only, 7291. 32) Photographic studios(group 7221). 33) Physical fitness facilities(group 7991). 34) Public administration (groups 91I1-9199, 9229, 9311, 9411-9451, 9511-9532, 9611-9661). 35) Real estate(groups 6531-6552). 36) Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores(group 5261). 3-2 37) Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors(group 7251). Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 45 38) Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges, and services (groups 6211- 6289). 39) Self storage facilities (group 4225 indoor, air-conditioned and mini or self-storage only), if permitted within the C-3 Commercial Intermediate zoning district. 40) Social services(groups 8322-8399). 41) Transportation services(group 4724),travel agencies only. 42) United States Postal Service(group 4311 except major distribution center). 43) Veterinary services(groups 0742,0752 excluding outside kenneling). 44) Videotape rental(group 7841). 45) Vocational schools(groups 8243-8299). 46) Any other permitted principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("HZA")by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including,but not limited to: 1) Uses and structures that are customarily and typically permitted as accessory and incidental to the uses set forth in Section 3.3.A.above. 3-3 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE III COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,000 S.F. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 75 FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA 1,000 S.F. SETBACK FROM NORTHERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE EXISTING 30 FOOT ROW EASEMENT THAT IS THE SOUTH HALF OF 15 th AVENUE SOUTHWEST. SETBACK FROM SOUTHERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY CPDD BOUNDARY,WHICH IS THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY THAT THE APPLICANT IS CONVEYING FOR THE WIDENING OF GREEN BOULEVARD SETBACK FROM WESTERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 25 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY CPUD BOUNDARY SETBACK FROM EASTERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET MEASURED FROM THE EASTERLY CPUD BOUNDARY SETBACK FROM INTERNAL DRIVEWAYS 5 FEET SETBACK FROM ANY INTERNAL PLATTED PROPERTY LINE 10 FEET SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES 50%OF THE BUILDING HEIGHT,BUT NOT LESS THAN 15 FEET MAXIMUM ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT 50 FEET MAXIMUM ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT 62 FEET ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SAME AS FOR PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES, EXCEPT THAT THE REQUIRED MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES OR OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SHALL BE 10 FEET. 3-4 Sungatc Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 47 SECTION IV DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of the project. 4.2 CPUD MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Exhibit "A", CPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final, and may be varied at anytime at any subsequent approval phase. Subject to the provisions of the LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and all common areas in the project. 4.3 TRANSPORTATION The development of this CPUD Master Development Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. Access points shown on the CPUD Master Plan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property boundary. The number of access points constructed may be less than the number depicted on the Master Plan; however,no additional access points shall be considered unless a CPUD amendment is approved. As a specific exception to the foregoing, this Applicant, and any successor Owner/Developer of this PUD, is assured that the remaining, western most of the existing driveways on Green Boulevard, as well as all three (3) existing driveways on 15`h Avenue S.W., shall remain, with the understanding that the most easterly driveway on 15th Avenue S.W. may,at some future time, be restricted to egress only by, and at the sole discretion of,the Collier County Transportation Department. B. The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion to close the median opening at 40th Terrace SW on Green Boulevard, as well as any median opening that may be approved and constructed to accommodate left-turn egress from the Development's Green Boulevard driveway. C. Standard County practice dictates that if any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County rights-of-way or easement(s),then compensating right-of-way shall be provided at no cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement(s) upon final approval of the turn lane design during the review and approval of first subsequent development order. As a specific exception to the foregoing, any turn lane that this developer, or any successor owner/developer of this PUD property, may necessarily construct upon County rights-of-way shall not cause or require the provision to Collier County of any "compensating right-of- way,"as stipulated in the first sentence of this paragraph. 4-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 D. Standard County practice dictates that if, in the sole opinion of Collier County, traffic signal(s), other traffic control device, sign, pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way, or easement, or site related improvements (as opposed to system related improvements)necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County,are determined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. Such being the case, any developer of this CPUD property shall be required to pay for or construct: 1) a sidewalk within the 15th Avenue S.W. ROW, for the entire length of the Development property; and 2) any left or right turn lanes that may be required for the accessing of any of the Development's driveways. Other than those stated improvements, however, this or any successor developer of this CPUD property shall not be required to make any contribution to or for the improvement or other alteration, past, present, or future, of Green Boulevard,Collier Boulevard,or intersection of the two. RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE E. Within ninety (90) days following the latter to occur of: 1) the expiration of all appeal periods for PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 without an appeal being filed, or 2)the dismissal or other satisfactory resolution of any such filed appeals; Developer shall convey (the "Right of Way Land Conveyance") to County approximately ninety-six one-hundredths (0.96) acres of land, as depicted and labeled on Exhibit "D" as "0.96 AC. RIGHT-OF- WAY LAND CONVEYANCE" and more particularly described in Exhibit"E", for road right-of-way, drainage, utility, and ancillary purposes to be used by the County for the proposed expansion of Green Boulevard. Developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall cause to be removed from The Right-of-Way Land Conveyance all liens and encumbrances, except oil, gas and mineral reservations and existing easements for utilities and drainage. The Right-of-Way Land Conveyance shall be delivered to County via statutory warranty deed. County, at its sole cost and expense, shall provide Developer an ALTA title commitment to insure title to The Right-of-Way Land Conveyance. Said title commitment shall be utilized and relied upon by Developer as the authority for the existence of any and all liens, encumbrances, or qualifications as to the then-current state of title of the Right-of-Way Land Conveyance parcel. County shall record the deed in the Public Records of the County and shall assume the costs associated with the recordation. The Transportation Administrator or his designee may extend the conveyance date at his discretion. F. Developer shall provide to County evidence of the authority of the record title holder's executing representative to execute the above-referenced deeds,and shall obtain from all entities releasing their respective liens and/or encumbrances from the Right of Way Land Conveyance evidence of the authority of the executing representative to so execute on behalf of said entity. G. The parties acknowledge that the Right of Way Land Conveyance is characterized as property rights acquired by a highway or road agency for the improvement of a road within the boundaries of a public right-of-way. 4-2 Sungatc Center POD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 STORMWATER ACCEPTANCE H. Developer and any successor owners of the Development agree to accept, store,and treat, in perpetuity, all of the stormwater drainage from any section, or sections, of Collier County Right-of-Way that may be selected by County; provided that the total area of all roadway sections being so drained to, and accepted by, the Development does not, in total,exceed 1.02(one and two one-hundredths)acres of right-of-way. I. Developer and any successor owners of the Development further agree to cooperate with County in County's efforts to obtain regulatory permitting for the drainage arrangement stated in the prior paragraph, including the execution of any necessary commitment documentation and the granting of any easements or permissions that County may need to facilitate and assure the actual stormwater conveyance in accordance with the permits obtained. Furthermore, in the event that the Development's stormwater management system has not yet been constructed by the time that County begins its improvements to Collier Boulevard (County Project No. 68056), Developer agrees to permit County and its contractor to enter upon the subject property and construct the proposed stormwater retention and treatment pond, and to install the drainage structures necessary to out-fall from the right-of-way to the pond. Any spoils excavated by County in these activities may be left on the Development property. J. County, at its sole cost, shall deliver and construct all necessary structures for the conveyance of said stormwater to the Development's Water Management System, as depicted in Exhibit"B". K. County shall make all reasonable efforts to assure that no hazardous waste material is contained within the stormwater that County conveys to the Development's Water Management System. L. If any actions or improvements by County cause damage to Developer's water management system, County, at its sole cost and expense, shall repair and mitigate said damages. SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT M. Within ninety (90) days following the latter to occur of: 1) the expiration of all appeal periods for PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 without an appeal being filed, or 2) the dismissal or other satisfactory resolution of any such filed appeals; Developer shall deliver to County a Slope and Construction Easement over the area depicted and labeled on Exhibit "D" as "SHARED SLOPE/CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT" and more particularly described in Exhibit "F". Said easement shall allow County to enter upon the easement area for the purpose of constructing County's adjacent roadway and to place upon the easement area any amount of landfill necessary to effect the proper slope relationship between the Developer's Land and the new roadway and ancillary roadway improvements such as sidewalks, drainage structures and street lights. The easement shall also grant, in perpetuity,to County the right to place and maintain, within the southern most three(3)feet of the western most two hundred thirty-five(235)feet of the easement,any lighting system that County deems necessary. 4-3 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1120109 Developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall cause to be removed from the Slope and Construction Easement all liens and encumbrances, except oil, gas and mineral reservations and existing easements for utilities and drainage. The ALTA title commitment referenced in Paragraph E (above) shall be utilized and relied upon by Developer as the authority for the existence of any and all liens, encumbrances, or qualifications as to the then-current state of title of the Slope and Construction Easement parcel. County shall record the easement in the Public Records of the County and shall assume the costs associated with the recordation. The Transportation Administrator or his designee may extend the conveyance date at his discretion. N. County shall replace any damaged or removed improvements or vegetation. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS O. There shall be no monetary or Collier County Road Transportation Impact Fee credit compensation to Developer for any of the above contributions. P. By virtue of, and in consideration of, Developer's cooperation and contributions as described herein, Developer shall not be held responsible, and shall not be charged for any past or future improvements to Collier and/or Green Boulevards, including but not limited to, roadway improvements, expansion, signalization, street lighting, sidewalks, bike lanes, and/or turn lanes. Nor shall Developer be required to make any payments in lieu of any of the foregoing. Developer's contributions satisfy all transportation fair share and mitigation requirements. As a specific exception to the foregoing, any developer of this CPUD property shall be required to pay for: 1) a sidewalk within the 15th Avenue S.W. ROW, for the entire length of the Development property; and 2) any left or right turn lanes that may be required for the accessing of any of the Development's driveways 4.4 ADDITIONAL COMMITMENTS A. Development within this CPUD shall comply with the lighting standards specified in Policy 5.1.1 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. 4-4 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2005-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 51 I i9 a i 1 V ,:11- - --- 1E2 =dim= 1 'i � .r� ir ' .à 'oi1 • E UOlI!! :::::;/1 I II I 1 1!11111ill.11l�. �� Iistinnuuu..i�iilw� �J. Cr 11111111111111111111111IIIIlltilflN 11111 Iii11111111111CA al ME limm..-:.AMI 5 11: ,. N° 0,-4 to z pp pz1.0 .1...5v 111 egg+ > ct — 0 m cl)z ci,i) -73 CD '^ !cel 1 m g 0-4 ,417 Er , '84 (1) tay .!s LL- y i 0,z� 1 I 4.01 ilvai 'PO !iIJ ; III A 14 s4 li r.,7.• a-a ..-1r,-----(3"ris)--- fat a :1 9 N S iI11 iiii 11111 i 71 x I s �1 ' 111 - - ---__ .�� i _ I ' Ll iJ (J 11141 8 Tr's,''''1,,, ,.a :4:: ,lai / : a l 1 $ I� .8.»vat [4 P ,+ u.. 7 _r_tra \. IfiI\` -e.13,13 \` i "—'M'S Wilt Ht Of �: ii 1 a 44 lilt C J+ :�1i 1 Ni l 11 ;...- 1•r b.s `� r 1 �'.j 3' I t``�� I ' s x3Tv airs 1' \4i I e"g '-\% i; a 9 e twat /L \ �.lira w......... -"` "� 1j 4 y 1 ! .a,brat II V 'r !� • -.6._ — ,'" i.N1 Qi q * ,........ ------�- ---. 8._--- — , �,, r'>t v ted...,._ �_..�_.. _____ —._.....--- — a — ._ __—tea.-. �_n i� �. .__ -- oi ii x 4II \ .1:i.i?, ------ !, -1--NEM . 9 � i. a 111111111-11111112- �1111 II g ' P' f _'` -__ e ioeyGil ---------lam g grail i EXHIBIT "A" "' r r : _ ^"^wnviv�ROPERr INC Sungate Center DAATA Planning ..� ""' _ -='.•"•� �.1f�` CPUD MASTER PLAN CPUD .a. iii i t 7.1 I I s 8 1 pis 11 1igil ,d yy . {. f d I d % d . . . N. < •- „ (-) 1 I `y g d -\ d d d d . d 1 d It t t , I: 5. . . . 'gig • <_ ` ' I , . t t d . . 1 1 d A . n i I (�7 a orci 'M'S 'tld3L HOPI rl. • I \� Z A ‘.. IL m,--4. ' y ^ ----- p .4 . ..IC A. • • ..1 A. • n „ I ,. ,. % % t1 \11.t. ,...1m , 11 IN, • .. .. „. .. .. , .. .• ,. .. .. . ,,, ,, l' tvkat, �! i ...'%'—'1 '''t g� a Fig L f ,`' 1 i I • I 'b 1 1 t illitt .. . .- 5, 1/4,..) d _ 7=i t. Mme. • it N .:',..._._N__IK.-.__% • • ---1-.17.--s_cL.2:t.....__.f.- ...;;;.......;.;•__ ____%,_____.____ rl - - — — -- b - ---- _... — --- ---- I ® I I EXHIBIT "B" IS +s awe =MAN WYNNPROPERTIa INC T` ii-k• Weida Sungate Center �V3 a■r�j/, y MIA N ,�• CONCEPTUAL WATER CPU') i.t 45,7 ,. j" �®sAR W..afiKr. a® MANAGEMENT PLAN W`':rommo .n...,. Iowan game . .. li irolo ih- 1 --•,,L �` 4 H ST. S.' , NMI i Q11 i Ill 1 II 1 40 oir mil'ii• 1\ �,4. vi li I 146 m IliL 3R, L . w 0 moi Jilt fin NO -I laitti 1E4;4 4 RD TE RA .W. d I F"4 VIA & I ME \ Ii '1 1:51-01mtv,AwN. . NM , I'M:: 1 khli Ui iflilk ' ■t1►gill 1 ; I hi. !ItItIl - , u � � Crq 1//11011 , I YA1:1J p I rt 'ill ERR i s Ili �' C) nu Ina ono1ST STREE W. _ + imiLih iik tti -I NWIld11111011111111111111111 ila, ____m _IL _____ 1•4-J r,...4 WWI COUNTY ROAD 951 Ma �`'.'�+I � (`Ez 30' Raw no�0p-oo t Or O-1pM w-y 0m,i!1 0 22 o>�o�?y 2m 0 I A4-,c0 x. -iZ<-C)p I '1 p m pay o Z `, VI wmio,,,x 7 I _— I w AZ mzNV7 ° o-i<p67 z-o• -,mm d C X r“:17 n 1 1 EXHIBIT "C" • . A XI, ll, : - "° WYNN PROPERTIE. INC. I n+G 0 f.14.110 A' Sungate Center 'D\IT Vringslizeice CONS L N ChS "'�...� .0 "` UTILITY H CRUD ice V r a � i1 insaing .'°® OFFSfCE INTERFACE EXHIBIT ' •��,,•«M ,.HNI5�OI...� ♦ ♦ rm., 1•••01.1.1.• 0M.1•r♦?.�II141. CC O l!q!yX3 41!1 > ill 111 lqi { I I I _ ' t , ,___ rNd1 „._ -----NT---T. 0 u 1...i..-.-"E- -- , , 1 e:rth 1 t t`I ii 2 iti Ivy' -----,..„ Litt 11 AA A p� Y ; I! _ x ; L. I �,'S -aa� f 1 1 y ruor / 1 1 I i II I I I I Ii t I I1,a a: t� 11 ^... .1311Y 1W5 1 I.1 ; X gip, I t - 1 1F 1 1 1 I ' 1 1 IIg 1 IIri 1 1 {ICi il / I 1 1 1 I.it 1 a I1ati ..2 . ,. 14N40 iG6 11 Li p r , ., . ,‘.., , ....., L .., 76041.10 a' 16.1 OS ANISI WYNN PROPERTIES INC. SUNGATE CENTER CPUD Nil:ARIc.v..P=iii. ® ., ��1.s� EXN�ITV RLHTOFWAYDEDICATIOAITL A.�,. SYiAREDSdOPEGiDIrSIRUCTIOMEA HENT .140.r 1w ne MM.."' a..» • EXHIBIT " E " LEGAL DESCRIPTION (0.96 ACRE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE) A PARCEL OR TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE COUNTY OF . COLLIER LYING IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST AND BEING PART OF TRACT "B" AND "0" SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27, PAGES 1 AND 2, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEGINNING AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT D: THENCE S.89'30'50"W., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. FOR 660.07 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT "B"; THENCE N.00'29'08"W., ALONG SAID WEST LINE FOR 64.25 FEET; THENCE N.89'30'50"E., FOR 235.00 FEET; THENCE S.00'29'08"E., FOR 2.25 FEET; THENCE N.89'30`50"E., FOR 393.62 FEET; THENCE N.52`59'23"E., FOR 39.14 FEET; THENCE S.00'29'08"E., FOR 85.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN. CONTAINING 41,819 SQUARE FEET OR 0.96 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL AS BEING N.00'29'08"W. NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR ,fes/in tee • BY;_ RICHARD V. NESTLER, LS# 4786 DATE SIGNED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH REVISED 10/20/08 J %VT/ lam` 10/20/08 CLIENT: e I /A WYNN PROPERTIES INC SUL IN Snnern&Mappa", .i.a. T V.L ..a. Planticis,PKjcctMPE1WS oto RY TITLE: LEGAL DESCRIPTION 6010 WDOW Pork INN',Sage 204 : a �,<�,o do 1O « mom° 0.96 ACRE RIGHT—OF--WAY CONVEYANCE, (23k 597-0576 (PHONE) MAW (230) 897-4676(Fox) SEC; MIN , PROJECT SHEET 1 2 FILE wCATE OF AUTHORIZATION Z 15 495 26E NUMBER: 050214.00.01 NUMBER: Of NUMSER! 0502415K2 FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AiiTF14Ri7AT10N LB(8952 _ 57 - *** THIS IS NOT A SURVEY *** EXHIBIT " E " WEST LINE OF TRACT"B' 1.1 140079'•:"W B.O.$' N0O'1910"E 650,00 (P) \ '\ \ \ '' `\. W \\` \ tzi \�` cii �',\ r*i SCALE 1"=100' 1 \`..\\ W 1! PI a- `.\' E- 5 0 UNE TABLE \ \ \ \ 54 F'R LINE BEARING LEN G(H c '�,' �,' 000—R N L1 N00'29'08 W 64.25 P \\\,\L2 z L2 S00'29'0$"E 2.25 '\ P-y8 z L3 N52'59'23"E 39.14 1 (n \ �\ -Dz ''' L4 S00'29'08"E 85.29 1 ` ebm 40TH TERR. S.W. O 4�`\ i i -D eq g +s a \\\`'\, ma $2a° \\\\\\ y '�C` C7 \'. \` 2 Y .-4 '\\'. CSD r'i..,..°.A 0. .\'. Cn n S \ \,.\ rn LEGEND \ \ \ \\\, W POD —OPOINT OF'POO — POINT OF B GINNING NCEMENT r \\\' 0., O.R. ..=OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK \ \N PB - PLAT BOOK \\ POS — PAGES S C = CALCULATED `. ' P c PLAT Q =CENTER UNE -\\`;\\` \\\ '\\\ \\\`\\\\ '\\ .\\„\\N ' • <<T BEARING BASIS ,,`\ \ , N00'29'05"W 660.09 (CC POB L4 No0l8't0"E 660.00 (pp SOUTHEAST CO-, ER TRACT°D'' SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D, 1 q. S.R. 951 (P) COLLIER BLVD. (F) SEE SHEET 1 FOR LEGAL REVISED 10/20/08 ITA" 10/20/08 CLIENT� 1, 20/ WYNN PROPERTIES INC zSurvey s&Mappers, i IL. r .1. i Plaaaca.,Pakiectkitaagelb alION Fr= TITLE; SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY 661O',now Pork Drive,&Rs 200 RY DESCRIPTION Naps, Rod 34109 cs co o M: (239)697-0575(PHONE) (239)597-0079(Fox) cc MAW FCF1 PR0.lEGT SHEET FILE 050241 SLC2 FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OFLAUTHORIZABON LBI6952 15 49S 26E NUMBER; 050214.00.01 NUMBER: 2 OF NUMBER ��•••• EXHIBIT " F " LEGAL DESCRIPTION (SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT) A PARCEL OR TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE COUNTY OF COLLIER LYING IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST AND BEING PART OF TRACT "B" AND "D" SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27, PAGES 1 AND 2, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT D; THENCE N.00'29'08"W., FOR 85.29 FEET; THENCE S.5759'23"W., FOR 8.89 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE S.52'59'23"W., FOR 30.24 FEET; THENCE S.89'30'50"W., FOR 393.62 FEET; THENCE N.00'29'08"W., FOR 2.25 FEET; THENCE S.89'30'50"W., FOR 235.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT "B"; THENCE N.00'29'10"W., FOR 15.75 FEET; THENCE N.89'30'50"E., FOR 652.92 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE ,PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN. CONTAINING 11,005 SQUARE FEET OR 0.25 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL AS BEING N.0029'08"W. NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR BY: _ /C/2,ac)t RICHARD V. NESTLER, LS# 4786 DATE SIGNED PROFFESIONAL LAND SURVEYOR SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH Ro REVISED 10/20/08 "7/23/0CLIENT: WYNN PROPERTIES INC T� w Lawmen, ° SLT NG Survecyto�n 1ppers, ,°""N/A TITLE: LEGAL DESCRIPTION _"' V 68810O Willow Park Drr v.,Mao Project RY SHARED SLOPE AND Nap's', Florida 34109 CHECKED°Y' CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (239) 597-0575(PHONE) MAW (239)097-0575(Fax) sect m Roe PROJECT SHEEP FlLE FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OFtU INORI�7.A11ON!,8!6952 15 495 26E NUMBER: 050214.00.01 NUrI ER: 1 o>' 2 NUti0ER: 050241 SK1 i *** THIS IS NOT A SURVEY *** EXHIBIT " F " 1.5 N00'29'08"W 660.09 () _ N00'19'10"E 660.00 (P) �`WE UNE tRACT'D Ca '- CO s • CI Cl. . Q \ SCALE 1'=10D' N I\ SCALE CCP!r \ O"\ I L4 ,\ , ;m 85b � i LINE TABLE L INE BEARING LENGTH �' 40Th TERR. S.W. "�,o 2 Sp LI 1400'29'08"W 85.29 \ vi •o §>,IaR L2 S52'59'23"W 8.89 \ m z IP kL3 S52'59'23"W 30.24 9 "' '\cO') 2 L4 NQO'29'08"W 2.25 co g �•' L5 NQQ'29'10"W 15.75 co r, 0 �, g wm;i 1 LEGEND POC .• POINT OF COMENCEMENT W.` . POB - POINT OF BEGINNING • N7.r. O.R. - OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK N �\ �a�S PB PLAT BOOK PCS = PAGES r4) �� C m CALCULATED P n PLAT �`�, f£ ..CENTER UNE \ I.\1 -PROPOSED SHARED BERM EASEMENT t"\ .\ BEARING BASIS POB X,c, N0029'08"W 660.09 (C) POG/ L1 NOG 19'10"E 660.00 (P) SOUTHEAST CORNER TRACT'd'j SUNGATE CIENTER P.U.D. • S.R. 951 (P) COLLIER BLVD. (F) SEE SHEET 1 FOR LEGAL REVISED 10/20/08 TA i4 7/23/07 CLIENT: neE; WYNN PROPERTIES INC RINInAStari'('pau3s&h1 ppea. a 100 .i.a. V II.1. i Plenncts P cctt�iammz� LPO TITLE. SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY 6810 Wow Pork DrIv.,)wits 200 DESCRIPTION Naples.Florida 34109 urtcx[o err (239) 97-0575(PHONE) MAW (239)vriwbe� 15 rWP.. 26E PROJECT 050214.00.01 SHEET FILL: 050241 SK t FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION LBi8952 15 49S NUMBER: NUMBER 2 or 2 NUMBER: 60 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I , DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of : ORDINANCE 2009-06 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 24th day of February, 2009, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 27th day of February, 2009 . DWIGHT E. BROCK . Clerk of Courts a4,,Clerk Ex-officio to ,1:Wrd-of` i. r' County Commiseiop :rs • By: Martha Verg $0 • Deputy Clerk 61 ATTACHMENT "I" Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information R7 Page 1 of 1 Collier County Property Appraiser ' Property Summary Parcel No. 36618000000 Site Adr. 795 CR 951, NAPLES, FL 34119 Name/Address ARAND CORP ALINE JIDY ALFREDO JIDY PAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOONCIR City SANTA FE State NM Zip 187507 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 4610 325600 120 04610 10 49 26 2.37 Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761 Millage Area 0 100 Millage Rates 0 *Calculations Sub./Condo 325600-GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 School Other Total Use Code O 0-VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 6.5246 11.6466 Latest Sales History 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) ^ Date Book-Page Amount Land Value $128; 07/19/10 4590-3261 $300 (+) Improved Value $0 04/16/07 4214-758 $150,000 04/16/07 4214-756 $0 (=) Market Value $128,673 05/04/05 3790-2413 _ $485,000 (-) 10%Cap $77,926 06/01/84 T 1085-760 __ $43,000 (=) Assessed Value $50,747 (=) School Taxable Value $128,673 (=) Taxable Value $50,747 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll httn://www.collierannraiser.com/main search/recorddetail.hal?sid=611719110&Man=No&FolioNum=36... 10/11/2017 Page 1 of 1 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary Parcel No. 36618000107 Site Adr. Name/Address 1ARAND CORP [AUNEJIDY 'ALFREDO JIDY, RAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOON CIR City SANTA FE State NM Zip 187507 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 4B10 32560012014B10 10 49 26 I 2.23 Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1759 Millage Area 01100 Millage Rates 0 *Calculations Sub./Condo E 325600-GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 4School Other f Total , Use Code 0 0-VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 z 6.5246 i 11.6466 Latest Sales History 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll ---` (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) Date € Book-Page Amount Land Value $ 134,525 07/19/10 1 4590-3261 $300 r (+) Improved Value $0 04/16/07 i 4214-758 $150,000 , _ - (=) Market Value $ 134,525 04/16/07 j 4214-756 $p 05/04/05 3790-2413 $485,000 (-) 10°i6 Cap 75,756 (=) Assessed Value $58,769 (=) School Taxable Value $ 134,525 (=) Taxable Value $58,769 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll 1 -1,4-i—.//...---- ,.,.11:,a,.,.,- i.---:— ,,o.,...,1,/,-o...,r.a.la+..;1 1-,41$,170;x1=A1 1 7101 1(1RTMar‘=ATraTFn1inNT»m=2A 1(1/1 1/')01 7 Page 1 of 1 4, # , a f e I a I r � rq #,` ` �� 0 e -+: ' * ' tea ' ," S grr x ,, . http://maps.collierappraiser.com/output/Collier 201 sde03 I 6540545210242.jpg 10/11/2017 ATTACHMENT "J" Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy—White Paper AR Attachment "J" tiill co ger county Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper -` o _"'"` „,,,....,„_=__,....7 GOLDEN GOLDEN GATE AREA =--� ::7''''--L- - FUTURE LAND USE MAP y� - . - ,: u T sr..-,. I L o j'e . _ a.xtartc M.:D o[:mt Weani 7 i ........, g gx 1 A ` . ` =.iiiiiiiiiRPROV • $ ffili�lleffiiiQ A _t" , a ;k IiiiiiiSIBEMEI a:,.e I sTr. I nz.E I r..ce 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 67 ipto Co ler County 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 RestudyINtute Paper 12/19/2017 Page 2 of 220 68 Co ier County Figure 12: Golden Gate City Planned Transportation Improvements 21 Figure 13: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Distribution of Residential Development26 Figure 14: Golden Gate Western Estates Distribution of Residential Development27 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 69 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 results. 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 70 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 Figure 1 GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN UPDATE:3 AREAS l —\w d i D LEE COUNTY LINE - c ^ Zi \ m w ?GM 'AD 11. OILWEIIRD w OIL WDLL RD ti G g 111THAv N a ' ISINIDKN!Ee RD RNOMLL&w 7 z Q Ri 2 C a {uO , z 94 0 0 VANDERBILTBE/CN RD o S Z q } L num GOLDEN GATE BLVD W GOLDEN GAR BLVD E 0 17 ffi Z O 6 11*AGAR DR a , d FIV.RODE RD p. 'H i k �1 m $ a _ O , - R < Qrji Gomm ti. ® D O W O w IT! e $1, i f9 DLDEN DATE PAY ' ,I. mas ]S. N RPMRD 445 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 71 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 72 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 GGAMP, 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 73 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 the 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 Figure 2 Save our Everglades Golden Gate Estates c:E1 IMAIONALEO ROA" programs, Picayune Strand South Blocks State Park was envisioned j and pursued, along with i j significant restoration c .-1 OIL WELL ROAD activity. The acquisition IMMOI:.ALEE ROAD � 4 process was completed RANDALL SOULE,ARD around 2006. Since then, L� a VANDERBILT J miles of roadway and canals BEAM ROAD o ������{{{{ a g t 001 DEN DOPY ---. BOULEVARD 0 Z z have been recontoured and PINE{RUIaR RD. - El WHITE MAD. �j ° three large pump stations c ° o E m and levies installed, with 2 =�' r j i _ 5 the aim of rehydration to ,, O. ; - g ET restore natural sheetflow '. 1 24....'.,1173 Sit 04 for the benefit of wetlands, = f L DAVSIS BOULEVARD" aquifers and estuaries, "" it under the direction of '-* 1 South Florida Water '� ° g Golden EsIalaR & -- --OP- 'South Nooks" ---- Management District and { the Army Corps of __ Engineers. Accordingly, as shown in green on Figure 2, approximately 39,000 acres t___ _= that comprised the "south ® s!_ 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 74 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 Figure 3 about 8,300 acres and Golden Gate City GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES ( E OF 951) PARCELS TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 approximately 2,500 Parcels with Structures:Approx.11,296 acres. The Parcels without Structures:Approx.12,512 characteristics of these Legend areas vary greatly. STRUCTURE IMa1 KALEE RD The rural Estates PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES .r ',,,'' 4 r1'_ `', retains the most"rural" PARCELS WITH STRUCTURES ,irul "T:LL Z � , ��,, character of the three l` Iiiiir,, _ I •elk* i areas, given its size and f r Il c residential distribution. .' ,�' 1 irr�,�U12 s� Ciiii , ! 4" '' is Because of the ° l _� .; Rim. �,` , �` 2. lolly development pattern _ I ,H L� � Rt� and changes in °� � i�, 'ii�`- condition over the past = r „ ,' -t'liP G s..'tI 'W,NDkt�vU �r�. fl,--,,,,IG[ +4111, , 5 decades, flooding, M EERD11, I .-ogre_� 'tz `,; ' g1i i wildfire and wildlife ; c{`; y;"" �,_ ; 'SNIV;Ifit '`N IA 11 conditions playa more •iii++11411' p -VANDERBILT REAL RD I Nl . - r y-+.t' g 111.{� f important role in eastern Estates 1 } : ,` t... t ;_i iE ''; -IL"A+ RAF -,--� .1- 1 �. �`,7 r, nr a 1. N4 - : ,++.,_,,,, 4 r_ -^4 residents' lives as �_ �TqL � compared to the urban ,.°°' 71a �' - � area. !'I1 ; ` 1 's.i I Q2EEN BLVD - juilif �,, � . t As of 2016, the rural i. ` �� ' t' a Ir' i,1,, i/ I s Estates was nearly 50% F.— �1 --� ��' built out, as shown in ', � � I t-!!,. • . l.. Figure 3, with a higher ✓ ! p1 d41. -ifi li ° ! concentration ofw I TS t` it-=''' ,tea 3 N dwelling units located '1 t , _ y 0 0.5 1 2 3 nearest the urban area. gMiles The population ., 4 projection for 2016 was Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 9 of 220 75 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, Figure 4 including areas within GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES {WEST OF CR 961) the Horsepen Strand IMMOKALEE RD flowway. Meanwhile, the pace € Legend of development � p DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.x.691) remains high in the -'g° I I I VACANT RESIDENTIAL(APPROX,430 eastern Estates. In fact, building permits VANDERBI BEACH RD ise- i( issued in this area - f ii raar I it' increased from 273 to 408 year to year, as - I! t measured second ,� C , 11, . j GOLDEN GATE BLVD quarter, 2016 to 2017. I I 2 8 In contrast to the 1 I1 I r rural, eastern Estates, 1, i = 1 10 txi m the western Estates is h more associated with 1( v I, > l t k k , L — the urban area, AI i Ir . I ' 1:14 ll �� `I; e although large lots g 0 predominate. This 0 ' relatively smaller area J 1 $ is in closer proximity ' i, .r'". 9 to goods, services and ` job opportunities. GOLD' t�A 1,2_1.J1�1 1 Because of its Nu g ` im N location, it is closer to 'IIIIIIIIII1_75 _ A 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 76 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. Figure 5 c t C(4TIy GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA A F , CO a o ' m m CP . . q • F._ 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 77 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. Figure 6 GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA VACANT PARCELS ®Vacant Parcels Golden Gate Master Plan GG Urban Infill Commercial 0 Activity Center tT0':1 Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict GG Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict • u� iii UCAI mow. A Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 12 of 220 78 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 +mew and eastern Estates kicked-off with aK, visioning process. The intent was to determine if any of the community r values had changed. The visioning - ° process lead to each community -� . ' f ° developing their own vision � r statements. These community- defined vision statements should provide guidance for implementing 4 planning goals, objectives and policies. These are provided as a preface to the following Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates t sections. Golden Gate Estates Visioning Workshop Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 13 of 220 79 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 Figure 7 GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA FUTURE LAND USE ACREAGE Residential:Approx.2,255 Acres Nat-Residential:Approx.291 Acres Schools:Approx102Acres 9r4 Schools Golden Gate blaster Plan GREEN BLVD lEi GG Urban Inn Consnercial 1111 Activity Center M.Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict GG Parkway Professional°Rice 1 Commercial Subdistrict f Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict $��' 0 in l g m g ; m re QW iD a a o IU 10 ' c..) w �_ i / • GOLDEN GATE PRY ` r ri/e, Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 14 of 220 80 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 Appraisers 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 Figure 8 ,, A Golden Gate City Single Family and Multi-Family Units m_>.. = GREEN BLVD s =coma Legend - - '-:&k Itz a',,, _____:t ,... I... Ii -- s - eek ;a — _ Single Family - ton— �c y y (4,21 Units) 7 � � /6- l Multi-family -� — '� m., I u: (3,674 Units) w l I� Golden,Gate City i,;,,,N,,,,, �i 7:•. . .,‘, . to,„.„,..., si�� � �uL -' wrE � - �� El N� .:L - aI to • « ..d N tl,„ 1 t--- l' rt ii wi,, ..,2=wr--e_ . , -11, CC al r.g I- I z 1 : . \ op_ t.. 'I'1 -F11141491 -viiiling- F s ' - w t,--,,d,„, 1, ,,, two v.,, , ,,4„,,,,,,,,,,,t -Ile, \:' ' GOLD _e � ;* -gin4itit' _ , g __..iiJ mi._.��-� rr--1 1 i ii ,,P , i: .-‘\ lc, 'i , if [0. -- - - --....„,- - 2 rwrom t r- I Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 15 of 220 81 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 sense 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 82 greater certainty that the park is well connected into the Activity Center and a focal point for community celebrations. Figure 9 PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP Legend N GREEN BLVD Category Addition MI Golden Gate Urban Infill Commercial sis Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Goden Gate Dowtown Center -^ Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict L. Urban Residential - Activity Center Addition Addition O w co 1. q m Eq z � q U Addition GOLDEN GATE PKY.-\\\ 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 83 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). Figure 10 Redevelopment and Renewal Area of Focus sRe`dey [ p Renei Area Boa d;•yp � a tlif aao w y a .. Vii" 1.1., .1,...;!.% -,t.z.,.-.,, , -,-, „ ,-.- -..,4...,q,;....#,..„,..,, x . -' = ,----.:4--,Ait:1-t tN4 4 vt.,.,„....,...e.„.40.z...x. ...,:„ ,, :., IA � n ��, Jaz"� :'' � Y�" u � ` "� -\.1 ..rem t =u t,` 4 ? 47-1::: of...11 -.1----,4 a ,x " ' ,Pe s - - ,- " . s,_fit --,:::::441,--',.. w7. ' 4::.,-'=i Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 18 of 220 84 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). Figure 11 Activity Center Development Areas As developed, these three areas within the Activity Center do not interconnect or **41*1.< 1>i " ' ' ' - ' :I.''';51. (k 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 - ��� ,. + ' r` favoring the automobile. This -� - c.. s- E. maw" - �?:= -r �I � , '. I1#t- t�.y 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 85 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 86 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 87 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 88 Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict 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 the 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 89 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 Figure 12 Golden Gate City Transportation Features TRANSPORTATION FEATURES '" r ., $moo,# C,sLmo�da_-,. . F.,Siaf.na Edsm�Payee 6houwee , E»sung RIkF L®.M •.. GYt2aiiam gi—--Eslslny&u.RR'''''''' R ■ U"nw ---EUMad f Ian-Roads '` PINE RIDGE RD 6 1111 Manned vmks = uv Baanr�,..PrP.N..,"Parks _ FubuesTs�eraau ' ! FubRe TaanulPark-N-Rid. .' Lai SMarilfSla5ms . Frmim Tranvt Trac.f,r Cam:._, I 'yam ti". GREEN BLVD C KI a a"' ■ ce � 1,11±11 � I i r x>. Cord -oP, ett. , r s .w M �� a a t a ` _ .g it ilF6U ` fir a; � �. � --.� "' •- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 24 of 220 90 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 support 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 91 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 92 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 93 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 within the rural Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 28 of 220 94 By contrast, Figure 14 shows Figure 13 the development of urban GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES(E OF 951)PARCELS Estates lots is much closer to TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 build out. In this area,86%of Parcels with Structures:Approx.11,296 Parcels without Structures:Approx.12,512 the parcels have been Legend developed, leaving only 430 STRUCTURE MI..Ca vacant parcels in this much I PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES '� , l Pt T smaller portion of Golden I PARCELS WITH STRUCTURES Gate Estates. `i An analysis of building " '"�i- t"y- f activity in Golden Gate �� I. ieVii Ei ter k t Estates suggests that .- ,. - L - �, I a - .bin . development is currently - ""°""""° ` ��i - ftl". N4. accelerating. WhenI � rAt �l comparing annual totals as , of second quarter, 2017 to ` .--L ' _ second quarter, 2016, permit 1 .-;'-„_#„.-..;,4.,-:::':.'‘,.4'1,,,k;� Vic�� applications rose from 273 to l' . �'�„ I,I it:i,` 408, an increase of almost k - 1 50%. Taken together, 681 --- �' ' n housing starts over this 2 M year period suggests economic vigor in a post- - 1 �j high foreclosure market. Ir 4a, N / /%/ 0 0.5 1 2 3MMw 1 i 0 0.1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 29 of 220 95 Figure 14 During public outreach, residents GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES (WEST OF CR 951) and stakeholders did not IMMOKALEE RD advocate any major changes in ..C..-i residential land use. Most Legend preferred to individualspolled -` ,..,; 1 �DEVELOPED REBlDENT7AL(APPROX.2,691) maintain a low density residential •- 'C mama C' -.`>! VACANT RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.43e) environment with few changes. In fact, the Golden Gate Estates VANDERBI BEACH RD 1. I - Area Civic Association (GGEACA) I! voiced the preference for a "low GOLDEN GATE BLVD density overlay" to protect its ii f character well into the future. 1 , r , u o 0 The minimum lot size would �� t I �� m remain unchanged, with the � r Q possibility of recombining some I ) It I legal non-conforming (smaller) " ` ' lots. No new designations of residential areas to Neighborhood Centers were suggested.The sole conversion of GOLD. residential areas endorsed by the ° , ,_nu i� ,c14: a I public was for office type = _ 175 A commercial along a short lengthy- '�, 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 96 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 Figure 15 Future Land Use Study Area the subject of Board direction at 33rd AVE NE Transmittal to effect affordable OIL WELL RD �--- or senior housing needs, or to accommodate other public uses .414 I NM such as park and ride locations, w or other land uses. One specificZ Z Z N N y O location that gained attention a 4o following public outreach is the y� 25th AVE NE . area in the vicinity of the RANDAEL BLVD Immokalee Rd. curve near MMOKALEE RD Randall Blvd. This is a location I ? 24th '41 Randall Blvd Ccmm! al SubdIsVlct AVE NE 'where significant transportation planning is underway, and the 33 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 31 of 220 97 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 determine 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 98 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 Figure 16 Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers Golden Gate Master Plan Calory GOLDEN GATE ESTATES CONDITIONAL USE SUBDISTRICT INFILL COMMERCIAL QNEIOHBORHOOD.CENTER SUBDISTRICT -MISSIONSUBDISTRICT FUTURE LAND USE MAP -PINE RIDGE RD MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT -RANDALL BLVD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT RURALSEIILEMENTAREA giM ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER 1MTIOkALFF:KO f -SOUTHBROOKE OFFICE SUBDISTRICT42 -EVERGLADES RANDALL SUBDISTRICT I URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT -GOLDEN GATE POW INSTTJTONAL SUBDISTRICT -WESTERN ESTATES INFILL SUBDISTRICT -INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT I RESIDENTIALESTATES SUBDISTRICT 7 P m r I on-N1:I.LRD Olt.%M 7 _.+�.._N.AAT.AI.I-R14.T , INIMOKAI FE RD C i - tet 1 _ I 'iND IU BEA CR RD 'JI' I r - c = C C.OIDFN CAI DI3rD W -j GOLDEN GAIE BTVD F. 9 — � PLVF:tWG& D c cC. E ! a e c Gi J < tC- Ca - 7 N A RADIO RL INTEIIS'TA-TFTV I DAVIS BITS I Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 33 of 220 99 rural, residential character of the Estates could be maintained. Importantly, by placing office, commercial, business and industrial parks in these adjoining Districts, shopping, 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 Figure 17 Centers should be allowed Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards "sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, o and water retention." A Additional rationale would include parking, future right- of-way expansion and effective buffering from residential uses. % G' • PA. `�`i`° i 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 220 100 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 commercial uses (C-1), 8 conditional uses and 6 residential uses. One of the residential uses is entitled to a transitional Figure 18 Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface / ! NI 1 L1 ,� Jam' ii Legend N /' 11 � I POTENTIAL CU �� MN EXISTING CU 8 PU10/N id11111 11‘11111 �a* At E.COMMERCIAL 111 41111 Note: 111i �40 a Golden Gate re includes and Use caned commercial pedlor designated commercial on theUlla Golden Gale Area Fulun Land Use Map andbr tlevslopad commerclel. �� .,(b)Yost"Commercial"parcels would also be eggible fora Conditional Use. I♦ %Oil% ik (e)This map is a guide.The Golden Gate Area Master Plan should be consulted to determine end eligibility of landusea. 11r Z 1 1111 ■ in pm all mil1111 Illlll��r li 4.1110 v 1111 ►_, Immokalee RD 28 'Autumn Oaks LN ( " °` £1 72 1lA '12 123 192 149 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 continuity. 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 220 101 Conditional Uses Conditional use opportunities in Golden Gate Estates include churches, social and fraternal organizations, child care and adult day care centers, Figure 19 private schools, group care APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES facilities (such as nursing homes and assisted living j "'""EEo Legendend 11 =• 111,,iiiiis Po TENTALCU facilities) and model eraPPlellla ®EXISTING CU B PU olvu1lluC lillCOMMERCIu homes. As conditional �� Wri.anonarder ,�® . .nth.:® � iillir uses, theyare generally :VOW Mill 4 o :''w; i= a . .,rm aiI're.,f,nYE6•y rr.e..a appropriate if compatible do� A�� with neighboring uses, and i, $ r 11 should be limited as to Illiv: Figure 20 APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES oda � I lnlnn ..- 11111 € Sit Y .l. - -Z �� z � ' 111i[IM piguE �1uuIIuuIU S 1lfllul iuumuumullld zum0111Iann n ouh,1UIIImudi111(IH.moutiu u mmmumh nIhnmu o- {mn f n1Iil11HtIitluiMk iniuuFoni !g=-i1m 111111MIMra / IIMIla. illteM mpusp dnuut t 1111 uiqlllnTln,I fpiHu = inh =ntli :rl.utunnimui : muiuulwimmstniIntI ■Iutl/nlum:MIMUIMIIT:mon 111m Situ/n iumunllltn=Gln11uIIIMU 1MMU _ mu! oHnmmmmi aiiim rmumun=rrummuulundo@n�dnp�a,"nimmuu nn'mu- �. �~ utn i�unESmnunlmumv u ntumr.ra i minmi unn�tln-_nhIilnllplilppi�i�hn�ailnin- ' nlllllltil 3�inimmwmusumni =ifpum uuildtddli'1v_i it onti l ommou_ 1� Innll-y11u1p�1- ndmunl Slln duutmn mn Immunm Imuffin 111untltull 'L'l1ltnlllnl'TTInmlun IMSLIMIDIM Sltn�r1MINEU ltimulONI= Illlulmu- INIM3C11n1I1nd� -ImUnd#ImmMmut n I nlhntutnnnln III IVIS--..-•. S-- -- --- -- - rM'SSI11n1111f lhh UMMI1�1J4iIhI1u11thRln IIn- �pI :.- " - S '•SC.--'..-�.',*. SS L" i#n pp FIIhIIIIInuu-m,=== "•t- �`- SG '' - 1 ulnuEtl nI111mtlltlllllll ltl M Iu nIIIIi :SS �3 _-... - - OS II Snmlu#pp1U= -. ,-- �L —G u S n...^ CL'S - --C -- 11111IA 1 Ut )IUnldullfltIh h�ui#7Sin1 = IIntl•111n1ItIS S i E.. ""` r+ CS�z urntu#nu CIq Inn11nllIln nlll I ullullinr:-SS -- -CC- x C C --C, --C CC--3-'- llulllulllul rhIIn1UIIihu111111t1 I- �IilullLuullS-" - C.�.+---=" C-- d------- CItmulnllllhSllminnlntiutllnl'it- SIUUmtllnull 'GllullunluluRU1n11mu111111nnu111111 lummluluumwu'!umma1I111111U1uu1uull Iu111Un11I11 urlllI tip -IUIlhII tiu1u11nn1uln nnnnnl)n1111IIunnlnnIllnlnII InlPut1111mmintumnunnnnmluIIhIihn11m1 ui114llnnullluuntntt =181111111111111=1kr ... C!a-'SCS ^ S S -CGS __SII Intl#nid CIipmmunIIIlt11n111 UUI S..S: S - - C.". r S 1 IImII .^,utu11d111#IIllm!•n[IS :InluniUln -F t- - n �I "`imllllm111 }1:42 S .S d! � ,- CCC '.,. i liunruntl RUM mil Ili !Ilii dutl/mlm .� -1; + "- '- p --= S QC ==== G -.^SL mm l 1 u MMUUl umun+ 1,lllln--- __� -,�. - m� <1 mnnuuuuu- .� -T,t----- - P--`- - �'� EBB Na=loom g— ntumuuunnmt In/uunn•.•� mnmullit w.. „ -- UU• =easy H uililltlt ' i�ltlllillni�IihIiilu•ilnd- r#mnnimm�nuunnn III E. 1...- Stml21!11111=rE dart -C=MN= - udnitl Um1# 1 11 UI'� h�11fu'nn11111 c=v_ h IIiii �inro unu - , IInI I 11111 UII I nlmtuuS 3111111111M101===8=4"====- ..S=&:13====,, � INllltllt `t��EIi11 1IlIIIil lt#. 1-11n211IUnn -4"."' nulmntln- ra111,111'nl UMW HIM F - u1lllltl multuuIuIt#III -hutlll111nt ::n1E111 111 Ill •a a - u ! n I 1 In #ullllnlnl;r xtnundunr I Ilii 1�C uluudlup;uer►ttl1: nttllnitll - u,uu. -'tumlllnll[ilutl'ott =uila!lltulu - Lag�d linin! I uIulInu11111nUI 1�1111n11F C-- .loom! �ti1ld11n111rinigr 1116 Stllllil1dl1/Y orC a=-"` �-----POTExn,°i- Inn/u1 SIIF, � #mnluluu =11111111/i HZ - ---- ME E7asTuaccu a.PU itnllniS..,lIlll�1 Alin u!!!lm: -nt•I!?IIIMii , -a ' -tu111u1;#,allnnuulnnnlrPM= nE: rymtIt�r U Coa+a xclni - UMW= Elnnmmlun 1 lltl: Flora ui i - _ innnu =111111111011111111111111111: In„��� 1 - --=moon= !llmilmlunA!lnl: !Bont u•c«...,.4r•��ws...p.aa.,iww,.�ww.wwrw.;•,,a.as....wsiN«,a. nun -lutllllnlnluluulnt: 1llulllull +Fuson la.•Us*U.. o.a.,w...•..ra IMMIII lnmum llnl•[l!Ut: ��m1N,11111 tom Y""'”"•°"°`�""y'�"`r'•iWefi�'w""'�a". u1t1u1 +� hind uunlluUU: ��i gH111 1 1� .w.. II"o. a."""..,n...Mme...,.w.a.a,.."" ludoI=fig#lllnnIIIMM111I!I l5 awb ere .MMPI!,al lab-.. 1l11110 =>Aalin111dI#Mtnu!!e 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 220 103 Figure 21 APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, o7meee -alit. AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES ) T___ ___l _____e ulnl IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES ±ltl�siiian �'^ -,limliar'9•_ir•rrf113 Legend 1 �_ tr will11�;lll1 POTEelrutcu 1 41111111.15:1311M1 1 In DUSTING CU&PU `' _ i+111m11rizrlillnillll -COMMERCIAL N �i1tel.:;:ldelrtl eell11anigl g eM� 711 alliMlitlihillil I pl^r<mmerdd'buludea p.adr smell wsereld.edla deigi.td mvsrdd eats Gel/!GW Ptak Fenix*UM UN 113,idler dMbbN 4144111114161 111111 111.9414111111 lb/Merit VonsmmMNbr port.%dAd NN be elgile for a Cannier/Use. =71wtIIIIINm 111111111111111 4o/nit lro t agm1a 864 GIMP Geo Amster PM,OWN Ye Cel4ulted lo atesmA. 1 7°meeeeed _.oe .Wr .eonm alpbetp M land uses ' ieIIll tti'n'iii =isloieltr. _ e11i1ll IUililtinnnnnimil;nnmlel�r!��!nminni1 :1111911111 111 en el iLt 1113111'=ems =1wrCmuurnlr 1 11 11i11Rnlltl-lle=uunnl --z- _� --=tit!e��leiliiiiiiillii imiten1111u11rR111n11t1111 =ueer11:.- ..�ii. . ',mom 0111111111MICINI nut -11n1n11_ nur4rsnw .vel w❑. mwiwr yr nu11nunun�m1111u11c e. wormer I�lsa 1�i mmnuwtll_1llnu n: eerrirm ^ 11111114 -•91111 li tan: I ti '� /111111111111111 I/lrlllnll � 111111 .41111 111/1!!Ser 11® mi n11n11niimi 111umr i ip f' 1 s0 ■u 1��t_uminn c e* id , - ' lllll-l----_-_-_-=pe' = risramie-::•illosinismain9..t= 11M� NI411�u11111I11 IOw11•rm1r11 1 e®tl ���tmllltllltlTEE _ f _ a �e1�111/:rt - .m1111111I11 ad hill. .'.., 1111 11 Illlll�llllllllln��� � � � 11111111If11 q 1111 Illlnuug11111nr1111mnn 1Ir1mlri11 11IItlf.flllfln 1}I II 1111111 Oltlllilrt 11117111[ Dille lllta 1 1 nunnuunu um11nm -111111111111 1141111111 1�� e4lgvlwunumr - '1Anions' -, uu111llllrml 11m11u11r -11n1111uu -tnlnn11l�� : .imnl 9 nn11nunm 111111 -111111111111 leltmuunu WW1 fr1E9t111 311111IIR 111111111111 1119 411441111! =Il 14;:11 El s� e /unluu 111117 = ^[annul/ !INEIIINI n nanul 4 IV 11I11f1r1111111 ••.III 1nu �'1111rllIllll IIIIIIu11e0d1O _eeiwl111r1111I111 L N� 1u17n9Tltun R!9I 19114 7111111111111 =lel/iu111r• = • w111mn1 UIIIS9.111111 11••1 1 lull :11:7118111 .-.IE 19I11111� m�ll�l�l lr l[St 111 111111111111111 lilllI 11111 =111111111111 I11111llll =m�111I111!VI .. 111111111[111171 "Ill Illlt -nnumm ,e415111111 -1111 rel�r ant,, 1 r. 1ti11I111111111 ,1 1 1 111 1111111Im1 lulllllll� l��gellllinClll t 1111uiei.uiiii •.11l 7 111 lulunllll .,111.111111�ii1�F ee�erllil•r 9 1 C n1111111111 11 1 11 iii Itllllnllll I4.13Ilr7M�� =®"Iltl ili . , •Cull!11111! S•1 I 1 II! 11111111111 It M111111 meed -ee_ m1111!C 1 1 C mown 111 11111 Imnm1�1 �I�u�1�l=eele�g■ F=lum�.= E 11 rq sri ■_ rte® ��111111 1 1 ( II..II l�1iL-�'lei eelliill'''leeieeeee ■eiefeete.0 iM ill/ i7.I 71111 r_.--- ■... .. r.-- %Ming elF.Leiilel e[ ■1-1 eli _ 1 ri[ ■-Cit ekerer. leler .011 - ■■ I I 1 11-- 'll( reg e t i IliiGurever r.:. - e iLr I `1 nil 411 ori Vali Innnnnnnnnnnn��nRM1nnnrrnitnnnrnnr -nnnnnnnnnir9nnnriminniin ri 1 f 1111'1 I .11 r 11111 1111 111111 ii I 1 11111,All 111111 1111 1111 1111 1111 IMO III 111 1 I1�1 Ie�r1111111111111 Iil Ii s�i•ueEl11n.1_"i1 lig lec■Ori■er 6�rr-CG1'era Lrl.al efeisamorms■tsPer`■.■ er.cIrur ' -- , 11911ills lar alk a, Vii IIAIIII1i=Gi Ill 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 220 104 • 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 220 105 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 residents 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.The 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 220 106 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 addition, 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 220 107 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 these 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 220 108 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. The 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 lmmokalee 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 Long-Range Transportation Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 43 of 220 109 • 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, 1-75 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 u n The Collier MPO is Figure 22 a federally .,- 'I' Figure mandated and COLLIER 2040 .. t. _ 444 federally funded Long " ' � Q=0 transportation ori � policy-making , organization and is Highway Cost F ®sable Piarsmo aiee made up of Highway Improvements by Funding Periods representatives of "� ��'� local governing `. bodies. The MPO has the authority to 4 plan, prioritize, and , „ire, . select ' " Lit transportation ML projects for federal t - ,,...,„„, -fi- - I funding t �� ,� �4 / 44.:4k, local a ro riated b `" the US Congress 1 ' , N.u1 � . through the US t '< �� Department of I1 r' -, .� = Trans ortation sed Federal Highway .,j ,,,t7,:„,,, Administration and _�; Federal Transit ` - Administration. � �,* f „--1-:41-4:' a r �” �' Tia€;7`�.°s�rr ' � .. In addition to '" LFl '� ` Estates residents, �;�� � , rilacieS *.(4.141P°4 Collier County Eve Te citizens, taxpayers sem` E and visitors are also 3 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 residential 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 220 111 to shorter trip lengths, positive factor in rnorth south and reverse direction tripslevels, particularlyofservice.at peak hours, will be a and resulting oad demand infrastructure Figure 23 This synergy was also ci II,highlighted in COWER 2040 recommendations in LiongR geTransportat Plan the County's Master .,„,;;:_---,-,-.13- � "- Mobility Plan (MMP) INeedsAssessment ©moi`' {" accepted by the . . , Board in 2012. Recommendation #3 . -£-_ in the MMP calls for incentivized oodsr. i � ` g _ V services and jobs in , ;_l'i 1iirt4 .viiiirqA Neighborhood • `i` Centers, the RFMUD , �� '� `' Villages and the " - —-- Orangetree t _ 4 .: �r,• , Settlement area to , ! ! i , reduce the vehicle 1 Na ;V V 7r ,* p ��' �.-. N miles travelled by estates residents. :_4 Mobility related to t I� the Estates is also Y � £ ` p addressed b Recommendation #9 '# 'r study Area enhanced localized connectivity through ,. 41 � lr,terchange Improvement g bridges and Other ; t;; island Interse�tionimprovement connectors, and by V '�''"' Recommendation #13, development of ver 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 12/19/2017 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper Page 46 of 220 112 study area is not yet funded. Staff recommends funding for 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, Figure 24 shorten trips and increase overall road capacity. In addition, coordination GCMiJEit 2Q4U Long Range Tra n Plan /:I with emergency services , officials is mandated for County staff and MPO. 82 CMS ITS and New Bridge Projectsiii In August 2008 the ' , '6 , Collier Count Transportation Services �� Division produced the r tali 11 East of 951 Horizon StudyNs for Bridges. The study s �� included stakeholder input from Emergency ��" `, service providers, a11470 ' 0; � environmental groups © © and other County ` et 0tai 44. � Divisions. The study '' considered emergency : service response times, J evacuation needs, public � '` . 4 ,> service efficiencies, � � _l I a�x, Spar 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 220 113 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 priority 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 reason, 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. 1-75 Interchange The GGAMP currently calls for coordination between the County and FDOT to implement a study of a potential interchange "in the vicinity of 1-75 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 UR to the federal Highway Administration.Subsequently,the Board approved a course of action that would request emergency access to 1-75 (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 220 114 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 1-75 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 1-75 was granted subsequent to the 2012 IJR submission. In addition to 1-75 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 220 115 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 220 116 Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP 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 1-75 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 220 117 Policy 6.2.2: 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 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 52 of 220 11R 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 1-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. b. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to 1-75. 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 220 119 Recommended Policies • 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 1-75 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 1-75 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 coordinated 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 220 120 Environmental Stewardship 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 Figure 25 water and groundwater, North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project wetlands and related Legend environmental resources NGGEFW Pt JeM�aun4�ary yr and the performance of the MOr panWeUands " current water management NGG PW Wetlands :et I.4 ? facilities in providing the Description � - desired levels of services for � ", ; ill Hydric Ratwo vd „ _ „, flood control, water supply' ress p p Y, Hydric Hammack 1NlfCh@ -ii ` rt water quality andh �x, . : «. environmental protection. � p of t rkr . 14 It recommended initiatives ii t that would serve as a guide �.�.,.:M�es ,� " for staff in developing , + � �- policies, programs, °" tz - . .. , ,�' , ordinances and regulations , '�'� � Golden Gate Blvd. , %{ z fr for further consideration by ? • the Board.The major water " `"� , GG Main Cana! ,f,',.,4:.-;;' � resource concerns ��. �� � � '- t, identified for the GGAMP ,'''.-.4'4441.;' , :. 4 '-'3.::§-';°:::,:',:--::. - region include: . +" IDs. A '✓. ' ::tdkpl ' ' • Excessive fresh � North Belle Meade water discharges ""� t { "ri from canals into '` ,4 ' ` Naples Bay .ttot ,` ..' � r • Lack of appropriate �• levels of flood lit protection z r A • Pollutant loading 1. .. j 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 220 121 Notably, among the WMP ranking of projects for benefit 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 Figure 26 Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area Watershed Improvement Legend Plan was developed and ,>, > accepted by the Board. < ty 6elleM�deAraa Coun S Picayune Strand State Forest Collier ounty " This plan, co-sponsored r�oidsncatecanai rw Cdlier Countywatersheds by Rookery Bay National �� s ,, ---- Canals Estuarine Research iniatI3BaY ratershe�d""'' County Boundary Reserve, outlines a Belle Meade rehydration effort y Naples Bay Gotaeo ca#s canm Area designed to provide greater balance between the Rookery Bay and Picayune Strand Naples Bay estuaries, n st;teForr3st through diversion of a portion of Golden Gate Canal flows to the Belle Rookery Bay 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 220 122 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 standards 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 220 123 Citizens and representatives of the GGEACA suggested that these lots might be re-combined, if possible, through an incentive- based system.The rationale behind Figure 27 recombining these smaller lots GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES(E OF 951)PARCELS relates to water benefits- TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 Parcels<...1.5 Acar $ watershed, floodplain, aquifer and (Parcels with Structure:3,036;Parcelswithout Structure: ucture: 3,397) estuary related. It has been said by Legend a former District 5 Commissioner, Wd 1.00PA IIIII Parcels‹=1.5 Acres without structure(Vacant) i structure i111/1 x that protection of this low-density �GoldenGateRuralEstlest3oundary area translates to a "County DRGR 1.:.. ' pili i;,P (density reduction, groundwater +�it "� e1 tiiv.+.119111 recharge) area without cost to the i ;rP rr IN County." It follows that further r�i1, J,xdr� till " Idensit reduction in the Estates can p ,',' .i y til. m.e1.P ' � : , enhance these benefits. Larger lot __ �P I stat I Ill sizes with relatively less impervious eEPo ',P 1; „i',i ',1r,'t lif 101 G �1� area generate less run-off per lot, I's'.' ';`. ,I I� , 1,011;4: �'i('i ' ;. and contribute to surface water _ ''i: I ' ' _ 4.0 ,li i ylt,:c,:lii 1y — - e® . ,Ig . attenuation, water quality benefits, - - -a,i,., -. - - „==.14,'„I 4 ',t. , floodplain storage capacity, aquifer ----- :- =07 VV 'Pi p g -a= ii till,. 1' ►I ,,.E 7--77_72:iii'' 5�. � , recharge and less flow or"pulse"to p I ry+i ':-' 7 '',', 1,;,t;(. l G......J a _al PI I 1.IU B, POI'11 �1. canals and estuaries. 1,� 1 :=-� j;, , l,.,;$ iy i t} Ideas to incentivize small lot1111: Ill 11i I��ji ,t recombination have included tax '' f'„ P 'r,'0'1 1 incentives, impact fee reduction g 4 N and credits for stormwater s o a-s 1 2 3 . Miles 1 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 220 124 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 Figure 28 implementation, its provisions would be contained in the Land Development GOLDEN GATE ESTATES WEST OF 951 PARCELS TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.3,442 Code or Code of Ordinances. Parcels<1.5Acres.Approx.542 (Vacant Parcels:136;Developed or Other Parcels:706) Legend Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) INIVacanl Parcels(Parcels<1.5 Aces) credits in the Estates IBMDevelopedor Other Parcels(Parcels<1.5 Acres)— _111 it Community Planning staff attended 11'1011 w numerous Comprehensive Watershed s Improvement Plan Ad Hoc Technical `1Ir VANDERBILT BEACH RD Advisory Board (CWIP) meetings, ) exchanging concepts related to the '� 11 existing TDR program (RFMUD) and Z <�� t GOIDENGATEBLVOw potential Golden Gate Estates 0 •) 'a ° 1 e initiatives. One idea that gained ' 0l •t 1 1 1 PINE E RIO R attention was the potential issuance of 1" z t )a s ii i 3 1 TDR credits as part of a sale or ( + I �, donation proposal for parcels within current or future acquisition areas.The i) i 1 I examples of two specific wetland sites, ii� Red Maple Swamp and Winchester �z �►' .64 f ) Head within the Conservation Collier - ■� ' acquisition areas were discussed and " , N studied. The "Gore" properties and surrounding area could also be RADIO RD -/\ �� 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 220 125 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 supply 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 issue, 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 Development 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 environmentally, economically, or socially (if private property rights are encroached). Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 60 of 220 126 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 goals 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 220 127 County should continue to study costs, feasibility and possible implementation as a long-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 Golden Gate Canal 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 220 128 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 Golden Gate Canal, Reestablish habitat and *Two feasibility and Estates Flowway Naples Bay and hydrologic connectivity modeling studies have Restoration Project Henderson Creek—Belle along two wetland strands been completed;and,a (Winchester Head and Meade for eventual restoration of network of 42 culverts was Horsepen Strand) the historic flowway to the installed in project's first Rookery Bay Watershed phase. *Funding and evaluation of other project segments are needed (NS) North Golden Gate Golden Gate Canal, Multi-parcel(60) *Land donations are Estates Land Naples Bay&Faka Union acquisition within the accepted through the Acquisition for Canal Winchester Head area offsite preservation Winchester Head provision of the LDC Wetlands Preservation *Funding for acquisition and/or additional land donations is needed (S)Corkscrew Regional Golden Gate Canal& Hydrologic restoration by *Project scope has been Ecosystem Cocohatchee berm removal,vegetation defined Watershed/East Bird control, ditch blocks and *Funding is needed Rookery Swamp flowway redirection Hydrologic Restoration Enhancement (S) Northern GGE, Unit Golden Gate Canal& Wetland restoration in the *Project scope has been 53 Acquisition and Cocohatchee area of Shady Hollow Rd. defined Restoration Ext.and 38th Ave.N.W. Ext. *Funding for land by berm removal and exotic acquisition and restoration vegetation control is needed (S)Golden Gate Canal Golden Gate Canal& Six Tracts conveyed by GAC *Funding for feasibility Water Quality Naples Bay to Collier County totaling 33 study needed Improvements acres,with 3,646 ft.of frontage along the GG canal system,to be used for isolated water quality treatment (NS)Stormwater All Watersheds Restoration and protection *Retrofit options such as Retrofit Project of existing natural systems sewer inlet protection, by establishing retrofit debris collectors,and bio- programs to address swales have been existing developments, identified by staff public facilities and other *Pond inventory and SOPs areas that lack treatment 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 220 129 establish Best Management Practices. *Ongoing efforts to establish new programs to meet project objectives Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status (NS)Water Quality All Watersheds Define water quality *Ongoing program that is Monitoring Program conditions in estuaries and periodically reevaluated along canal networks to and adaptively managed achieve greater distribution by the County's Pollution in the groundwater Control staff. (Specific monitoring network recommendations for monitoring completed in 2014) (NS)Verification of No All Watersheds Implement requirement for *Modeling was used to Floodplain Impact development to verify no evaluate future impact upstream and development alternatives downstream for the 100 on DFIRM base flood yr./72-hr.design storm elevations(BFE)in GGE. event 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 All Watersheds Propose a standard 25-yr *SFWMD is modeling the Levels of Service design storm for drainage primary canal system on arterial roads and 10-yr. *County to follow with design storm for collector modeling of the secondary and neighborhood roads to system increase flood protection *Staff to continue to refine levels of service concept for inclusion within the planning process for the CIP (NS)Low Impact All Watersheds Implementation of a LID *The Pollution Control Development(LID) program that would apply Section is developing a LID Program to all new development manual to be used as a countywide 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 1'4n 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 planning, 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 220 131 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, 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. 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 has 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 220 132 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. In4111 April, the "3d Avenue Fire", stoked by high winds, tore across the North Belle 2017 Wildfire in Picayune Strand State Forest 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 220 133 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 220 134 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 220 135 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 1-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. e. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to 1-75. 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 220 136 • 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. I fes• � 441 ws Photo courtesy of the International Dark-Sky Association/FAU 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 220 137 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 220 138 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 the 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 220 139 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 initiative 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 anticipated 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 character 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 220 140 Preserve Exemption Currently the GMP and LDC require a portion of the native vegetative present on property to be 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 1/4 acres size. Analysis by staff shows a total of 75 lots remaining in the Estates Designation, north of 1-75, 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 220 141 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 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 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 220 142 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 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 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 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. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 77 of 220 143 • 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. 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 1-75 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 1-75 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 220 144 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 220 145 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 220 146 Appendix A Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Public Outreach Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 81 of 220 147 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 policies 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, S pp g parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, neigibor 00 walkable community." cmty-center ano a a l'kssafe„ t lwaysals.14 communuty= ll vb.won Ysoe..- -. education 71 milliest-Er, �eW � ..�. Ika 1ew. , . a bike-frie dly ' working-class green space Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 82 of 220 148 /Th, Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement commun working- lass "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an commercial nodes interconnected, low-density residential community .1 rge 1°1m-101e-family nl gle-family with limited goods and services in neighborhood ordablep _, centers, defined by a rural character with anurefam�lies 111 appreciation for nature and quiet iaNe Ytl res. .. .� �•w�+�+ surroundings." pra-anpercia r' y graloaf-densii�VWc un�r-Imng en"ronmentpeacepll recreation Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement "Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, .,,.dam-e large-lot residential neighborhood in a igiffill n't 29M-bet liitedce®meci al natural setting with convenient access to h a tojEconmer91 ear�toWn�l the coastal area." re rum ilrgiii+�fnenvironment V Now Ironic pal neI hbIrb 1 gmanc estate privacy r es low-density Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 83 of 220 149 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 for 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 Planning Restudies and the importance to the Golden Gate area residents. He reminded the group of the relevance of the"green map",in that Over 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 220 150 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 ..), e 44-- - -among stakeholders to ,. incentivize uses that are not • _ presently adopted- most particularly free-standing - = ., .; . ° �- - .. employment centers and _ sports venues. GGEACA and ,r. " 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 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 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 220 151 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 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 220 152 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 issues 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 220 153 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 alo • Golden Gate Parkway. e, 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 t 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 IF4 I. The Western Estates will be Distinctive for: o 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 H No commercial uses or special uses, maintaining uncluttered thoroughfares o Natural habitat with areas for wildlife and environmental protection o Single-family living for local working families o Agriculturally and livestock friendly per allowances II. The Western Estates will be a premier location for: o Peaceful living with private single-family homes & Beautiful gateway to the City of Naples 0 Quiet estates residential living o Family and neighborly atmosphere safe for children o Low traffic a Small town feel d Wildlife and agriculture ¢ A remote animal services substation to support domestic animals found in the area o Accessible to services while maintaining a rural character o Well maintained infrastructure o A predominantly residential community with supporting uses including senior housingalong arterials. o Maintain distinction from Golden Gate City III. How does the Western Estates area complement Collier County? o Untouched and quiet nature maintains the charm of Naples area 0 A respite from commercial blight o Peaceful living close to town o Provides a non-gated, peaceful, estates-living neighborhood between the City of Naplesand Golden Gate City l< Serves as the gateway to Naples E Gives long-term residents a place to raise generations o Maintains the value of environmentally friendly neighborhood with little commercial uses 0 Unit 29 should be its own neighborhood, rather than part of Western Estates o Clean, crime-free area o Maintains true to the existing master plan a Provides affordable living for year-round residents Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 89 of 220 155 0 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? o Safe, cohesive neighborhood for families o Desire to maintain privacy o Maintain the existing character, no need for further enhancements or intrusions o For the area of Unit 29 to be sub divided into its own area similar to Pine Ridge Estates o Commercial and additional uses will only destroy the potential Country living close to town o Enhance the "Gateway to Naples" o Most desired residential acreage in Collier County & Ability for growth of environmental protection services o 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? d "One of the best places to retire with friendly people" ¢ "Unique and faithful community that supports the integrity and charm of Naples" o "A great and convenient place to live" & "We are not a part of Golden Gate City" & "Local homeowners rejoice over being left alone" H "A pearl of beauty that truly complements Collier County" o "A wonderful residential community to live in" o "Commissioners gave in to their supporters and turned it into another Pine Ridge Road" o "This community stayed the same" 0 "Premier Estates living 3 miles from the beach" o "Beautiful corridor to the City of Naples" o "Excellent quiet location close to town provides solitude from busy work life" o Depends on how much "commercial" money changes hands with commissioners e "This master plan has not changed in 50 years. What a wonderful place" 0 Hardly anything-this area is quiet. .-� & "Estate living still exists" a "Close to everything in town while maintaining privacy" Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 90 of 220 156 VI. What three things would really improve the future of the Western Estates? g Not amending the master plan & No commercial uses 0 Maintain privacy & Maintain traffic flow without addition of lights or stops F Enhance Golden Gate Parkway west of 1-75 into a lush landscaped corridor serving asgateway to Naples f Uncouple the 4-block area from the GGAMP Increase wall height for 1-75 to reduce noise permeation & Enforce existing laws and ordinances k Small localized sub-neighborhoods with neighborhood commercial development thatsupports rural areas & Establish additional wildlife and environmental preservation areas ¢ Provision of public services and access to schools, museums, parks, etc. 0 To never build a RaceTrac in our area 0 Create a name/identity for our neighborhood & Re-study traffic impacts of J-75 interchange & Consider traffic light at 66t Street SW H Water feature at SW corner of Golden Gate Pkwy and Livingston is a very welcome,positive feature & Sidewalks & Nature conservancy d Community gardens The workshop concluded at 8:35 p.m. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 91 of 220 157 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 wasplaced 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 k .rl timing of each. Discussion . �. , also included the process, - l � identifying current plan > tet, •a.� ... provisions of importance to j� :t °` the community, identifying ` �` N opportunitiesfor erti Nse ; improvementand 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 220 158 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 utility 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 summary of questionnaire responses: I. Golden Gate City will be known for: Cleanliness Affordability New Growth and Development Celebrated Diversity E Safety Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 93 of 220 159 II. Golden Gate City will be a great location for: o Raising Families o Affordability o Community Services o Mobility o Recreation III. How does Golden Gate City complement Collier County? o Diversity Center of Activity a Accessibility to workforce IV. What is the full potential for your community? a Unifying to accomplish goals o 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 o Third fastest growing city in the state of Florida o Golden Gate notes first million-dollar home sale A great place to raise a family o Number one most inviting community ff Golden Gate wins state championships in sports, music, arts and more o More full-ride scholarships provided to residents per capita than anywhere in Florida Community rallies to improve image o The remarkable turnaround and revitalization of Golden gate o The city that met the needs of its people VI. What three things would really improve the future of Golden Gate City? o Code enforcement o Safety of mobility (pedestrian, bicyclists) Infrastructure o Creation of a CRA 0 Reduced public transit headways Creation of a community trolley ¢ Lighting o Preservation of green space o Increased homeownership Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 94 of 220 160 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 audience 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 focus 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 220 161 • 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 Do you live in Golden Gate City ■No ■Yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% •Resident Which option best represents your II Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate City? •Developer/Representative ■Elected Official B Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in Golden Gate City? •Very Unsatisfied ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How Satisfied are you with the y ■Somewhat Satisfied locations of existing commercial uses VerySatisfied in Golden Gate City? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 96 of 220 162 Do you think Golden Gate City should have its own unique standards for architecture or landscaping? 1111 Do you have adequate health care resources in Golden Gate City? mom • Would you volunteer one evening per month No to serve on a planning committee? Not Sure ■■� •Yes Do you agree with existing policies about citizen-driven planning efforts? DoPPou support a more uniform set of ■■ Y development rules for commercial or mixed- use areas? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ' um ■Retail ■Personal Services What type of commercial use is most needed in Golden Gate City? Dining ▪Offices M Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Government Services What type of institution is most ■Places of Worship needed in Golden Gate City? Adult and Child Care Centers ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 97 of 220 163 ■Expanded Should home-based businesses change in NI Reduced any way in Golden Gate City? Stay the Same •Not Sure 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 ■Never How often do you walk to get somewhere in ■Monthly Golden Gate City? Weekly ■Daily 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ti !No Do you have school-aged children that igi.fr walk or ride bikes to school? Yes I don't have children 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Street Lighting Of the following options,what is your top priority for improvement in Golden ■Traffic Calming Gate City? f t x Sidewalks ■Bike Routes/Lanes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 98 of 220 164 Have you ever used Collier Area Transit(CAT) ■No service? Yes i � t 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How satisfied are you with gateway design for Golden Gate City along Golden Gate Parkway? ■Very Unsatisfied How satisfied are you with the current •Somewhat Unsatisfied CAT service times and schedule? �.: Not Sure I Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied How satisfied are you with the current Ittis,n14-4,7,-&liNt,,,";,,. CAT routes? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 99 of 220 165 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 1-75 interchange is very different than others Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 100 of 220 166 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 Do you live in Golden Gate Western Estates? � � ■No Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 101 of 220 167 /'"'N •Less than 1 Year •1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden •5>10 Years Gate Western Estates? ■10>20 Years is Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 11 Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate111 Developer/Representative Western Estates? ■Elected Official IR Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in the Western Estates? !Dining .. II Offices Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 11 Reduced Should home-based businesses change in 11 Stay the Same any way in the Western Estates? Not Sure ■Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 102 of 220 168 How satisfied are you with the neighborhood identity for 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 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 cellular reception/service in or near the Western Estates? •Very Unsatisfied ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure 1 How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of religious ■Somewhat Satisfied institutions in or near the Western I Very Satisfied 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 social organizations in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Western Estates? 1 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 103 of 220 169 Do you have adequate access to ped/bike trail system 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 ■ .■ neighborhood parks in or near the Western Estates? Do you agree that raising livestock and crops should be allowed in the Urban Estates? Would you volunteer one evening per month ■®... to serve on a planning committee for the Golden Gate Area? Would you be in favor of a voluntary small lot combination" incentive program? Should there be a change to allow rental of ■No your guest house?(Do-over) Not Sure .•Yes Should there be a change to allow rental of ■� ■� . your guest house? EMIWould you support an Interchange ActivitY . .■ Center at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and 1-75? Would you support office or conditional uses along Immokalee Road? Do you support conditional uses at any other locations not currently allowed? Do you support conditional uses at major z; - intersections? Do you support office uses at major intersections? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 104 of 220 170 ' 1 ■No Would you consider a voluntary t Not Sure association for the Western Estates? ■Yes,sub-areas Yes,as a whole 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Never How often do you walk to another lill1111111111111 I Monthly destination? •Weekly ■Daily 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% is Bus How do your school-aged ■Car children get to school? Bike or Walk I don't have school-aged children 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How do you feel about existing public : ■Not Enough Light street lighting in the Western Estates? L Perfect Amount Too Much Light 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 105 of 220 171 ■Street Lighting Of the following options,what is your top priority for improvement in the I Traffic Calming Western Estates? Sidewalks i Bike/Ped Trail System 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 106 of 220 172 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' � lk opportunities for retail, malt k a # „ service and jobs for Estatesr r � _ . i residents. Transportations 4 study areas were discussed - as were watershed and other environmental I I 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 220 173 • 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 220 174 • request to prohibit fireworks and pyrotechnics in an effort to protect wildlife and prevent wildfires • requests for improved drainage • strong support for an 1-75 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 Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? ■No III Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 4.111 ■Less than 1 Year ■1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden -" 5>10 Years Gate Eastern Estates? ■10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 109 of 220 175 •Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Developer/Representative Estates? •Elected Official Other 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 110 of 220 176 How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes 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 cellular reception/service in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of religious institutions in or near the Eastern s Very Unsatisfied Estates? ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How satisfied are you with the ■Somewhat Satisfied availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the ffi Very Satisfied Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Eastern Estates? 111. How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the • locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? .= 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 111 of 220 177 •Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in the Eastern Estates? E Dining ■Offices ■ _ E Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 112 of 220 178 Should there be trails and greenways in the Eastern Estates? Should there be usable public spaces in the Eastern Estates? Watershed Concept 2:Would you support a 111111 voluntary transfer of ownership program for undeveloped parcels identified by a watershed committee? Watershed Concept 1:Would you support an incentive to owners who wish to combine a 1.14-acre lot with an adjoining lot? Do you support an 1-75 connection in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard? _ No Not Sure Would you use a Transit Park&Ride or Ride E Yes Sharing Facility? Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? Do you want specific architectural standards for non-residential uses in the Eastern Estates? Should there be more neighborhood commercial centers throughout the Eastern Estates? Should there be a larger commercial center central to the Eastern Estates? —71 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 113 of 220 179 Is there a need for an industrial area or •No business park to provide jobs and Not Sure support trade in or near the Eastern Estates? ■Yes,nearby-not in •Yes,in the Estates 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Reduced Should home-based businesses change in ■Stay the same any way in the Eastern Estates? Re Not Sure ■ N Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Allow everywhere ■Allow along arterials Should potential Conditional Use Only at select locations applications change in any way in the Eastern Estates? •Only certain kinds at additional locations •They should not change 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Not Sure Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 114 of 220 180 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 or 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 :tib w t. - 1.1 it these districts applied to theiri ‘ I '` �,, property. To invite discussion '" related to improvements thati I'_�� 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 220 181 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 1R7 • 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 220 183 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 after 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 1-75 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 220 184 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 ■Resident Which option best represents your •Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Eastern 01111111.1 Estates? Developer/Representative ■Elected Official Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? •No ■Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 119 of 220 185 How long have you lived in Golden •Less than 1 Year Gate Eastern Estates?(do-over) ■1>5 Years •5>10 Years ■10>20 Years How long have you lived in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Over 20 Years r_I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 120 of 220 186 1 I Retain existing policy to pave lime rock roads. i -I The County will develop rural architectural standards for commercial and institutional development in the Estates. I ill Neighborhood centers may be increased in size to accommodate stormwater,septic and buffer requirements. Accommodate growing demand for employment,goods,services,and entertainment with provisions adjacent to the Estates. III Add new provision to allow '. communications towers. ■Strongly Disagree •Somewhat Disagree11111 �\ Not Sure • ' Add new provision to allow Group ■Somewhat Agree Homes(7-14 people). tea; •Strongly Agree Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections.(do-over) 11111111 Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections. , Retain existing policy to preserve the rural character of the Eastern Estates. '1 Retain existing policy allowing for livestock and crops. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 121 of 220 187 /"N The County will consider a TDR program for natural resource protection. The County will promote the combination of 1.14-acre or similar "small lots"into adjoining lots through incentives Retain existing policy that the County will encourage"dark sky"lighting standards. Retain existing policy that the County will consider incentives for wetland preservation. Retain existing policy to conduct wildfire mitigation education and prevention •Strongly Disagree programs. •Somewhat Disagree The County will update setback and Not Sure buffer standards for non-residential uses •Somewhat Agree in the Estates and for adjoining uses in the RFMUD and RLSA. •Strongly Agree Retain existing policy to coordinate a future 1-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. =MI Retain existing policy to increase north- south and east-west route alternatives. mitti Retain existing policy to create a greenway plan. Retain existing policy to schedule(or update)and fund bridge improvements. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 122 of 220 188 Do you support the ability of owners to rent/lease their guest homes. The County will create new lighting standards within the LDC. •Strongly Disagree The County shall continue to work toward the goal of providing a septic •Somewhat Disagree disposal facility located in Collier Not Sure County. •Somewhat Agree The County will continue efforts to •Strongly Agree support independent fire districts and Florida Forestry Service in public education, planning,and resourcing related to wildfire prevention and response. ^ The County will consider dispersed 1 water storage and watershed connectivity to,through,and from the Estates. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 123 of 220 189 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 220 190 Golden Gate City Workshop — initial Recommendations: 04/26/2017 I , Do you live in Golden Gate City? ■No IN Yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ■Less than 1 Year ■1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden 5>10 Years Gate City? ®10>20 Years •Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Resident Which option best represents your IN Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate City? •Developer/Representative ■Elected Official •Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 125 of 220 191 Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards, including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove 1-acre rezone requirement. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards,including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove prohibition on rental housing. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards,including vertical mixed-use. ■Disagree a No Opinion Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: ■Agree Remove prohibition on rental housing. Consider provision in zoning overlay to allow property improvements even if not to some of today's development standards (ex:parking,landscape,setback,etc.) The County should consider one or more zoning overlay(s)to reduce the cost and complexity of individual rezone petitions. Mixed-use provisions and Land Development Code standards should strive for uniformity Commercial sub-districts should be simpler and more cohesive,emphasizing mixed-use and supporting redevelopment ^ opportunities.(do-over) ' 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 126 of 220 192 Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Retain Plan language related to pedestrian connectivity and alternative modes of transportation. 1.1 Explore feasibility of CRA,Business Improvement District(BID), or Innovation Zone within Golden Gate City. Adopt appropriate tools for business enhancement,such as incubators or accelorators. Enhance community cultural assets, international focus,and community identity. • Enhance community participation in area and sub-area planning through a county- fostered initiative with the ultimate goal of self-sustained community planning. Mi Disagree No Opinion Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: Agree Should certain light industrial uses be g allowed if adding jobs to GG City? Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: 1111111 Do you agree with the uses within this Subdistrict? Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: Should the boundaries of the Subdistrict be expanded? Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Increase height to allow 3 stories adjacent to Golden Gate Parkway. I - Golden Gate Professional Office - Subdistrict: Expand uses to C-3 (commercial)and residential. I l , 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% �\ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 127 of 220 193 Develop a program requiring removal of all exotic vegetation using Golden Gate City as a pilot. Continue stormwater outfall and connectivity improvements for flood control. Seek appropriate grant funding opportunities for conversion of septic to sewer service. /-� Continue canal/outfall water monitoring •Disagree for surface and groundwater •No Opinion contamination as it relates to septic. Agree Study potential for utility service conversion from Florida Government Utility Authority to Collier County Water Sewer District. Express need to conduct a pedestrian bridge connectivity study over canals. Identify and prioritize traffic-calming locations. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 128 of 220 194 Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: ■No Should the Uses include"light industrial"if Pc No Opinion compatible with neighborhood? i Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ' 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 129 of 220 195 Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220 196 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 expansion2. 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-industrials 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 survey6 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 z http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=764 3 http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bbtk-factsheet-blight.pdf a 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-QMxD6RLNvPoW6NbkZFNfiwGJzBWWRgBo/viewanalytics Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 131 of 220 197 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. 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. 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 log \ \ II I - II._.-1 I 1 I 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 133 of 220 199 From: DelateJoseph Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 1:00 PM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita;VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG City improvements Attachments: GoldenGateCityStormwaterDrainageSystemlmprovementPlan_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_SW 1.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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 134 of 220 "nn • 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 lichee1�. !Mosta,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. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 135 of 220 201 ^ II 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.usj 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 136 of 220 •)r» 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 23`d 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 A Please consider the environment before printing this email Iii\Prd"Yr PARRISH, WHITE & YARNELL, P.A. attorneys at law 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. Unauthorizea 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. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 137 of 220 203 GOLDEN GATE PRESS STATEMENT RE: POTENTIAL COUNTY ACQUISITION FOR STAFF USE This transition [of the Golden Gate Utility System]follows the original FGUA vision and historical practice -of partnering with local governments to acquire private utility systems, move them to public ownership and improve their condition to a high quality municipal standard. The FGUA has an agreement with the local or"host"government wherever we are[now in 14 Florida counties]to convey these systems to those governments when they desire. The Golden Gate system was among the first acquired by the FGUA when it was formed in 1999.The Golden Gate system was one of several systems purchased from Avatar Holdings, Inc(Florida Cities Water Company). Other systems acquired with Golden Gate included Barefoot Bay(Brevard County), Carrollwood(Hillsborough County), Poinciana (Osceola& Polk Counties),and a system in Sarasota County. Since the inception of the FGUA,there have been a number of utility systems acquired and then conveyed to local governments. When purchased by the FGUA,the Golden Gate system can be described as"troubled" by its physical and financial condition. Its high customer rates are directly attributed to the initial cost to purchase it from the private owner and the capital improvements required to bring it to its very good current condition.As the FGUA prepares to turn the utility over to Collier County,the system has strong finances as evidenced by the 2015 credit ratings of"A2" by Moody's and "AA"from S&P. Further, it has been recognized with awards from the Florida Water Environment Association and the Florida Water and Pollution Control and Operators Association in recent years for its quality operation and safety practices. We are pleased to have served our mission of improving the system, providing very good customer service and putting it in the best possible condition for it to become part of the county utility system. We look forward to working with Collier County on what we hope will be a seamless transition. Last Update-June 26,2017 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 138 of 220 204 Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220 205 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, 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. • 1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 140 of 220 9na 008 4 2SrrB83NOY 18 AN g 22 COLLIER COUNTY RECORDED AGREEMENT c' THIS AGR$fffi�Tf made and entered into this 15th day of November, tCD ' ' 1983, between ANWAR PROPERTIES INC., f/k/a/ GAC PROPERTIES INC., a co tz— Florida corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Many", and COLLIER o en ac COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as 'County", acting by and through its Hoard of County Commissioners. WITNESSET H: YEEREAS, the Oamainy entered into a Consent Order with the Federal Trade Commission dated July 23, 1974, which in Section III, Paragraph E, provided for aonpany to donate 1,100 acres of land to ,a County, in the subdivision known as "Golden Gate Estates", to be usedO -0 a to provide facilities for such things as recreation, utility and )s C, co community service for the existing antur .residents and visitors of f'7 Collier County, and to provi � iWof fund improvements within the area known asp 1 ,� !- T -• herein; and WHEREAS, the afo •• t Order was a.,,,•-ny and the Federal Trade � • in a Modifying OrdPts April 17, 1979 aqd the . ..' _ . . • .- no longer required bhe Oamiany to deed to County the X1,10 in Golden err -_ .tes; an\ `` r WHEREAS, � ,,.ty has a eceipt or previtxnslx 4r . In a land from the ,60114.. , _. _ b � t .cr 11I .,-•-, conveyed by (*pany! • ,061, ; , / 1 3 Ems, • , an.. � '•. ty 1 ; th' muttSal . ' 1 recognize that' .. : of - r -#61.2 ., by •: ... .. ; yhe County remains a tial need to enable the • ty to Beet n present and fut :' is needs of the Golden ( tates MREAS, the' ' has determined that the • ) y -.•-r_ d • 'cit of that certain Agree da .....October 4, 1977 have been' •.:t ally satisfied by various ._- - Comparny, incl01(g; , r. limited to excharhg of purchase of ,a s- ._ e,�• 1 sers, and expenditure and tendering to i o�f .- . •anal maintenance and water retention facilities; THEREFORE, in consideration of the aforesaid premises, it is mutually cxxrvenanted and agreed between the many and the County as follows: 1. The Company hereby reaffirms that it will donate by special warranty deed 1,061.5 acres of property in Golden Gate Estates to the County. Golden Gate Estates is made up of the property shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated try reference herein. 2. The Company and the Ctxmty mutually agree that the following described lands will be conveyed in aaaard with the following schedule: a) On or before December 1, 1983, the Company will convey to ` the County the lands listed in Exhibit 'H" encompassing approxi-- mately two hundred ten (210) acres. These Lands are within the area r marked I as shown in red as set forth in Ehdhibit "C" hereto which is incorporated herein by reference. C'oci.+f.[Cr.rry e7r.of -1- j This in n.r rent prepared by 4'i/icy For/ weals Per h77o� *,, DG�i'li:.i (_T1,+ Esq+: 11 -;a1r.2ofica �n�,gate Area Master Plan R12/t121M1Wite Paper Page 141 of 220 Caa:aabies.Fionda 33134 .\ ' 207 i 001052 000492 _. • OR BOOK PAGE b) On or before December 31, 1983, the (bnpany will convey to the Ctunty approximately two hundred twelve (212) acres within the area marked II as shown in blue as set forth in Exhibit "C". c) On or before December 31, 1984, the Company wilt convey to the County approximately two hundred ten (210) acres within the area narked III as shown in brown as set forth in Exhibit "C". d) On or before December 31, 1985, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred fifteen (215) acres within the area narked IV as shown in green as set forth in Exhibit "C". e) On or before December 31, 1986, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred fourteen and five tenths (214.5) acres within the area marked V as shorn in yellow as set forth in Exhibit "C". 3. The Company and aunty will meet in October of each calendar year referenced in Paragraph 2 so as to mutually establish and agree upon the property to be deeded fram,&am 's...' ventoiy to the County for that particular year. + . t c i and County are unable to do agree then " ., � -.,ee upon a mutually acceptable ' ' -,.te are' i bitrator to settl .,•'di;- as to property to he do _ -.' -. A - County by the Company for -t icular year. In the - - . the s..,,.:. the County are e to as to a mutual l; a •-e- =. _ a..;.• •=. r t a . tra r., , then the 0.,.”.- and the County eek' • abide by -K. .- ti• to the ' i Y Arbitration Asdoci a . t fes'( ; r- ve'a al }.,� -Ace what propertie0 sha( •- dons > ty� 'F . a 4. The ,- a} i ( _-, to - i• t , '"r F . County thirty ��).:•'-,ys re - y- -# :tie -=, Caenitment _ • ' e to be good and insurabl= •jec to bpi • and zoning laws, # ons, reservations, 1'. _ •.,e- ---_ of record, taxes for`' : , ce of the year followin• - ;: .- .- of of conveyance and -....,----:=. -- s. If the county has ti‘ii objections, they must -• in writing to .,-,!,.. -, 4,in forty- five (45) days from Cam regi_ _ . '.� a ,, _,_- , In the € event that the title shall not:6 4141,-,-t .. :: d insurable, ..- Company, at Cbnparry's option, may cure such defects and shall have sixty (60) days in which to do so, which additional time will extend the conveyance date herein provided. If after reasonable diligence on Ctmpany's part, said title shall not be made good and insurable within the time provided, the Capany shall have the obligation hereunder to substitute other inventory land in Golden Gate Estates of a similar nature and acreage. The Company and the County will mutually establish and agree upon the property to be sutstituted in acoordaance with the above. 5. The lands deeded to the County pursuant to this Agreement el shall be used only to provide governmental facilities for existing and F future residents of Collier County, with all capital improvements to be r. physically located within the geographical boundary of the area known as "Golden Gate Estates" and any proceeds from the sale of dedicated lands as provided herein shall be utilized for capital projects, as �, ^( Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rtibtlefitrliffite Paper Page 142 of 220 .` ` 208 ( 0 C I 0 5 2 000493 OR BOOK PAGE provided herein, to be located within the area known as "Golden Gate Estates*. The governmental facilities which can be constructed ipon said property or with the proceeds of the sale of the prcperty include fire protection facilities, police facilities, public schools, libra- ries and recreational facilities and equipment necessary for the oper- ation thereof. Neither the property donated nor the proceeds from the sale of any dedicated property shall be used for the purposes of ac- quisition, -quisition, construction or maintenance of roads and bridges, or similar projects. If it is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that the County has allowed the lands or any part thereof to be used for any ptspoee other than the aforesaid, the ownership and title thereto shall revert to the Company. The conveyances provided for herein shall be made by the Onpany to the County regardless of whether a present or immediate need exists for such acreage in the year of conveyance. The parties hereto recognize that the progress of development in Golden Gate Estated-benne-tivslbeed for facilities, is not dependant upon the convey'' -- .,;dineiiv - ein. The t Company shall have the r' to . _ = ''}'and mineral rights for , "-be donated hereunder,' . the right of reascnableing d egress. In the event tha`. ',or- ation for or exploitation o any-gas.,, oil or minerals is on s b' 1 results in damage thereto out in adiminink in vol�f : subject property, the, .••• • agr= �. .i.” 'fy £ul y the Cour�y fo t, Such damage or 1 ha "- `� £ I ThThe e Co ty r .: to l i a s. .. .::t un or any I i and all revenue -.- ed..by tt>etof�-• e. f any y described herei \ tl...• 011 .- �i:..- of aft #7 collected so tha ‘it:..., be determined that said nirrues have l utilized only fort._:= s provided herein, 17. It is and agreed that the Coun � 1/1 i right to sell or tr / ) 9h t;d cqutred hereunder. ty shall not sell or trade 08 of said lands ' arils_ year. The County does hereby agre�`etithat ' flu... #-.'by shall be . subject to the same limitations`'t le 8:1 -.4ic purposes within Golden Gate Estates as described in Paragraph 5. Funds acquired frau the sale of the lands shall be used for governmental purposes as described above and shall be used only to acquire other lands, equip- ment, materials or for the constructing of improvements as hereinte- fore described in Paragraph 5. Before any lands nay be sold or traded, the County shall have an appraisal oampleted by an M.A.I. and the contemplated conveyance may be oonsmsanated only if: (a) the sales price is ninety (90%) percent or more of the appraisal fair market value or, (b) the appraisal fair market value of the property to be : I' received in trade is ninety (90%) percent or more of the appraisal fair mmr market value of the lands to be traded by the County. All appraisals ; herein shall be undertaken and dated within ninety (90) days of the closing date of the particular transaction. Upon such sale or trade - the Cbnpany shall quit-claim deed the reverter interest of Ctilpany - l w referenced in Paragraph 5 to County. ., Golden Gate Area Master Plan RlaittfitYMPrite Paper Page 143 of 220 1 209 1 01052 000494 OR BOOK PAGE 8. It is understood and agreed that the Ctapany shall have the right of first refusal to acquire any property the County desires to sell or trade under Paragraph 7 above. The County shall notify the Ckapany of all terms and conditions of any such sale or trade and the COmpany shall have the right and option for thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice to elect to acquire the property for the same consideration and upon the same terns and conditions. If the property is subject of a trade, the County shall, through the appraisal referenced in Paragraph 7, establish the fair market value of the property and the Company shall have the right to acquire the property to be traded for said fair market value amount. The Company shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of such notice to respond to the County by notifying the County of its desire to exercise the right of first refusal. If the right of first refusal is not exercised by Onpany within the stated period, the County small have the right to sell or trade the property to spud► •' - but only at the price of sale and upon the terms arta ,• n F' ' ►.,,,, mated to the Company. Nb sale pr _. , `until the foregoing requi0 om ied with ty the • , ight of t first refusal s h the land, and failure of and failure of ., .-: to exercise such r ' air= --.. shall not effect the •°_„•- - right to exercise ri," _ ;. y case then-j; arising. Thum status of title to !Atli; y ..^ with i right of ,irst refusal opYioi, s = lti. ' - '''' at the time of ... _.4 tie pr..- y a he .t . County confi. _,,.. _.r,. r.' - a., . t.: -• for - = or Shall be ellg •. .r is ee -.:..' ;1." n,'t. "e4---; Z 9. In vi- .. • premises and in c man• - ion .i the obligations - ibilities hereunder, t ,-A-'0 y -re; -- =-- the Company, its . .. .• ation and their sub6i::= i - and I all obligations • 7e_-•• 'bilities, as set forth in i..)-.,- t dated October 4, 197 ,4111ti, which is at .....7,-- ;..(4r' ]fled Exhibit "u', and incarpoti 10. The Company and the ttl: - wally sharing in . revenues frau the sale of excavated spoil materials in the Golden Gate Estates area, and it is mutually understood and agreed that during the duration of this Agreement, the County will continue to have such rights as the Company can convey, at no cost therefor, to utilize such spoil materials that remain available frau tine to time, for fill purposes on the various land parcels conveyed hereby, if such is deemed by the County to be needed. This Agreement will terminate on tecenber 1 31, 1986, except for the provisions of this Paragraph 10. [ 11. All amendments, alterations, modifications or changes to this Agreement to which the parties hereto mutually agree, shall be in i; writing and duly signed by authorized representatives of each party. In the event notice is required to be sent to Company or County P "` pursuant to an amendment, alteration, modification or change, or pursuant to compliance with or default of any obligation set forth herein, such notice shall be delivered by Certified Nbil to: 1?(44.1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan RtinlicipliTffite Paper Page 144 of 220 \ , 210 0MI052 0001, 95 OR BOOK PAGE -- COMPANY: AVATAR PROPERTIES INC. c/o Avatar Holdings Inc. Attention; Legal Department 201 Alhambra Circle Coral Gables, Florida 33134 COUNTY; C01.1I12t Ca2N1Y Board of County Commissioners Collier County Courthouse Naples, Florida 33942 FEOBRAL TRADE CD SSiON: FEDERAL TRADE C1lIISSICN Bureau of Consumer Protection Enforcement Division Vuehitgton, D.C. 20580 12. Coapany affirms that it is duly incorporated and in good standing in the State of Florida, and that the execution and performance of this Agreement is in its corporate powers, having teen duly authorized, and is not in oonntrn*tom!+ of the law or the terms of its charter, by-laws or other-:.. a�`p agreement to which it is a party or i ,;i is or other writings sutmi :gouty with this Aug ? eafter in a -tion with tt�e nt are or shall be true, oar - ,•. .lete, valid and genuine. Cornu-was4nts that it has every fight . enter into thi,(Agr:-i1-nt; ____,J-, \ 13. The lIbws • the State of -&N hall gontthe oro stru tion and int pre - 'on •1 t� \ 14. This is - 're e4men to • P -• to = $ _ I parties hereto -a ct •_ �.f pr.•- y -• above, and th �• aper-- _ y ".g -_, or understandings ) 15. Other , set forth herein, es �e that there are no. - 'T . ' •,., representations mekr� ,,oral i or written relati Agreement. "I< r 16. It is her °a 1 law, custan or 'bot l contrary notwithstanding, that ,rampn T"F_v�e' #1 "all times to enforce the conditions and are .heti -S-ed in strict accordance with the tenors hereof, notwithstanding any conduct or custom on the part of the Canpany in refraining from so doing; and further, that the failure of the Company at any tine or times to strictly enforce its rights hereunder, shall not be construed as having created a custom in any way or manner contrary to the specific conditions and ¢: agreements hereof, or as having in any way modified or waived the same. 17. If it should beanie necessary for either of the parties hereto to resort to legal action or arbitration under this Agreement, W . -5- Golden Gate Area Master Plan R141511.1WY4171ite Paper Page 145 of 220 a 211 1 061052 000 ' 96 • OR BOOK PAGE the nor-prevailing party shall pay all reasonable legal fees, costs and other ecpenses incurred by the prevailing party, including attorneys' fees at trial or appeal level. 18. Invalidation of any provision or clause in whole or in part by judgment or Court order shall, in noway, effect any of the other provisions or clauses which shall remain in full force and effect. IN wrni S AHEREDF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be mated according to their proper authority and seal, this day of Pry- is , 19 3'3-. AVATAR PROPERTIES INC. Witnesses: (CORPORATE SEAL) - cfZn BY: �AlY 7 . t•aU```ems.,.r Attest: ,.� MAWS By: ilhoge thai 41i: } • test: 0$: ,//` 6 L :.cum J. �'t•""r, S (SEAL) 't‘'°:\-1:5N*f4' 6.44„, CIWC + jI -6- Golden Gate Area Master Plan RtYttfilgf illite Paper Page 146 of 220 212 • EXHIBIT "B" UNIT TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 446- 8-7-75` ef W. 150' 1-+3 -t?)V 6 39L N. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 7 81 Entire Tract 9.11 11 107B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.17 co cD 11 139D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 = '".o. no 13 20D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.17 o it-0'v x 1.' - 13 144C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.17 14 114D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 14 127 Entire Tract 5.77 15 35B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 16 84C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 0 17 18C1.13 CA -3 0 17 368 � o�� .s ' 1.13 � .� to rn 17 89 / Entire Tract 4.62 1' 17 10. ' f,,,.,. _ 75' of E. 150' 1.13 18 'D 75' of S. 5' ' 1.17 18 '9B . . :,;' 1.13 18 55 +.1::!4 e + 4.43 18 ' o o 150' 1.13 CM 18 2$ N. 75' of S. 80' 1 19 l'il E. 75' of W. R=' ' ;..// 1.17 1.13 20 2 Entire Tract 8.78 t 20 17A 0. W. 105' of W. 18$ 1.59 20 81➢ f 1.13 20 134C 1.17 23 318 W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 23 58W W. 180' of 330' 1.75 23 75A W. 105 ' of W. 130' 1.63 ` 23 SOD E. 75' of E. 150 -.-7 23 1190 W. 75' of W. 150 :.13 23 142A N. 105' of N. 180' 1.63 23 143A S. 105 ' of S. 180' :.63 2y 49C 75' of 150' 1.13 24 32B W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 24 688 W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 25 70'1 75' W. :80 _.__ , . poJcgn Gate Area Master Plan RWIlitiMI7fite Paper Page 147 of 220 ,. } 213 • UNIT TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 24 97 Entire Tract 4.42 �' 24 106C E. 75' of W. 150" 1.13 24 126A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.63 25 25B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 25 26A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 6 o 25 28A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 0 C) cn 25 28C E. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 7z iv 25 77k W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 26 13A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 27 3OB E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 27 53A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 27 96C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 0 28 35D E. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 "v ob 4. Gl co 28 98D o ".. i' 1.13 rnco 33 1O3D r(AA 0 4. 1.13 33 104B (.5) W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 48 43C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 48 12 ' , . 75 0 0 ' 1.17 49 6: S .1 ' 81 ' .59 49 1'6 E it k .60 49 1-T.:1N. 7 ' .f ,180' .17 50 1' S. 75' of N. :0' -4 Aold .17 50 23 N. 105' of N. , ,c ' Ab 1.59 50 24D N. 75' of N. 15. ' (5) 1.13 50 66A 0 S. 105' of S. 180' 0ers., 1.59 50 1.03D1.13 51 3D ' . i 03^ 1.17 S1 10D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 51 35D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 51 43C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 i. 51 69D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 e 51 50B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 51107C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 _ 95 A Entire Tract 4.09 r 95 38B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 �„\ 95 47D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 95 53W W. 180' of 330' 3.92 95 95D W. 75' of W. 150' -,13 150' Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rattlf}'Mifite Paper Page 148 of 10/4/83 1e 214 1 t11511 t! - 1a8.: 3 ol. J UNIT . TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 95 106C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 46 - Road R/0/W - S32, T48S, 29.28 R26E 96 121 Entire Tract 4.52 97 10 Entire Tract 5.67 o a C, 193 15A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 co — 0 0 193 16C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 o CR 75 of 193 21B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 48B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 54B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 193 72D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 193 93A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 0 CD 193 94D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 -u o 193 i35p � r `-� 3.00 co Cell 194 27A Or.44 + o :-.14/-i, 1.59 � 194 27C /,r ,i N. 75' of S. 150' . ' 1.13 194 30A ' of S. 180' 1.59 194 34 / ; 5' . W. 1 0 1.13 194 5 01 .13 194 6 D S. 75 o - ..13 194 8 d7) t 0' .. j 13 W. 75' of E. : 1 ' il .13 I94 92 / 195 85 Entire Tract 4.77 T� 195 115B ÷ S.-75'75' of N. 18011-7' .) 1.13 195 131N 150' of 330' 2.50 195 133S -1:14PE 'i'' C. 3.00 195 135S S. 1:$ • ' 3.00 i 1 s Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rfi`ttlitgffffite Paper Page 149 of 220 215 L I • 000500 RECORDER'S MEMO: Legibility of writing. Typing or Printing UR '300K PAGE unsatisfactory in this document when received. - • . . ' bad_ I datiU ilmAilt itb del.' 11 it6 ... ...,T-,-4,-. --,.4......,..--...,s....C.W.:-..i.rag,c.‘ ........ ..... - 4....••• -• "".Z.. • • •••"'",,,,..•-••-: ----!••••.:Z.: •• •••.•:".=:...." 4.4T,1;.1'...--:.4,.........,-,,;•••=.. .. .......f• •:-7:71,--,:;,.... -- UNITS By NurtriBER ......,.„...,-,...,.• ,, ,. ..„...„.• .....,.........:-,.-.:.:...--..-IF-. -_- • ___•• ..........4••7•,...•••••:-......4%,.....-•••••",-,-...,..-.1.... .S.7,-"..."...-17rt-'......"6".:•..V....4.F...-r...f4".-". .......,- ).....o.-=..,............0.4,4734. --4.. .:-.. '.:....,. .... .....2. ._.=:.,,-;;;.,...•-•:.;..".,:.7....,...7.7.t.''..T.- '''.... t-I,.....r...'•-.... ...:t2r'7-,71::-.'''.'"-"' --f" f_ .::-:Z..:1,•l':._•1:.-2....neer•-. • • -- '• ''••- .•'w' •.f:77.*:e--7-....:-:.:-_ :7-,-.7,7=7.-_=-........--s.:ts.,-,!..;•-•,...7__,...---, .....• ,:f ..• :,....ki• _A ........:,.... . .._.,,...,,.......:.,.„...,:„:„....,.. .. .......A.,...,. .„, :Pa-ri.Vio...r. ca.1:i.-::f,'7.14.210=•:-....:tei......q. ''.. . • 7,``..n..`i:. 't-fZ-.. ...".".''''17,'..1'4=-::470 --.- :.t76- -,46",".e. '4,!,:.t. ",;-w•T•il-:,,17:-::''''''—'.. --f:?:"-:z'i,:..t.7-:='""..:..-..1±,tonik44 ei, .... 7i...,-:-.--..z.-z•• .:1:.,..;:r.".•.:.t---:'.7..i:,,...iii- .. -- -- •' -- - ' • - ' •,.-1'. i _t&... .„4:-: ,r1..,--.47-,-Zi!t: . -74;--...-1 -:-,.... .....r-.7:::-...::,--,e......L. -.......,2-,7::::--,-......-::._ ,....• \ 71:..7-7 7.7...,...7.7.2...÷..___..7..;.....r.:._:::..........a......i:.,?:....:1....77:_ :.. - .'" S' -:;-"-i-fj*--1.--A rs----.7:--=:1-i:,---3•:# .-4.4.??,-7 t'.::::::Z7::.. " Z-...-..-:: ' , - .......-.........--...., 7.,..---.,....-v=: ;-.-•---1-•-Z.,...-.;0,----•:••;'7.2.....1"6*.r: .. ...7'...'L'C''gV, ••'Lt.,.,Vle0-.432. ...." 7. -...t.,.....:!.....,..e.a::.r. V:,...4--,-."..:_-.tt.tr.;::'::..-' .:...:if'2:4.1'•;...:,..li4.-F-t' -...7-W.,.... ...,-.::::...-_7 7:::.3`ir.",.;.', f'..',.. ":14'.'Ir' • ... . . -. '.."1:7,--..,...-7.•-...7:"--7=:-,:.::.; -•-.--,:2---.1---rz-,-..1-..-:-.- : • ...le!-. ---7---:".4 : ., ccuazA Czmay _, , EN se . lim az' 12. •,,, , ... ,,.....,, -,-.:••.,:-.."-..-.,, - .. - IS 33_ SI SS ...,.....,, _ B .....--- . _ STATE WW1 S-15I -- ..4, _ • Tr . • • . -- .. . - - STATE ROAD 846- „mai ía 01 ."-- A.._ • I mai Lirio—nti--"' -120-011 .- 7._ .. •,-.- § - „aim aftlit,sTeli Rsitilli - --- A ilk -,t .4.-.- . ,.. .t-.--. i_i . 1 ,.. 4.3 tz 13 . ---• • EXHIBIT:"Co-_ - I• :,- 131,1 PIE-10 mit 1 min r-=- = , .1 - • ._ - -• . . - --- -r--• • '• " ' ' ,- - 4 1 L i - — -• -- - - - -''''"*.I I ill I I I•=•4.: Kipling' ___:.. .. • . __ ..., . . .: • . TA F.,_ smirt Neil IM - , I 1-.= • k - i . 'G 0' - i-- . , arizmiiiit., u;Fr.1/10000.04.7 TM WYSS) Z*till • s--,."1 d i - 1 ItarreW111111&" • - 1 ... 'a - ecii3 • . . J° ' Li _ .... ..• .. . ...c• „i:i 0 . ''' . . - . 1mM— .... • . . Liviii tins - --I-al - • FiTnei a lia I 112 , p • .... P -1..., I - .„...,-!. ip. .. _ 131 In MS I Mt lor II Lati-''" • 4 .1% CM is I LW 04\ 10 ,. I ./ ' T4 07:41flar BLVD.0". IIMIEFT".ra : 4,1/4t, • • T4. e MN 1.13 01 ! ._•-• .. • . 2 0 . us us ta I In Ili if I N I 41 x 1 0 07 r , I • . •i Krib.1%. • 1 1 13 Cla. •. ,,84'44'4'14 frktsj . i • 4 SCAL11 • . ! • . . ......... Golden Gate Area Master Plan RtibtlitiVrItilite Paper Page 150 of 220 216 l 1 EXHIBIT D -t:tee!_ . .... 1• _.. ("rho is 1a3ocll `' ) }tiiV::: .'i.C•!iF of Collier County, Florida ("... _ C.,:1nty„) to accept, in principal, a program for the completion of the roads and canals in Golden Gate Estates and the eventual acceptance of . such roads and canals by the County. This Agreement is cr.:, subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Coact. o Ln Pq 1.4. _ The Company estimates the total dollar value of its planned expenditures to be $3,100,000. This total is broken down into four categories as per the..attached Schedule A. The Company would propose to fund $300,000 to the County to be utilized for capital improvements, maintenance o co and restoration work in t - - - . ate Estates canal system. cn. ›P cyl l:e r i Lely $300,000 or m o The Company pr-- o• such sum as is ! to accomplish- e.,(% ring and t restorationo tho_e canals lying South of ewa Boulevard t___ and North o Ta ám '-- ' (w 7 Lc - s are oss'ha tched on Exhibita e t'` mrilli, , \ ,........ -The --do te. t a. •. - s - ' a and ::e. dial effn ` `.,e .,,,1.. road cl 4- raising rais ing of lba elevations on certa { roads prep aptly South of Ste oulevard and fort . 7'- ,�ia] � �.l (as f identified by 46.: lines on Exhibit 2 ayart wciuld cost approximately $l,' + r041I. The Company prop" -s� -sn.4 `' of $500,0033 or such sum as is necessary to accomplish the raising of road elevation fir. ane estimated cost of the road restora- tion and remedial efforts for unaccepted completed roads, • (which work could be deferred until the County determined to have it accomplished) is approximately $700,000. Thi Company proposes to fund this $700,000 to the County for use for capital improvements, restoration and maintenance la• as required by the Golden Gate road system. 1 tf HEC-011011 '-EJiO: l rr rosin or ?rinsing �� writing. TcpinK document of in �: owati,Ea.t.,rc Ns 1 01; ferri tie a. Golden Gate Area-Master Plan Rgilt126Mffite Paper Page 151 of 220 217 I Iit!.'ti::acy by t:hc> CounLy tics:- or :O ..J.:. -i-.i_i“ .a:'..Sti. The Company would he agreeable to the $300.000 canal fund referred to above and the $700.000 road fund referred. to .hove comprisingta single $1,000,000 fund for use by the C7'G County for capital improvements_ and maintenance of roads to — . . o a and/or canals in the Golden Gate Estates area. o cr, N The Company proposes to spend approximately $1,200,000 for water management (retention) and related structures to enhance the overall water management of the Golden Gate . Estates Area. The details of the proposal which at present contemplates•a 500 acre plus or minus retention pond with o -ti o controlled discharge will be refined and.worked out with the t; cre cn County Engineer and nd 1r ttriril�al engineers ''.= . t engaged by the C 4 . - e Comps- - st_i ,' rior to corn- tn ncement of c n tion thereof. ` The C an pr ores i'6,-ORend.4app oxi.mate]y' 00,000 on drainage and dike work in d t 4•ii to that .et\fort above, including a -1:pai(r%.E ci. bie the r they peri- meters. of h •1dn -to Es a : ea. \,) ( Ic...4 As statedrev o sly;' Ehe •cit y it e r D initial approval ofx , Bove concept, which once t VniAliides the ;r, ir 91 , acceptance bytion of the entire Estates canal system (w3. h t xception of thea, .s outh of Stewart Boulevard a . Nr 1 f upon the tender of the sum of $'300, Trustees of GAC to the County. Implicit in the request is the understanding that an application for acceptance of those canals South of Stewart Boulevard and North of Tamiami Trail will he accepted by the County upon the completion of the clearing; ';';W • 4 G BEE(tfiitER'S MEMO: Legibility of writing. Typing or Printing nn<ati.fartory in this do.uutent .hen rr.rice.I. Golden Gat- •rea r aster Plan RbliittelyeMfite Paper Page 152 of 220 .\ t 218 i . Am, rc;:toration wu . contempiarca net',...., . . coL-dition consis: cnr ...;iH1 originJ: .2....:.. ,- .....,:-..:, , • • , KE IT RESOLVED chat the foregoins pro , is nerchy approved in principal, subject to furthi,r r(25inclmen!:. . , . . DATED: October -4, 1077 . gOARD. OF COUNTY COM'clISSIONERS ATTEST. COLLIER CO3-TY, FLORIDA IIILTApk-LAEACOpy/61;lk 4;1 127;:j49.:,,,-4,.......-„,,,yy..,„. Llir • - -..."(.• .e 7,4 - a ,....;..fi.c• r• - '-' .rit. - - :-. -:' • . . o=as :. Arc er - •-"Z -of- Chairman _ . :.... .. - .... : .. • 7 . . - . C3 C=1 '• e . • .., . . .. CAC CORPORATION - ' .-_ . G3 . , WI;tpes,sid:-. .f • . • cn c) - A.„„, 4/ ,• : J ..,- • --.-... .7;07 - .: ...• ..—....--- - ----.....di-..r de e , illy Ai 401F . - 7 . '. —Ii.. ‹:/, .; , ..". , 'Co-Trustees COOA >, Co .0 Li • C=I C3 Ill (22 •• -. - (t1.PS4A(,, . 4IF Ia Ys I. \), • . . • 5(.14 . a• . MI07 eCt ( S . )e .0'... 41 . -- E CIV--1/4 • • . • ,: 0, . r E • RECOR DER'S NIEJIO: Legibility of writing. Typing or Prtrin:: unsati4artory in this document whom rerivra. Goldn bate Area Master Plan FitiAlkyrilite Paper 1 Page 153 of 220 A ' 219 1 0r, 1052 000504 OR BOOK `,2 77 PAGE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 1. Canal Maintenance $600,000 This provides for cleaning of North Arca 32+ Miles 0 approximately . $300,000 and clearing of South Canals • • (South of Weirs) e approximately • $300,000. 2. Road Restoration Remedial $1,200,000 efforts on unaccepted Roads, plus raising certain South Roads to Construction Standards. A. Raising est. cost $500 B. Restor ' an dial 0 3. eta ° ement Retention keJ ( $1,200,000 ted structures. 4. Dra• ag 11I.-k--e9 work `' w $ 100,000 r ' ‘ I \ $3,100,000 . 1\nt...i, I 11t)(071 ( 1-, 1 • 1 1 IV e ' t 8 ik / ;� \\6N-,„Nt.'4 v1 it .5 a NE u4.E t , Sar, *, 1,12tLq Golden Gate Area Master Plan Riat11262tl'Wlite Paper Page 154 of 220 A " 720 liii O O. M •OM cDOOO ON O Qtv vZbrN_ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1111 1 1111 :11111111111 11 1111 i iiii i ii iiiiiiiii M M MQZQ M 1111 1111 w a a a a a ¢ a a I i i Ili! ill iiiiiiiii I II III _ 11 1111 .. III- 111111111 HUW 1111 1 1111 1 11 111111111 s M n v r, o v 1 I 81101111 ; III 800 ""7 " ; II ■©©©0©©0000®®®B®88880®®®BMIUMMO®®®8®B Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 155 of 220 221 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 156 of 220 222 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 ifs 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 157 of 220 223 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 158 of 220 224 From: castillaglass120@gmail.com Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 12:05 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future Plan recommendation Please open 1-75 and Everglades Exit the ramp is there,we need acces Thank you Angel and Ingrid Castilla Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 159 of 220 225 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 sammyosj 1100 Commercial Blvd # 118 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 160 of 220 22R 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 161 of 220 227 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:militorlProgers.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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 162 of 220 228 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 163 of 220 229 From: Michael R. Ramsey<michael.r.ramsey@embargmail.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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 164 of 220 230 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 165 of 220 231 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.orq 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 Respectful , • 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 220 232 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 220 233 02 November 2016 Page 3 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.orr 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 220 234 02 November 2016119 Page 4 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estales-Ciric.ore 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 220 235 02 November 2016113) Page 5 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Ciric.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 220 236 0 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. Respectfumoi``""lly,'' ,. "a4(14 M. '- 'amsey,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 220 237 28 November 2016 Page 2 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34776-6002 Estates-Ciric.ore 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 RFIVIUD 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 220 238 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 Nancy Richie Dennis P. Vasey Clarence Tears Rob Griffin Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Web Site: http://www.collierscd.org Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 173 of 220 239 F'Rr„4 h t lil' NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS M.James Burke•Christopher L. Crossan • Norman E. Feder•J. Christopher Lombardo•John 0. 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 220 240 Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220 241 I IIMMI1A ____. I - I I 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 Ill 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 176 of 220 242 847-291-3700 From:VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday,June 10, 2016 3:43 PM To:chenning@continentalfin.com; rrosin@peat.com Cc:ienglish@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/commu nits-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. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 177 of 220 243 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. Thwdwc.e.h-t 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 178 of 220 244 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. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 179 of 220 245 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 180 of 220 246 CI GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects 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- 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 . .-. - - - . Ai.' I _.- 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 220 248 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 183 of 220 249 From:Angela Turner[mailto:ajturner37@hotmail.com] j 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. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 184 of 220 9cn Subject:GG Parkway From: aiturner37@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<aiturner37@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. 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 185 of 220 251 t Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off 175. 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. l 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 4 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 186 of 220 oco 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. 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 1-75 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 1-75,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 1-75, 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 thank you for your input. Sincerely, Edwin H. Koert 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 187 of 220 253 239-289-4420 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> 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 188 of 220 254 HELP PRESERVE THE QUIET,RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHO 'BE INVOLVED* May,2016 To:Concerned Citizens, You are being contacted because you live in our neighborhood and signed a petit community leaders to prohibit the allowance of any commercial rezoning effc approximately two mile stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Boulevard, Enclosed are the following: 9. A Notice from Collier County Government of a public meeting/worksho 0 o.m.on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. See the re meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of obtaining the corn concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Masto changes could potentially include amendments to the Master Plan tat commercial development or apartment buildings alone Golden Gate Par Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. 2. Questions and Answers Concerning the Proposed Commercialization Parkway. This information was previously distributed to you by our neighbc response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate Parkway to so — their efforts to commercialize the Parkway. WHAT TO DO; ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOP, AND FUTURE MEETINGS CONCERNING TI PROVIDE YOUR INPUT AND SUPPORT. YOUR PRESENCE AT THESE MEETINGS WILL G TOWARD EXPRESSING THE RESOLVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID THE NEGATIVE WOULD RESULT FROM ZONING CHANGES ALONG THE PARKWAY. PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY. YOU MAY RECEIVE NOTI( MEETINGS BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, BY CONTAC LENGEN AT 239-252-7268 OR THE EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEND AN EMAIL, WHETHER OR NOT YOU ATTEND THE MEETING, WE ENCOURAGE YOU LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN TO: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY OPPC CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARI LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL. PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. I AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAININ( RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARM NEIGHBORHOOD." J–. TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. II IS OPPOSITION TO BE HEARD. 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220 255 • Collier County Government Growth Management Department. Contact: Connie Deane Zoning Division Community Liaison 2800 N. horseshoe Drive 239-252-8192 or 8365 Naples, Florida 34104 colliergov.net twitter.com/CollierPIO facehonk.comICollierGa voutubecum/CollierGmm April 27, 2016 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Ares Mast( Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on t Area Master Plan (GGAMP), The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning documc, {` Cale area that shows the vision for the community in the next 10 to 20 years, The plan cor growth, what it should look like and how land uses should be arranged to live, work. shop The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Bouleva will he held at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Carter, 4 i Parkway,Naples, Florida 34116 It is critical to the success of the Master Plan that the residents of this area participate in deli vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed, Agendas will he posted prior at huns://www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies. During the coming year,there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and sl on the(1 TAMP, including advertised public meetings,digital forums, website iniormatior web content. All interested parties are invited to visit https://www.colliereov,net frequently, to see the background materials, current planning efforts and areas for direct pul county plannersmay research and gather the issues and concerns important to all stakeholi email updates or to provide comments,please email us at: GGAMPRestudycolliergov.: Two or more members of the Board of County Commissioners, City of Naples City Gout Marco Island City Council or any of their respective advisory committers may be pi participate at these workshops- The subject matter of these workshops may be an item for action at future meetings of these boards, councils or agencies. Anyone who requires an auxiliary Hid or service foreffective communication, or o accommodations in order to participate in these proceedings_ should contact the Collier C Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E.,Naples, Florida 34112, or 239-25 as possible, but no later than 4S hours before each of the scheduled events, S accommodations will he provided at no cost to the individual. s Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220 256 Ouestion.s and Answers Concerning the t.pon announcement that the 1-75 Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate planned. the residents expressed mi ri Parkway development of the interchange might commercial and conditional uses consistently made their concerns km leaders, and the response from such 1Vhat is being proposed? 1 here is an effort underway to been that the impacts of adding the change the Collier County Growth Management Plan, and surrounding residential ncighbarhox} thereafter the County's zoning ordinance,to allow commercial and the neighborhood would he pro uses along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road development; recognizing that inters}. and Santa Barbara Blvd (the "Corridor'): 1 he proponents of development. in fact, in consideratit this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at larg front on Golden Gate Parkway. The proponents of leaders put in place significant harrit commercialization are proposing to ultimately rezone the rezoning and the expansion of conciiti, entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors. developers and What barriers are in plat commercial interests. The proponents are pooling their money commercialization of the Corridor' to hire attorneys, engineers and other professionals: The has been for a long time, zoned proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential zoning classification land. Their first step will be to propose an amendment to the commercial uses; and the Growth Ma part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known as longi: time. designated the Con the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (the "GGAMP"). which neighborhood to he used for primarily guides future land use decisions and presently prohibits commercial uses along the Corridor. in December 2007.contemporaneous the 1-75 interchange, the Board of Why should this change to the Growth Management Plan consistent with a great deal of coo= be resisted? If the proponents are successful in changing the consideration, adopted an amcndme n GG TP.it will pave the way for the Corridor to be filled with contained the following policy statem conunercial uses; very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. in order to "Recognizing I facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant residential nature of ti changes to the roadway system in the neighborhood arc being surrounding the planned 1-7: proposed. The proponents want to create a system of hack Golden Gate Parkway, a: roads along the full length of the rear boundaries of the lots restrictions on conditional fronting on the Parkway to facilitate access to commercial Conditional Uses Subweetiut establishments.They want to eliminate direct access to Golden Gate Area Master Plan. tilt Gate Parkway for many of the existing streets. They want to further commercial zoning install additional traffic lights along the Parkway and funnel abutting.; CGolden Gate Pat all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The Itivingstc}n Road and ' commercial establishments, including gas stations, Boulevard. No new comms convenience stores, retail estahlishments and offices will be permitted on properties attract additional traffic and congestion to the area, including accessing Golden Gate Park transient traffic from 1-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. In improvements and utility facilities. such as sewer and water, exception {arc that twisting will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Cci additional traffic. These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrict, which is Ic would likely span multiple decades, as has happened on Pine northwest corner of the Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community, Golden Gate Parkway and and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding Boulevard]. neighborhood, will be significant. And there is no present demand or need (hr additional commercial establishments in Also,as a result of the same the area that can justify these adverse impacts. The same Board of County Commissioners types of businesses and services as are being proposed are requirement regarding conditional use ,^ already nearby. "Recongnizing Is this a new issue for the surrounding neighborhood'.' No, residential nature of tl it is not The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have :„r,.,,,,.,a;,,,, 0.,m ..a,.,,,./t 1_7, 9 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220 257 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara of local area neighlseorhoods we Boulevard, except" [there is a limited anticipated. The only changes that ha exception for David Lawrence Center, are those which were anticipated. Center Point Community Church and provisions of the GGAMP restricting essential services]. Further no properties adopted in anticipation of such chart abutting streets accessing Golden Gate area;actually, in anticipation of the pit Parkway within the above-defined segment to bear as a result of those changes. shall be approved for conditional uses except" [there is a limited exception for The proponents will also assert that tha David Lawrence Center, Center Point desirable places to live. Some prop Community Church and essential services], Parkway, recognizing the value of the have made sizable investments in bu As mentioned above, the-Growth Management Plan/GGA?►1P their homes to make them nice Plat. is intended to guide fitture land use decision making, widening of the Parkway and increase Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their property will ul amending the above provisions of the GGAMP. Amending `Commercial"" and are therefore hold the QGAM P is an expensive and time consuming process,and their property. Some proponents migh amendments must be approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of blight along of 4 votes)of the 5 member Board of County Commissioners. favorable to their cause. A clear sign The goal is to keep these substantial barriers in place and to that the area will remain residential w prevent commercialization. the health and viability of the entire n an even more desirable area for all Na Why is this happenine now? Property values have been commute through. rising. The proponents of commercialization see an opportunity to sell or develop their lots and reap large What can von financial rewards. There have been changes in local government leadership; and the proponents arc hopeful that The good news is that there are signi the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the propos resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled. in order to achieve their objet tI\es They believe, perhaps, the time is ripe. Those are the real vtity there should be any change to the reasons. GGAMP. Ura the other hand, the However, the proponents will assert that they are unfairly appearanceaeet leaders to maintainar t restricted bythe currentprovisions of the CiGAMP. Yet, surrounding and utility f the Carrick neighborhood and protect while the community undertook the proems of considering the residents has not been tested, It i future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to spe; through public hearings. the proponents were almost entirely influence in order to resist the pressure: absent. On the other hand, those interested in avoiding the bear by the proponents of commercialii commercialization of the Corridor spoke one And there was strong community-wide sentiment to keep the Corridor Yon can expect to be invited by , uncluttered by commercial uses. involved. You may be asked to sign government leaders, write letters. atte Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to to"properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this proses, within the above-defined segment" (i.e., the side streets) bearing upon the outcome. You are en Unfaul matter with people residing insi neighborhood; to encourage the Furthermore,many of the proponents have purchased their lots commercialization of the Corridor. along the Corridor subsequent to adoption of the currant provisions of the GGAMP, !crowing well that they were Traiitionally, the Naples community a purchasing a lot in a residential area - designated to remain a in favor of maintaining the predominan residential area. of the Corridor. They have put in ,/"\ ' commerrciialization, The proponent The proponents will assert that a change to GO'MP is Golden Gate Parkway will not prevail necessitated by significant changes to the surrounding area the surrounding neighborhood act as it resulting from the 1-75 interchange, other roadway and it does not matter. Please take 10 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 192 of 220 258 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 193 of 220 259 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 1-75 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 194 of 220 9Rn 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 195 of 220 261 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 apposition 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 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 197 of 220 263 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 198 of 220 264 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 199 of 220 265 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,F1.34105 Sent from Jo's iPad 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 200 of 220 : TIMMI 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 201 of 220 267 From: Whitney Murphy<wnofl@aol.com> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 11:20 AM To: Van LengenKris 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 202 of 220 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 203 of 220 269 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 220 270 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.NaplesHorneSpecialist.com 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 205 of 220 271 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 retable 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 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 206 of 220 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> 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 207 of 220 273 Gate Subject:GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on GoldenG t 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 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 208 of 220 97A 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:aiturner37@hotmail.com Date:Wed,4 Jun 2014 19:37:33-0400 To:fredcovle@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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 210 of 220 n-m Thank you. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From:Angela Turner<aiturner37@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 175. 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 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 211 of 220 277 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 1-75 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 1-75,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 1-75, 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> 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 212 of 220 278 HELLP PRESERVE THE QUIET,RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHO( "`BE INVOLVED' May, 2016 To:Concerned Citizens, You are being contacted because you live in our neighborhood and signed a petitii community leaders to prohibit the allowance of any commercial rezoning effor approximately two mile stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Boulevard, Enclosed are the following: 3. A Notice from Collier County Government of a public meeting/workshop 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. See the rel meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of obtaining the comr concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Master changes could Potentially include amendments to the Master Plan that commercial development or apartment buildings atom Golden Gate Park Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. 2. Questions and Answers Concerning the Proposed Commercialization o Parkway. This information was previously distributed to you by our neighbor response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate Parkway to soli "' their efforts to commercialize the Parkway, WHAT TO DCO ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOP, AND FUTURE MEETINGS CONCERNING TH PROVIDE YOUR INPUT AND SUPPORT. YOUR PRESENCE AT THESE MEETINGS WILL GC TOWARD EXPRESSING THE RESOLVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID THE NEGATIVE WOULD RESULT FROM ZONING CHANGES ALONG THE PARKWAY. PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY. YOU MAY RECEIVE NOTICI MEETINGS BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, BY CONTAC LENGEN AT 239-252-7268 OR THE EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO C SEND AN EMAIL. WHETHER OR NOT YOU ATTEND THE MEETING, WE ENCOURAGE YOU LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN 5 TO: KrisVanLengen@caliiergov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY OPPO$ CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARK LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALE PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. I AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARAC NEIGHBORHOOD_„ TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. IT IS - OPPOSITION 10 BE HEARD. 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220 279 Collier County Government 111 Growth Management Department Contact Connie Deane Zoning Division Community Liaison 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 239-252-8192 or 8365 Naples, Florida 34104 colliergov.nct twitter.com/CollierPIO fatebook.comiCollierGol voutube.com/CollierGov April 27, 201.6 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Area Maste: Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on ii Area Master Plan (GGAMP), The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning docurnen Gate area that shows the vision for the community in the next 10 to 20 years, The plan cons growth, what it should look like and how land uses should be arranged to live, work, shop g The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Roulevar will he held at 630 p.m. on Wednesday, May 11 at Golden Gate Community Caner, 47( Parkway, Naples, Florida 34116 It is critical to the success of the Master Plan that the residents of this area participate in defir vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed. Agendas will be posted prior at httos://www.colliergov.net/CMPrestudies. During the coming year,there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and sh on the GOA MP, including advertised public meetings, digital forums, website information web content. All interested parties are invited to visit httzs,://www.collierEov.neth frequently, to see the background materials, current planning efforts and areas for direct pub county planners may research and gather the issues and concerns important to all stakehold' email updates or to provide comments,please email us at: GGAMPRestudvAcolliereay.n Two or more members of the Board of County Commissioners, City of Naples City Coun' Marco Island City Council or any of their respective advisory committees may be pt.( participate at these workshops. The subject matter of these workshops may be an item for action at future meetings of these boards, councils or agencies. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service for effective cormnunication, or oi accommodations in order to participate in these proceedings, should contact the Collier C( Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E., Naples,Florida 34112, or 239-25'; as possible, but no later than 48 hours before each of the scheduled events. Su accommodations will be provided at no cost to the individual. 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 214 of 220 7n Questions and Answers Concerning the Upon announcement that the 1-75 Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate planned. the residents expressed Parkwaydevelopment of the interchange might commercial and conditional uses. consistently made their concerns kno% What is being Proposed? There is an effort underway to leaders, and the response from such I bee change the Collier County Growth Management Plan, ands that the impacts of adding the I thereafter the County's zoning ordinance,to allow commercial surrounding residential neighborhood and the neighborhood would be proti uses along Golden {late Parkway between Livingston Road development: recognizing that interclr and Santa Barbara Blvd(the 'Corridor). The proponents of development, In fact, in conridcretioi this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at targe. front on Golden Gate Parkway, The proponents of leaders put in place significant barrier commercialization are proposing to ultimately rezone the rezoning and the expansion of ccrnditio entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors, developers and What barriers are in _place commercial interests. The proponents are pooling their money commercialization of the Corridor? to hire attorneys, engineers and other professionals, The has been for a long time, zoned proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential zoning classification 11 land. Their first step will be to propose an amendment to the commercial uses;and the Growth Man part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known a.5 brig time, designated the Corgi. the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (the "GGAMP"). which neighborhood to he used for primarily i guides future land use decisions and presently prohihit.K commercial uses along the Corridor. in December 2007,contemporaneous t the 1-75 interchange, the Board of ( Why should this change to the Growth Management Plan consistent with a great deal of comm be resisted? If the proponents are successful in changing the consideration, adopted an atne udnten GGAMP,it will pave the way=for the Corridor to be filled with • contained the following,policy rtaterne commercial uses; very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. In order to "Recognizing th facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant residential nature of eft► changes to the roadway system in the neighborhood are being surrounding the planned 1-75 proposed, The proponents want to create a system of hack Golden Crate Parkway. as roads along the full length of the rear boundaries of the lots restrictions on conditional fronting on the Parkway to facilitate access to commercial Conditional ',Nes Subsection establishments.They want to eliminate direct access to Golden Gate Area Master Plan, that Gate Parkway for many of the existing streets. They want to fitrihcr commercial zoning install additional traffic lights along the Parkway and funnel abutting, Golden Gate D'art all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The l,itnn_*,fon Road and S commercial establishments, including gas stations, � .__ Boulevard. No new comma convenience stores, retail establishments and offices will be permitted on properties a attract additional traffic and congestion to the area, including accessing Golden Gate Park, transient traffic from i-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. /Mt improvements and utility facilities, such as sewer and water, exception for that existing will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Con; additional traffic.These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrkt, which is lot would likely span multiple decades, as has happened on Pine northwest corner of the i Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community, Golden Gate Parkway and and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding Boulevard", e7rdf, neighborhood. will be significant. And there is no present demand or need for additional commercial establishments in Also, as a result of the same o the area that can justify these adverse impacts. The same Board of County Commissioners types of businesses and sen'icus as arc being proposed are requirement regarding conditional uses already nearby. "Recognizing ti. is this a nen issue for the surrounding neighborhood? No, residential nature of tit it is not. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have r „a;,,,, ..i,A.,,,ii,t t_•a, 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220 281 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara of local area neighborhoods wen Boulevard, except.' (there is a limirc,d anticipated. The only changes that hay exception ,fro,- David Lawrence Censer, are those which were anticipated. Censer Point Communit>• C'hurch and provisions of the GGAMP restricting s sserit ed services/. Further no properties adopted m anticipation of such chang abutting streets accessing Golden Gate area;actually, in anticipation of the pre Parkway within the above-defined segment to bear as a result of those changes_ shall be approved for conditional uses except" /there is a limited exception for The proponents will also assert that the! David Lawrence Center, Center Point desirable places to live. Some prope Community Church and essential services]. Parkway. recognizing the value of them have made sizable investments in butt As mentioned above, the Growth Management Plan?(;CAMP their homes to make them nice place is intended to guide future land use decision making. widening of the Parkway and increases Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their property will ult amending the above provisions of the GGAMP. Amending ``Commercial" and are therefore holdit the GG. 1!' is an expensive and time consuming process,and their property. Some proponents might amendments must be approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of blight along 11 of 4 votes) of the 5 member Board of County Commissioners. favorable to their cause. A clear Signa 'l he goal is to keep these substantial harriers in place and to that the area will remain residential wo prevent commercializationthe health and viability of the entire ne an even more desirable area for all Nap Why is this happenin;_ now? Property values have been commute through. rising. The proponents of commercialization see an oppnmmity to sell or develop their lots and reap large What eau'host d. financial rewards, There have been changes in local government leadership: and the proponents are hopeful than The good news is that there are signif the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the proporn resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled. in order to achieve their objectives. 3 They believe, perhaps. the time is ripe. Those are the real why there should be any change to the 1 reasons. G(.AMP. On the other hand. the : government leaders to maintain th 1lowever_ the proponents will assert that they art. unfairly appearance and utility of the C'orridoi restricted by the current provisions of the CCiAMP. Yet, surrounding neighborhood and protect t while the community undertook the process of considering the residents has not been tested. It is future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to speal through public hearings. the proponents were almost entirely influence in order to resist the pressures absent. On the other hand, those interested in avoiding the bear b'. the proponents of commercializi commercialization of the Corridor spoke out. And there was - strong community-wide sentiment to keep the Corridor You can expect to be invited by y uncluttered by commercial uses. involved_ You may he asked to sip r government leaders, write letters. alien Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to }e to"properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this process within the above-defined segment' (i.e.. the side streets) bearing upon the outcome. You are enc. Unfair'? matter with people residing utsid neighborhood; to encourage then Furthermore,many of the proponents have purchased their lots commercialization of the Corridor. along the Corridor subsequent to adoption of the current provisions of the (J(JAMP, knowing well that they were Traditionally, the Naples community an, purchasing a lot in a residential area - designated to remain a in favor of maintaining the predominant residential arta. of the Corridor. They have put in pl eommercializaticFn. The proponents The proponents will assert that a change to GGAMP is Golden Gate Parkway will not prevail s necessitated by significant changes to the surrounding area the surround ng neighborhood act as if 1 resulting from the 1-75 interchange, other roadway and it does not cranes. Please take tl 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220 282 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. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 217 of 220 283 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 JamespduffV(d�comcast.net t x This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com I 1 Page 218 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 7R4 CHEFFY PASSIDOMO ATTORNEYS AT LAW EDWARD K.CHEFFY 821 Fifth Avenue South Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer ANDREW H.REISS Board Certified Business Litigation Lawyer Naples,Florida 34102 Board Certified Business Litigation Lawyer JOHN M.PASSIDOMO O Telephone: (239)261-9300 WILLIAM J.DEMPSEY Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer www.napleslaw.com Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer JOHN D.KEHOE R.BRUCE ANDERSON Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer NICHOLAS P.MIZELL LOUIS D.D'AGOSTINO DEBBIE SINES CROCKETT Board Certified Appellate Practice Lawyer BRIAN J.THANASIU DAVID A.ZULIAN Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer Board Certified Construction Lawyer MARIA VIGILANTE CLAY C.BROOKER Board Certified City,County and Local Government Lawyer Of Counsel: GEORGE L.VARNADOE DIRECT DIAL: (239)659-4942 rbanderson rcnapleslaw.com November 1,2017 Via Email: krisvanlengen@colliergov.net Growth Management Department Attn: Kris VanLengen Collier County Planning Manager 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,Florida 34104 RE: Golden Gate Master Plan -Transitional Conditional Uses Dear Mr. VanLengen: Wayne Arnold and I represent LDJ Associates, Ltd.,the Larry E. Brooks Trust and Larry E. and Maria R. Brooks who own 12.73 acres located on Collier Boulevard between 13th Avenue Southwest and the Florida Power and Light PUD. This property is the subject of a GMP Amendment application to be designated as a Neighborhood Center Subdistrict to allow intermediate commercial uses. That application was put on hold pending the update of the Golden Gate Master Plan. We have reviewed the draft White Paper for the Golden Gate Master Plan regarding Transitional Conditional Uses ("TCU"). We support the Staff recommendation to amend and require nonresidential uses on only one side of a property that would be eligible to apply for a TCU along the West side of busy 6-lane Collier Boulevard, as is allowed on the East side of Collier Boulevard and the rest of the Estates. We note that the "Transitional Conditional Uses"Section 3d of the Master Plan presently excludes from TCU eligibility: "Site shall not be adjacent to permitted Essential Service as identified in Section 2.6.9 of the Land Development Code, except for libraries and museums". Electrical transmission and distribution lines, substations, and emergency power structures are Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 219 of 285 Permitted Uses in most zoning districts. The FPL PUD (copy attached) allows those uses in addition to customer service and commercial buildings, open storage of materials and equipment for construction and maintenance, and truck parking and fueling facilities. Attached are four photos of some of the uses and structures that are a part of the operations on the FPL PUD property including a large new two-story operations service center building that is under construction. Also attached are the architectural plans for this new building. The FPL PUD is so much more than just a simple neighborhood electrical substation. We would request that the Transitional Conditional Uses be amended to add as an exception(along with libraries and museums) "electrical substations operated in conjunction with onsite commercial or industrial uses". The subject property is uniquely situated in that it is not adjacent to a neighborhood center, yet has a quasi-industrial land use located contiguous to it. From a planning perspective, the currently permitted use of very low density single family residential development is not compatible with the adjacent land use, and an opportunity to obtain approval for limited non-residential uses through the conditional use process would afford the property owner the ability to obtain a compatible land use. As noted in the white paper, Collier Boulevard has been 6-laned, further making the site incompatible for very low density residential development. The conditional use process requires public hearings and informational meetings,which insure that there will be public input once a specific use is proposed for the site. The conditional use process also allows the Board of County Commissioners to impose conditions of approval in order to insure the use is compatible with surrounding uses. We believe that providing the opportunity to obtain a conditional use on the property is the appropriate planning process. We respectfully request that you consider our proposed language and include this letter with its attachments in the backup materials for the Golden Gate Master Plan update that you prepare. Please feel free to contact Wayne and I if you have any questions. Sincerely, R. Bruce Anderson RBA/nung CC: Larry Brooks Wayne Arnold Enclosures Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220 286 Z:\ACID€Projects\O\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\PUnn�nq\2016-06-20 GMSC-P-BASE on Suv y.dwq(CSP)Fred UDod Jun 21,2017- 1:07pm SIDENTIAL) ESTATES ESTATES ESTATE (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) (DEVELOPED WATER COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY CANAL § y / y �- <// m omNno G xj e \ �NN00°28'30""W 6680005) ' 75.00'(P) i7 275. 75.00(0)_ A. I / '4 / /'7.-// i /,‘ --/-V-7/--1 .-) ,/ l!r s / /~ m.4sS. w wSa+lau. 3. w w war}L s.w i w ..,, 1 / / m ,...,..,,,,,,,,,,73,,,,..6.,,,,,..:47.,tivi-k,,I,.., ,,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„-, . n / • , ' . . . o m 1 �� t �� I" r m u i • ' e v I— .. O $ m o m o m w K00D0 � cn o Co cry o0 c33 � m 1 z Z— mN � 0D mn cn c .- cnym I � P m �'i G) m � c� � m y PvzOp I Pm D r- CDom H mZ � cn occ� o - i hi > m -n > --1 GTcn z0 w Z-,,-0C- � � y m _ m 1- m D � O O D z z I 41 ;� � o � m � m -< o -1 '� a X I m cn n D It cn . m ' . . "I z /\:':. .,, ,, , ,:...-::,;= ..n,,,,....,,,,"-..,,T,,,:,-,:„:4,,; .,..,, ' .. 1:. , _....,,\ D 1// �/ // // // A/ 1 i //1 //��//�///////// ////////p/ // I -�. 1� N00°28'48"W 330.09'(0) { O 47,r _, /,r // I k g m S'm i m �/ / o Q I O/ � sN/ / / OT i i 9 y /// / .. . Z z M m I .a 1 IT'' O o _ _ p4 a * m cn 5r z ° ° 25'PRESERVE — D co 0 m m Nur O m .. /' STRUCTURE SETBACK x r cn o F D ��v T �m I. aD -I Dm o �w 1 .> m oo K cn oo 0 I \ 1,r CO i 414 ril SI o _", ep. n.e m 275 00'( 75.00'(P) Oi m n I 0 275.00'(0) >/ 75.00'(5) '> �+ N00°19'10"E 330.00(P) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) �I 1 `— WEBER BLVD. S.. _ N00°28'48"W 350.00'(5) N00°28'48'W 330.19'(5) Arn '°1 RIGHT-OF-WAY s�� o o m v o m ►•C m m 0 O O o Zm m cn C o o z 1y cn cn r- cmn O I p m -1 Dm Dm w �b E0) vO -< Zm o IP m Q o o z m m m n mI 2 1. 11 m CO O N PROJECT: CLIENT: ' REVISIONS DESIGNED BY: 0 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH .E.R. z GRACE ROMANIAN DRAWN BY: o CHURCH A.E.R. 11 DAV I B B R I N SHEET TITLE' 6017 PINE RIDGE RD.,#84 CHECKED BY. NAPLES,FL 34119 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples,Florida 34104 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN PROJECT NO.: 16-0106 P 239.434.6080 F.239.434.6084 `Company Cert.of Aollwrkallon No.00009498 REV. DATE: DESCRIPTION / Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH—CR 951\DWG\Planning\2016-06-20 GMSC—P—BASE on Survey.dwg(CSP(ZOOMOUT))Fred.Hood Jun 21,2017— 1:07pm i -------i--i--i-- i� i��i �i� i i i��i��i�iia.r.i 1�i ter.iaar. ESTATES ' 1 (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES ESTATES ESTATES I 1 (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) (DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I co I o COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY 1 I 1 1I 1 I I CANAL $ e I 1 - Ao IAl I 001°, (, l I +w v 1 �� �IaIIIIrl11� 1� 1I l°LalfllLllIlll�l11 IFIL' �x o i I ^ O I J Y, a�tp a \ m o m w 3pDp 1 =® 8 m I v w c� c�Am ...,......I I Zm onI I E. II m�D �2 m C�DDm ,91 �I �CSt me Pm m_v P P"bZOTDmDmmDWW11--1 <—mrnrrIlm �mrm A-- v—I m tv7-j r1—1 x 12—{ set — ccret cn I I v 8 ,\ — . r:. z 1 1 o � r is /� iI. $n o i 1 o rt°°„<aw °°9,e1 I � • 1 1 m a _m I/// i/'z. , L '- 0 m M m z ---- - owe._ _ —I D,- 2 m I Z G m Ie o I ..ACK < r m ms s m� 01 69� , ,L TD I n 1 1 < _ A I m M A t - Aon c 1 m m z 1 D r \ 1 apt 6 __. k a �sl, w / °I51 —) 1 ` 275,1, I Koa:e.ew»°°,°, WEBER BLVD.S.:x_ � rt°°,e4aW ;s, / l I o grs1 RIGHT-OF-WAY 0 + m 0 0 m r m r I o co0 1 m m Im 1 o m—I I m D m D g r2,1I +D-4 D r mm gm m -C 1 m 73 M co N m cn1 i z 1 1'71 r_ D O H I I O n O v) z _o glw O l 1 rn I. t2*Z o 1" Ili 11,�II 0•1 O � _N O co- °PROJECT: (CLIENT: ' REVISIONS m GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DESIGNED BV:AE.R. (o GRACE ROMANIAN DRAWN ay. CHURCH A.E.R. ° DAVIDSON 6017 PINE RIDGE RD.,#64 CHECKED BY ENGINE 651 NCs SHEET TITLE: NAPLES,FL 34119 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 PROJECT NO.: Naples,Florida 34104 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN P:239.434.6060 F:239.434.6064 16-0106 Company Cart.of Authorization No.00009496 ` `REV. DATE: DESCRIPTION , COLLIER BOULEVARD C-R.951 200'RIGHT OF WAY ill N00'1010"E 680.00)P) P j N00'28'33"W 680.00(S) �` ' 75.001P) .�•/ 275.00'(P) I d— 75.00(8) � 330.00'(P) 275.00(S) I 330.00(S) 1 H ET X01 1 O1 O 2 I kQ I X c m cid 'PC 1E2 I AP 1 m0xv Ori D1 0m =N-iS m2 ocziH N4 o,>OZm-imoaCZ z� hi 1 1 p= S 00 0I -1 0�0 I g A'`S� 1s romp 1 R gwg XNS,omFa ppi� Al; 0 Om �m� 0z Im5 yo TZD� �-i p0,1 w ji I ' 4 m m23 mN-I N -0p < IO 00x 0m0 v 0 I O m :a O 1 m�r- S m gg I tooZ--II �I - m roNn< mZZ-1 ,illi I 0G)cri ;N OZ� 1 NO0'1910'E 330.001C) N00°28'48'W 330.09(0) O m N n0 731'•A Z-I n m u, m Z m mN I u8 5 kCd mA% 4$ 1 1›SLC Z 4g m W-I IS> K q 9`~p70 D v9 X. I m{mc ?hi m loz 10 _ z5 4 mg m NI . m I« 0 1 11 1I 1 I I mm 1 20 O D I I I DS p--1 1 m� -., m 00< I 'd 88 I 010Z� .;4 ��$ 00x=D 2m Nn mmAOmJ p 1 ga I pFnDAamiO oo< 1 Ioog rnm -1-n Q= I nn I v Co n A N Rl I ig nE gi iiia 1 5z 241 11 - 111 I \_ _, F 4cx s x x MORN WNW ocr72 H- 1 ES270.00(P) 75.00'(P) o 75.00'(S) V 275.00'(5) �\ N._ N0099'10'E 330.00'(P) —�-� N00°79'10'E 350.0'(5) / N0028'48"W 330.19'(S) WEBER BOULEVARD N00'28'48"W 350.00'(S) $aSS 60'RIGHT OF WAY IR 0 0 0 s m 00ZZ1 00-1 '5� -,,,,,z-1,0 om D.pv m - H 2 m (n 1,N5 PyA-1 y �vD m io m y m c....m N�,n �°z 0-IC) v 0n DO►IDZ Z DSC rg$g YOpOm Cmm -1ie,���mnnn„mm O,p00OOK OOg 9041 qp A- liiri, iritl;rnm 1mpvy m0AVOYi, m°m mi'op �� =OP+IzN 2.6g.w0OOg'2gy;mon OY�Po� 101 V a vZ 'Itch li-1 gOOi'gZ ylla _o AZ -*;N.�T O / 648;j12 2Z-8vZ r'-'aODO, O l�N7OD�0 r- p=y0 09,1 S.T�. �yZ9mbn D <9yy Ael(y�!g 'Om1",'.;;. 0^ C2 �'D'lm K�T5m y ° Z Oy9N�D mxmlaD lvl UI TQF s6 PT 70pl 1x gr,' ��mm55nn �p� N Zpm -yl > m= 'A�-lOfj �m 0 _ °om z i6 y 'Oq��mo toimzsr"'m0 ' Z� 0 mEg NEgElgg4 c,E3 .P+ Pql Edo Xr : o 1,P71''7m6�' 0- -4EmTi o �{ 000grg6 D€ s Pte= BE %>° -F' F ,s ,y4 $�0 m COT S ll, NTy p' C ZCO C� coM v C `L _E m-1 �C � Z°— M1�ZO 1. Z0~ 0 g 2 m 521i71!!) Nm z. g g ; z 80 g qEs I� �m CZ Z N =N ►� vy0A Opi � • 4' ed FO q V_ DZ , Dy pOyDDm Z 02 A O- DO 65 i. y COASTAL CIVIL ENGINEERING CLIENT: DATE: SCALE: oocwe�.xomEwxcErlewvo x u w = SURVEY&MAPPING GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH OF NAPLES 10/07/16 1"=40'REUSE OF ADOPIATIP�COASTuMIME ON MS DOCUMENT,���� � am. m ENGINEERING COASTAL ENGINEERING DRAWN: MMW F.B. N/A N.M.OMIT(TO OKI Oxxl OU5BIDIME0. o ENVIRONMENTAL TITLE: •- CONSULTANTS PLANNING SERVICES CHECKED: RJE PG' N/A INC. BOUNDARY SURVEY OF ALL OF TRACT 16,AND THE Sec. TN/P. RNG. ACECI GROUP COMPANY WEST HALF OF TRACT 15 OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO.4, 11 490 26E PHONE:`239)643-2324 ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT Serving Florida Since 1977 ACAD NO. FAX:239 843-1143 16.218 3106 SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE www.coastalengineerIng.com BOOK 4,PAGE 79,PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. REF.NO. °0 NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 E-Mall:Info@cecill.com 16.218 NO. DATE BY REVISION DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT Q Trebilcock vlanninjlinnineering Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 06/26/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31St Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee—$500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee—Small Scale Study—No Fee Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. ��' PN • . 7< . • No 47116 :"f- it; * _ :1- • STATE OF 41-1Z 0R1 e'''SS/ONA�Er.�`�, Norman J.Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. 4/111111110• FL Registration No. 47116 This item has been electronically signed and Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA sealed by Norman J.Trebilcock,PE using a SHA-1 authentication code. 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Printed copies of this document are not considered Naples, FL 34110 signed and sealed,and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies. Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 12 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Table of Contents Project Description 4 Trip Generation 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment 6 Background Traffic 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis 11 Improvement Analysis 13 Mitigation of Impact 13 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 16 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition 23 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits 26 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection.The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11,Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1—Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1—Project Location Map PROJECT r• Go gle As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for a multi-purpose church related building and accessory recreational area. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2022 planning horizon. The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project's proposed trip generation. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 The associated church multi-use amenities are considered passive incidental to the sanctuary use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Total Size Code Proposed Conditions Church 560 15,000 sf(300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary;sf—square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. Trip Generation The project's site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE — OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures,the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 15 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions)—Average Weekday Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 15,000 sfi1i 137 5 3 8 4 4 8 Note(s): a1)Sanctuary;sf—square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: sanctuary Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 — Sunday peak hour of generator,the number of seats variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the purposes of this report. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 — Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Church 300 seatsill 92 91 183 Note(s): (1)Sanctuary. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 16 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2— Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour Collier Distribution PM Peak Hour Project Roadway Link County Roadway Link Location of Project Traffic Volume Ili Traffic Link No. Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd.to 35% SB—1 NB—1 Golden Gate Blvd. Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd.to 35% NB—2 SB—2 Pine Ridge Rd. Collier Blvd.to Wilson Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Blvd. 30% WB—1 EB—1 Note(s): (1)Peak hour,peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Fig. 2—Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour ti PROJECT TRAFFIC µsq n. DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE N t . Peak ‘10 ^ 35% Peak Direction SB441 Direction EB le 30% Peak Direction NB 35% w I Go gle 1 r , , PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PM PEAK HOUR N c 0 NB1; SB1 Peak Peak Direction SB - Direction EB <---->WB 1; EB1 Peak Direction NB NB 2; SB 2 Go glc Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 18 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2016), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2016 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2022. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project(2016-2022) 2022 Projected 2022 2016 AUIR Projected Pk Hr,Peak Dir Projected Pk CC Pk Hr,Pk Dir Traffic Background Hr,Peak Dir Roadway Link AUIR Roadway Link Background Annual Growth Traffic Volume Trip Background Link ID Location Traffic Growth Factor w/out Project Bank Traffic Volume Volume Rate (trips/hr) w/out Project (trips/hr) (%/yr)* Growth (trips/hr)Trip Factor** Bank*** Vanderbilt Collier Blvd. 30.2 Beach Rd.to 1,200 2.00% 1.1262 1,352 166 1.366 Golden Gate Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 1,867 2.00% 1.1262 2,103 40 1,907 Ridge Rd. Golden Collier Blvd.to Gate Blvd. 17.0 Wilson Blvd. 1,660 2.00% 1.1262 1.870 0 1,660 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate-from 2016 AUIR,2%minimum. **Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)6.2022 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2022 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume+Trip Bank.The projected 2022 Peak Hour—Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation,which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 19 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 2016 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Exist Peak Dir, CC AUIR Roadway Link Exist Min. Peak Hr Future Roadway Link Link ID# Location Roadway Standard Capacity Project Build LOS Volume out Roadway Vanderbilt Beach Rd.to Collier Blvd. 30.2 Golden Gate 6D E 3,000(SB) 6D Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 6D D 3,000(NB) 6D Ridge Rd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd.to Blvd. 17.0 Wilson Blvd. 4D D 2,300(EB) 4D Note(s): 211=2-lane undivided roadway;4D,6D,8D=4-lane,6-lane,8-lane divided roadway,respectively;LOS=Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 110 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service(LOS)—With Project in the Year 2022 CC 2016 Peak Roadway 2022 Peak %Vol Min LOS Min LOS AUIR Roadway Link Dir,Peak Link,Peak Dir,Peak Capacity exceeded exceeded Roadway Link Dir,Peak Hr Hr Volume Impact without with Link Location Hr Capacity ID# Volume (Project Vol w/Project By Project? Project? Added)* ** Project Yes/No Yes/No Vanderbilt Collier Blvd. 30.2 Beach Rd.to 3,000(SB) SB—i 1,367 0.03% No No Golden Gate Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 3,000(NB) NB-2 2,105 0.07% No No Ridge Rd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd.to Blvd. 17.0 Wilson Blvd. 2,300(EB) EB—1 1,871 0.04% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report;**2022 Projected Volume=2022 background(refer to Table 4)+Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph — urban conditions—the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph —urban conditions—the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet(which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Weber Blvd is a 2-lane undivided local street under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 30 mph in the vicinity of the project. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a)two-lane roadways—40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways — right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted,they shall always include left-turn lanes. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 111 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access—Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 64 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. Site Access—Southbound Weber Boulevard The proposed project is expected to generate 28 vph left-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. It is noted that the Collier County roadway network peaks during a typical work week day. As such, the estimated project's peak hour traffic occurs on an off peak day. In addition, Weber Blvd. is a low volume roadway serving surrounding residential properties. Based on the fact that the generated traffic is not a high warranting volume and occurs on an off peak day, it is our recommendation not to provide a left-turn lane at this project access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points—turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. As part of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection improvements, the Weber Blvd. connection onto Golden Gate Blvd. will be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out access. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 112 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project accesses on Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points — turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 113 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 114 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 - Z F 2 Z d 0 0 w w-rl _,I FW-LL FW-LL N ~Q CD W—1 W 0 1L 2 Z E N N W_Z ❑ ❑ . I0 N Q R ❑ i 0 0 o a P- ^ A'dM-d0-1H'Jlil --y-'S'woe 171383A+1 14 X1,3 : F Z 111II <rt : °1'I Z ILI❑ W >Q .;I .E i 0 y i N W ¢ :III _ w+I 1 p i cc 1- } Q▪ LL > ILII j - 0 W W WJU' W[� ❑J Y uo. 1 }1 1 W Z Z O 1 a I i1 J � '4 Ji --/ I o i a ❑ W i 0 III i.i i� a0 0 Z� 1 i / Lu o� VIII (� w 4m n a III , as ZZ IL N 6_Z N p WI W }_.__S- �-1 I l_ 1 !� r❑>W U I l 1x J "Lai 2 F, I zz�d❑ g �< Eh I � ti LI I g r: ��U7D Q y� ccZ W 1 1 NJ W0 Li� :S':• it_ ����m c i� oce 111❑K 1111 .I WN Z �,i i ❑�O❑ o u d N I tl, . V. aLL$ C W W I I o 0. 1W I 'I, ; ',J Li U LI I o W \ _ - II i V321V 1N3W3DVN W Y13IVM _ -- 1VNVO AVM-0-ii°JIN 0NVA31n08 N3n100 N31VM 03do13A30) (1N30.43011NVW 2131VM 03dO13A30) (TdIIN301S321 A1INIVd 31DNIS 03d013A30) 31V1SS S31V1S3 S31V1S3 (1VIIN30IS Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 115 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 116 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply,or N/A(not applicable). Date: April 26,2017 Time: N/A Location:N/A—Via Email People Attending: Name,Organization.and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer.Collier County Growth Management Division 2) Norman Trebilcock.TCS 3) Ciprian Malaescu,TCS Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title:Norman Trebilcock.AICP.PE Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions.PA Address&Telephone Number: 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202, Naples, Fl.34110:ph 239-566-9551 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager Organization&Telephone Number:Collier County Transportation Planning Department Ph:239-252-2926 Applicant: Applicant's Name:Davidson Engineering.Inc. Address:4365 Radio Road,Suite 201,Naples.FL 34104 Telephone Number:239-434-6060 Proposed Development: Name:Grace Romanian Baptist Church—Rezone Location: On the east side of Collier Boulevard(CR 951),south of Golden Gate Boulevard and west of Weber Boulevard.(Refer to Fie.1) { Land Use Type:Church ITE Code,"-: LUC 560 Description:Proposed 15.000 sf building with 300 seats. Parcel has an existing residential structure that will be demolished to allow for the new development. Zoning Existing:E—Estates Zoning District Comprehensive plan recommendation:No change Requested:Rezone—Conditional Use(CU) Page 1.of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 { 'Piga—Project Location Map. , . $ . s u• { s G.c gte Findings of the Preliminary Study. Study type: The Golden Gate Boulevard existing full-movement opening at Weber Boulevard South is scheduled to be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out connection. Since estimated project net new traffic volume is less than 50 AM or PM 2-way peak hour trips,this study qualifies for a Small Scale TIS —no significant operational or roadway impacts or work within the county right-of-way. The TIS will include AM-PM peak hour trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments, significance test and roadway link analysis. Site access points turn lane analysis Will use. conservatively,the higher of seats vs.square footage for the independent variable for trip generation. Roadway con currency analysis—PM peak hour weekday traffic Site Access Analysis—Sunday Peak Hour of Generator traffic. Internal capture and pass-by reductions are not considered for this study. Study Type: (if not net increase,operational study) Small Scale TIS ® Minor TIS ❑ Mai or TIS ❑ Study Area: Boundaries: west— Collier Boulevard, north — Golden Gate Boulevard, east —Weber Boulevard Additional intersections to be analyzed:N/A Build Out Year2022 Page 2 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page l 18 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Planning Horizon Year: 2022 Analysis Time Period(s): Concurrency—Weekday.PM.Peak Hour; Operational—Surid"av Peak Hour of Generator. Future'Off-Site D evelopm ents:N/A Source of Trip Generation Rates: _CIE 9t Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:N/A Pass-by trips: NIA Internal trips:NIA Transit use:NIA Other:NIA Horizon Year Raadwav Network Improvements:2022 Methodoloev&Assumptions: Non-site traffic.estimates: Collier County traffic counts and 2016 ATM { Site-trip generation: OTISS—ITE 9th Edition Trip distribution method:Empirical Engineer's Estimate—refer to Fig.2 Traffic assignment method: project trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate:historical growth rate or 2%minimum Turningmovement assignment:Estimate—site access—refer to Fie.3. Fig.2—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage ?c ECT TPA F- E45.3TRIBULON, PERCE€t T AGE. PROJECT ;i" 11121 Page 3 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 119 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Fig.3—Project Turning Movements by Percentage [i m _ TURN!APPROMIMATEL'O'' T i I i I LJ''i14i i' , I �� 03 MILES EAST 01 I WEBER Rt t'rt 1 6 f �'$I —I ''•ceamau:tt +..e- .t".* 1 1. L=___-_,..-, --- i15 .7 •rCASA ,.ascot . l'''': -. . - I , PROJECT TURNING MOVEMENTS BY ! c= r�' � PERCENTAGE ® i r,iir.:p X11 tS';E i Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A Queuing:N/A Access location&configuration:N/A Traffic control.MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs: N/A On-site parking needs:N/A Data Sources:CC 2016 AUIR CC Traffic Counts Base maps:N/A Prior study reports: N/A Access policy and jurisdiction:N/A Review process:N/A Requirements:NIA Miscellaneous: N/A Page 4 of 6 { Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 120 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Small Scale Study--No Fee X Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1500.00 Methodology Fee S500 X Includes 0 intersections Additional Intersections-$500.00 each Alifees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the application. SIGNATURES N rviA.G1v,Trebilcoc12, Study Preparer—Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 5 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 121 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review,Analysis Review,and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review-$500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement,including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s),distribution,assignment.and review of a"Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confinnation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review"-$750 Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:optional field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation,distribution,and assignment,concurrency determination,confirmation of committed improvements,review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency"comments/questions. "Major Study Review"-$1,500 Fee(Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of traffic growth analysis.review=of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis,review of site access and circulation,neighborhood traffic intrusion issues,any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates,and preparation and review of up to two rounds of"sufficiency"comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-$500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. J1 Page 6 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 122 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (2 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 123 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 •1 I Project Name: Grace Romanian Baptist Church No: ] Date: 4126/2017 City; 1 State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: " Country: Client Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: ITE-TGM 9th Edition WEEKDAY AIN PEAK HOUR Pn.FEMA(HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 1, 560•Church i 15"' I 69 68 ` 5 { 3 4 4 Reduction 0 0 0 0I M 0 0 Internal o 0 1 0 0 0 i 0 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Non-pass-by I fig 66 I 5 I 3 ; 4 4 Total 69 68 5 ' 3 I 4 _ 4 Total Reduction 0 00 0 0 0 1 Total Internal 0 - 0 it 0 i 0 II� 0 0 I Total Pass-by 0 0 I 0 0 i 0 0 i Total Non-pass-by 69 66 5 3 i 4 4 I 1 nr- _I r-eeP3n 3;or,.1 nroe 1 Ii PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH I ANALYSIS NAME; 'Weekday I y INDEPENDENT I LAND USE VARIABLE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL 560-Church 1000 Sq.Feet Gros 15 Weekday „ I Average i� 69 68 137 I 9.11 1 PROJECT NAME. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ANALYSIS NAME' AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 560-Church « Average v (' 1000 Sq.Feet Grose! 15 Weekday,Peak Hot v I ,_ 3 6 0.56 1 I r a PROJECT NAME; GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ANALYSIS NAME: !PM Peak Hourul LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL 1 VNRIP,BLE (r 560-Church 1000 Sq.Feet Gros,N 15 1,Weekday.Peak HOU V Average I 4 4 8 1 — �_r 0.55 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 124 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Project Name: Grace Romanian Baptist Church-Sunday No: Date: 426!017 City State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: 1 Country: Client Name: ,Analyst's Name: Etdtlon: ITE-TON!0th E thon S'.INDAY-GEEERATS.1 L/ND USE SIZE Entry Eadt SC-Church 300` 92 91 Reduction 0 0 Internal 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 Non-pass.by 92 91 560•Church•1 15- 89 92 Rocecuon 0 0 Internal 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 j Non-pess.by 69 92. PROJECT NAME. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH-SUNDAY ,-N,4LYSIS NAA` Sunday-Genereto �� LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE L. 560-Church 1 Seats j 300 Sunday.Peak Hour Ls.. Average 92 91 183 1 -- - - 0.61 L.� Average l vII le L. 560-Church-1 1000 Sq.Feet Gros v 1 15 Sunday,Peak Hour'.. 89 92 181 12.04 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 125 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits (2 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 126 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 _ Flw—__-i_.,i1—x<,1_. 0,:V<,_..-,_..,_J:, C0.•."...O.*."..,_ F— . ,er T I < 0 ZrF.-- ,--0-- 0 a. LLI ud1.-- irt Z La.: C..) r--- < , H W Lc: 0 2 Liti --) ;:.% W 0 0 --' p i... ,-,-, I Rã k...? n, GAlS .. _ IR 1 I cof 2 1 ,ar _ 1 .. - - - ! „„, t .,._ 11 ,, L I - 8/11:13S3Hd 32,IDV 69L 0 z 1 1 1 -, 1 I •1 ,''. ' U ' I I ' - „' 11 1 (N) : , _ ___ _ , ‘, - M ZE1 i ) / ,,,; / .„...._ .,/,' / ' - 1------.- - 0 I __i•-• , — -‹ 11 3411 _j_ Li -5:41 'ill N1 1 -I- Luzao0z 2 w w 4)_,,, 2:=1122ezR°v)i W u_w,me.- —z id,r1.1 -I- H `i 111 C:j 2°Ftar='110D- rc4C cbw It . 4 . - , 1 r I-1 I g ilI '; 111 l , -11-1 ' ul ,,,,_ ;- -1- — - I , . ' .. ;----,/- --------7 '%%iv iNtoilesiNvoi 83,1yhr/ , / ,r,i/'' '-- ---77----, L•'--- , , , • , / .'•• ----• 7, '-`, 1 , I . ; Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA P a g e 1 27 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 E., .4-4.. '''.11F1 jvc O 2 a bi 1 Z 0- z 0 n Z 0 ' O• U) II 0 F- I- I CO D i F._ Z 0 Z W — -) LU 0 > c0 ii: 0 •=1- '°4 ' cs.i EL. M co ....._. i4---- - , Z_1 --- -- -.. \ ,,,. • , 01 , II \ \ 1 N. it ao L o •1 > ,.11 ,11, I I I.,.., 4. \ 8A149931id 31IDV 69/.0 •:,.-: " , , o '- •, '.. , ! 1 ,i•,• 1117 ,','t.T--1 i , TYPE D ) ;Q4.'',‘ /, (,-,, i 1 1 ',_ r-:• ,-----N ,-/z .., r„,,, T-',,'IL: ( 1 Fil / 4:y 1 111 ' - ill ' :-,--. — -a / w <zu, ' , ...;:r--. •z F '-td,1 ' ','..--... • / —trir, ,- 1 2,7c.„.< 1 ,7. 111 ';'',(C3' 1 IT',it ai _7-7:--1 i ..--- .... ( ) ( , /i.:.•.„.',.: 7 1—'4,,,,,,.,,,r.E,D 4,. ID1 1rj 17%4- 1, 1 51'1 4111.1.......... A 1. 1_1.• — I ---1-4''J\\ ; .Ean 161 __ _ _ __._ _ wx wz<oa . C.) 0_0 6- ,.. IL CO_> Pi E-I _,—D O. 1--c0ZR04,0 ' ' Lu LI-00:/17,02,-_,___ • Z Li err,...1 , t 15(_)=5 IT ir I— 00Z0..--1•<°-6 *2 4t 1 . _ , o_,,, a!: •i.' '---4_ —, W<-Ca F_D,61 to n EC iii re M MOO . i W•-•-•7 / — -- --.-7 . . ' r---. . IiIlli U Hi Il IU II ii U H -; •••,......._, I• i //- ' I 'VB)dVASI,000,101A1.83.1-Yrie/'N .'l'7--/'—`. -... ' // : - ' ;i'iL 10 t(n?•: i ----- ______________________--- Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 128 DAVIDSON Et-!L L L_Y..t-1C EXHIBIT"R" COMPARATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)ANALYSIS The proposed development known as Grace Romanian Baptist Church is a ±6.25-acre property located in Section 11, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is bound by Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) to the south, 15t Avenue Southwest to the west,Weber Boulevard South to the north, and Golden Gate Boulevard to the east. The subject property is currently zoned as Estates.The subject development consists of two properties to be combined with access points on Weber Boulevard South, Golden Gate Boulevard, and 15t Avenue South. For this analysis, the site will be conceptually developed to the maximum standards using the current project zoning and the proposed zoning amendment. The currently zoned lots consist of the following residential uses at build-out: Single Family Residence (1,201—2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Single Family Residence(1,201—2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Total: 4,500 sf The newly proposed Development (proposed zoning amendment) consists of the following at build-out: Church 300 seats Total: 300 seats The Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan establishes Levels of Service for the following: Arterial and Collector Roads Surface Water Management Systems Potable Water Systems Sanitary Sewer Systems Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Parks and Recreation Facilities Public School Facilities Each of the areas will be examined for the proposed developments in this summary report. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAVIp50N DE Arterial and Collector Roads Significantly impacted roadways are identified by the proposed highest peak hour trip generation (net new traffic) and is compared with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update Inventory Report,the peak hour for the project's adjacent roadway network is PM. Therefore,the PM Peak Hour Trips were calculated using gross square footage for the proposed GPMA (Church at 15,000sf) and dwelling unit for the current zoning (Single Family Residential at 2 units) as this represents highest and best use scenario. Table 1-Project Trip Generation(Net New)—Average Weekday Development PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA 4 4 8 (Total non-Pass-By Trips) Current Zoning 1 1 2 (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) Proposed Net New Traffic (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) 3 3 6 Net Increase/(Net Decrease) Based on the roadway network link analysis result, the proposed development at build-out is not a significant or adverse traffic generator for the existing roadway traffic at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development generated trips without adversely affecting the adjacent roadway network level of service. Surface Water Management Systems Currently,the neighboring sites are developed with single family homes and not permitted with an agency for storm water management. General development will warrant an environmental resource permit (ERP) through South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The District's requirement for development is to attenuate 1.5 inches over the entire site during a 25-year, 3-day storm event prior to discharging offsite. The post-development discharge rate for this project allows 0.15 cfs/acre. These are minimum requirements despite the type of development proposed; therefore, neither project will pose a significant or adverse effect on the overall storm water management system. Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Currently, the site contains a vacated house with all utilities privately owned and maintained. The proposed non-residential site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAVIDSON E NG@'N EEF:@@1 C- Per Policy 1.5 of the Capital Improvement Element section of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the potable water system level-of-service is based on population growth. The proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth;therefore,the proposed use will have no impact on the potable water facility's capacity. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Solid waste is provided by Waste Management, a private contract provider. Commercial accounts are charged by the service provider directly with rates set by the Board of County Commissioners through contract negotiation with the provider. Parks and Recreation Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Parks and Recreation Facilities. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Public School Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Public School Facilities. The use will not impact school attendance. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by either of the proposed build-outs. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAV I DSON 1174,,e CN GI ni Et ktl N C, Fire and EMS Facilities The proposed build-out will have no measurable impact on Fire and EMS Facilities. It should be assumed that newer buildings will be constructed to current NFPA and building code standards which may reduce the likelihood of related calls. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out conditions. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 EXHIBIT S der • unty Public Utilities Department Engineering & Project Management Division June 16, 2017 VIA: E-MAIL Jessica Harrelson Jessica@davidsonengineering.com Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Water and Wastewater Service Availability Project: Grace Romanian Church Parcel#: 36760800006, 36760720005 Dear Jessica: The subject project is within the Collier County Water-Sewer District's (CCWSD) water and wastewater service area, but wastewater service is not readily available to the project. Water service is readily available to the project via an existing 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd S. Potable water is available for domestic use,fire protection, and irrigation, subject to the provisions of LDC 4.03.08 C,the Collier County Irrigation Ordinance (2015-27), and other applicable rules and regulations. Connection to the CCWSD's water distribution system will be permitted only after the GMD Development Review Division's approval of hydraulic calculations prepared by the Developer's Engineer of Record in accordance with the Design Criteria found in Section 1 of the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities Standards Manual. Source pressure assumptions for water distribution system design are prescribed in the Design Criteria. If you have any questions, you may contact me at(239) 252-1037 or EricFey@colliergov.net. Respec f illy, c Fey, P.E., Sen r Project Manager CC: Steve Messner, Division Director—Water, PUD/WD; Beth Johnssen, Division Director— Wastewater, PUD/WWD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD _1 Public Utilities Engineering&Project Management Division•3339 Tanen Trail East,Suite 303•Naples,Florida 34112-5381•239-252-4285•FAX 239-252-5378 DAVIDSON EXHIBIT "S°' UTILITY STATEMENT Ill The proposed site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. s �. ®> t 3m .. b �F Golden G.....vow t kD C m - Ir ` ►�e. s ..i''''' 1 .4 wi�� Yiff 4,'9 �� 4-4::::-..4 c+C v" .oma €. ! ���; °� ill>, � "�� 1 , J .., 1 �v': ''' .'i,lo,...-Iii-''!';1,,l''''' �'' fit+a�,4r ',=-':);—:&, � ''' rz ver i^.. . = , s£` i 1 „ f ,,,,,,,„„:„, ,-4.,:trt-4.47. :1,,,,rAil...,,,,,,44,01,.. ;011:,-,,,,,,.-. ';',„:,iit ,... ,.:-:,1,1,-- _ '?+1.1‘ 2 i 12,t.,,,.., t-*:',.;'''irrt*Ati ,--41F0,#'. ',:('2 I* 4 - 4:i i -f.-,4-1110?;:#, ,,,s...w. ittvi, s ",i x "+3i4� : ,d}., 'S t' 'S, "'• T°4 u 7'''''...."-,,,,,4,471 E.:.' =F , r 7 i a.' ,44' ,,,,,--1 rt,....:Z.-:, - '71 � r# r I ',4 f. 1.> 2i 7: kie r ii„,,,.-*, 1F-.. ' A-- „AA. ,,.. . __-- s. �_.. 15YAVESW_... ^' z.:�slY:a57c >;iii!e�`c. tsI AVE 9VY� '"" a := I - :.:a..',. ..r'" , dc+t.„ i .; a' ,s�.' . '.,�f”& ;7,16' x'�`. aoi `.w.^ £ � . COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES—GIS EXHIBIT Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAVIDSON EfJGIt:LCI.I PI�_ Narrative &Justification of the Proposed GMPA Amendment EXHIBIT "T" The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District.The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. 163.3187 Process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: Response: The property for the proposed amendment is±6.25 acres in size. (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. Response: The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small-scale amendments adopted by Collier County does not exceed 120 acres. (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However,text changes that relate directly to,and are adopted simultaneously with,the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. Response: The proposed amendment involves a text change that is directly related to a request for the adoption of a small scale future land use map amendment. (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s.380.05(1). Response: The subject property is not in an area of critical state concern. (2) Small-scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAVIDSON Response: Acknowledged. (3) If the small-scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal,state,and local environmental permit requirements are met. Response: The proposed small scale development does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity. (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. Response: Acknowledged. (5)(a) Any affected person may file a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57 to request a hearing to challenge the compliance of a small scale development amendment with this act within 30 days following the local government's adoption of the amendment and shall serve a copy of the petition on the local government. An administrative law judge shall hold a hearing in the affected jurisdiction not less than 30 days nor more than 60 days following the filing of a petition and the assignment of an administrative law judge.The parties to a hearing held pursuant to this subsection shall be the petitioner,the local government, and any intervenor. In the proceeding,the plan amendment shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government's determination that the small scale development amendment is in compliance is fairly debatable.The state land planning agency may not intervene in any proceeding initiated pursuant to this section. Response: Acknowledged. (b)1. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found not in compliance, the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found in compliance,the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the state land planning agency. Response: Acknowledged. 2. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is not in compliance, the agency shall submit, within 30 days following its receipt,the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is in compliance, the agency shall enter a final order within 30 days following its receipt of the recommended order. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAVIDSON NClNFCGING Response: Acknowledged. (c) Small scale development amendments may not become effective until 31 days after adoption. If challenged within 30 days after adoption, small scale development amendments may not become effective until the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission, respectively, issues a final order determining that the adopted small scale development amendment is in compliance. Response: Acknowledged. (d) In all challenges under this subsection, when a determination of compliance as defined in s. 163.3184(1)(b) is made,consideration shall be given to the plan amendment as a whole and whether the plan amendment furthers the intent of this part Response: Acknowledged. Policy 5.3: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map; requiring that any changes to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary; and,encouraging the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural designated area, which will better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of agriculture and other predominantly rural land uses,and provide for cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Response:The proposed SSGMPA does not contribute to urban sprawl. The subject property is within the existing urban service area and will not require any special or additional costs to provide necessary services. The property has been contemplated for residential and limited non-residential conditional uses per the existing zoning and future land use. The proposed addition of a religious facility land use(through addition to the Conditional Use Subdistrict)will place no greater burden on community facilities than did prior uses of the property. Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to,the surrounding land uses,subject to meeting the compatibility criteria of the Land Development Code(Ordinance 91-102,adopted October 30, 1991,as amended. Response:The subject property,and its potential land use,shall be compatible with and complimentary to its surrounding land uses. The proposed Conditional Use Subdistrict is bordered to the north, east south and west by residential land uses and zoning opposite existing right-of-ways.Collier Boulevard,Golden Gate Boulevard, Weber Road and 1st Avenue SW all directly border the subject property. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DE DAy1I? c t Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Response:The proposed SSGMPA will be a companion petition to a conditional use application that will continue to provide appropriate connections and interconnections. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com COMM.).mxd PLANNING (HALF-MILE N NTH "A-ArrAcHmE A ,A- E —7:10— w ning‘EISt2°1744 24 GR SSG S I, R 951 owG,plan CHURCH-CR. cE ROMANIAN CH eject‘GIGRA Z.lActivePr ,„ ' 9 corkscrew 1 ' , LEGEND ANALYSIS ssGmpA SUBJECT [ 1.1 DATA 8`ROMANAANc RES L— GRACE 6 2 c:3 PROPERTY:Estates 46 - D!_c_R-8_-- Urban Estates , leamOr1/4/4 --.1— % 1 -V- Iv' te; -- - ., I , 846 11 i EE-R131CR I, I iP4i49" - , , „ ,_ - , „:.,!,,:-„, :--,',--, ,, ,, - -, - , '-'5,::' ,..-;,;-,;-;;- ' ' , ,„. ,:,::;*-4t;;-'it--5,''.v,::- ', -1 '' '*. > ''':::'''''': ''';::.?1 1: ' I _ _1 :„1,,,,.: '' "`,.. 1,:' Estates -' h ar)10'i- ''' cl '' ilia1 -i- — la 12 u H RP. — D EAC I.I.Ell'B: i 17,..r aBiur BEACH ,,L 4' : t ..tes 1 i I iiiDE:". LLFL. 1 1 I Es-- ' i1 1 1L'.' ri — : - , : , 1 II .':. I ' I VD 4"I'''.',''''-': wHHIT-E BI--7: , 1 sil w"- ' ,i,".:''',, ' P 'AvF" ::-7,•;.:,5 -.4:::,...,f,:---,,,,,,,„ , • ' .• ------ , 1 1 Trk •16. .,'" , I . , ' : ,.,;::i,), ,•- '';f:---:-.:::j04;4'": ", 7. I i , 0,, . 1. •'-,7,:,,‘,,,,If :. .,14'„*-?,::. -iigr,,,';,1, :44, I ! , i-•,: ,411 -j.-„,„."?', .-,,-,-;t:-,-,-:';'..7 - i, ' ,- t.--:":'4!.-f" - - 'i-B1 1 .t ,;:,„,,,,, ,„,,, ,,,,,:::;--- ---,,,,, ',-,., , BLVD , - ,,,,,,,„i7i7-1, ---,,,..„,':,, i/EN 1 : I ...._ 0 ' ,„ ' 13-1 I ,---4- 25 0.5 s g -----=, ""slai ,i. 1, '" -I, Za3 01- :) 43!..-',.-7,7-1I CHURCH t /1 .',---H._ ilc,.. ' I HU—SSGMPA .71 m .-, ,,r, , - 1 i C BAPTIST _ ._,- ,.. ,_- ;t3c ---:--* -', ij---- les lEs IT.- ntr-I Naples . GATE ----'!":11"--- MUN- 2 Ce ILIL:t.. SYSTEMS(2016) • ROMANIAN SUBDISTRICTG COM R 3861G9-.-_\:., 1 I I (1)INFORMATION GRACE USE GEOGRAPHIC INFO I U: PLANNING NT j 1 COUNTY ATTACHMENT ENGINEERING,SO INC. CONDITIONALATTA‘-' LIRC.ES-i+LLIER 1 1 E 201 sUIT --r 1:4AD' 0 0.__ MILE DAVIDSON RADi,, „,1 04 _„ e 436p5LEsy F_L_4,:4-60bu ri.,;;, . PHONE:NA239-44 DAVIDSON Dt•I/M N E- Z:Wctive Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\OWG\Planning\GIS\2077-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT U(PLANNING COMM.).mxd N,, LEGEND '"a W P� W r; 'DATA&ANALYSIS AREA - - -- 4 .V'`x' r t} :Y"' _ ;.'iia. SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES t ,� .; 1st_ ::';`1.',„:"-' �et,,-.'-‘,....„1.,44y..,1-1,r,y .-to.„;.„...,,S -North Naples .- � :' '"6 �s _-' , R fi+F "k Urban Estates _ Q I• .. s em --, _.. -Central Naples 1 - z ��`. ' ,� - d 3 ~ ..___.._._.. Golden Gate a� } �Y a : �� � x a IOW Rural Estates '" .t'" . •. ,py'3= ..ti �. ,`" � ":,:..r1' � * ,:.,..,,,,,4„,,..1 ,, ''I,.- a.„, ®Corkscrew r r `x <-Atf" - x � �� �'` `� • �* r a� : Etc} 5- yj "�• t i '.::,1:i'4,-,;,'4'.':-K, "" „, 'y`�c-s �R*-. . °5 � • r • ; * a vs ,: r ."tom .� „ _., ' 5 1'. ;4,,,,„,41,k,11,.• 3,� 1.r ^^s }- w i,.x v x f�. �-y • -.e'�$ 9 t £ ` p s . &� '� t, as 9 .a r ,; a,g utr .� c- r~ r t 'z `3.Y 'Z• - .: rr� }fix ` 4 '�- ... ¢;:- �� * �`''7 e�,k e r 1. F'$S r--` .�` - '-, z n fig ' a s , ,: a„','-.;',;;,14...";.:40,%';',”',4 ,r .a; ` cad �. '.''';,,:,.,•;.-‘,j,a .1-1-t.-',"‘.''''lr.� .*`' -1 `� ” tf .. a "• t'i Tt ' t ' ' t' s -'w ;. ,tea x d - ens " �'a ,� = '` r4:44.':1'.''''..'-..' a '' '.F.ta c `n - *. - .'cfid . ` . .- $ • t--,,,,,,,,..v....,. ,�_` sf..,,,-..!..---,,--. ..i ' L �C r x. 3. a ;n f C tY�p?„\� i14T r.,. .',*s+: 1 s. fi : W�,.. II x" �' -. ` ;nom 1` I r -,:,,,,—.4t,,,..1.,./ I Vie I 7 des?•k:.,,'..:.,,*,,t-,,,,...,,.-''.: .; i . ;g !•` [,.. i 1 ----Hyl 11 t i }a I I i ! �<gzT ,'ryg� �`S�`#� Pis�kG I Li ta i gd'lfie �'-4"" r btt ,a+emr+�`.t fit 47- .w ,n .... 1 1. p r._ GOILDE GA B I I ;� :' ,, „c # ,4.'xw ,ass tF 'G"S jF I ft i• � � ;;;.4..,:-,,,,-.:;;:,fix1 $$ {S _- �' �:x t n�2': 't tq, '. - 7 I 1 t '-.14,:;,,.::-„,,%,--11..;7bYi I { I I j' j xpc< a .< c �'' 5 ^' ` ,z r,t,. ! BL ! i I I i ~ �".x' < .x ' " `--r'N?+Sr 1 ry. �#�eg -tt{,r , E i .£� r.•fl ,:,„.y,„,..,..„t di dp 3' i"t 4'rf2.e ,iy+"YkYs. ; { (n yi 3yR�1' �+ S' f 3'}t; sP.1"`�•',....,,,„..; L t r5y * ."' 4r I— I 3 • `' t ,ww• .�41 sem." : Y'"i"iC J 3y yG + i to . : :.a �, t¢� +t r ra°Y fi ss-- t s $ "'.`,a r.a: r "c<„�i iGa' <'# 3 t tc`R .r# ,.' �, E v '.tv 4, ,. . >. f !f ,.1 =x Z > s r... i 6TH/4UC}.SW • 'ate,. '> ,.sx' t + t{i ., �r � 4•,'....,,,,,,,...-,...r.f ”"'ik#8y+' jv.+ Cyd# t I I I. d - '} '-G',� °t. - y€ .1:,;;**, '3At} '`I�" ,se' Sv 4 +:Q 1 I t 1 1 2 ! �R; ` �� + , " w"" ! If MILES - SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTIY GEOGRAPHICIINFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) I j r :-4- tom :. s I t DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT U: PLANNING COMMUNITIES ���n^'`� " �• LEGEND , � ,x CHIDATA&ANALYSIS AREA ' GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPASUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES ' '' '�.'� - FLUE DISTRICTS/SUBDISTRICTS AG-AGRICULTURAL �s ' >4::;,; �. , C-CONSERVATION ' tV, i- t x -CD-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ',423 , ' IES-ESTATES € s � ; IIM MUA-MIXED USEACTIVITY CENTERS %� ��"�` �c �'..ac '�<:� �_° � �4 �. RFN-RURAL FRINGE NEUTRAL $.'�*�� e ,^ RFR-RURAL FRINGE(RECEIVING) '� ,�. ' RFS-RURAL FRINGE(SENDING) ' � � :-:!: �, f �"; UR-URBAN RESIDENTIAL ,r-'-ir,,,,,,4' �`A -:1;:" � y " , ,r"4---r,r,--ir,?.: a ''.1,i,"',.''::. 7,1 VANDERBILT/951 COMMERCIAL ,` :. ` ' �;: ':,--,'''' i,,,:*::18' F �_ .:1114-,.;:: ::: ;i'-',' ! . IMMOKALEERDICR�846 ::- a ��4 ,, v''8.,. say aL�a'�$"�r� �` �a 5 Q �� , VANDERBILT BEACH RD..' a' 7 ��,. y � 1 :44:i- ', 6: t'lt:44''''''''',':x o it- it; 0 >I , .17 t , S _ a € g I I S m , zQ GOLDEN GATE BLVD ' _ O F' } ' , • _--__-,__-:1_ r _ J. - .w-, _a I � a, tI 3 �. i OP` PINE'RIDGE'RD WHITE BLVD ' 3 3 , i co 4 �1. ��4 n �0 ca y o z > : IN 16THAVE SW , GREEN BLVD' W 0,. . 'a f N� L pz' 11 p . ff Z _ _ _ ,.---...,./,�'.- riff mtkl` �__._ ._- rf i:1-;°,:::::1,5...'",.:4::;:.-„4.,:'4.-..,,..T.i.,..,---,,,,,;;;':.."..',,..1',,,,T,.+',.".,,,,,,,', J q W o � ....._.. _..-,._ :sae a . . �5 i N � , �a_ _ -- 1 CR 886/(;OLDEN•GATE Q , r 1 331 ) I g W�I , E z kms _L'® 1q, I ; `: w � o �:_ S /l) VS 0 1 2 $° ® SNn.►►D/OSP MILES SOURCES:COLLIERPCOUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION•SYSTEMSA2017),I I < DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH :11,,23--3A NAPLES,4366 FL 34104 SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT V: FUTURE LAND USE 'SUBJECT SITE1 ZONING MAP: GGE22 GGEB1 EXHIBIT W uisusel sin is anus,ennu GOLDEN CATE BOULEVARD cu4.8.11 BU.e'T. 1t7TE 2 —1 E 1ST AVENUE SW 15 Is 17 Is 47 48 65 50 75 ea a V ro 112 113 114 14 113 ,. P' 16 46 al 78 ea no 13 .0, 3., ,3 47 So 23 86 75 52 la sa 111 114 .127 , ao . . , " las Ise 15 55 35 .. 51 62 67 78 as as ini 110 115 106 12 117 12 21 44 55 n 13 LOT 2 LOT 1 11 115 AVENUE SW 43 63 . T3 66 Do .E4 io U4 ...T, 23 45 at 55 74 U5 150 2 i E 23 40 1 E II 73 iv 8 , 7 S111 AV NUE SW n 34 . w w3 AD . 3 n aa n 70 51 VP 123 6 22 27 36 43 54 56 70 75 96 VI 102 . 115 . 5 26 67 ao n ea in 124 23 26 55 42 55 58 T 24 57 20 . ica ne in • • ea 34 n in as in 125 V3 a a 711I AVENUE SW 30 as as ,1, 54 n 4. 2 a 51 31 65 ea n . in 1-LL 31 25 40 41 55 57 72 73 OS 119 104 105 ,33 11 4 ' S2 II 54 65 56 97 126 1 12 UNITS CO.U7 4 5 mis rs TO CM.THAT.6 IS A PAGE Of THE 0471101AL 2121411/5 AIL. IA ' RESUMED TO..10.09720 0718381116110E BY MO..PO.514-41 Dr ..A.'LLT i LAE COUP.Of CO...Roma.96374.21 4624E 22 WOE. _,2III127I . .7,2.i2.: 88HI SIMMS.INDEX '92317112I,13.7i R. w.h. P.3 P3 110. 14614E 0.2 PS. Iiiqi;;Iei COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA MOEN.TE E.=tilrr 4 4 nen „ E,i k a §g a 6 5 i By .... 20113.WI 1.15.OW 5 4 II' E J2.tld, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION axiacen-wane is le 2!7Z6.1i 777Z1 "PNP 49S RNG 26E SEC(S)11&12 su, MAP NUMBER: 4 A211.77 CLIME 600 GGE22 1 ZONING MAP: GGE20 GGE19 GGE19 sr ro,TAF> ..�. • F•,., " , . L- ,.1, ,. . +zr wn. e an„ ., ., 6 1 • y. 2,-.1 k �> �_--- 4 - - - wgGA..4o .,9, • 9 0„ rp.a..R.....E V L J ., .. . „ ., •• ., • 711119.19.59 0 GGE26 GGE2R THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A PAGE OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS REFERRED TO AND ADOPTED SUBDNISON INDEXb ' BY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO.06-01 OF THE ' COUNTY OF COLLIER,FLORIDA,ADOPTED JUNE 22,2004, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA ®W g-a AS AMENDED BY THE ZONING NOTES AND SUBDIVISION u.ra 'IC 'ae� a OA INDEX REFERENCED HEREON. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION ..2i2"z'> BY CHAIRMAN TRAP 49S RNG 26E SEC(S)8810 _..� �'¢ ATTEST CLERK N MAP NUMBER: .w...,sn+., a .: s '54;q4,,,-?. .... I I I GGE20 4/242017 B635= 663 5 B ZONING MAP: GGE21 ` ' ', VANDERBILT BEAROAD (AKA KINGSVILLE RD) sc, . 06 .7 172An 2 i , Gww % « ,N Ll 47 • ---'" " ` 611 112 113 BA ,• I .m m NA 1 ,s•,iH VENUE IW , ` , / , m.v \ w 1« „5`M13STM1-Z u '' N « - -----« n wt- 15 110 127 IV m « , v n « w ,,. u „ •l'`. SIH AVENUE SW „ u « w n « ,m 1,a ,a `\ ST/W , A � 50• ea u m . m 50Umrm n a. . a 11 E N • « a ^ 5'M1Vd` ' Till ... SRo AVENUE NW 3• m r ,w F. 26 37 110 69 an • 50 1 ;=rA �DEIw - 50 "� _ n u : p m V L �,[ « 1. ,m 1r 161 i UNITS —L _._ ,J 3 GGEu B 11115 lS TO MIT.THAT THIS IS A PAPP OE THE omO/L 30113113 MIAS 55TERRED TO AND ADOPTED BY CE 217 OF INDICATES SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY TME m=NTT w 05111ER FLORIDA OPTED ANN 3332.3505..D D.-« 21 SUBDIVISION INDEX nue ..a BY auRNw COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.1.1.1 0672 ESTATES UNIT 3 DA k'' u",° mnm COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISIDN1wmS.0121602 ` TNP 495 RNG 26E SEC(5)1&22 Ar.r K MAP NUMBER: le LE NI o .D GGE21 DAVID�SON e-:vixs area EXHIBIT "X" DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST PROPERTY OWNER: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP: 100% REGISTERED AGENTS: • Adrian Roman—President/Secretary • Adrian Ungureanu—Director • Gheorghe Lup—Director • Mihai Simut—Director • Daniel Pop—Director • Vasile Valean—Director • Vasile Brisc—Treasurer/Director Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com ❑❑ECIA❑ E❑CE❑❑ION❑ CO CON❑I❑IONA❑ UDE ❑OCA❑ION CRI❑ERIA ❑ GRACE ROMANIAN ❑A❑❑I❑❑CHURCH COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD a CC w J O Ct 0 U LEGEND CONDITIONAL USES j/ PREPARED BY:GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION 0 250 500 1000 SUBDISTRICT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE:4/17 FILE: SCALE IN FEET ADOPTED:XX,XX,2017 BY ORDINANCE NO.2017-XX(CP-2017-C) NIM INFORMATION AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, at least 15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner's list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance (Signature of Applicant) State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this day of ! , 2017 by 1� ti* ,who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. 11 . _110 Al r1_ (Signature of otary Public) (Notary Seal) �C`6� Printed Name of Notary tote,,ay,L JESSICA HARRELSON I,,�'',����,,,, Notary Public-State of Florida Commission# FF 954332 ., My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 *' Sanded through National Notary Assn. CU- PL20160002577 SSGMPA- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 ~ NapLr&i B1aiLjjrwEi NaplesNews.com Published Daily Naples,FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News,a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida;distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida;that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed.Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na- ples,in said Collier County,Florida,and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida,each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples,in said Collier County,Florida,for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.# DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 1764054 MEETING OCT 11 MEETING OCT 11 Pub Dates September 26,2017 r' 1-atet, 9/.0-eni/1 a (Sign ture of affiant) :`'••V.: KAROLEKANGAS , da 4 Sworn to and subscribed before me = ` NComotary mission*GGGG12600441 , '• Nlycnmm,Enpl,esio129,m21 This October 04,2017 .. ea,aw,nrtspnw,wurworory,� an " (Signature of affiant) ACOSTA, ROMO CARLOS ALBERTO AJITHKUMAR, ELEZABETH S AMBROSE,GAYLE L DORIS A ACOSTA 510 13TH ST NW 3815 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W -85 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34120---5027 NAPLES, FL 34120---3040 LES, FL 34119---2929 BAZHAW,BRENDA K BORRELLI,JOHN R BROUILLARD,JOHN J&ERIN L 3830 1ST AVE NW 201 WEBER BLVD S 13535 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 BUKOWSKI,THADDEUS A BUKOWSKI,WANDA CLEM,ANDREW&SHAWN 71 WEBER BLVD N VINCENTA BUKOWSKI EST 4110 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 8380 WHISPER TRACE LN#J105 NAPLES, FL 34119---2635 NAPLES, FL 34114---0000 COLLIER CNTY CORDER, MICHAEL A&LAUREN K D'AGOSTINI,DOMINICK J C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3821 3RD AVE SW MARTHA L D'AGOSTINI 3335 TAMIAMI TR E,STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34117---3027 220 PARK AVE NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 SOUTH PLAINFIELD, NJ 07080---0000 DORTA,CHARLES MANUEL FERREIRA,OSCAR F&ADELA GARGIULO SR,JEFFREY DEWEY JENNIFER DORTA OSCAR C FERREIRA VALERIE BOYD 81 WEBER BLVD S 6000 COLLINS AVE#527 4055 3RD AVE SW NAPLES,FL 34117---3037 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 ADEN SR,BILLY M&TERESA W GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH HA,CUC 4040 1ST AVE SW OF NAPLES INC 20 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES,FL 34119---2600 6017 PINE RIDGE ROAD#84 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 HALLOCK,SUSAN C HENRY,JEFF HICKEY,BRENDAN F 3960 1ST AVE NW 161 WEBER BLVD S 3870 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 J D&R L EDIE JOINT REV TRUST JORDAN,WILLIAM S JOSE,ANU 13555 COLLIER BLVD 4111 1ST AVE SW JULIA JOY NAPLES,FL 34119---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2640 100 TRAPHILL DR MORRISVILLE, NC 27560---0000 KEEFER, DAVID KELLY TR,RENATE S KENNEY,JOHN&STEPHANIE DEEATRA MARTIN-KEEFER RENATE S KELLY REV TRUST 4110 1ST AVE SW 3898 1ST AVE SW UTD 8/06 NAPLES, FL 34119---2641 NAPLES, FL 34117---3000 291 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 KLEIN,RICHARD KYLE LONG,MARIA E LOUISE V TAYLOR REV TRUST 4ARY MARTICA KLEIN 3835 1ST AVE SW 627 GORDONIA RD 1 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 NAPLES,FL 34108---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 MARZUCCO, MERISHCA MASSARD, RENE J MCCANN,JAMES&BEVERLEY 3791 1ST AVE SW 1460 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 103 4111 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3011 NAPLES, FL 34105---3128 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 MILLER TR, PATRICK K MILLER, ROBERT C MOUNTAIN,BRIAN.) TERRY B MILLER TR 40 WEBER BLVD N 21 WEBER BLVD N UTD 2/2/99-UTD 2/2/99 NAPLES, FL 34120---3054 NAPLES, FL 34120---3039 210 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3034 ONDERKO, RONALD A&DEBORAH J PAULICH IV,JOHN &DANIELLE PEREZ, HECTOR&JOHANNA 4075 1ST AVE SW 260 WEBER BLVD S 3980 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2611 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 PIDGEON,STEPHEN ROTH,STANLEY F&RUBY J SEARS,WILLIAM M 3961 1ST AVE NW 190 WEBER BLVD S SONIA E MOLINA NAPLES,FL 34119---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---3036 2 PRESTON ST NORTH BILLERICA, MA 01862---2428 SPILKER,CHRISTIAN&KELLI THOMAS, KEVIN J TOBIAS, DAVID 4035 3RD AVE SW JENNIFER E HITE PO BOX 1236 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 3830 1ST AVE SW ISLAMORADA, FL 33036---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 VAN DE WERKEN, GARY Golden Gate Estates 181 WEBER BLVD S Area Civic Association NAPLES, FL 34117---3035 PO Box 990596 Naples, FL 34116 Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON# EERING www.davidsonengineering.com September 25,2017 Dear Property Owner, Please be advised that the Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. has filed formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W 0 OD N 1st AVE SW 0 0 CO u++ In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, we are holding a Neighborhood Information Meeting to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the request. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. Please contact me at (239) 434-6060 ext. 2961, or via e-mail at fred@davidsonengineering.com, if you have any questions regarding the meeting or the proposed project. Sincerely, j4 Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property. located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility,or place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. P PROJECT LOCATION 1 Golden Gate BLVD W 0 J m L CO1st AVE SW o U 0 J in - L W N CD ((SS/ WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County-Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W.,Naples, Florida,34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Frederick E. Hood,AICP Fred Reischl,AICP Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Davidson Engineering, Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Growth Management 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Phone:239.434.6060 Phone: 239.252.4211 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net • ECivil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON www.davidsonengineering.com MEMORANDUM October 23,2017 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Fred Reischl, Principal Planner FROM: Jessica Harrelson,Senior Project Coordinator RE: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU-PL20160002577 NIM Meeting Minutes A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, at the Collier County- Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples,Florida,34120. The following individuals,associated with the review and presentation of the project,were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Sue Faulkner,Collier County • Fred Reischl,Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting by marking a presentation, reading the following: • Introduction: o Good evening. My name is Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering and I am the land development consultant representing the applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, o The applicant is seeking both a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment application to be reviewed by Collier County for the development of a church. o Here with me tonight is Jessica Harrelson,the Project Coordinator with Davidson Engineering,and Adrian Roman,the President&Secretary for the Grace Romanian Church. o Fred Reischl and Sue Faulkner,with the Collier County, are also in attendance tonight. They are the reviewing planners for Collier County Growth Management. o Per the land development code,tonight's meeting will be recorded.At the end of my presentation I will be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the proposed development. 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 DE DAVIDSON ENGttNEERING • Size and Location: o The subject parcel is approximately 6.25 acres and is located at the Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards. • Purpose of the Applications: o Two separate applications I mentioned earlier have been filed with Collier County and are being reviewed by several County departments at the same time. o First, is the application to amend the County's Growth Management Plan. The County's Growth Management Plan describes the vision for the future of the County and helps to regulate where particular land uses are developed, and to ensure that those land uses are consistent with the goals and objectives that the County has in place. As the County grows and continues to develop, the Growth Management Plan gets amended from time to time. o Based on the size of the subject property, we have filed a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, or SSGMPA. The SSGMPA will amend the future land use zoning of the subject property from Estates Mixed Use District- Residential Estates Subdistrict,to the Conditional Use Subdistrict, per the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. o The Estates Zoning District permits churches as a Conditional Use,therefore a second application, identifying all the required elements for a conditional use request, per the County's Land Development Code, has been filed. This application will also provide more specific details and conditions of approval for the subject property. Examples of conditions can be handled with the Conditional Use request are specific to setbacks, building height limitations, landscape buffers, etc. o The approval of both applications will allow the proposed church to be consistent with both the Collier County's Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan's vision for the future. • Details of the MCP o As you can see from the proposed master plan,the applicant is seeking to locate a sanctuary as the only principal building on the property with an accessory recreation field to the south. o The proposed sanctuary and accessory field have been designed and placed as close to the Collier Boulevard right-of-way to provide the most distance from adjacent homes to the east and south. o The building pad is bordered by parking and a circulation drive. o Additionally,to provide the most amount of screening from the adjacent homes,we have placed the property's proposed water management and preserve areas along the eastern portion of the property. 10 *14 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING o The remaining property boundaries will be subject to the County's landscape buffer screening requirements between residential and non-residential land uses. o The means of ingress and egress to the property will be along Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South. o Per coordination with County transportation staff,these are the two access locations that have been requested. o We held an informal NIM about a year ago to gauge the community's feelings about the proposed project. o At that time,the concept plan was slightly different with one more access point to the south along 1st Avenue SW. o Since then,the applications have been reviewed by Collier County and we were asked to remove that access point. o While the application is still in review,additional changes can be made based on the feedback we receive from you all and from Collier County staff. o Although this layout looks official,this is not an approved plan yet.We still must finish our review with Collier County before moving forward. The following concerns were stated and questions were asked: 1. Concerns with the additional traffic along Weber Blvd,with also making the point that there is a nearby park, two existing churches and elementary school in the area. 2. County not willing to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd. 3. Why can't a bridge be constructed off CR 951(Collier Blvd)to the site, instead of accessing the property off the residential streets? - Fred Hood replied that this was something that could be considered, but the direction of County Transportation, regarding access points to the site, was followed. 4. What are the trip counts, hours of operation? How many accessory uses/buildings? - Fred Hood replied the design of the site is for a maximum 300-seat sanctuary to house the applicant's congregation only, with no plans for additional services or to lease out the church to other congregations. Fred noted that the recreational field could be open for the enjoyment of the public's use and was something that the church was considering offering the community. He also stated that there were no additional accessory uses being considered and the Conditional Use application was to allow for the church-use only. DAVIDSON ELIC INttRir�_. 5. Concerns of outside services,such as child care and alcoholic counseling services. - Fred stated the outside services brought up were not being considered, and would require a separate application to be filed. 6. The applicant then spoke about the congregation, and why they chose the Estates location. 7. An attendee then spoke in support of the church. 8. Is a PUD being sought? - Fred replied that no, a PUD was not being considered and explained the Conditional Use. 9. When are the services? - Fred and the applicant replied with the services days/times. 10. What is the traffic count? - Fred replied that the Sunday peak-hour was 183 trips. 11. Discussions of traffic, ingress &egress are held. 12. Building heights? - Fred stated the site would conform to the current development standards& went over height and setbacks. 13. Are dark skies proposed? - Fred replied that was something the church would look into and take into consideration. 14. Is there the possibility for the church to expand on this parcel? - Fred went over the required open space,storm water,parking areas, etc.for the site. 15. More discussions regarding traffic, ingress&egress continued. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:13p.m. End of memo. 12D Tuesday,September 26,2017 Naples Daily News e sr,.._.. bM2408rll . iL „a:.RUift. :` 1 '.t a ;7;,J.1 b- - pP rtibn _ PliC,St n WE BUY CARS,TRUCKS SUNS, Location:866 Neapolitan Way disability requiring auxiliary Unless rorty the ppedescribed OF N 1485FT OF E 135F7 OF W Etc.Anything from$1,000 Agent: Natascha Bonder- aids and services for thiys In said certificate shall he Mr/re 30FT OF SW1/4 OF SE3/4 OF FORMULA Sem($239)595-4021ease call Estrella Clerk's Office yat213-1015 with theproperty willbe soldtosaidproperty4 being in Collier VARIANCEPETI11ON 17-V7 equests at least two business the highestbidderat the County,Florida. 2018 OUTBOARD MODELS ,-' de Consimining Variance Resolution days before the meeting date. Rul ier gC77th Floor,,Room r711 az Name in which assessed: 310,330,CBR,350&430 IANroufrcerrrLM- 17-V7 for approval f Publish: Tuesday,September 1:00 P.M.on Monday,October BARBARA LEE THOMAS variance from Section 56-124 26 2017 16,2017- .�,.;. m _ to gross fl000re than 50%of the NO 1765855 Unless the property described -3,�.o- Fes al5 .ter v#, stazlonitohe devoted tr area to a 5essollece Datedathis 21st day of August, iredeemedeaccoordingstolllow, l)4 f cold drinks,package foods, Ta ,-,�--I. p? DWIGHT E.BROCK the property will be sold to BOAT AND YACHTDEIAH PERSON IN GRAY CAR tobacco and similar grocery NOTICE OF APPUCATON FOR CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT the highest bidder at the Sea)B4 Made Involved in accident on 9/21/17 items where less than 50%Is TAX DEED Collier 7tht 1 or.00cm 711 n Q3a,Ioep7104 at 91 near NCH,please call permitted on property owned BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Building on Mondoy, c711ffi Sea SbleMarineFlodda-cont (239)774-0081 by 7-Eleven, Inc-, a Texas NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN Deputy Clerk 3:00017.on Mon day,October CAPTAINS LICENSE corporation and located at 697 that LOURDES M OR CHARLES Donna Rutherford 16,2017. Naples OUPv-6-oak t',: on 9th Street North&8607th Ave ) ALAIMO holder of Me (Seal) Oct.9th 877-435-3187 North- followingtax certificate has September 5,12,19,26,2017 Dated this 8th day of August, �LOga15 Cit. FEE ,- Petitioner. 7-Eleven, Inc. a filed del certificate for tax No.1732D99 2017. (n MARINA Texas Corporation deed to be Issued thereon- NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR THE AT - Location:697 9th Street North Certificate number,year of TAX DEED DWIGHT E.BROCK FACTORY BAY C� &8607th Ave North ssuance,desCriDtlon of CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT Agent:John M.Passldomo g1,otJCg5 property,and name In which NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that NOTICE assessed 15 as follows: MICE of the 2 264owing ationonna Clerk Sli47'10kcw'Wide:e aCmending an Ordinance certificate Number l0-5586 tax certificatefrhas deedfiledt said Donna Rutherford 4T LOA 19'Wide; Notice Is hereby given that amending Chapter 58 Article certificate for tax to be (neap Deep Water Marinaa., the Naplet Planning Advl1Dry Ili Division 4 governing Prapert ID#i 4089088B10B Issued thereon. Certificate September 5,12,19,2612017 Direct Brdge Jus e;1 - begin will htld a meeting use coce protety.On antl land EST UNIT 77, R 136 L GTHE numrer, near of Issuance, ND.1731982 No Bridge Issue• beginning at ber a.m., use compatibility. EST UNIT F TR 136 LESS THE description-of property and Contemn Floating Docks; Wednyesd un October 11,2035 Location:-Staff E CST OF THEN 200FT AND mem which assessed is as Clubhouse;Pump Out. Eighth Street)South,Napless Districts:Airport Overlay LESS THE 548 per OF THEE follows: p2a5F7r,said property being in ^_„^�� Reduced$55.10% sane Florida,34102. Collier County,Florida.FlCertificate Number.15-5209 ClB7`--Jh TEXT AMENDMENT 17-14 Call Paul: (2392534755' The public hearings to be Consider an Ordinance Name In which assessed: Property IDA-81320760007 ' considered at that meeting amending Chapter 2,Division FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE Description: WELLS BLK B ,c..,,-pers.RLS Ere: 4, Design Review Board COMPANY LOTS 1-3,said property being no and Section 16-82, Section In Collier County, 1 WANTED AU.MOTOR HOMES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 16-116 and Section 16 321 Unless the property desWibed Florida, AND CAMPERS Any cond. AMENDMENTI7-CPAs re the Code standards Ordinances in said certificate shall be Cash Paid (954)789-7530. adopting an rehin sive revprocess for and c theeprope accoill be so law, BRUNO which assessed: atlopting Comprehensive review for historic the property will be sold to BRUNO CAMPOS place 4 ' Plan Amendment Petitioner preservazlon. the highest bidder at the DANNY CAMPOS Ca`k OnaSoO.' 17-CPA1 to amend the Petrtfoner.$faff Collier County Administration OWN YOUR COVERED RV O✓ Comprehensive Plan In Location:Citywide Building 7th Floor,Room 711 at Unless the property described 7.7 O OR BOAT PARKING SPACE! accordance with Florida 3:00 P.M.on Monday,October in Said certificate shell be jjj"jjj�'��j\ hitlenr eyrvcondes.com Statute Section 163-3191. ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE 16,2017- redeemed according to law, wMIKEPRICE239-340-0665 Petitioner City of Naples INVITED TO APPEAR AND BE the property will bidderbe sold hto e Germain Properties of Naples Location:Citywide HEARD. Dated this 8th day of August, the highest at the Aepar Cky Naples Planning 2017- Collier Courrty Administration here SRVs, boat,o: Moored Department Any Gerson who decidesmto 7th Flonr Room 713 az iB-Je RVs, auto. Covered and with made ty DWIGHTLERK E.THE CIRCUIT 1:00 P.M.017.on Monday.October available. (239)643-0447 17-CUI 10NAL USE PETITION this Board with peen to CLERK OF COURT 16,2017. 17-0114 any matter codtlered at this Consider a Resolution hew ng will need a neo BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Dated this 14th day of August. �Transportation 7� Petitionnin17-CU4, purrsuant Use mit*cesureethett a vveeeWNm Dona Ruuty lerk therford 2017. to Section 58-033(7) of record Is mad..which record (Seal) DWIGHT E.BROCK Real Estate the Code of Ordinances,to includes the testimony ace September 5,12,19,26,2017 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT F" allow outdoor storage of evidence PoeNo.1732011 SSwhich the b*ts and lmdurts t automobile Inventory with eppeni Is to be heard- Any NOTICE OF APPl1CATION FOR BY:/s/Donna Rutherford 2014 BMW 320 Black;w/new screening as an accessory erson with a disability heels; sports package; use to the permitted use of requiring auxiliary aids and TAX DEED Deputy Clerk as Indoor storage of automobile services for this meeting may rui Donna Rutherford $19,500.(239)919-4230 or Inventory,on property owned call the City Clerk's office at NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that CSeap (239)298-1656 by TT of Naples,Inc.,a Florida 213-1015wit requests at least FNAFLORIDALLC holtlerofthe September 5,12,19,26,2017 2017 BMW 648 M Sport Pap Corporation and located az two business days before the followini tax certificate has No.1731998 ® ::I 5K miles;White&black 2725 and 2745 Corporate Flight meeting dare. filed Sad certificate for tax NOTCE OF APPl1CATION FOR convertible top.581,000. Drive. deed to be issued thereon. TAX DEED (239)9194230; or 2981656 Petitioner:TT of Naples,Inca James Krell,Chairman of issete number, year Florida Coryorazion NAPLES PLANNING ADVISORY of Issuance, descrlition of NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that ('tlll[r 'X1e Ice " Location:2725 and 2745 BOARD p property and name in which TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-g1 20171NFlxIT DOOR Rear wheel Agent:corpo�Johne lgM htDrive Pub: N0176e5842 ben 26,2017 assessed is as follows: cer C ease for has fileer of the d said drive,loaded only 800 I. Cheffy Passidomo Legal Nonce Certificate Number:15-4688 certificate for tax deed to be blue ext/tan Int,DVD$70K issued thereon. Certificate ono.(Pd$831)(239)222-9081 VARIANCE PETITION 17-V6 Notice of)mem to Designate Property',ID#:68941840002 number, year of Issuance, Find ,,y Consitler a Resolution Management Service Class UNIT IIA CONDOMINIUM UNIT name In which assessed Is m Va ' 17-V6, pursuant to Section Designated Position with the 246,said property being in follows: DODGE GRAND CARAVAN Odinancesototallowoforof o FloridaRetuemeef System: Collier County,Florida Certificate Number.15-171 IoCalfieds 1014.Wehee flmr mapn&tie dock and boat lift to extend Notice is hereby given that Name in which assessed: downs.(239)494-8267 beyond the maximum shore the North Collier Fire Control RICHARD E GILL EST Property IDA:0 01174 0 0 0 0 1 normal dimension of 25 feet and Rescue District Intends Description:3 47 29 S 1185FT , es'.1 for a combined pier and boat to designate the management nted lift In the Aqualane Shares posklon of Executive Director NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING A.A.TOP DOLLAR PAIDI for btedof22 for property Se SeniCl Management Cl.minn Cars,Muscle Cars, notated at 2ef Aqua Court. Service Class h eslg�a�ed &Spoils Cars.(239)2n-sem Location: 21 Hewett Position with the Florida Lotazlon:221 Aqua Court Retirement F sy approval to be Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier ABSOLUWanted Dead or Al Top$ CY ALL AUTOS. onstruction,In. Florida Marine effective Florida Division M Retirement.of the County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan FREE PICK UP 239-265-6140 comments or questions Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and a Conditional Use CONDITIONAL USE PETITION should be addressed to MOTORcycu:�SuckS'TRAIiats consider a resolution BrolnsFinancial on at(2az3B)352-132Becky ['I'LL''T160002577],for a±6.25-acre property,located at the southeast corner TOP PRICE.(219)NO2-8687 determining conditional Pub: September 26 and of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. COBVETIESWANTED Use Petition 17-CU6, October3,2017 Top do5-3-Cash 41-923 4211 of to Code Section antes, NO1763491 941-809-3660 or 941-923-3421 f the code of ordinances, The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and to allow the retail sale of Real Estate Conditional Use applications is to add the roe within the Estates MOST TRUSTED MOTORSTsecondhand merchandise in PP subjectproperty rtY BUYER TRU ED• the HC-Highway Commercial Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict,and permit the required All Vehicles wanted NeaZonpolitan at 006 7'11�eomplaceblm..]m1e zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church,religious facility,or Rod or Jim(239)774-7360 Petitioner-Paul scrogham place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. locsalfieas 10.1.111111111111"11), TARPON BAY REALTY NOTICE OF INTENT TO •REGISTER FICTITIOUS NAME NOTICE OF ACTION PROJECT Z / Notice Under ida St NemsLOCATFONLaw Pursuant to Section 965.09, Floritla statutesGolden Gate BLVD W NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned,TARPON BAYDEVELOPMENT.LLC desiring ',11 G• to Brig a In business under j `y+a„er: R/ theH nus name of TARPON J 7 CP BAY REALTY located az PO Box fl) ® i 1402,In the Coumy of Lee, `„ • 3 Bonita Springs, Florida i co 1St AVE SW �� said namdse h register the said name with the Division U p cit, of Corporations f the /� -� Florida Department of State, J S_ ®�eTallahassee Floritla.Dated ai 8, m eli Naples,see,Fl September 18, Pots. v 4_ TARPON BAY REALTY 3 Pub:September 2d 2017 Na 1763111 • Manage your subscription ,IDt;e • Find a newsstand to xouceef WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Naples Planning Advisory buy a paper Board lee ile meetIng lastedk ybe owwill The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting,held by Chamber,7335eEig(dh SStreet Frederick E.Hood,AICP,of Davidson Engineering,Inc.,representingGrace • Place an obituary,classified South,Nap les,Florida Repniar Meering.wed., Romanian Baptist Church of Naples,Inc-on Wednesday,October 11th,2017. ad or press release la/11/d meeting a-m. The meetingwill Agenda and meeting packet begin at 5:30 p.m.,at the Collier County-Estates Branch are available from: Library,located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W.,Naples,Florida,34120. • Submit news City Clerk's Office,City Hall, 239-213-1015 City website,http//www. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments,they • Submit a letter to the editor naPNOT CE Fen can be directed by mail,phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Formal action may be taken on • a Reportproblem any Item discussed or added to P this agate e erq person who F ederick E Hood,A CP Fred Re sc J,A CP Sue Faulkner,Principal Planner dacMestoaVpealany OecWooP ode by the City council Davidson Engineering,Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Gro dh Management wxh respect to any i*(or www.naplesnews.com/customerservice ennnidered attMs jai*(or 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 2800 N.Horseshoe Drive ZBDO N.Horseshoe Drive headna)MU need a record Naples,FL 34104 Naples,FL 34104 Naples,FL 34104 of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim Phone:239.494.6060 Phone:239252.4211 Phone:299-252-5715 apIr►�a �News made,y piniIncludesPn'eallEmail:FledOdavidsonor iiaeibg.com Email:Fredreischl®colliergov.net Email:5uefaulimerOsslliorgovnet '"`TT'' �J the testimony and evidence wrtaraur.rawrxnwomc upon which the appeal Is 10 aeplanbar 26,2007 ND-1760054be heard Any person with a N.) I-1 1—A F-A 1—, I" I—, 0 LD V Cr) Lil 4=. W 1‘) I—, 0 LD CO V C Lc, -1=. W Iv I—, 1y (01 M .t. ' _, • '.-1 . - al 'V N-0 . , 0 %,..1 Z . ..., co c A ( L. V -0 vi F. T NJ 0 IS F-1 ......, al, ?,.J .•4 ___ 97,-,,I L, ,,,j _A 0- -12-, ,..) c'J • 1 r°1° --\-- kli __r ------ La t‘J 0 1-4 '..$ . 0. E __ - .) ,Th --- .. 1--- 11.1 & i'. IN) , V.7 k ' s?' tr' , \ A 3 Z 1 - . rj. oa r Or-<mo M Zs, Is, Thi = •L'i' I-4 LI 2 V '-\ m0 r1C4 0, l.) z .:,, Z:Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\OWGIPianning\GIS\2017.04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E(AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd 4*- ''''It'4'.'f'' '.4 -4'- ':':"..' tb''' ' q 5° 4 i z. - 'f 4� a , " irk" ' , °$ q i.:.-" .;;'':' ,;.• .-,'--:' 4,.. , .. - z i ,.. , - .!.. • y- ,. , V-i7;: -." .: 1,...i:;:- „.,..,....,:iii- .'";.'-'• - ;.;•-• ' c:?;.4.., i.i.:‘, ' r....-:‘:';4 . . . ,. :. : ',-;,'''' •••41i-: ,. ,:, ..e.,_,-'y; '' ' ''' ..; '*"''' .,;,. I + :45ra# } Y`a.i Isw `" s s-. f - y i ry o f Y *4.4*; .-.,,,i''';',, '� b y � - ' N 1 IBLVD n e. fi GOLDE GATE 3 " , ..,.tis _ �c.. �M. -1,'-'1 ' yg,r,::-,..,..- ... *,' .e.m.: : - ,„ , „..,.-..,.._,:, .;;.,,- , ' p� S i y. .cy i � fl r -#40 `f _ iW flJ m�, r �� � � � ,� ;mac � t" it "s ......, , LEGEND w. i " Y K ^�" a' + • D.GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT ' r irtioT '" ii PROPERTY:8.25 ACRESnii wt j, " s 's . -.M *.• :;w " , •� .",-,:,,,t 600§7 1 1 SOURCES.COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 1 12017)1 ,_-..,t , ® BAPTIST p- -._ 1..�� a®N�+,�..1,_ DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ri::,,, w 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSONJ. PHONE:239-434-6060 EXHIBIT F.1: AERIAL EXHIBIT Note: 2017 Aerial obtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. ESTATES ESTATES ESTATES 3w (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) L2 I O w o 1 ='�>w �P � ' GOLDEN GATE BLVD. I I E -- RIGHT-OF-WAY S 6f _moi B • OW T or .' I .. 1 � I \ r ._....„. .,,,,,„ „ .„ , ... , _k "'t'':'''„....' '1 OA ' ' 1 -^ 1 t LT' DEVELOPMENT ///s a0 3 ",, \ ., AREA OUTLINED P .r� ' a ,• J s g O r.,� FOR SANCTUARY/ ^ .,�, .t ^^ <a W AZ MULTI-PURPOSE € \`‘,.\ \\ \ I o - wo •,' "� BUILDING T \ \ 1€ I m 3D0 SEATS MAX 4\{� �� �\ I g Al to..rt a a 41.1.0 z \\ \ \�\ �� ESTATES L'' I,_' \\��\\ �� (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) u I I .t \\\ `I' U a Q OU , m Q wra \\\,, m I Z Q v z I ;+ ACCESSORY I'`\\\ iu O ¢ 9 wo I - RECREATION AREA ! \\`I, 5 1 "' \\ti\ .o E LI' i q i�`\\\v ESTATE6 I - ESTATES "�0 I % \\`,i' (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) - (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) wZ 0.30 ACRE SEPTIC \\l O-g1j,pi DRAINFIELD \ 1• 1110,a1 4 D (RESERVED) \\�` LOW x .' § I 4�,'-\\-' -' u,.ve e wrren Uz i € W a:. tildolr' ° \\\ I gv --__ r,,,,. 1ST AVE SW - - gr �.v - I 4 RIGHT-OF-WAV _ ,- ESTATES ESTATES fu>• .o P (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIARREL I INARY-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION E. n 1 OF 1 ' '• h. . ifte (CHAPTER 8,COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s)must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen(15)calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s)must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code,Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street richt-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s)must be securely affixed by nails,staples,or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post,or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s)in place,and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost. or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY,PERSONALLY APPEARED Frederick E.Hood.AICP,Senior Planner WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE \ COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER CU-PL20160002 77 and SSGMPA P.L20160002584/CPSS-2017-I ,\ �\ 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 SIGNATURE OF APPLI`tAN?'OR AGENT STREET OR P.O.BOX Frederick E.Hood,AICP,Senior Planner Naples,FL 34104 NAME(TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY,STATE ZIP STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of April , 2018 , by Frederick E.Hood,AICP , personally known to me or who produced as identification and who did/did not take an oath. \ n %%%%%%%%%% JESSICA HARIiELSON ,Signature of NotaryPu l ic� -"Nye, Notiry Public-Stale of Florlda 1 ' $ Commission FF 851332 'a� '.-. r My Comm. Sires May 18,212/ Bondedthrou Notional Notary Assn. ante fNotaryPu lic My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH CU-PL20160002577 SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 A ,� � °��'� f �� •; 3 PUBIIC HEARING REQUESTING A S E SCAEE GROWTH ti `r + PiNl�NEARDIG REQUESTS A SMAIl SCALE GROWTH 1 ' i i,`, ( ]RtANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT A' CONDITIONAL USE { / kANACENEMT PLAN pkENOMENT AND CONDITIONAL U$E '4 , wllLmYp9NT aP.1nYnPIDIYfP711nbu8LNDbf no. V rnnxl� .I,uly nalwlLm,Lrnar.-ucna[u r+mrnn le mro rm I lulunel nn.Mn4(UNYNWnlnTnllW legennl .nlnlnX+wNl IaL ualetuN\I1 M1INIV:nW1�la411TfInV 11111eie l(tt111(pLIu1N111[RStb(L) u nl • ' a unnm nnnolw ii:lua,ln.>rrvr v:.nu"M:in 4a u Ls L. t ,.,rn.. rr�l.+crn nl. ne tr I u _ -. , • • • • • • Y PUBLIC HEARING REQUESTING A SMALL SCALE GROWTH ; �, [+ ! MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL US t. ( II I Nlll 1.1201.404151.C,,,,;,;,, 17l-autnrt nlY -'•'•=:‘,l rl sn uuneae rinln� m.nueweeLNli � ( Vt� vy a errs,a ° _ fi . '. � , • r. • r , 44,_it! • c iM' , _ it £ '4 "} Z4';,',7,'":'• i1-r ri_."(-.".,.. _• ' y .` f cP1 .-3-7.1.11 =} 1,. :,:., y. w - rh'r - 'L. a TP .4: • f ....:,;-.4,,,,..„- .f " I MV x ..,tif_'— �"�+1Ly ,04 . ,, v'''1.'.0-';'',',.-' 4 pt� ""--- a i. -ry� - f r,« a ' .h F F. IlliktL. • • s _ x;11 - , r. ,I- . = i y ww a.= � Q w ?x -34,c4 0 ,3�opAoaQ = CWOdFNQm s' ,.- WC.) A1::: QZ F„ Z ¢ 7AArl GVW z zW i.,---”' a)- x °.oP 0 - t.z = 1 x -_-=h _ r . . . • .. cn 4-�womax- g o w o�a _ - _ _�-C 'iLeZ`woUU�dxQ wwy too vz �<�wz�xwx� ll'x� , / _ -,---x 0 ,�0)..TedWxS :a °-st. `, y . 3J� aF-esF -� U •-�� • :Iii Q,p . o, 6 .t -' OZ Or m J' = 7:-.=.7.:,,-_- _,.. _ Z2i q'uvZZO200 O vi, Fe' 3U� w tnLOO _ xFC� O3jaE � ° w� . duti --jt 31r/ s} ,r= a - '4•4.` 1vVFmO DO ,- 1• lr _• 4 , 'L � O i n. 40 O. ¢ VI d lr.. az _ ,�� ��` oOv moo � �3 „a vN¢ m 't .. / - --/ = x f JQNO v..wu.=-..47,',...7c°00 O:GH• Cr,� NJ r t �:. aZwa ®<1- -Zo .-;---,a a'.1..=�T� - - 7447";:‘,-' 154-11.* di �-<-. a•1N2a,Z ;4 '' -1 = _ „isoo zoOw�zno0.� z x�r.y► - - - n i, r �C��N~mac.".'c2ott_ FnE- cGZ ., .G - 1 '' e O/ J4,..2:‘.-��Z GC: / - - *• M. �� ,� c4 -P.C`-'L-� c Oma. .. - ,,,:,.4'. * _'''.,..,-...-r"37”at>-14 jt1*.'M;"....Er::::P-:12::" :' 720:: ---8'11: 1:-:''''- 3 W4 ` ,1.-;11:-I:1-;---':::-41_:::---a:,,i'r--" ,7:11 • • zx �vvyr _ � . =CO) x o>zz--Lcau. - X' '>1zi' - Z e < ccp, .�4�=ozoo•'', CZ' = v _ 7. WF" F� °xOywcO�wx" i3 m c a _ ,Ls3c'oF 'Q C Zr� ,,,,...,,s--6-.....,,:! ._ �Op? e s ' craa cs �� < u-v3 C, /V y er � wei zouwcKCG O z G �� '- ,1. �_ „ m mxa -oma b ,.'-�.- C/DE�o ,.C .0 :tura a .. * 2. rnuisu:FU,V ;, i '•,' =z7 &o:_iD<°�, i.- z c : - r' Z� o �z"�u`+A`-mc M ZO 1�. i ,- Duioac�>Q '''' y s—Z __ - L LZ< F. X1 1' J / ../ -/ oLcaz� oa�o^ •of .. _� _ ffi'ij pee —_ . ..._ . 41.1..f -::-:, . <z izc.„Qoz GRt_z 1-,. Wa --,, ---72'-/.---:,,. �„ ,;.:_==,;,_ „ .F ii rx2u<rrEZ_zm 8 _ i_ • —a-- i ,_= �” _ - _ - 4 s r /% « J Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON www.davidsonen meerin com '.�1 ..� ? NIEERING g g May 10, 2017 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Use Subdistrict Dear Mr.Weeks, Attached, is an application for a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment(SSGMPA) and the required submittal information, for the request of an amendment to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Use Subdistrict. The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District.The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSONEENGINEERINGG www.davidsonengineering.com July 6, 2017 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-P120160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2"d Review Dear Mr.Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. SSGMPA Application 3. Text Amendment Language, as Exhibit"C" 4. Aerial, FLUCCS and Soil Maps,as Exhibit"F" 5. Zoning Maps,as Exhibit "H" 6. Surrounding Future Land Use Exhibit, as Exhibit"I" 7. Public Services Map,as Exhibit"K" 8. Conceptual Site Plan, as Exhibit"0" 9. Boundary Survey,as Exhibit"P" 10. Level of Service Analysis,as Exhibit"R" 11. Project Narrative, Evaluation and Justification Criteria,as Exhibit"T" 12. Planning Communities Map, as Exhibit"U" 13. Future Land Use Map, as Exhibit"V" 14. Future Land Use Inset Map,as Exhibit"Y" Comprehensive Planning's Comments related to the Application Form: 1. Page 3 III. Description of Property: G. Surrounding Land Use Pattern — Reference is incorrect — not Exhibit '0', but Exhibit 'I'. Exhibit'0' is a site plan. Response: The surrounding land use patterns are shown on Exhibit "0" with a 300 foot radius of the subject property. 4365 Radio Road Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 r DAVIDSON ENCINEE S.INC, 2. Page 4 IV. Type of Request: C. Amend Future Land Use Map(s) ...TO Estates Mixed Use District —Conditional Uses Subdistrict...-Add the"s"to Uses. Response: The application has been updated to add the"s"after Conditional Uses Subdistrict. 3. V. Required Information:A. Land Use—Reference is questionable for"Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning)with subject property outlined - Exhibit 'V' is a good map for showing surrounding land use, but Exhibit'D'is listed in the"List of Exhibits"as the'Location Map'. Response: The application has been updated to reference Exhibits "D"and "H"for the general location map showing the surrounding developments(PUD, DRI's and existing zoning). 4. V. Required Information: B. Future Land Use and Designation — Exhibit `I' and 'V' were referenced for providing a map of existing Future Land Use Designation for subject property and surrounding area with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property, however neither exhibit shows an acreage total. Response: Exhibits"I"and"V"have been updated to include the subject site's total acreage. 5. Page 5 V. Required Information: E. Public Facilities — Arterial and Collector Roads — Reference is incorrect — not Exhibit'R', but Exhibit'0,'the Traffic Impact Statement. Response: The Application has been updated to reference Exhibits "R"and "Q", as both exhibits outline information related to the LOS. Comprehensive Planning's Comments on Application Backup Documents: 6. Exhibit 'C' Proposed GMPA Amendment Language — Add "A. Estates — Mixed Use District" underneath the first "***TEXT BREAK***" and then add another "***TEXT BREAK***" underneath the "A. Estates — Mixed Use District". Capitalize "Use" in # 5, first line. Add a parenthetical reference to the map exhibit at end of sentence,e.g. "...Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4(See map titled )." Response: The proposed GMPA Amendment Language,as Exhibit"C",has been updated as requested. 7. Exhibit'F-2' NRCS Soils Mapping—Please add the total acreage of the soil#14. Response: The Soils Mapping,as Exhibit F.2,has been updated to include the total acreage of soil#14. 8. Exhibit 'H' Surrounding Zoning Districts - There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property's boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a 's' on the title for the map to"Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA..." DE DAVIDSON ENGINEE€:INCr Response: Exhibit "H"has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site. Additionally, the title has been updated as requested. 9. Exhibit 'I' Surrounding Future Land Designations -There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property's boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a 's' on the title for the map to be "Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA..." Please modify the legend to show the Estates Designation as'Estates—Mixed Use District'. Response: Exhibit "I"has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site and the legend has been updated to indicate'Estates—Mixed Use District'. 10. Exhibit 'K' Proximity to Public Services - Please add a 's' on the title for the map to be "Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA...". The word 'Sheriff' is misspelled (just one 'r') in the legend, please correct. Response: Exhibit "K"has been updated to include the additional "s"and the misspelling of sheriff has also been corrected. 11. Exhibit 'N'Alternative Site Data &Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) Two additional sites were reviewed for this analysis: Addie's Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) and Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). The Sungate CPUD site can accommodate the church and is approved for this use without further planning action, however,the analysis stated that the proposed location provided more viable accessibility. The analysis also stated that Sungate CPUD lacked immediate accessibility. The Addie's Corner MPUD site, although it can accommodate the church use,the analysis stated that the intensity is currently limited, and therefore,the MPUD might require an amendment to the existing zoning (to guarantee the intended commercial square footage). The conclusion of the analysis was that the access to both alternative sites does not provide viable accessibility, and therefore, the proposed location best meets the needs of the Church. Staff would like to see further elaboration of the conclusions in this analysis including a provision of a definition of'viable accessibility' and 'immediate accessibility'. Response:After further review of the subject properties it was determined that access was not a limiting factor for either alternative sites. However, further research identified developer commitment requirements within the Sungate PUD and we have provided additional supporting documentation to ensure the selected site at C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Boulevard is a superior site for the development. These additional items include the limited square footage for commercial use and requirements to provide water management for adjacent properties within the PUD and C.R. 951 right-of-way. Additionally, the Addie's Corner PUD was eliminated from the analysis due to the recently amended PUD that would limit the commercial space to 4.32 acres, which is less than stated key criteria for the property. The minimum 5.0 acres was selected as a key criterion to ensure the future development would be able to construct a mixture of permitted land uses within the property;for example, accessory uses to the church, and multi- purpose fields. Please refer to the updated Data Analysis Report identifying Sungate as the only alternative site to the C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Blvd property with supporting documentation identifying our selected site as the best choice. 1,4r 111= r DAVIDSON E N G IAVIN E E C I N G There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: • In "Contents"—Add an 'a'-Data&Analysis • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 3—Capitalize and add a 's'—Conditional 2s es Subdistrict • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 6 — "...provide due process ..." consider a different word choice. • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 2, line 4—add 'dwelling unit' • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 3, lines 1&2—Reword—the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict • In "Alternative Site Analysis." Paragraph 2, Line 3—Change"permittable"to"permitted" • On Attachment 'D' Existing Congregation Location—Since you are proposing to build a 300-seat church, where do the rest of the parishioners live? Response: The referenced spelling errors have been corrected throughout the document. 12. Exhibit 'T'—Narrative and Justification of the Proposed GMP Amendment 1.c.—In response to Ch. 163.3187 (1)(c), Please revise your response to indicate the amendment does include text change that is directly related to a map change. Though the statutory provision reads, "goals, policies, and objectives", it is applied as any change to the text of a comprehensive plan. Response: Exhibit "T"has been updated to indicate that the amendment does include a text change that is directly related to a map change. 13. Exhibit 'U' Planning Communities —This was incorrectly labeled as Exhibit 'V', however the List of Exhibits identified it as Exhibit'U'. Please correct the label/title. Response: The Planning Communities Exhibit has been properly labeled has Exhibit"U". 14. Exhibit 'V' Future Land Use—The label/title is missing the'V'. Please correct the label.Although there is only one existing future land use on the subject site (Estates), please incorporate a summary table showing the acreage of the Estates within the subject site(see the application V.B.). Response: Exhibit "V"has been updated to be correctly labeled and the summary table also shows the acreage of the subject site. 15. Exhibit 'Y' Conditional Uses Subdistrict inset map—Please add a 's' on the end of Uses in the map title. Staff believes the map title ending with "Special Provisions" is incorrect and should be removed from the title. This application is to amend "3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict, e. Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria"—not"3.b.Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions." Response: The title of the inset map, labeled as Exhibit "Y", has been updated per the email correspondence with Sue Faulkner on June 28th,2017. 111 DAVIDSON N G I N E E K I N G 16. General Comments: • When uploading documents for submittal in the future, please include each of the Exhibit labels. Staff had to go back and rename each of the documents by adding the Exhibit labels. Response: All Exhibits labels have again been provided for each document being submitted. • Please submit all maps in color for future hard copy submissions. Response: Acknowledged. 17. Environmental Planning Sufficiency Comments : The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use(CU)for the project. A listed species survey was conducted in March 23, 2017. No listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Several wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata)were observed in trees on the parcel and will be retained or relocated on site in accordance with the requirements of section 3.04.03 of the LDC.The general provision for protection of listed plants is included in CCME Policy 7.1.6. Letters from the Florida Master Site File dated March 8, 2017, list no previously recorded cultural resources on the subject property.The site will be subject to the requirement of accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by CCME Policy 11.1.3.The provision is also included in LDC section 2.03.07 E. The subject property is not located in any County well field protection zones. The proposed GMP amendment will have no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Response: Acknowledged. 18. Transportation Planning Sufficiency Comments: Please note: This petition request is sufficient for review; however, transportation planning staff is requesting changes to the master plan and CU (Conditional Use) language (the CU language is provided for information not as part of changes for the GMPA). The petition is sufficient for review; however,the number and location of the proposed third access onto 1st Avenue SW needs to be removed. Access onto local roads is limited by Access Management, plus the location at the extreme southwest corner increases the amount of traffic and length on the local road. Please remove this access from your request and the TIS. Informational comment: Provide as part of your CU request (not this GMPA)the following commitment: For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service DE DAVIDSON £N G1NEthING provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Division Director,Transportation Engineering or his designee. Response: The third access off 1St Ave SW has been eliminated, and the Conceptual Site Plan and TIS have been updated accordingly. Additionally, the language referenced above will be requested as a Zoning Condition of Approval, within the proposed Conditional Use Resolution. 19. Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Sufficiency Comments: Per GMP/CIE Policy 1.5, the potable water system LOSS is based on population. Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. So, the proposed use will have no impact on potable water facility capacity. Please revise Exhibit"R" accordingly. Response: Exhibit"R"has been updated to state that the proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. 20. Collier County Attorney's Office Sufficiency Comments: Please provide Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, with subject site shown.This will be an attachment to the ordinance in addition to the text and Conditional use map. If you already provided it, please email it to me. Response: Per correspondence with Sue Faulkner, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, showing the subject property, will be updated and provided by County Staff. The acreage you provided is 6.25.The acreage according to the property appraiser is 6.64 acres.What is the correct number since the survey does not have the acreage on it? Response: The correct site acreage is 6.25 as shown on the survey. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner DE Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com October 23,2017 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict 3rd Review Dear Mr.Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data &Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to comments issued August 18, 2017: Exhibit 'N' Alternative Site Data & Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) — One alternative site was reviewed for this analysis: Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). Sungate CPUD's Ordinance #09-06 does not list churches as a permitted or accessory use, nor are there any conditional uses associated with this CPUD; therefore, the CPUD would need to be amended to permit a church use. There may be other locations that might be able to accommodate a church 'by right'. Staff feels additional work is still needed with this Exhibit 'N'. Upon review of your criteria that are being used for the analysis,we have the following comments: • Please consider using additional criteria (such as 'property must be undeveloped', specific site dimensions are needed, not just property size in acres, price of the property,etc.) • Since the actual proposed site is not zoned commercial, nor is it proposed, the criterion "Eligible for C-2 or higher zoning"doesn't seem appropriate • Please consider including non-commercial zoning that might allow a church by right, or with a Conditional Use (properties that would not require a GMPA), such as non-residential uses in an Urban Designated area allows for churches. Also, Agricultural/Rural Designation or Mixed-Use Activity Centers allows community facilities such as churches. • Please explain your reasoning for locating with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway — is visibility important for this church? Response: The Data&Analysis(Exhibit N)has been updated to address the above comments. 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 DE DAVIDSON ENCINEEF:IHG There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: • In "Contents"—Add an 'a'—'Data&Analysis and Trade Area Analysis' • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 6—"...provide due process..." consider a different word choice. • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 2, line 4—add 'dwelling unit' • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 3, lines 1 & 2 — Reword —the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict • In "Alternative Site Analysis." Paragraph 2, Line 3—Change"permittable"to"permitted" Response: Spelling errors have been corrected throughout the Data&Analysis(Exhibit N). If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, (f bt; 1 �` Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner DE Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAV 1 D S O N ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com March 1, 2018 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict Dear Mr.Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data &Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to the sufficiency letter issued December 4, 2017: • Please consider creating a map to show the three site locations discussed in Exhibit'N'. Response: Please refer to Attachment "F" within the Data & Analysis for the aforementioned site location map. • Please consider creating a table to quickly compare the criteria of the three sites for inclusion in Exhibit 'N'. Response: A table has been added to the Data&Analysis. Please refer • Please consider elaborating on the sentence in paragraph 4 on page 4 of Exhibit 'N'to clarify for readers the "ongoing Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy". Response: The Data&Analysis has been updated as requested. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 Jessica Harrelson From: Fred Hood Sent: Tuesday,April 10, 2018 12:32 PM To: ScottTrinity;Jessica Harrelson Cc: KhawajaAnthony; SawyerMichael;AshtonHeidi Subject: RE:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Trinity, Understood. I know this is an important issue for the neighbors in the area.We have provided them with this reasoning that Weber has not been looked at in the past for traffic calming.We will speak to this again in our presentation at the CCPC and BCC hearing in the future, but I also wanted to make sure you all were aware that this issue will likely be discussed by the local residents at the time of hearing. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to set up a quick call (when you have some time)just to go over some specifics that they (the neighbors)asked us about. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior PIE nruer DAVIDSONfrtle Main: 239.434.6060 fred(a)davidsonenclineerinci.com www.davidsonenoineei•irmq,.cor t Naples, FL Sarasota,FL Disclaimer:This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying os this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From:ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent:Tuesday,April 10,2018 10:49 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com> Cc:Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com>; KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>; SawyerMichael<Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>;AshtonHeidi<Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP)Manual that is utilized by County staff includes a list of roadways in Collier County not eligible for traffic calming. Weber Boulevard is included on that list. Therefore, Weber Boulevard is not eligible for traffic calming initiatives. https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=75968 Please see Exhibit A of the attached document. i Respectfully, Trinity Scott Transportation Planning Manager Cot -reCounty Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees& Program Management Division NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239.252.5832 Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent: Monday,April 9, 2018 12:32 PM To: KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>;ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com> Subject: RE:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Thank you,Anthony. Trinity, Please let Fred and I know if you would like to set up a call to discuss. Jessica Harrelson Senior Planning Technician Original Message From: KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent:Sunday,April 08,2018 8:00 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>;ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com> Subject: Re: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) program is managed by our planning section I copied Trinity Scott on this email to provide you with a response. Anthony N. Khawaja P.E. Chief Engineer of Traffic Operations Growth Management Division 2 2885 South Horseshoe Drive<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0> Naples, FL 34104<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0> AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net> Tel: (239)252-8260<tel:(239)%20252-8260> On Apr 6, 2018, at 3:21 PM,Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»wrote: Good afternoon Anthony, Per the email chain below, can you please confirm if there are any traffic calming options for Weber Blvd? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Planning Technician <image001.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL From:AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent:Tuesday, November 07,2017 3:22 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net»; KhawajaAnthony <AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:M ichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>> Subject: FW:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Fred, See Mike Sawyer's email below. I recommend that you contact Anthony Khawaja in Traffic Operations. He can tell you whether there are any options for traffic calming on Weber. Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 (239)252-8400 From:SawyerMichael Sent:Tuesday, November 7,2017 3:13 PM To:AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>> 3 Cc:ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net<mailto:TrinityScott@colliergov.net» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Heidi, Weber does not qualify for our Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) because it currently has a rural cross section instead of the required urban cross-section. Additionally there are no sidewalks on Weber which to a degree is another consideration in the NTMP program. Also,there are is no budget/funding for traffic calming in Collier County. There are road segments-streets in the estates which have traffic calming devises however my understanding is that these were special BCC directed efforts or improvements associated with other roadway improvements projects such as new bridge construction. In this case it is possible the Planning Commission could recommend a traffic study be performed by our Transportation Operations staff regarding excessive speed and trip counts and evaluate any potential improvements. This study and improvement evaluation could then be considered by the BCC in their review of this petition with fact/study based information. Let me know of follow-up questions and/or concerns. Thanks, Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning, Principal Planner Collier County Capital Projects, Planning, Impact Fees& Program Management 2685 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 (239)252-2926 From:AshtonHeidi Sent:Tuesday, November 07, 2017 2:37 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Cc: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Fred, I did not speak to Fred Reischl. Traffic calming on public streets is handled by traffic operations, outside of the PUD. I will see if I can find out who you should contact. Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 4 (239) 252-8400 From:Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com] Sent:Tuesday, November 7,2017 2:16 PM To:AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net» Cc: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Heidi, This was an issue that was brought up at the NIM.As I recall, Fred R. and myself fielded questions about what could be done to calm the traffic along Weber Blvd. Members of the public had stated that they weren't getting anywhere with the County to install traffic calming measures to curb the speeding up and down the road that they were seeing and experiencing. In an email from Fred R.on October 13th, he mentioned that any calming measures on specific streets may be looked and at discussed at the BCC level and that he had spoken with you about researching whether these were items that we could add to the CU application; maybe as zoning conditions of approval to be voted on by the CCPC and the BCC.The thought was to identify some measures that would make the adjacent neighbors feel better about the proposed non- residential use being permitted along the Weber Blvd right-of-way.This would obviously need to be voted on, but I think his intent was to see how you felt about this or any other measure being added to the ordinance or the new proposed subdistrict. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <image002.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengi neering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From:AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, November 03,2017 11:05 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»; ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net» 5 Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Jessica, I have been copied on some emails but I am not working on this issue. Who wants to place traffic calming?What type of traffic calming? Has anyone approached Transportation Operations to discuss this? Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-8400 From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 10:01 AM To: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net» Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred and Heidi, Have you had the opportunity to research the possibility of adding traffic calming devices, along Weber, in conjunction with the Conditional Use? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator <image002.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:41 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»; Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Not yet... Heidi is out. Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 6 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <i m age004.j pg> From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent:Wednesday,October 18,2017 7:17 AM To: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»; Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, Do you have an update on the research being conducted on the traffic calming? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator <image002.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent:Friday,October 13,2017 2:10 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE:Grace Romanian Mike said his preference would be a single access along Weber. He said chicanes or other horizontal traffic calming would be OK, but they must be authorized by the BCC. Heidi is researching to see if this can be done in conjunction with the CU. Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <image004.jpg> From:Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com] Sent:Friday, October 13,2017 2:04 PM To: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net» 7 Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, I spoke with our client earlier. It's their preference that we retain two access points.Their reasoning lies in the concern that we would be creating a bottleneck at the ingress/egress point along Golden Gate Boulevard, and that that may cause even more of a headache for the traffic flow along the Boulevard. It's not a hard no, but it is a concern that they and I share with causing a bigger problem to the Boulevard. Does Mike S. share any of that concern? I'm sure we can come to some agreement that would be a combination of calming and access that would make the neighbors happy. I think we should keep the dialogue open about this issue. Thanks! Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <image002.jpg> Main: 239.434.6060 fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure,dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From: Fred Hood Sent:Thursday,October 12, 2017 12:44 PM To: 'ReischlFred'<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>> Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, We'll reach out to the client and get their feelings on this. It may not be an issue for them, but let us confirm. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <image002.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 8 fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure,dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From:ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent:Thursday,October 12, 2017 12:35 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> Subject:Grace Romanian Hi Fred&Jessica- Is one access point (GG Blvd)acceptable to the church? -Fred Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <i mage004.j pg> 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. 9 KendallMarcia From: jak34117@comcast.net ant: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:46 AM o: SaboJames; FaulknerSue Subject: GGMPA-PL20160002584 & CU-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Baptist Church Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Planning Commissioners: Thank you for allowing me to speak before you on May 3rd, 2018, in opposition to your Agenda Items 9.F and 9.G; more specifically, Petition Numbers PL20160002584 and PL20160002577, an amendment to the Golden Gate Master Plan and a companion Conditional Use authorization, to allow for a church at the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. Again, my name is John Kelly, and I am representing myself as a 23-year resident of Golden Gate Estates Unit 4, Tract 12. Please recall that you also heard from.my mother, Renate Kelly,who resides within Hedrich Harbor which adjoins my property. Again,we thank you for accepting our verbal statements of opposition. As you're aware, the subject items were continued to your next regularly scheduled meeting on May 17, 2018. It was my understanding that this delay was to allow the petitioner time to draft conditions of approval that would in effect ameliorate the effects of a non-residential use in Golden Gate Estates, an agricultural/rural residential zoning district. I'm both confused and concerned as I have just recently learned that if the petitioner desires to accommodate the Planning Commission that they may be required to conduct a second Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM); however, should they desire to move forward without a second NIM, they're able to do so provided they bide by their original plan. In other words, the "ommunity loses.That being the case, I must renew my steadfast opposition to both the Golden Gate Master Plan mendment and the Conditional Use resolution. Be it known I am not specifically opposed to a church; rather, I am opposed to any use that will generate more traffic than that of three single-family residences at the subject location; as the LDC allows one single-family residence per 2.5 acres within the Estates Zoning District. The only other use I would offer no opposition to is that of a model home. Please be reminded that Weber Boulevard South is presently bveing used by the motoring public as a high-speed CR-951 by-pass road. Additionally, Weber Boulevard South is the primary means of accessing 1st Avenue Southwest which already serves the following: • Max Hasse Community Park • Big Cypress Elementary School • Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall, with two worship centers capable of performing simultaneous services; note, this use was approved with the condition that an emergency access to 1St Avenue Southwest be gated off—that gate is open and has been open for at least a month. • Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church and Child Care Center, which by all appearances is not yet conducting formal worship services for whatever the reason. The most current approved site plan reveals the church was to be developed in phases with 280 total seats. As the church has been built it is likely the use will be allowed to continue and will ultimately evolve into a successful church As I stated before you on the May 3rd, this community is being inundated by high-speed traffic and the street was )t designed for such. Traffic increased dramatically when the traffic signal serving the right-hand turn from ,forth bound Collier Boulevard to east bound Golden Gate Boulevard was converted from right turn on red to no right turn on red from the far-right lane. This action can be safely remedied today with minimal action; however, i the County will lose that luxury should the County grand the subject petitions. As traffic is already horrible and we already have a church not operating to capacity it is ridiculous to further exacerbate the situation. Here is the solution... • • y'rgp • • n a e<} W _ The area within the purple borders are the properties to be combined for development by the church, they are presently 2-legally conforming properties. Each property should have access as indicated by the yellow arrows. within the blue border is what should be used as a turn lane; however, it is presently marked as an ingress fo- _,le larger property. As this is one 5-acre parcel, it need only be afforded one access point; were the property tt be divided, an alternate means of ingress/egress could be developed. The area in blue should be a turn lane that merges into Golden Gate Boulevard. Again, this corrective measure will be lost should the petitions be approved. I remain concerned that the petitioner should have had no expectation that the properties in question could be developed for a church upon purchasing said properties as the use is not consistent with the Golden Gate Master Plan. The applicant's representative stated on the record that churches are an allowable conditional use within the Estates Zoning District. This is not entirely correct as the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC) Section 2.03.01.B.1.c. states, in part: "For Estates zoning within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in the GMP restricts the location of conditional uses." It is this constituent's belief that the Golden Gate Master Plan, being an element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, should not be eligible for change without great study as the documents represent the County's Future Land Use.Plan.At present, Collier County is engaged in a major restudy of the Golden Gate Master Plan and this process should not be surpassed on a piece meal basis. Please let the re-study process play out. Both the petitioner and staff point to the Restudy to indicate the community desires to allow for conditional uses at the subject location. I don't believe that the property would have ever been mentioned within the restudy had it not been for the petition before you; the opposite side of Golden Gate Boulevard is an improved residential property. Were all Estates residents polled, I'm of the belief they would vote to keep the Estates as it is today without any change; the process will prove me right or wrong. I ask that you let the process play out. Please note the subject properties are located within what is described as the Eastern Rural Estates; in fact, it is the entryway to said area. The vision statement for the Eastern Rural Estates reads as follows: "The Golden Gate pastern Estates is an interconnected, low density residential community with limited goods and services in ighborhood centers, defined by rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings." The County's Staff Report related to this project states hat, in staff's opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase 2 the likelihood of a similar petition being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Boulevard. Is this really in keeping with the aforementioned vision statement? T+is somewhat interesting to me that the applicant indicated that the subject property was selected due to proximity members and affordability. As I indicated previously, I remain concerned that the applicant originally desired a much larger facility at an alternate location. Although the applicant had all approvals in place to construct a church, with educational facilities and a residence, the church chose to sell the property. Now the church acts as if they should be approved as this is the only property they can afford. Interestingly, the church has failed to disclose that as per the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office their portfolio includes an additional Golden Gate Estates property as well as an improved commercial property at 6645 Willow Park Drive. A search using the Cityview Public Portal reveals a Zoning Verification Letter having been issued to provide an affirmative response as to if a church would be a permitted use at the subject location. Their testimony to the Planning Commission was not very forthcoming. I'd also like to address a concern of Chairman Strain's. Chairman Strain indicated that he would likely support a church at this location, subject to a number of restrictions, as it could be less intense than anything that might come forward in the future. I was also asked if I knew what transpired between the County and the Jehovah's Witnesses when they were previously denied a use. Please simply note that being adjacent to a property within a Public (P) zoning District an amendment to the Golden Gate Master Plan was not required as it is in this case. Absent such an amendment there should be no expectation that the use would be considered, the same is true for the Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church. With respect to the Conditional Use Application. Until our current unrest with traffic, this community has been peaceful and for the most part quiet.Aside from the traffic generated by church worship services,we're concerned that churches typically have outreach programs and may sponsor other activities that may include the use of 9mplified sound and speakers. As such, we'd ask that a church be regulated as to the hours and that there be no .tivity after 9:00 PM. We would also like to see the area go dark at night and use low level lighting when necessary. I'd also hope that the Planning Commission seek a commitment that the petitioner will seek no administrative waivers or deviations from he development standards contained within the LDC. Additionally, we'd ask that uses be severely limited; no day care, no educational facilities, no special events such as festivals, revivals, summer camps, car washes, garage sales, farmers markets, and/or food truck competitions and the like. Restrictions as to lighted signage on Weber Boulevard South would also be appropriate, the community desires none. Lastly, should you find in favor of the petitioner's request, it is hoped that you will do all within your power to limit traffic within our neighborhood. In closing, I'd ask that you not support the subject Golden Gate Master Plan Amendment as based upon the arguments I have presented herein. The applicant's own traffic engineer pointed out to you why stop signs are not likely to be seen on Weber Boulevard South. I have provided you with the best traffic calming instrument, a dedicated turn lane off of Collier Boulevard. This solution is only possible if the properties remain dedicated for residential use. I'd suggest that not every corner property on an arterial or collector road within this County should be commercialized. There will always be some less than desirable properties within this County and such properties may be the last to develop; alternatively, the market will adjust and such undesirable properties may just be those that are also affordable. Lastly, please recall the outcome of the recent Summit Church project off of Napa Woods Way; it's my belief that the subject property is far less desirable for a conditional use of this magnitude. Your consideration and objectivity are very much appreciated. espectfully, John Kelly 3 KendallMarcia From: ferro63@aol.com ent: Monday, May 14, 2018 5:03 PM o: FaulknerSue Cc: Maurizio Ferro Subject: Petition Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mrs Faulkner I understand that you are the comprehensive planner for petition SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU-PL20160002577. As resident of Weber Blvd I urge you not to approve the building of a church on the corner of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S. This area is already congested with overflow and speeding vehicles from Collier Blvd trying to avoid rush hour. Considering the fact that Weber traffic flow to Collier has been blocked at Golden Gate Blvd from recent road median construction I find it disturbing to even consider such location for a church congregation and subsequent congestion that would certainly have a monumental negative effect at the intersection of White Blvd and Weber Blvd S. . ask that you would carefully consider the impact this proposition will have and reject such location for the common wealth of this, once peaceful, neighborhood. Regards, Maurizio Ferro Sent from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Ed Laux<elx@att.net> ant: Monday, May 14, 2018 9:22 PM o: FaulknerSue Subject: Proposed church at Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Ms. Faulkner, As the planner for the proposed church rezoning I urge you to understand what this will do to traffic on Weber Blvd S from a homeowner's perspective. Traffic has increased considerably since the shutdown of Golden Gate Blvd as an access to 951 from Weber S and the addition of a church in a residential zone will exacerbate the situation considerably. Please don't be deluded in the thought that most of the traffic will be on a lightly-traveled day (Sunday): the church will be holding functions (some very large) on all days of the week and during all times of the day regardless of what the church might tell you to get their zoning approved. It will be an absolute nightmare for the residents on Weber who have already been hit broadside with median extension on Golden Gate Blvd. Weber Blvd has a 30 mph speed limit but in all honesty those signs should simply be taken down and replaced with nothing since the majority of vehicles don't obey them anyway. Add the trash that is thrown out of cars along with the trucks with no mufflers whatsoever and you have a street that is chaotic on a slow Hay_ and now there's a proposal to make things even worse??? If you want to be an effective planner... one who is trying to serve the community at large while not destroying the lifestyle of those already in place... I ask you to seriously consider vetoing this plan. As well, if you are seriously interested in the well being of those on Weber S you should consider speed bumps along the entire stretch of road. If you don't think they're necessary you are more than welcome to sit on my covered front porch for an hour or two and watch the Weber 500 for yourself: do that during rush hour and you will nix the rezoning immediately and add the speed bumps. The offer is a serious one, refreshments provided on the house. Take care and please be thoughtful with your decision... our front porch is waiting for your arrival Ed &Judi Laux 720 Weber Blvd S Naples Fl 34117 239-455-4580 (H) 239-682-1205 (C) elx@att.net KendallMarcia From: Jan Lopata <JL240z@hotmail.com> ent: Saturday, May 05, 2018 12:43 PM o: McDanielBill; FaulknerSue Subject: RE proposed zoning change on Weber Blvd S. Sir: I am a resident in the area between White Blvd and Golden Gate Blvd. off South Weber Blvd. The zoning is residential estates and has been since before I moved here over 15 years ago. I have lived in Naples since 1957. I selected this area as it was nice and a basically rural area compared to the down town area that was, even 15 years ago, getting to be over built and crowded. I know that this is just normal growth but it gets old after awhile so I chose to have a bit more elbow room and here is where I chose to build and retire and want to stay. I am sure you are aware of the proposed church that is planned to be built on the corner of Weber Blvd S and Golden Gate Blvd. Also fronting on Collier Blvd as well. Since it requires a zoning change to conditional use or whatever allows it I think the proposal still requires approval of the County commissioners by vote. The planning commission seems to be in favor of the change at this point. Weber Blvd has seen a huge increase in traffic thru this residential area and it gets worse every year. The daily traffic by parents bringing their children to and from the Cypress middle school and the people who use it to short cut the traffic on Collier Blvd. The owner of the property for the proposed church, to my knowledge isn't a resident here. That property has been for sale the whole time I have lived here and the owner has tried several times to get the zoning changed. He was denied all those times. The residents have spoken and made themselves clear that they do not want the zoning changed. The owner is not vested in this community because he owns property cant sell for whatever profit he wants. I am sure there is more history behind that, but its not fair for the iwner to make the people who live here 24/7 pay for his mistakes. The proposed entrance on Weber will make traffic on Weber a significant daily increase. The entrance should have been planned off Collier Blvd. regardless of the cost to the developer. It is possible it cant be done due to the proximity to Golden Gate Blvd. , so they figured its ok to dump all the traffic generated by the church into the neighborhood. The statement that it will only increase on Sunday is wrong as it also has proposed a day care center and there will likely be many events especially on all the holidays as well. This will likely add traffic in the evening hours as well. They even propose a farmers market. The proposed drain field is adjacent to wells and would be a health issue. When that was pointed out to the Commission at the meeting, one of the commissioners made a joke about it. I was told Collier County also purchased land near enough to it for a planned well. At the planning commission meeting they also tried to add other uses beyond the original plans hoping to get them added without documents including a residence for the pastor. There are probably even more changes the Weber Blvd. and area residents aren't aware of yet that will somehow find a way in if the zoning change is approved. What isn't included could be approved just by doing an insubstantial change to the documents once the zoning change is done. This is a residential area and should stay that way. The zoning change should not be allowed as the church would have a negative effect on the neighborhood. They even used the argument worst case scenario by using which would you rather have a 7-11 or a church. They already tried to get a 7-11 type store once before and it was denied! I don't remember what other zoning changes were attempted but they were denied as well. If you would like I can find out for you. I will also forward copies of this email to the other Commissioners and ask for their support. There was a comment made at the meeting that we would be hard pressed to stop a church. That makes it sound like its already approved. We are not anti church, we just ln't want any zoning changes that will make negative changes to our neighborhood. This is not a win/win ,ituation. The land owner wins but the residents loose. The church comment would be valid if the zoning was already in place but its not and shouldn't be. I haven't found out if a church gets any reductions in permitting 1 and impact fees or property taxes and zoning fees either. So I wonder how much revenue the county loses if it does get built. With in about a 2-3 mile radius there are 3 or 4 churches already. The one on the corner of Vanderbilt and Collier often hires off duty cops on sundays to direct the traffic so the religious attendees can -et out of their parking lot. At this proposed site the access/exit on Weber will likely cause a traffic jam on .,ieber when they all leave. The access/exit on Golden Gate Blvd can only turn right and go east or turn onto Weber where they will encounter the Weber exit. Its going to be like when the people exit a movie, they all leave at once. I think all I have said is just the tip of the iceberg. Its only going to get worse. The county principle planner is Sue Faulknersue.faulkner@colliercountyfl.gov. The petition number is SSGMPA- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1, and CU-PL201600002577. We the residents of this area need your support to defeat the zoning change to allow the church. Thank you for your attention and help. Jan Lopata Naples Fl 2 May 1, 2018 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA &CU To Whom It May Concern: I, Melania Budiu Hotaranu would like to express my support of the proposed the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (Petition#: SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and the companion Conditional Use applications (CU - PL20160002577)for parcel numbers 36760800006 and 36760720005. I believe the project as proposed by the applicant, and their representatives at Davidson Engineering, is something that I would prefer over commercial or more intensive residential development in this location. I believe that the church and their representatives have been open to conversations about their project and the traffic issues that have been on the minds of other residents in our neighborhood. Please accept this email as support of the Grace Romanian Baptist Church and their proposed 300-seat church and associated accessory uses. Sincerely, MELANIA BUDIU HOTARANU 3541 1st AVE SW NAPLES,FL 34117 May 1,2018 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA & CU To Whom It May Concern: I would like to express my support of the proposed the small-Scale Growth management Plan Amendament(petition#SSGMPA_PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and the companion Conditional Use applications(CU—PL20160002577)for parcel numbers36760800006 and 36760720005. I belive the projectas proposed by the applicant, and their representatives at Davison Engeneering, is something that I would prefer over commercial or more intensive residential development in this location. I belive that the church and their representatives have been open to conversations about their project and the traffic issues that have been on the minds of other residents in our neighborhood. Please accept this email as support of the Grace Romanian Baptist Church and their proposed 300 seat church and associated accessory uses. Sincerely, CRISTIAN HOTARANU 3541 1st AVE SW NAPLES, FL KendallMarcia Subject: FW: Romanian Church Original Message From: Denise Smith [mailto:dmsmith1652(cyahoo.com] Sent:Wednesday, May 02, 2018 11:26 AM To:WeeksDavid<David.Weeks@colliercountyfl.Rov> Subject: Romanian Church Mr.Weeks, We live on Weber Blvd.and we want to express our opposition to having this Church being built in our neighborhood. We love where we live and don't see the need for another church. We appreciate the County Commissions and Planning Department to review our opposition. Regards, Ted Bukowski Denise Smith 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. 1 KendallMarcia From: Carla Trombly<crtrombly@gmail.com> ent: Monday, April 30, 2018 3:34 PM ..o: FaulknerSue Cc: Teddy Subject: Rezoning on Weber Blvd S Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good Afternoon -We're the residents of 641 Weber Blvd S and this is a written statement that we're in opposition of the re-zoning of the vacant property at the corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South,for the purpose of building a church. Unfortunately we cannot attend the meeting on Thursday May 3rd but wanted to make sure that as residents of Weber Blvd S, that it was noted that we're not in favor of this re-zoning. Please reference petition number SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU-PL20160002577 Thank you, Carla &Thomas Trombly 1 KendallMarcia From: Glembin <jglembin@embargmail.com> 'ent: Monday, April 30, 2018 2:04 PM o: FaulknerSue Subject: Petition SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1& CU-PL20160002577 To whom it may concern: I will not be able to attend meeting on Thursday May 3rd, but I want to have my opinion heard. As a resident of Weber Blvd S, I do not want to see the corner of Weber Blvd S and Golden Gate Blvd zoned for anything other than residential purposes. Weber Blvd is already the street all people use to get to Big Cypress Elementary School as well as Max Hasse Park. In March the Collier County Sheriff's Office did a traffic study on the south bound traffic on Weber Blvd S. Please review this report. In the two week period which included a slow week because of spring break for the local schools, we had over 10,000 cars and the highest speed was over 80 mph!!! This was only SOUTH BOUND traffic, it would be twice as much if north bound traffic was also included. That is a lot of traffic for a residential street. Another large traffic concern is the amount of traffic that would be forced to travel on 1st Avenue SW. The speed limit on this street is 25 mph, and that is frequently ignored. Anyone wanting to access this property from the East would have to come down rt Avenue SW to get to Weber Blvd S to get to the property at the corner of Weber&Golden Gate Blvds. There are no left turns allowed from Golden Gate Blvd onto Weber Blvd as there is a concrete median there. Weber Blvd S. is already over trafficked. In addition to the school and park traffic numerous people use our street is a ,hort cut"to avoid Collier Blvd. However most of these people DO NOT obey the posted speed limit. We have repeatedly asked for speed patrols our street. I respectfully request that you deny the use of this property for anything other than residential use. Thank you, Donna Glembin 780 Weber Blvd S. 1 KendallMarcia From: Marianne Varma <mgvarma5@gmail.com> sent: Sunday, April 29, 2018 6:48 PM 'o: FaulknerSue Subject: Petition#SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 This note is referenced to the above petition and #CU-PL-20160002577 There is a public meeting on Thursday, May3rd at 9:00 at the County Commissioner's Chamber on the 3rd floor. We (my wife and I) live at 530 Weber Blvd S. We agree with NOT allowing a church to be built on the corner of Golden Gate and Weber Blvd S. We would want to petition against an amendment of rezoning the property. Due to our physical disabilities we would not be able to attend. Thank you. Edward Weaver Sent from my iPadO 2 1 KendallMarcia From: Gary VanDeWerken <garyvandewerken@yahoo.com> ent: Friday, April 27, 2018 12:39 PM o: FaulknerSue; SaboJames Subject: Re: SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 CU-PL20160002577 > On Apr 27, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Gary VanDeWerken <garyvandewerken@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Sue, > I live on the corner of Weber and 1st ave S.W. where they are proposing to build this church with 300 seats. Im totally against any commercial building in this area Its right next door too me its zoned residential and it should stay residential, lye lived on Weber for 32 years and would have not bought here knowing somebody wants to change zoning. > I looked at the site plan they want to put this church on septic system, that doesn't work for me high volume run off and sewer water leaching into ground water, this will destroy surrounding drinking water, my drinking water. > Not to mention the area where this property is situated will cause major traffic concerns, putting more traffic on Weber Blvd S that has been over loaded with school traffic that backs up 1st ave all the way to Weber Blvd S and 1 block down Weber Blvd. We also have Max Hasse Park and 2 other churches located around big cypress school, and people speeding over 70mph to bypass the traffic lights on 951. Roll over crashes in my front yard destroying my property something has got to be done and putting more traffic on Weber Blvd S is not the answer. Not to mention my property value would greatly depreciate. And you don't want to bottle neck traffic on jolden gate Blvd or 951 this is the main access for Golden Gate estates. This project or any project is not a good idea for anyone living in the Estates. >Thank You > Gary VanDeWerken > 181 Weber Blvd S > Naples Fl 34117 > 239-825-8035 1 Hello Ms. Sue Faulkner, I was asked to contact you in reference to this possible amendment located at the property at the corner of Collier Blvd and Golden Gate Blvd. The public hearing request is in reference to the building of a church there. (Please see attached photo below) I'd like to submit this letter, as I cannot personally attend the hearing, as a petition against the building of a church. My family and I live on Weber Blvd South just about a block away from this property. Modifying the amendment to allow the building of a church at this property, which would cause a lot more vehicular traffic, is definitely not what Weber Blvd South needs. Weber Blvd S is already used as a thru street for rush hour traffic Monday through Friday from Collier Blvd morning and evening, as well as for Big Cypress Elementary School Monday through Friday when school is in session, morning and afternoon. During the peak of these times, I refuse to walk on the sidewalk with my children along Weber Blvd S because of the consistent traffic speeding highly above the posted 30mph speed limit. I'm even very nervous about checking my mailbox. The Collier County Sheriffs Office has been requested numerous times to conduct speed enforcement along the road. There is no raised curb along the road and the sidewalk is only just feet away. In addition, recently new traffic patterns at the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S, as well as the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd, have denied traffic from making left turns. The intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S has a raised median in place, but the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd has a painted median which many people consistently violate to make a left turn from Weber Blvd S to travel east on White Blvd. If the building of a church is granted there at that property, there will be an increase of vehicular traffic during church functions as well as on Sunday. That will be an additional day, making it 6 days a week of vehicular that travel on Weber Blvd S. My family and I politely request that this amendment is denied for the building of a place of worship, and to remain for residential structures only. Thank you. The Osbornes 161 Weber Blvd South Naples, FL. 34117 '• r•itoriii f 416 In" `'bd ln:frA� . The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, Inc. P.O.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 ry , www.estates-civic.org 05 June 2017 Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 RE: GGEACA Declines Request for Community Meeting regarding proposed Project: PL20160002584, Grace Community Church at 3899 1st Ave. SW; PID 36760720005 & PID 36760800006; and companion PL20160002577. Dear Sir/Madam Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA) has received your request to hold a community meeting with regarding the proposed project of Grace Romanian Church. GGEACA understands this project to be applying for a Zoning Change, Growth Management Plan Amendment and a Golden Gate Master Plan Amendment. We appreciate being included in the proposed changes that may affect the Estates community. We have taken the information you have provided and evaluated it with our group. Concerns for traffic and the need for comprehensive planning in the community are the purpose for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy. Amending the Growth Management Plan through amendments like this is counter to the comprehensive planning being undertaken. As well, there are serious concerns with this project's traffic circulation, traffic impacts to the area, and the impacts to the gateway to Golden gate Estates At this time we have come to the conclusion that it is inappropriate to meet with your group concerning this project. The reason we have come to this conclusion is that the Golden Gate Master Plan is currently undergoing a comprehensive update and we feel it is inappropriate for this project to be considered during the update process. Furthermore, it is GGEACA's position that no applications of this type shoul be considered until after completion of the Golden Gate Master Plan Update. Sincerely, /fri • Michael R. Ramsey PresidentGolden Gate Estates Area Civic Association http://www.estates-civic.org Michael.R.Ramsey@embarqmail.com c: Board of County Commissioners, Collier Co. NOTICE OF PUB1JC HEA ING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby giver that the Collier County Planning Commission,will hold a public meeting on September 20,2018 commencing at 9:00 A.M.in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber.Thiry floor,County Government Center,3299 East Tam iami Trail,Naples,FL_ The purpose of the hearing is to ostler: AN ORDINANCE OF TILE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05. AS AMENDED, TIIE COLLIER r:Our'rY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY REVISING THE CONDI'ITONAL, USES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW;FOR TILE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION It,TOWNSHIP 49 SOL I'll, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN F.FFECTPVE DATE. 1PL20160002584i A A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW A(.:iit:RC:I WITHIN AN ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.91.B.1.e.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUT'HF.AST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER R()tfl,E:%ARD IN SECTION 11.TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 FAST, COLLIER COUNTY.FLORIDA. IPl,20I600u2s771 PROJECT L.00.ATION '' Gnldan Gate BLVD W in 1st AVE SW V All irterested pa-ties are invited to appear and be heard. Con os of the proposed ORDINANCE& ill RESOLUTION will he made avaitabie for'nspection at the GMD Zoning Division, Cot pruhcrsivo Plannng Sect on, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, betwecr file 106r3 of 8 00 A M and 5:00 P.M., Monday t'rrouyh friday F urhe'more,the rateria's will he made avai'abie for inspection at the Collie, County Clerk's Office,Four.,"door,Colter Courty Gone nrront Curiter,3299 Last Tatman; Trail.Suite 40' Naples. one week prior to the scheduled hewing, Any queatiors rtortaininq to the documents shook"be directed to the `AO Toning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Writian comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to September 20,2016 will be read and corsiderec at 111 the public twurir3. If a persor dec des to appeal any dec'rion made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meet.=ny or'reari10,hew II reed a record of that atcceeding. and for such purpose ne may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed ngs is made,wi record includes the testirccny and evidence upon which the appeal rs to be based. It yon.area tremor,.villi a d eacrlity who needs any accommodation in o*icer to participate in this proceeding.you are entitled,at no cost to yo.r,to the:revision of certain ass stan:e. Please contact the Calle-County Fac'i es Management Divisiom located at'3335 Taiwan Trail East,St.ire 101, Nat1'.es.FL 34112-x338,i239;252-9380.at least two days prior to the meet:no. Assisted listening devices for the bearing irpa'*ed are eva table i,he Board o"C:rsnty C).5i55s;oners Ott cc. Mare P.Strain,Cha:,•man Collier County ulannrng Commission :.:0.1 1;,2011 N.1'20'yfh3fi 12A 1 FRIDAY.AUGUST 31, 2018 1 NAPLES DAILY NEWS : NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission,will hold a public meeting on September 20,2018 commencing at 9:00 A.M.in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber,Third Floor,County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY REVISING THE CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20160002584] A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW A CHURCH WITHIN AN ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. [PL20160002577] PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W m o w 1st AVE SW C.) J CO o w+` All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCE& RESOLUTION will be made available for inspection at the GMD Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday.Furthermore,the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office,Fourth Floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Suite 401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the GMD Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to September 20,2018 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division,located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 101, Naples,FL 34112-5356,(239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P.Strain,Chairman Collier County Planning Commission August 31,2018 ND.2098848 0 PROOF O.K.BY: 0 O.K.WITH CORRECTIONS BY: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY•SUBMIT CORRECTIONS ONLINE ADVERTISER:BCC_COMPREHENSIVE PLANNI PROOF CREATED AT:8/22/2018 12:18 PM SALES PERSON: Ivonne Gori PROOF DUE:- PUBLICATION:ND-DAILY NEXT RUN DATE:08/31/18 ND-2098848.INDD SIZE:3 col X 9.25 in 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.B Item Summary: ***This item has been continued from the May 3, 2018 CCPC meeting, May 17, 2018 CCPC meeting, and June 7, 2018 CCPC meeting*** PL20160002577: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, providing for the establishment of a conditional use to allow a church within an Estates Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for property located on the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) [Coordinator: C. James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: James Sabo 08/30/2018 11:50 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 08/30/2018 11:50 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 09/04/2018 9:47 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/06/2018 9:14 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/06/2018 1:52 PM Zoning Camden Smith Review Item Completed 09/11/2018 10:34 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 10:35 AM Zoning Michael Bosi Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 12:56 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 9.B Packet Pg. 594 9.B.1 Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Final Supplemental Staff Rept Grace Romanian 9-7-18 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.1 Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Final Supplemental Staff Rept Grace Romanian 9-7-18 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.1 Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Final Supplemental Staff Rept Grace Romanian 9-7-18 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.1 Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: Final Supplemental Staff Rept Grace Romanian 9-7-18 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2Packet Pg. 602Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.2 Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Resolution - 081418 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 05/07/2018 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31st Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee – $500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee – Small Scale Study – No Fee 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 7 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 11 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 12 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 12 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan .......................................................................................... 13 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 15 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition ........................................................ 22 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 25 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 4 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection. The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1 – Project Location Map As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for 24,000 square feet (sf) multi-purpose church related building, accessory recreation area and accessory structures (up to 3,500 sf pastor’s residence and up to 1,800 sf storage sheds). For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2023 planning horizon. 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5 The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed trip generation. Consistent with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provisions for church uses, the accessory recreation area and structures are considered passive incidental to the church land use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. In addition, the traffic associated with the existing residence on site is part of the background traffic. As such, no traffic impacts are expected due to the proposed pastor’s residence use. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Proposed Conditions Church 560 24,000 sf (300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary; sf – square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided via one existing right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard. Trip Generation The project’s site trip generation is based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (most current version). The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project average weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions) – Average Weekday Note(s): (1) Sanctuary; sf – square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 – Sunday peak hour of generator, the GFA variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the operational analysis purposes. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 – Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 24,000 sf(1) 167 5 3 8 5 7 12 Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size (square feet) Enter Exit Total Church 24,000 115 125 240 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volume (1) Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 35% SB – 2 NB – 2 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 35% NB – 2 SB – 3 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 30% WB – 1 EB – 2 Note(s): (1) Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 8 Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2017), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2017 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2023. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2017 - 2023) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2017 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 1,220 2.00% 1.1262 1,374 86 1,306 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 1,904 2.00% 1.1262 2,145 42 1,946 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 1,600 2.00% 1.1262 1,802 0 1,600 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2017 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)6. 2023 Projected Volume = 2017 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2023 Projected Volume = 2017 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2023 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10 Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2017 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 2017 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location Exist Roadway Min. Standard LOS Exist Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Future Project Build out Roadway Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 6D E 3,000 (SB) 6D Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 6D D 3,000 (NB) 6D Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 4D D 2,300 (EB) 4D Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2023 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2017 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project ** % Vol Capacity Impact By Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 3,000 (SB) SB – 2 1,376 0.07% No No Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 3,000 (NB) NB – 2 2,147 0.07% No No Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 2,300 (EB) EB – 2 1,804 0.09% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report; **2023 Projected Volume= 2023 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided via one existing right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 616 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12 for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access – Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 115 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build-out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project access on Golden Gate Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 618 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 14 9.B.3Packet Pg. 619Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 620 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 16 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 621 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 17 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 622 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 18 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 623 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 19 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 20 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 21 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 23 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 24 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits 9.B.3 Packet Pg. 630 Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 26 9.B.3Packet Pg. 631Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 27 9.B.3Packet Pg. 632Attachment: Attachment B - 2018-05-08 GRACE - UPDATED TIS (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 1 of 14 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIONAL USE LDC Section 10.08.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code PETITION NO (PL) PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. To be completed by staff Additional Agent: Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Firm: Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester Address: 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City: Naples State: FL Zip: 34103 Phone: 239.435.3535 Email Address: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 2 of 14 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 3 of 14 e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 4 of 14 ASSOCIATIONS Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ PROPERTY INFORMATION On separate page, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application:  If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include separate legal description for property involved in each district;  The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre-application meeting; and  The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Plat Book: _______ Page #: _______ Section/Township/Range: _______ /_______ /_______ Subdivision: __________________________________________Lot: ________ Block: ________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ Size of Property: _____ft. X ______ ft. = _______ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _____________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 636 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 5 of 14 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property: (If space is inadequate, attach on a separate page) Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: __________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________________________________ CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST DETAIL Type of Conditional Use: This application is requesting a conditional use as allowed, pursuant to LDC section 2.03.00, of the _______________________ zoning district for _______________________ (type of use). Present Use of the Property: __________________________________________ 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 6 of 14 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC section 10.08.00 and Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code, staff’s recommendation to the reviewing body shall be based upon a finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and that the specific requirements governing the individual conditional use, if any, have been met. Further, satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable. On a separate page, provide a narrative statement describing a request for a conditional use and a detailed response to the criteria listed below. Specify how and why the request is consistent with each of the criteria. a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? No Yes (If yes please provide copies.) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 638 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 7 of 14 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ___________________________________________ City: ________________ State: __________ ZIP: ___________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: _______________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: _________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: ____________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): ___________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System PROVIDE NAME_______________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be served: ____________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ B. Sewer-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 8 of 14 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________ Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 9 of 14 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 641 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 10 of 14 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: A Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing Examiner Chapter 3 C.1. of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting, and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. Requirements for Review # Of Copies Required Not Required Completed Application (download current form from County website) 16 Cover letter briefly explaining the project 16 Pre-Application Notes 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Warranty Deed(s) 3 Boundary Survey 3 Conceptual Site Plan 24” X 36” plus (one 8 ½ X 11 copy) Plans showing proposed location for utilities, if required Plans for screening and buffering the use with reference as to type, dimensions, and character, if required Plans showing the proposed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations, if required Plans showing the proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions, and character, if required Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s), if applicable 4 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 5 Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments & sketches) 1 Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 3 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearing. Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 2 Traffic Impact Study (TIS) or waiver 7 Historical and Archeological Survey, or waiver 4 Electronic copy of all documents and plans * Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 * If located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, include an additional set of each submittal requirement 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 11 of 14 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS:  Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager.  Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required . ]Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan Graphics: Mariam Ocheltree City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Vicky Ahmad Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Other: School District (Residential Components): Amy Heartlock Communication Towers: Mosquito Control Collier County Airport Authority Naples Airport Authority Commercial Mining: Impact Fees 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 12 of 14 FEE REQUIREMENTS All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners  Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 (to be credited towards the application fee if the application is filed within 9 months of pre-application meeting)  Conditional Use Application Fee: $4,000.00 o When filed with Rezone Petition: $1,500.00 o Additional fee for 5th and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee  Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $300.00  Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00  Listed or Protected Species survey review fee (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00  Transportation Fee, if required: o Methodology Review Fee: $500.00 o Minor Study Review Fee: $750.00 o Major Study Review Fee: $1,500.00  Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Hearing Examiner or CCPC: $1,125.00  Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the BZA, if required: $500.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 13 of 14 Public Participation Requirements LDC Section 10.03.06 B. or C. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code Notice for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum:  Date, time, and location of the hearing;  Description of the proposed land uses; and  2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. Public Hearing for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Hearing Examiner: The Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Notice for Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 14 of 14 Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum:  Date, time, and location of the hearing;  Description of the proposed land uses; and  2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. Public Hearing for Conditional Use Petitions Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC): The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC): The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA): The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 M E M O R A N D U M July 13, 2018 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner James Sabo, Principal Planner FROM: Jessica Harrelson, Senior Planning Technician RE: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU - PL20160002577 NIM Meeting Minutes (June 25, 2018) A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Monday, June 25, 2018, at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. The following individuals, associated with the review and presentation of the project, were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Josh Fruth, Davidson Engineering • Rich Yovanovich, Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester • Sue Faulkner, Collier County • James Sabo, Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting at 5:30 p.m. and used a PowerPoint presentation, reviewing the proposed project and updates being requested since the May 3rd, 2018 CCPC hearing. The PowerPoint presentation is attached hereto for reference. Following the PowerPoint presentation, the following concerns were stated, and questions were asked: 1. What is the total property size? Is it 40 acres? - Fred Hood replied that the project was 6.25-acres. 2. The storage shed was originally proposed at 1,000 sf. It is now updated 1,800? - Fred Hood replied yes that the request for a storage shed was 1,800 sq ft. **Inaudible response*** 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 3. What types of special events are proposed? Any types of revivals, farmers markets? Concerns with events generating additional traffic. - Fred replied that 12-specicial events per year were being requested, but not certain on what those events would be. He stated a farmer’s market is a type of special event that could be requested, but that church isn’t certain on those events yet. Fred mentioned a temporary special use permit would be applied for and reviewed by the County, and the standards of the application would need to be complied with. 4. If you have a Pastor’s Residence eventually, where will the special events be located on the site? If you have a Pastor’s Residence there (points to site plan) and a 1,800 sq ft storage building there (points to site plan). - Fred uses the site plan to demonstrate areas and replied that a special event could be held in the parking lot. Fred also mentions that if a Pastor’s Residence and shed are not built, that area could be used, but Fred mentions the area will not be lit at night. Fred also stated that the church is concentrated on building the sanctuary. Lauren Osborne, residing at 131 Weber Blvd, stood and spoke against the project for the below reasons. She stated she was unable to attend the 5/3 CCPC meeting, but put letters in mailboxes making people in the neighborhood aware of the project and encouraged those to write the County regarding the project (Sue Faulkner). - Lives 3 homes away from the proposed Grace Romanian Church site - Concerns with proposed additional traffic from the church – “traffic nightmare” - Concerns with proposed access point to the Church site - Concerns with proposed/ potential traffic patterns and entrance to the Church - Concerns with the closed median along Golden Gate Blvd/ Weber Blvd - Concerns with current speeding of traffic along Weber Blvd- has children, husband is a state trooper and has clocked cars traveling at 80mph along Weber - Concerns with current litter/trash along Weber Blvd - Concerns with current traffic along Weber, including school pick-up line (can’t access her driveway at times from the long parent pick-up line to Big Cypress Elementary) Sue Faulkner, then addresses the attendees to let them know that all letters, emails and correspondence she received from the public were sent to the CCPC/BCC for consideration. 5. What is the time it will go back to the Planning Commission? - Fred replied that dates have not been set yet, that the NIM meeting needed to be held first. 6. Concerns with traffic, entrances discussed amongst two attendees. Patrick Miller, 210 Weber Blvd, addresses the audience regarding his concerns regarding the current traffic and accesses. He stated that he pushed to have the Weber access eliminated and that would allow for only one-way traffic along Weber. He also mentioned the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, and that Weber Blvd is specifically prohibited from having any type traffic calming devices and that no one in the County can tell him why. He said he spoke to Commissioners and individuals in the traffic department. He also stated that he would rather 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 649 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) have the church over a “RaceTrac” development (speaking to Lauren Osborne). Lauren responded she doesn’t want any type of commercial businesses but that residential would be fine. 7. Has the Church researched, or done a study, on what the cost would be for an entrance along Collier Boulevard over the canal? - Fred replied that was a question at a previous NIM and was brought up briefly at the 5/3 Planning Commission, with the Chairman of the Planning Commission, and brought up with review staff and found that it was feasible. 8. It was only a matter of cost then? - Fred replied that costs and the distance requirement to the Golden Gate Blvd intersection is an issue. 9. What types of special events are proposed? Can they have fairs, rides? - Fred replied that there were no restrictions on the types of special events and that an application would need to be submitted to the County to be permitted. 10. If special events are planned in the parking lot, like previously mentioned, where will people park? Attendee spoke about concerns of people parking along the Weber Blvd ROW for special events. - Fred replied that special events would not be church service hours. - Josh Fruth then stated when the temporary use application is applied for, it would require a parking plan. Attendee stated she is concerned with parking in the ROW during special events. She brings up if there is a funeral, what happens if the parking is not sufficient? 11. John Kelly, 221 Weber Blvd, stated he did not want special events such as carnivals and revivals- asked if uses can be limited. He asked if a prohibition could be added on these types of events. - Rich Yovanovich, Attorney representing the Applicant, requested if there were any other types of events he would like eliminated. John Kelly replied carnivals and revival meetings are his main concern. 12. Attendee suggested that a law enforcement officer may be able to direct traffic off of Weber Blvd (compared to other churches that have officers for services). Other attendees join conversation, speeding along Weber is discussed. Rich Yovanovich replied to law enforcement request, and that it may not be required unless there is a concern- inaudible. 13. Michael Ramsey, President of the Golden Gate Area Civic Association, speaks to the attendees. He spoke about other churches along Immokalee / Wilson. He suggested that Grace Romanian Church hire an off duty CCSO for traffic control. He also discusses traffic distribution, Weber Blvd access. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 14. Is there a chance of coming back and adding an exit on Collier Blvd? Is it financially possible for the Church? Fred Hood replied that the Conditional Use would need to be updated to add an access point. Fred explained that there were originally three access points – uses site plan to show them -1st Ave, Weber and Golden Gate Blvd. He also explained an access on Collier Blvd would not meet the distance requirement, and that the connection would have to be on the church’s property. Josh Fruth addressed this question by stating it would not be possible due to spacing, compensating ROW, the inability to construct on someone else’s property. 15. Does the County lose out on impact fees for a church versus single family homes? Michael Ramsey and attendee replied that churches are not required to pay property taxes. 16. What will be cleared for the preserve area? Fred replied native vegetation within the preserve would remain. 17. When will we be notified of the hearing dates? Fred replied that the boards (hearing signs) would be updated, mailers would be sent out (within 1000 ft of the property), an ad would be placed containing the new hearing dates. Michael Ramsey also stated the hearings would be posted on the civic association’s website. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:08pm. End of memo. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Published DailyNaples, FL 34110 Affidavit of PublicationState of FloridaCounties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na-ples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.___________________________________________________________Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 2036062 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMA Pub DatesJune 9, 2018 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis June 11, 2018 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 8A ❚SATURDAY, JUNE 9, 2018 ❚NAPLES DAILY NEWS + NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING PleasebeadvisedthatformalapplicationshavebeensubmittedtoCollierCounty, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Monday, June 25th, 2018. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Frederick E. Hood, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com James Sabo, AICP Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.252.4211 Email: James.Sabo@colliercountyfl.gov Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Sue.Faulkner@colliercountyfl.gov June 9, 2018 ND-2036062 ND-FMN0002548-01 (855)814-1492 |naplesgrande.com/dining 475 SeagateDrive,Naples,FL 34103 ComplimentaryValetParking SUMMER AT THE CATCH Servingdinnernightlyfrom5pm-close. Experiencewhat’snewonoursummermenuincludingfresh CitrusTunaPoke,FloridaCatch,andSearedDiverScallops pairedwithseasonalsuccotash! Bar Bites Happy Hour 5-7pmSundaythroughThursday WWW.NAPLESGRANDE.COM/SIZZLE JoinusMay31st-June13thfor SizzleSWFL RestaurantWeek 3-courseprix-fixemenu|$36++perperson $5 fromeachrestaurantweekmenuwillbedonatedto FloridaGulfCoastUniversity’sscholarshipfund! County. She helped her two daughters raise and care for their children and was a friend to everyone. Rivas Hernandez was a doting grandmother and aunt who always had tacos ready for her kids — young and old — when they visited her. Tabitha Campbell, a longtime family friend of the Hernandezes, grew up with one of Hernandez’s daughters, Daisy. Campbell said Rivas Hernandez was like a second mother to her. “She always kept us grounded and fo- cused,” Campbell said. “She was there when people needed her. I’ve been try- ing to be strong for them, but (her death) is hard for me, too.” Campbell said Rivas Hernandez’s youngest son, Jesus, was with his mom at the time of the crash. The two had gone to Broward County earlier in the day so she could co-sign on a new car for her son. Jesus was driving his new car in front of his mom’s vehicle when he noticed the Camry crossing over into his lane, Campbell said. The car was coming toward them at full force, Campbell said Jesus recalled. His instinct was to move out of the way, and he couldn’t do anything to warn his mom before the Camry crashed into her car head-on. “He saw it all through the rearview mirror,” Campbell said. Campbell said Rivas Hernandez’s son tried getting her out of the car and had to punch out a window to help her. Jesus was his mother’s first respond- er. The Hernandez family is now trying to recover from a painful loss while life moves on. The hospital and funeral bills have piled up. Rivas Hernandez’s kids have returned to work. Her two daughters moved in together to support one anoth- er through their grief and help to raise their kids. Daisy Hernandez sent Campbell a text saying she had a dream about her mom after her death. In the dream, Dai- sy Hernandez tried to wake her kids and get them ready for school, and she heard her mom saying how beautiful the kids looked sleeping and to give them a few more minutes in bed. “Daisy said she didn’t see her mom, but she felt her and heard her,” Camp- bell said. “She said she had a happy cry.” Daisy Hernandez, 36, and Christina Hernandez, 39, are single mothers with six children between them. The sisters are also supporting their younger brother, Jesus Hernandez, 22, whose guilt about the crash has devas- tated him. The trio’s other brother, Leobardo Hernandez, 31, didn’t get to say goodbye to his mom. He was arrested by Collier County Sheriff’s deputies in March on suspicion of violating his probation on a battery charge. The family has a large support net- work, Campbell said, and they’re relying on each other for help. In the years before Rivas Hernandez died, she became involved in her faith and sought a closer relationship with God. After the crash, Campbell and Dai- sy Hernandez went to retrieve a purse and other personal items from Hernan- dez’s car. The front of the car was man- gled, and there was still blood inside. Campbell said Rivas Hernandez had a Bible next to her in the car. “Her death has been hard, but we’re at peace knowing she’s in heaven be- cause of the type of person she was,” Campbell said. “She had the gates open for her. She would have been more than ready to take the place of her son. The accident wasn’t meant for him; it was meant for her. God takes the good ones, and she was definitely a good one.” A friend of the family set up a Go- FundMe page to help cover funeral and medical expenses. See https://www.go- fundme.com/ memorialjuanarivas. Juana Rivas Hernandez, right, and Angel Hernandez, left, with their daughter Daisy the day of her graduation from Florida Gulf Coast University. Daisy Hernandez graduated with a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice.HANDOUT Rivas Hernandez, second from left, with a few of her children and grandchildren. HANDOUT Crash victim Continued from Page 3A cupied by Public House in Creekside Corners,” said Blake Gable, CEO of Bar- ron Collier Cos., in a statement Friday. At 1:30 p.m. Friday, the restaurant’s website had not been updated with the news and still included its hours and a lineup of bands until June 30. By about 2 p.m., the website had been shut down and now says, “server IP address could not be found.” Lee Blackston of England and his band, the Ex-Bachelors, were supposed to play a show Friday night at Public House. Blackston and his Motown band, with members from England, Se- attle, New York, New Orleans and Nash- ville, had been playing at Public House once a week for about a year, he said. “(Public House) had a band play last night, so they must have just closed to- day,” Blackston said. “I’m disappointed. It was a good place and a nice venue.” The phone number listed under Pub- lic House’s contact information on its website was not in service, and Public House officials could not be reached to comment. Pub closes Continued from Page 3A 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ACOSTA, ROMO CARLOS ALBERTO  DORIS A ACOSTA  13585 COLLIER BLVD  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2929   AJITHKUMAR, ELEZABETH S  510 13TH ST NW  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐5027   AMBROSE, GAYLE L  3815 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐3040  BAZHAW, BRENDA K  3830 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐2714   BORRELLI, JOHN R  201 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3033   BROUILLARD, JOHN J & ERIN L  13535 COLLIER BLVD  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2929  BUKOWSKI, THADDEUS A  71 WEBER BLVD N  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐0000   BUKOWSKI, WANDA  VINCENTA BUKOWSKI EST  8380 WHISPER TRACE LN #J105  NAPLES, FL   34114‐‐‐0000   CLEM, ANDREW & SHAWN  4110 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2635  COLLIER CNTY  C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT  3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101  NAPLES, FL   34112‐‐‐0000   CORDER, MICHAEL A & LAUREN K  3821 3RD AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3027   D'AGOSTINI, DOMINICK J  MARTHA L D'AGOSTINI  220 PARK AVE  SOUTH PLAINFIELD, NJ   07080‐‐‐0000  DORTA, CHARLES MANUEL  JENNIFER DORTA  81 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3037   FERREIRA, OSCAR F & ADELA  OSCAR C FERREIRA  6000 COLLINS AVE #527  MIAMI BEACH, FL   33140‐‐‐0000   GARGIULO SR, JEFFREY DEWEY  VALERIE BOYD  4055 3RD AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2935  GOLDEN SR, BILLY M & TERESA W  4040 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2600   GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH  OF NAPLES INC  6017 PINE RIDGE ROAD # 84  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐0000   HA, CUC  20 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐0000  HALLOCK, SUSAN C  3960 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2612   HENRY, JEFF  161 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐0000   HICKEY, BRENDAN F  3870 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐2714  J D & R L EDIE JOINT REV TRUST  13555 COLLIER BLVD  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐0000   JORDAN, WILLIAM S  4111 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2640   JOSE, ANU  JULIA JOY  100 TRAPHILL DR  MORRISVILLE, NC   27560‐‐‐0000  KEEFER, DAVID  DEEATRA MARTIN‐KEEFER  3898 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3000   KELLY TR, RENATE S  RENATE S KELLY REV TRUST  UTD 8/06  291 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3033   KENNEY, JOHN & STEPHANIE  4110 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2641  KLEIN, RICHARD KYLE  MARY MARTICA KLEIN  3871 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3013   LONG, MARIA E  3835 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3013   LOUISE V TAYLOR REV TRUST  627 GORDONIA RD  NAPLES, FL   34108‐‐‐0000  9.B.4 Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) MARZUCCO, MERISHCA  3791 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3011   MASSARD, RENE J  1460 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 103  NAPLES, FL   34105‐‐‐3128   MCCANN, JAMES & BEVERLEY  4111 3RD AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2935  MILLER TR, PATRICK K  TERRY B MILLER TR  UTD 2/2/99 ‐ UTD 2/2/99  210 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3034   MILLER, ROBERT C  40 WEBER BLVD N  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐3054   MOUNTAIN, BRIAN J  21 WEBER BLVD N  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐3039  ONDERKO, RONALD A & DEBORAH J  4075 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2611   PAULICH IV, JOHN & DANIELLE  260 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34120‐‐‐0000   PEREZ, HECTOR & JOHANNA  3980 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2612  PIDGEON, STEPHEN  3961 1ST AVE NW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐0000   ROTH, STANLEY F & RUBY J  190 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3036   SEARS, WILLIAM M  SONIA E MOLINA  2 PRESTON ST  NORTH BILLERICA, MA   01862‐‐‐2428  SPILKER, CHRISTIAN & KELLI  4035 3RD AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34119‐‐‐2935   THOMAS, KEVIN J  JENNIFER E HITE  3830 1ST AVE SW  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐0000   TOBIAS, DAVID  PO BOX 1236  ISLAMORADA, FL   33036‐‐‐0000  VAN DE WERKEN, GARY  181 WEBER BLVD S  NAPLES, FL   34117‐‐‐3035   Golden Gate Estates   Area Civic Association  PO Box 990596  Naples, FL 34116                             9.B.4 Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 June 7, 2018 Dear Property Owner, Please be advised that the Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. has filed formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, we are holding a Neighborhood Information Meeting to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the request. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 25th, 2018 at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. Please contact me at (239) 434-6060 ext. 2961, or via e-mail at fred@davidsonengineering.com, if you have any questions regarding the meeting or the proposed project. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) PROPOSED ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (POST 5.3.18 CCPC HEARING) 1.Church Operating Hours: a.Church services shall be limited to Sundays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. b.Church related meetings/gatherings (i.e. weeknight Bible Study) shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 6:30 p.m. and 9 p.m., for no more than 100 parishioners. 2.The Church is limited to a floor area of 24,000 square feet (including no more than 300 seats). 3.The Church shall be required to provide a minimum of 129 parking spaces. 4.The following accessory uses are prohibited: -Daycare -Food services i.e. Soup Kitchens, catering services open to the public or eating places -Educational Services -Outreach programs, i.e. alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation 5.The following accessory uses are permitted (in conjunction with the Church): Outdoor - Multi-purpose / play area -Gazebos -Covered pavilions Indoor -Pastor’s residence (shall be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet) -Sheds (shall be limited to a maximum of 1,000 square feet) 6.Leasing of the church facility, or property, to outside groups is prohibited. 7.Special events (operated by the Church) are limited to twelve (12) events per calendar year. 8.Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited. 9.Lighting of any outdoor accessory / recreational use in the Accessory / Recreation Area shall be prohibited. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 10. An enhanced 15-foot Type B buffer shall be provided along the abutting residential property’s shared boundaries with the Church property. The enhanced buffer shall provide the following plant materials, in lieu of a wall, and shall reach 80% opacity within one year of installation: • Trees o Installed with 25 gallon, 10-feet tall, 1.75-inch caliper, and placed at 25-feet on center at time of planting. • Hedge o Installed at 5-foot tall, placed 4-foot on center at time of planting. • Areca or Paurotis Palms (clustered) o Installed at 12-foot tall, 12-foot on center, and placed behind the required Type B Landscape Buffer trees at time of planting. 11. Site lighting shall be “Dark Skies” compliant and installed to protect neighboring properties from direct glare by directing all light sources away from adjacent residential properties. Site lighting shall be provided with full cutoff shielding and not exceeding 0.2 foot-candles at the shared property line(s). Pole mounted lighting shall be a maximum of 15-feet in height, within 50-feet of adjacent shared residentially developed property lines. 12. Zoned building height shall be limited to a maximum of 30-feet. 13. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 50-feet for roof type, appearances and screening of roof mounted equipment. 14. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 60-feet for a church steeple. 15. This conditional use shall be limited to a maximum of (8) eight PM peak hour (weekday) two-way trips and a maximum of 183 peak hour (Sunday) two-way trips. 16. The access located along Weber Boulevard South shall be limited to a right-in-right-out access only. 17. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) PROPOSED ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (UPDATED) 1. Church Service Hours: a. Church services shall be limited to Saturdays and Sundays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. and recognized holidays; b. Church related meetings/gatherings (i.e. weeknight Bible Study) shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 10 a.m. - 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.; c. Easter Sunrise Service is permitted. 2. The Church is limited to a floor area of 24,000 square feet (including no more than 300 seats). 3. The Church shall provide a maximum of 140 parking spaces. 4. The following accessory uses are prohibited: - Daycare - Food services i.e. Soup Kitchens, catering services open to the public or eating places; except church related food services associated with activities including, but not limited to, fellowship, weddings and funerals. - Educational Services - Outreach programs, i.e. alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation 5. The following accessory uses are permitted (in conjunction with the Church): Outdoor - Multi-purpose / play area - Gazebos - Covered pavilions Indoor - Pastor’s residence (shall be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet) - Storage Sheds (shall be limited to a maximum of 1,800 square feet) 6. Signage shall be provided for the Church in accordance with the LDC. The location of signs(s) shall be within 350-feet from the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards and will be placed along those rights-of-way. Distance shall be measured from the property lines and or right-of-way or access easement boundaries. Signage shall be prohibited along Weber Boulevard. 7. Leasing of the church facility, or property, to outside groups is permitted only when operated and staffed by a church representative(s) who must be present during any leasing to an outside group. 8. Special events (operated by the Church) are limited to twelve (12) events per calendar year. 9. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited, unless permitted under a Temporary or Special Use Permit. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 10. Lighting of the outdoor Recreation Area shall be prohibited. Pastor’s residence shall be lit consistent with typical residential lighting permitted for residential uses within the estates. 11. Site lighting shall adhere to the applicable Collier County Land Development Code Criteria. 12. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures (BUG rating of U-0--BUG = Backlight-Uplight-Glare). 13. Site lighting fixtures will have a maximum height of 15-feet, within 50-feet of residential property lines, the Weber Boulevard and 1st Avenue SW rights-of-way. A maximum height of 20-feet of height for lighting fixtures applies to the remainder of the project. 14. Project site light fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines, as applicable. 15. Any Church steeple lighting shall be prohibited. 16. A photometric light level no greater than 0.2 foot-candles will be permitted along residential property lines. 17. An enhanced 15-foot Type B buffer shall be provided along the abutting residential property’s shared boundaries with the Church property. The enhanced buffer shall provide the following plant materials, in lieu of a wall, and shall reach 80% opacity within one year of installation: • Trees o Installed with 25 gallon, 10-feet tall, 1.75-inch caliper, and placed at 25-feet on center at time of planting. • Hedge o Installed at 5-foot tall, placed 4-foot on center at time of planting. • Areca or Paurotis Palms (clustered) o Installed at 12-foot tall, 12-foot on center, and placed behind the required Type B Landscape Buffer trees at time of planting. 18. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 50-feet for roof type, appurtenances and screening of roof mounted equipment. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 60-feet for a church steeple. 19. Dumpster enclosure shall be placed adjacent to the western edge of the propose Preserve Area. The Church may coordinate with waste management services and Collier County review staff to determine if roll out receptacles may be used in lieu of a dumpster enclosure as required by LDC section 5.03.04. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 20. This conditional use shall be limited to a maximum of (12) twelve PM peak hour (weekday) two-way trips and a maximum of 240 peak hour (Saturday & Sunday) two-way trips. 21. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE, UTILITYAND MAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING(24,000 SF & 300SEATS MAX.)ACCESSORYRECREATION AREAAND ORPASTOR'S RESIDENCE(NOT TO EXCEED 3,500 SF)GOLDEN GATE BLVD. WRIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 75' FRONTYARD SETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE BBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER10' TYPE DLBUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATERMANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY(PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79)COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 10' PRESERVE SITE ALTERATION SETBACK 14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN REQUIRED PRESERVE NOTES5.15 ACRES (NATIVE VEGETATION ON-SITE)X 15% = 0.77 ACRES1. EXISTING IMPACTED AREAS WITHINTHE PRESERVE BOUNDARY SHALL BERE-VEGETATED PER LDC SEC. 3.05.07AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENTPLAN APPROVAL.2. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TOSATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERREQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTICVEGETATION REMOVAL INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1.3. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITHNATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BEIN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION3.05.07.PREVIOUS VERSION9.B.4Packet Pg. 663Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE, UTILITYAND MAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING(24,000 SF & 300SEATS MAX.)OUTDOOR ACCESSORYRECREATION AREAAND ORPASTOR'S RESIDENCE(NOT TO EXCEED 3,500 SF)GOLDEN GATE BLVD. WRIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 75' FRONTYARD SETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE BBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER10' TYPE DLBUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATERMANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY(PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79)COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 10' PRESERVE SITE ALTERATION SETBACK 14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN REQUIRED PRESERVE NOTES5.15 ACRES (NATIVE VEGETATION ON-SITE)X 15% = 0.77 ACRES1. EXISTING IMPACTED AREAS WITHINTHE PRESERVE BOUNDARY SHALL BERE-VEGETATED PER LDC SEC. 3.05.07AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENTPLAN APPROVAL.2. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TOSATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERREQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTICVEGETATION REMOVAL INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1.3. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITHNATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BEIN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION3.05.07.UPDATED VERSION9.B.4Packet Pg. 664Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU-PL20160002584 August 13, 2018 1 PROPOSED ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Church Service Hours: a. Church services shall be limited to Saturdays and Sundays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. and recognized holidays; b. Church related meetings/gatherings (i.e. weeknight Bible Study) shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 10 a.m. - 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. and 9 p.m.; c. Easter Sunrise Service is permitted. 2. The Church is limited to a floor area of 24,000 square feet (including no more than 300 seats). 3. The Church shall provide a maximum of 140 parking spaces. 4. The following accessory uses are prohibited: - Daycare - Food services i.e. Soup Kitchens, catering services open to the public or eating places; except church related food services associated with activities including, but not limited to, fellowship, weddings and funerals. - Educational Services - Outreach programs, i.e. alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation 5. The following accessory uses are permitted (in conjunction with the Church): Outdoor - Multi-purpose / play area - Gazebos - Covered pavilions Indoor - Pastor’s residence (shall be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet) - Storage Sheds (shall be limited to a maximum of 1,800 square feet) 6. Signage shall be provided for the Church in accordance with the LDC. The location of signs(s) shall be within 350-feet from the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards and will be placed along those rights-of-way. Distance shall be measured from the property lines and or right-of-way or access easement boundaries. Signage shall be prohibited along Weber Boulevard. 7. Leasing of the church facility, or property, to outside groups is permitted only when operated and staffed by a church representative(s) who must be present during any leasing to an outside group. 8. Special events (operated by the Church) are limited to twelve (12) events per calendar year. Carnivals are prohibited. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU-PL20160002584 August 13, 2018 2 9. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited, unless permitted under a Temporary or Special Use Permit. 10. Lighting of the outdoor Accessory Recreation Area shall be prohibited. Pastor’s residence shall be lit consistent with typical residential lighting permitted for residential uses within the Estates Zoning District. 11. Site lighting shall adhere to the applicable Collier County Land Development Code Criteria with the following conditions: a. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures (BUG rating of U- 0--BUG = Backlight-Uplight-Glare). b. Site lighting will have a maximum height of 15-feet, within 50-feet of developed single-family residential property lines, the Weber Boulevard and 1st Avenue SW rights-of-way. A maximum height of 20-feet of height for lighting applies to the remainder of the project. c. Project site light poles, structures and fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines. d. A photometric light level no greater than 0.2 foot-candles will be permitted along abutting residential property lines. 12. Any Church steeple lighting shall be prohibited. 13. An enhanced 15-foot Type B buffer shall be provided on the Church property along the abutting residential property lines as shown on the site plan. The enhanced buffer shall provide the following plant materials, in lieu of a wall, and shall reach 80% opacity within one year of installation: • Trees o Installed with 25 gallon, 10-feet tall, 1.75-inch caliper, and placed at 25-feet on center at time of planting. • Hedge o Installed at 5-foot tall, placed 4-foot on center at time of planting. • Areca or Paurotis Palms (clustered) o Installed at 12-foot tall, 12-foot on center, and placed behind the required Type B Landscape Buffer trees at time of planting. 14. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 50-feet for roof type, appurtenances and screening of roof mounted equipment. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 60-feet for a church steeple. 15. Dumpster enclosure shall be placed adjacent to the western edge of the Preserve Area as shown on the site plan. The Church may coordinate with waste management services and Collier County review 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU-PL20160002584 August 13, 2018 3 staff to determine if roll out receptacles may be used in lieu of a dumpster enclosure as required by LDC section 5.03.04. 16. This conditional use shall be limited to a maximum of (12) twelve PM peak hour (weekday) two-way trips and a maximum of 240 peak hour (Saturday & Sunday) two-way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/SDPA approval. 17. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.4 Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE, UTILITYAND MAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING(24,000 SF & 300SEATS MAX.)OUTDOOR ACCESSORYRECREATION AREAAND ORPASTOR'S RESIDENCE(NOT TO EXCEED 3,500 SF)GOLDEN GATE BLVD. WRIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 75' FRONTYARD SETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' ENHANCED TYPE BBUFFER15' ENHANCED TYPE B BUFFER10' TYPE DLBUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATERMANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY(PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79)COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 10' PRESERVE SITE ALTERATION SETBACK SUBJECTPROPERTY(6.25 AC)14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN REQUIRED PRESERVE NOTES5.15 ACRES (NATIVE VEGETATION ON-SITE)X 15% = 0.77 ACRES1.EXISTING IMPACTED AREAS WITHINTHE PRESERVE BOUNDARY SHALL BERE-VEGETATED PER LDC SEC. 3.05.07AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENTPLAN APPROVAL.2.PRESERVES MAY BE USED TOSATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERREQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTICVEGETATION REMOVAL INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1.3.SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITHNATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BEIN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION3.05.07.08/14/2018 REVISED PER COUNTY ATTORNEY'S COMMENTS 9.B.4Packet Pg. 678Attachment: 9-20-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) AGENDA ITEM 9-G TO: STAFF REPORT COLLIER COLTNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION.ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARINGDATE: MAY3,2018 SUBJECT: PETITIONCU-PL20160002577,3899lstAVESw COMPANION ITEM: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-l PROPERTY OWNER/ AGENTS: Applicant Owner: Agent: Grace Romanian Baptist Church ofNaples Inc. Frederick E Hood, AICP 6017 Pine Ridge Road #84 Davidson Engineering, Inc. Naples, FL 34119 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 REOUESTED ACTION: The applicant seeks approval for a Conditional Use to permit construction of a new church for the subject parcel, which is zoned E, Estates. A church is listed as an allowable conditional use in the Estates zoning district. There is a companion small scale Growth Management Plan (GMp) Amendment with the petition. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consisting of +6.25 acres of land is located at the southeast comer of Collier Boulevard (CR 95 1) and Golden Gate Boulevard, Section I 1, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, of Collier County, Florida (See location map on page 2). CU P12010002577-5/3/1 I CCPC Page 1 ofg ver 4.16.18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) _-l ia T_-olll- IEEr-laaJ i I6it-I J i a Ia6r = LOCATION MAP t-t-tr)Nooo@ oNJ o_ U o)-o Efz Eo .F o(L iolog o s o,A'l€ r.q.,$ oA'tg rarl|oS c d o-o .o (!oo -J CU PL20160002577-CCPC 5/3/18 Page 2 of I ver.4.16.18 s ot a, o =o ttc9.B.5Packet Pg. 680Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU- PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The existing parcels are vacant. The applicant proposes to clear the northern parcel, which is closest to Golden Gate Boulevard for a proposed multi-purpose church building and sanctuary. There is a proposed recreation area to the south ofthe proposed church building as well. No specific detail has been provided for the recreation area, which will serve the church. The applicant has committed to a maximum number of 300 seats for the church building. Access to the site is proposed along Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South at existing access aprons on both roadways. At this time, the applicant is not requesting child care facilities as part of their request. However, during the NIM they indicated that child care facilities may be requested at a later date. The applicant has stated that the proposed church use will have minimal effect on neighboring properties. The majority of traffic and trips generated will be during proposed worship services on Sunday at 10:00AM and again at 6:00PM. Landscape buffers required by the LDC and water management areas, along with retained vegetation will reduce potential noise and glare at the proposed church site. The applicant indicates that the subject site is bordered on all sides by residential land use and zoning districts. They further claim that while the property could be developed with single-family homes, the site is located at a busy arterial intersection and they believe that the property is better suited for nonresidential land uses that are compatible with the existing neighborhood. The ingress/egress is fiom Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard S. with parking areas proposed around the perimeter ofthe church building and accessory recreation area. There is a larger parking area on the eastem portion ofthe site as well. The applicant has indicated preserve areas and u/ater management areas on the concept master plan. The proposed concept plan drawing has been included as (Attachment A , Conceptual Site Plan). A companion amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) is required since the subject site does not comply with the specific locational criteria in the GMP for conditional uses for churches. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: East: South: West: E, Estates District, residential E, Estates District, residential E, Estates District, residential E, Estates District, residential cu PL20160002577-CCPC 5/3/1 I Page 3 of 9 ver.4.16 18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) AERIAL PHOTO Area to be developed GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA EXHIBIT E, AERIAL EXHIBIT NC, ttc. IIE 20' cu P1201 60002577-CCPC 5/3/1 I Page 4 of I ver.4.16.18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: comprehensive Planning Staffhas reviewed this request and offered the following comments: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Estates, Mixed-Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict, as depicted on the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (GGAMP) and in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning Staff has concluded that the Grace Romanian Church CU petition may not be deemed consistent with the GGAMP. However, it may be found consistent IF the companion GMP amendment petition PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 is approved (adopted) and becomes in effect. The CU Resolution needs to provide for the effective date to be tinked to the effective date of the companion GMP Amendment. (see Attachm entB - GGAMP-FLUE Consistency Review) ZONING DIVISION ANALYSIS: Prior to forwarding a Conditional Use recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) must find that: l) approval of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property owners in the same district or neighborhood; and 2) all specific requirements for the Conditional Use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made conceming the following matters: 1. Section 2.03.01 B.c.l, of the LDC allows conditional uses in the E, Estates District zoning district. The requested conditional use for a new church facility is an allowable conditional use in the Estates zoning district, subject to the standards established in section 10.08.00, ofthe LDC. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The requested conditional use for a church was determined to be not consistent with Golden Gate Area Master Plan. However, there is a companion GMP Amendment petition related to this request, PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017- 1, and ifapproved, would become consisrent (adopted) and becomes in effect. 3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Ingress and egress to the subject property would be limited to Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Avenue. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) submitted by the applicant indicates that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level ofservice. Transportation Planning Staffrecommends: Condition of approval: 1. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, cu P1201 60002577-CCPC 5/3/1 I Page 5 of I ver 4 16.18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Transportation Adminishator or his designee. The TIS has been included in the back-up packet from the agent. 4. The affect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects. The subject site is currently zoned Estates District. It is surrounded on all sides by residential uses. Ifthe proposed use is approved, it would likely have a substantial impact on neighboring properties because the land use changes fiom a vacant residential lot to church use. Traffic in the area would likely increase on scheduled church service days. Additionally, there would probably be an increase in noise levels on church service days. The petitioner will be required to meet the standards of Article IV Noise in the Code ofordinances, as well as, the code standards for lighting. 5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other properfy in the district. Under the current Golden Gate Area Master Plan provisions, the proposed conditional use is not consistent with the GGAMP. However, the use would be deemed compatible if the amendment petition PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017- I is approved. While the majority of the surrounding properties are residential, the site's location at the corner of a six-lane and fourJane road intersection suggests the location could be deemed appropriate for nonresidential use. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAO RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not review this petition because the site is under the size threshold (10 acres) to require an Environmental Impact Statement. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING NIM): Frederick Hood, AICP on behalf of Grace Romanian Baptist Church, conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) on Wednesday, October 11,2017. The meeting was held at the Collier County Estates Branch Library at 1266 Golden Gate Boulevard W. at 5:30 pm. In the back-up documentation, the attached sign-in sheet shows nine attendees other than the owner, consultant, and staff. Consultant Fred Hood conducted the meeting starting with introductions and an overview ofthe Conditional Use request to allow the church use within the estates district on a vacant parcel. He explained the GGAMP companion amendment request as well. Following the presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees for questions. The following is a synopsis of questions and responses: The following concetns wete stated and queslions were asked: 1. Concerns with the additional traffic along Weber Blvd, with also making the point that there is a nearby park, two existing churches and elementary school in the area. -No response provided. cu P120160002577-CCPC 5/3/1 8 Page 6 of I ver.41618 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 2. County not willing to install traflic calming devices along Weber Blvd. -No response provided. 3. Why can't a bridge be constructed off CR 951 (Collier Blvd) to the site, instead of accessing the property off the residential streets? - Fred Hood replied that lhis was something that could be considered, but the direction of Counly Transportation, regarding access poinls to lhe site, was followed. 4. What are the trip counts, hours of operation? How many accessory uses/buildings? - Fred Hood replied the design of the site is for a maximum 300-seat sanctuary to house the applicant's congregation only, with no plans for addilional semices or to leose out the church to other congregations. Fred noted that the recreational lield could be open for lhe enjoyment of the public's use and was something lhst the church was considering offering lhe communifit. He also slaled lhat lhere were no addilional accessory uses being considered and the Conditional Use applicalion was lo allowfor the church-use only, 5. Concerns of outside services, such as child care and alcoholic counseling services, - Fred staled the outside services brought up hrere not being considered, and would require a separate application lo be Jiled- 6. The applicant then spoke about the congregation, and why they chose the Estates location. 7. An attendee then spoke in support of the church. 8. Is a PUD being sought? - Fred replied thal no, a PUD was not being considered and explained the Conditionol Use. 9. When are the services? - Fred and the applicanl replied with the services days/times. 10. What is the traflic count? - Fred replied that the Sunday peak-hour was IE3 trips. 11. Discussions of traffic, ingress & egress are held. CU P120160002577--CCPC 5/3/18 Page 7 of9 ver.4.16.18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 12. Building heights? - Fred slated the site would conform ro the current development stundards & went over height and sethacks. 13. Are dark skies proposed? - Fred replied that was somelhing lhe church would look inlo and take into consideration- 14. Is there the possibility for the church to expand on this parcel? - Fred wenl over the required open space, storm b,ate?, parking areas, ac. for the sile. 15. More discussions regarding traflic, ingress & egress continued. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:13p.m. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attomey Office reviewed the staff report on 4116118. RECOMMENDATION: The Zoning Division Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition CU-PL20160002577 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval for the proposed Conditional Use for a church !f the companion GMP Amendment petition PL20160002584/CPSS-2017- 1 is approved and becomes effective. The Conditional Use Resolution effective date and the GMP Amendment effective date should be linked and subject to: Condition ofapproval: 1. For services and other periods and events ofsignificant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with stafling and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Transportation Administrator or his designee. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Conceptual Site Plan, Grace Romanian Church Attachment B: GGAMP-FLUE Consistency Review cu P1201 60002577-CCPC 5/3/18 Page I or g ver 4 16 18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER ION _ ZONING SERVICES SECTION 4. lo /8 DATE REVIEWED BY: *f,uf,a DATE (('la-rd MICHAEL BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: DATE RAYMO V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER ZONING DIVISION _ ZONING SERVICES SECTION S FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Condilional Use. CU P120160002577 Page I of 9 ver 4 10 18 9.B.5 Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Staff Report-PL20160002577-Grace Romanian Church CU (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.6 Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Attachment A-Concept Site Plan Grace Roman001 (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT B Growth Management Department Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Memorandum To: Fred Reischl, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section From: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section Date: February 23, 2018 Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PL20160002577 PETITION NAME: Grace Romanian Church – CU – Review 2 REQUEST: To obtain a Conditional Use (CU) for a ±6.25-acre site in Golden Gate Estates, to allow for a church, religious facility, or place of worship with a maximum of 300 seats in the Estates Zoning District. Submittal 2 included a revised Conceptual Site Plan, Location Map, ROW easement document, and aerial. LOCATION: The subject site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Estates, Mixed-Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict, as depicted on the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) states, “Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses, including: Conditional uses and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code… Also, refer to the Conditional Uses Subdistrict.” The “Conditional Uses Subdistrict” in the Estates – Mixed Use District within the GGAMP contains specific provisions for Essential Services CUs, CUs on Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard, Transitional CUs adjacent to Neighborhood Centers, Transitional CUs [as buffers between residential and certain non-residential uses], and, Special Exceptions to CU Locational Criteria [for certain excavation activities, temporary model homes, and specific sites for churches]. The subject site does not comply with any of these provisions. The applicant has submitted a companion Growth Management Plan amendment petition, PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017-1, that proposes to amend the text of the GGAMP Conditional Uses Subdistrict, (e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria, by adding the location for the Grace Romanian Church (Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4). This proposed GMP amendment must be approved first in order for the CU petition to be consistent with the GMP. In the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Chapter 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts, B. Estates, 1 (c) Conditional uses, Churches are listed as the #1 conditional use. Certain applicable Future Land Use Element (FLUE) policies are shown below in italics followed by staff analysis in bold text. 9.B.7 Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Attachment B Consistency Review (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 2 FLUE Policy 5.6 (shown below in italics) followed by staff analysis in [bracketed bold text]. New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning staff as part of their review of the petition.] Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The subject property fronts on Golden Gate Boulevard West, an Urban major collector road, as classified in the Transportation Element of the GMP. A water management/canal separates the subject property from fronting on Collier Blvd. (CR 951). There is one ingress and one egress on Golden Gate Boulevard shown on the submitted ‘Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conceptual Site Plan.’ There is also an additional access shown on Weber Blvd., a local north- south road that abuts the eastern boundary of the subject property.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [The site is proposed as a single development project. A loop road (drive) is shown on the Conceptual Site Plan that circulates around the entire site.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The Conceptual Site Plan shows the subject site has little opportunity for interconnections. The site is bordered on the north by Golden Gate Boulevard, on the east by Weber Blvd., on the south by 1st Avenue SW and one existing single-family residence (which staff acknowledges would provide little meaningful benefit to connect with), and on the west by the water management area/canal.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [Mostly not applicable, given that this is a religious facility development – not a residential development. There is sidewalk shown on the Conceptual Site Plan that partially circulates around the site and extends out from the subject site to Golden Gate Blvd. Since no sidewalk deviation was requested for this project, the project will need to comply with the LDC.] CONCLUSION: The Grace Romanian Church CU petition may not be deemed consistent with the GGAMP. However, it may be found consistent IF the companion GMP amendment petition PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 is approved (adopted) and becomes in effect. The CU Resolution needs to provide for the effective date to be linked to the effective date of the companion GMP amendment. cc: Michael Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Raymond V. Bellows, Manager, Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section CU-PL2016-2577 Grace Romanian Church R2.docx CU-PL2016-2577 Grace Romanian Church R2a G:\CDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews\2018\CU sf-dw/2-23-18 9.B.7 Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Attachment B Consistency Review (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 1 of 14 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIONAL USE LDC Section 10.08.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code PETITION NO (PL) PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. To be completed by staff 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 2 of 14 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 3 of 14 e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 4 of 14 ASSOCIATIONS Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ PROPERTY INFORMATION On separate page, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application:  If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include separate legal description for property involved in each district;  The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre-application meeting; and  The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Plat Book: _______ Page #: _______ Section/Township/Range: _______ /_______ /_______ Subdivision: __________________________________________Lot: ________ Block: ________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ Size of Property: _____ft. X ______ ft. = _______ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _____________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 5 of 14 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property: (If space is inadequate, attach on a separate page) Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: __________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________________________________ CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST DETAIL Type of Conditional Use: This application is requesting a conditional use as allowed, pursuant to LDC section 2.03.00, of the _______________________ zoning district for _______________________ (type of use). Present Use of the Property: __________________________________________ 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 6 of 14 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC section 10.08.00 and Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code, staff’s recommendation to the reviewing body shall be based upon a finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and that the specific requirements governing the individual conditional use, if any, have been met. Further, satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable. On a separate page, provide a narrative statement describing a request for a conditional use and a detailed response to the criteria listed below. Specify how and why the request is consistent with each of the criteria. a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? No Yes (If yes please provide copies.) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 7 of 14 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ___________________________________________ City: ________________ State: __________ ZIP: ___________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: _______________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: _________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: ____________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): ___________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System PROVIDE NAME_______________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be served: ____________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ B. Sewer-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 8 of 14 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________ Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 9 of 14 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 10 of 14 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: A Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing Examiner Chapter 3 C.1. of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting, and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. Requirements for Review # Of Copies Required Not Required Completed Application (download current form from County website) 16 Cover letter briefly explaining the project 16 Pre-Application Notes 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Warranty Deed(s) 3 Boundary Survey 3 Conceptual Site Plan 24” X 36” plus (one 8 ½ X 11 copy) Plans showing proposed location for utilities, if required Plans for screening and buffering the use with reference as to type, dimensions, and character, if required Plans showing the proposed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations, if required Plans showing the proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions, and character, if required Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s), if applicable 4 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 5 Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments & sketches) 1 Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 3 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearing. Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 2 Traffic Impact Study (TIS) or waiver 7 Historical and Archeological Survey, or waiver 4 Electronic copy of all documents and plans * Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 * If located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, include an additional set of each submittal requirement 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 11 of 14 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS:  Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager.  Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required . ]Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan Graphics: Mariam Ocheltree City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Vicky Ahmad Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Other: School District (Residential Components): Amy Heartlock Communication Towers: Mosquito Control Collier County Airport Authority Naples Airport Authority Commercial Mining: Impact Fees 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 12 of 14 FEE REQUIREMENTS All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners  Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 (to be credited towards the application fee if the application is filed within 9 months of pre-application meeting)  Conditional Use Application Fee: $4,000.00 o When filed with Rezone Petition: $1,500.00 o Additional fee for 5th and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee  Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $300.00  Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00  Listed or Protected Species survey review fee (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00  Transportation Fee, if required: o Methodology Review Fee: $500.00 o Minor Study Review Fee: $750.00 o Major Study Review Fee: $1,500.00  Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Hearing Examiner or CCPC: $1,125.00  Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the BZA, if required: $500.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 13 of 14 Public Participation Requirements LDC Section 10.03.06 B. or C. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code Notice for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum:  Date, time, and location of the hearing;  Description of the proposed land uses; and  2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. Public Hearing for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Hearing Examiner: The Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Notice for Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 3/17/2017 Page 14 of 14 Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum:  Date, time, and location of the hearing;  Description of the proposed land uses; and  2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. Public Hearing for Conditional Use Petitions Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC): The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC): The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA): The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “A” – Disclosure of Interest July 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST ATTACHMENT “A” PROPERTY OWNER: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP: 100% REGISTERED AGENTS: • Adrian Roman – President / Secretary • Adrian Ungureanu – Director • Gheorghe Lup – Director • Mihai Simut – Director • Daniel Pop – Director • Vasile Valean – Director • Vasile Brisc – Treasurer / Director 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 3000 ORANGE BLOSSOM DR NAPLES, FL 34109 Current Principal Place of Business: Current Mailing Address: 6017 PINE RIDGE RD. POBOX 84 NAPLES, FL 34119 US Entity Name: "GRACE" ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH OF NAPLES, INC. DOCUMENT# N04000010307 FEI Number: 65-1099324 Certificate of Status Desired: Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: ROMAN, ADRIAN 1090 31 ST SW NAPLES, FL 34117 US The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Officer/Director Detail : I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am an officer or director of the corporation or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 617, Florida Statutes; and that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Signing Officer/Director Detail Date FILED Apr 02, 2018 Secretary of State CC9007342249 ADRIAN ROMAN SECRETARY 04/02/2018 2018 FLORIDA NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT No Title D Name UNGUREANU, ADRIAN Address 1897 ISLA DE PALMA CIRCLE City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34119 Title SECRETARY, DIRECTOR Name ROMAN, ADRIAN Address 1090 31 ST SW City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34117 Title D Name POP, DANIEL Address 8539 IBIS COVE CIRCLE City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34119 Title PASTOR, DIRECTOR Name PETRISOR, AURELIAN CRISTIAN Address 4891 HICKORY WOOD DRIVE City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34119 Title D Name ZAH, VASILE Address 2821 TROPICANA BLVD. APT. C City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34116 Title DIRECTOR Name BOBOESCU, ION Address 2279 HEYDON CIRCLE WEST City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34120 Title TREASURER, D Name BRISC, VASILE Address 1853 SENEGAL DATE DR City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34119 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “B” – Legal Description March 27, 2018 www.davidsonengineering.com LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHMENT “B” ALL OF TRACT 16, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 4, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THE ABOVE DESCRIBES APPROXIMATELY 3.98 ACRES OF LAND. THIS ACREAGE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE NORTH 75 FEET AND THE EAST 30 FEET. AND THE WEST HALF OF TRACT 15, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 4, ACCORDING TO THE MAP OR PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. THE ABOVE DESCRIBES APPROXIMATELY 2.27 ACRES OF LAND. THIS ACREAGE DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SOUTH 30 FEET. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “C” – Evaluation Criteria July 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com NARRATIVE & EVALUATION CRITERIA ATTACHMENT "C" The intent of this Conditional Use request is to allow the applicant to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Conditional Use provisions within the Estates Zoning District and Future Land Use Designation. The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. a.Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. Response: The Estates District permits churches as a Conditional Use. The application and proposed master plan identifies all the required elements for a conditional use, as required by the LDC. Additionally, a companion Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment that seeks to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, will include the subject property within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. This companion application has been submitted for review to allow consistency with the Collier County Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. b.Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Response: The means of ingress and egress to the property are currently existing and proposed at Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South, respectively. Weekday vehicular and pedestrian traffic control/access shall remain the same or improve with the proposed land use being sought. Additionally, there are existing sidewalks along Golden Gate and Weber Boulevards that will continue to provide pedestrian walkability and safety. c.Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. Response: The proposed church will have a minimal effect on neighboring properties most days of the week. The majority of traffic/trips are proposed during worship services on Sunday mornings at 10:00 am and again Sunday evenings at 6:00pm. Landscape buffers, water management areas and retained vegetation adjacent to the existing single-family home(s), located to the east and south of the proposed site will be utilized to reduce any potential for noise or glare. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “C” – Evaluation Criteria July 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. Response: The subject property is bordered to the north, east, south and west by residential land uses and zoning, adjacent to and, opposite existing right-of-ways. Collier Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, Weber Boulevard and 1st Avenue SW all directly border the subject property. The Estates District permits Churches as a Conditional Use on designated Conditional Use properties. Although the property could be developed with single-family home(s), its location at a busy arterial intersection (Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards) have left the property undeveloped for sometime. It is the applicant’s contention and vision that the property is more suited for a non-residential land use that will fit into the fabric of the neighborhood while meeting the design and development standards of the Golden Gates Estates community. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Response: The subject property is currently owned by the applicant, and members of the existing Church are all local to the region. Upon the successful completion of the companion Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment application, the proposed church and accessory land uses will be found consistent and permitted within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict and subsequent zoning. Future Land Use Element Provisions Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The Estates District permits churches as a Conditional Use. The application and proposed master plan identifies all the required elements for a conditional use, as required by the LDC. Additionally, a companion Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment that seeks to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, will include the subject property within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. This companion application has been submitted for review to allow consistency with the Collier County Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The means of ingress and egress to the property are currently proposed at Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “C” – Evaluation Criteria July 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. An internal access loop has been provided within the design of the master concept plan. this access loop, however, provides access and circulation internally and to/from the proposed access points on Golden Gate and Weber Boulevards. Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Interconnections to adjoining parcels are not feasible, because the surrounding parcels are all developed with single family residential homes and connection to those properties are inappropriate at this time. Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. Sidewalks/pathways will be provided to the site, as required by the LDC. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples CU Attachment “C” – Evaluation Criteria July 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE, UTILITYAND MAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYRECREATION AREAGOLDEN GATE BLVD. WRIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 75' FRONTYARD SETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK30' SIDE YARDSETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK75' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE BBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER10' TYPE DLBUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATERMANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY(PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79)COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 10' PRESERVE SITE ALTERATION SETBACK 14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN REQUIRED PRESERVE NOTES5.15 ACRES (NATIVE VEGETATION ON-SITE)X 15% = 0.77 ACRES1.EXISTING IMPACTED AREAS WITHINTHE PRESERVE BOUNDARY SHALL BERE-VEGETATED PER LDC SEC. 3.05.07AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENTPLAN APPROVAL.2.PRESERVES MAY BE USED TOSATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERREQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTICVEGETATION REMOVAL INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1.3.SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITHNATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BEIN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION3.05.07.9.B.8Packet Pg. 734Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8Packet Pg. 735Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER BOULEVARDGO LDEN GATE BLVD LEG END GR AC E ROMAN IAN SSGMPA SUBJECTPROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES DAVIDS ON ENGIN EER ING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRA CE RO MAN IAN BAPTIST C HURC HCONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPAEXHIBIT E: AERIAL EXH IBIT . SO URCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 600 1,200FEET Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMA NIAN CHURCH-CR 951 \DW G\Plan nin g\GIS\2018 -02 -13 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E (AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd GO LDEN GATE BLVD W WEBER BLVD S.1ST AVE. SW 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) GRA CE ROMAN IAN BAPTI ST CH URCHCONDITIONAL USES SUBDI STRIC T SSGMPAEXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAPCR 951PINE RIDGE R D GO LDEN GATE BLV D VANDERBILT BEACH LEGEN D SUBJECT PRO PERTY: 6.25 ACRES MAJOR RO AD WAYS COLLIER LEE HENDRY DADE BROWARD PALM BEACH MONROE . SO URCES: COLLIER COUNTY G EOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) DAVIDS ON ENGIN EER ING, INC.4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201NAPLES, FL 34104PHONE: 239-434-6060 Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMA NIAN CHURCH-CR 951 \DW G\Plan nin g\GIS\2018 -02 -13 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D (LOCATION MAP ).mxd 0 0.5 1MILES GO LDEN GATE BLVD W WEBER BLVD S.1ST AVE . S W 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL Environmental Data Report Section 11 / Township 49 S / Range 26 E Prepared For: Collier County Growth Management Department Development Review Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Prepared By: April 25, 2017 Updated: Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com Ea r t h Tech Environmental, LLC 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Rezone Pre-App Notes & Environmental Checklists APPENDIX B: Staff Qualifications APPENDIX C: Protected Species Survey APPENDIX D: Davidson Engineering Site Plan INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00) for rezone and GMPA of the Subject Property for development as a church campus. This information is in response to the circled items in the Rezone Pre-Application Notes as provided by Davidson Engineering. See Appendix A, Rezone Pre-App Notes & Environmental Checklists, pgs. 17-22. PROPERTY LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located at the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The property is approximately 6.25 acres. See Figure 1, Location Map. Figure 1. Location Map 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST (Numbers match PUD checklist) 2. Who and what company prepared the Environmental Data Report? This Environmental Data Report was prepared by Earth Tech Environmental, LLC. Ecologists Jeremy Sterk and Jennifer Bobka. See Appendix B, Staff Qualifications. 3. Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Based on the FLUCCS system, there are no jurisdictional wetlands present on the property: FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland, but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a ‘drained’ designation. See Figure 2, Aerial with Wetlands Identified. Figure 2. Aerial with Wetlands Identified (No jurisdictional wetlands present). 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 8. Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 11. Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCCS Codes identified. See Figure 3, Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Based on the FLUCCS system, the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress – Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland, but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a ‘drained’ designation. FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property, this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity, as well as two smaller areas along the north-eastern property boundary. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay 14. Provide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property, along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has not been conducted on the Subject Property. 24. The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project’s compliance with LDC and GMP requirements (LDC 10.02.A.3 f). a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. See companion GMPA application. The project proposes developing the parcel into a church with associated structures. A portion of the existing habitat will be preserved onsite (0.77 acres). There are no wetlands present on the property. Water management facilities will be designed according to SFWMD and Collier County criteria. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See the information provided in this document. c. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan and FLUCCS map in Figure 3. The site totals 6.25 acres. Of that acreage, 6.15 is classified as native vegetation. There is an existing home site on the property that was allotted 1.0 acres of clearing as part of its building permit. 6.15 – 1.0 acres = 5.15 acres of native vegetation present on the property. 5.15 acres X 15% = 0.77 acres of native vegetation required to be set aside as a preserve. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 4. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project’s design compensates for wetland impacts. There are no wetlands on the Subject Property and there will be no wetland impacts. e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. No listed species were observed. 25. PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document, prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. See this document. ENVIRONMENTAL PUDZ-PUDA CHECKLIST (non-RFMU) 2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser’s office) and clearly delineate the subject boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.1. Application Contents #24). FLUCFCS Overlay - P627. See Figure 3, Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Descriptions are found in #11 above. 3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as “Preserve” on all plans (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on- site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculation (LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.1.d- e). Preserve Calculation - P547. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.1.b. Preserve width – P603. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4). Preserve Selection- P550. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. The preserve has been provided as a contiguous single area. There are no preserves to connect to offsite. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25’ from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10’ of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GMPs, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination (LDC 3.08.00). Environmental Data Required – P 522. See this document. The site has not previously contained a golf course or farm field. 10. PUD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved (LDC 10.02.13.A.2). Master Plan Contents-P626. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 11. PUD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses, the following is suggested: A. Principal Use: Preserve; B. Accessory Uses: All other uses (list as applicable or refer to the LDC) not in CV Library. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 12. PUD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site (LDC 10.02.13.A.2). Unique Features- P628. No listed species were observed on the property. There are no unique vegetative features. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX A REZONE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLISTS 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX B STAFF QUALIFICATIONS 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com E a r t h Tech Environmental, LLC www.etenviron.com Relevant Experience Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. His varied experience spans marine, upland, and estuarine habitats and includes extensive work with a wide variety of listed species. In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co- authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Early in his career, Jeremy was the principal investigator of a field research project in the Bahamas that utilized telemetry tracking to study the swimming speed of sub-adult lemon sharks. Jeremy’s environmental consulting experience includes: Protected Species Surveys Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Listed Species Management Plans Turbidity Monitoring Vegetation & Habitat Mapping Wetland & Water Level Monitoring USFWS Section 7 & Section 10 Permitting Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) Water Use Monitoring & Compliance Project Management Preserve Management Plans GIS / GPS Mapping & Exhibits Post Permit Compliance Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Land Use Planning Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Native Vegetation Restoration Plans Lake Management Plans Incidental Take Permitting Due Diligence Reports Site and Aerial Photography Wetland Jurisdictional Determinations USFWS Bald Eagle Monitor Bonneted Bat Surveys Gopher Tortoise Surveys, Permitting, & Relocations Mangrove Assessments & Restorations Scrub Jay Surveys Hard Bottom & Soft Bottom Benthic Surveys Burrowing Owl Surveys Artificial Reef Deployments Shorebird Surveys Seagrass Surveys Certifications/Credentials Certified Environmental Professional #1692037, Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent – Permit No. GTA-09-00192 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals – member since January 1995; served on the Board of Directors for the Southwest Florida Chapter from (2008 – 2012). Past Secretary, Vice President, & President. State of Florida Real Estate License (2003 to Present) Appointed by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners to:  Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, Chairman of the Lands Evaluation and Management Subcommittee. (2009 to 2014).  Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) (2015 to Present).  FWC Local Rule Review Committee (Manatee Protection Speed Zones) (2016 to Present). Publications Sundström, L.F., J. Sterk, & S.H. Gruber. 1998. Effects of a speed-sensing transmitter on the swimming speed of lemon sharks. Bahamas J. Sci. 6 (1): 12-22. JEREMY STERK, C.E.P. Partner \ Senior Ecologist j.sterk@eteflorida.com 239.595.4929 Years Experience 22 years Education/Training B.S. Aquatic Biology (1994), St. Cloud State University Professional Affiliations Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals #16992037 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com E a r t h Tech Environmental, LLC www.etenviron.com Relevant Experience Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental LLC in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 5 years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. Her experience includes projects throughout Collier, Lee and Gallatin counties. Her varied experience spans coastal marine, shoreline and estuarine habitats, to upland forests and alpine environments. She has worked with a wide variety of native and invasive plant and wildlife species. She is also an experienced Naturalist and Environmental Educator. As an Ecologist, Jennifer fulfills duties in environmental consulting, wetland & wildlife monitoring, species surveys, invasive species removal, report writing, GIS mapping, and ERP permitting. Jennifer’s work experience in many fields of ecology includes: Wetland Delineation Protected Species Surveys Listed Species Research & Monitoring Turbidity Monitoring Vegetation & Habitat Mapping Bald Eagle Monitoring Gopher Tortoise Surveys and Relocation GIS Mapping Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Invasive & Exotic Species Removal Natural Resource Management Trail Maintenance Mechanical & Manual Forest Fuel Reduction Ecological Restoration Environmental Education Relevant Certifications/Credentials Certified Interpretive Guide Python Responder/Patrol Training USFS Sawyer JENNIFER BOBKA Ecologist jenniferb@eteflorida.com 239.304.0030 Years’ Experience 5 years Education/Training Naturalist II & Environmental Educator (2012-2016) Manatee Research Intern Florida Conservation Commission (2013) AmeriCorps Field Crew Leader Montana Conservation Corps (2010) B.A. Environmental Studies Montana State University (2009) Marine Biology & Coastal Ecology Study Abroad Costa Rica (2007) Professional Affiliations Florida Association of Environmental Professionals League of Environmental Educators of Florida Florida Master Naturalist Program 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX C PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 624D3.88Ac 1102.27 Ac 7400.08 Ac 7400.01 Ac 7400.01 Ac COLLIER BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W Grace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida FLUCCS Map X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO. DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8 1 4 5 5 R A I L H E A D B LV D , S U I T E 8N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0 N A P L E S , F L O R I D A 3 4 11 0P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 P H O N E ( 2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 - 0 0 3 0 F A X ( 2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 - 0 0 5 4 O 0 200 400100 Feet Subject PropertyFLUCCS Mapping110, Single Family Residential624-D, Pine - Cypress - Cabbage Palm (drained) 740, Disturbed Land G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\FLUCCS Map.mxd / 9:10:20 AM4/12/17 Note:2017 Aerialobtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 1 COLLIER COUNTY WAIVER APPLICATION FROM THE REQUIRED HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT DATE SUBMITTED: _______________ PLANNER: PETITION NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAIVER: _____________________ (To Be Completed By Zoning and Land Development Review Staff) PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH OF NAPLES LOCATION: (Common Description) Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards, within Collier County, Naples, Florida SUMMARY OF WAIVER REQUEST: The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The property is approximately 6.25 acres. The southern portion of the property was previously developed with a single-family home with a separately constructed garage and screened enclosure. Per the attached letters from Florida Master Site File, no previously recorded cultural resources are listed for the subject property. (Properties located within an area of Historical and Archaeological Probability but with a low potential for historical/archaeological sites may petition the Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator County Manager or designee to waive the requirement for a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment. Once the waiver application has been submitted, it shall be reviewed and acted upon within five (5) working days. The waiver request shall adequately demonstrate that the area has low potential for historical/archaeological sites.) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 2 SECTION ONE: APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DATA A. Name of applicant: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Mailing Address: 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84, Naples, FL 34119 Phone: 239.389.2527 E-Mail: emiadi@yahoo.com B. Name of agent(s) for applicant, if any: Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering, Inc. Mailing Address: 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201, Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 E-Mail: fred@davidsonengineering.com; jessica@davidsonengineering.com C. Name of owner(s) of property: Same As Applicant Mailing Address: Phone: E-Mail: Note: If names in answers to A and/or B are different than name in C, notarized letter(s) of authorization from property owner (C) must be attached. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 3 SECTION TWO: SUBJECT PROPERTY DATA (Attach copy of the plat book page (obtainable from Clerk’s Office at the original scale) with subject property clearly marked.) A. Legal description of subject property. Answer only 1 or 2, as applicable. 1. Within platted subdivision, recorded in official Plat Books of Collier County. Subdivision Name: Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 Plat Book 4 Page 79 - All of Tract 16 and West ½ of Tract 5 Section 11 Township 49 Range 26 2. If not in platted subdivision, a complete legal description must be attached which is sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property on County maps or aerial photographs. The legal description must include the Section, Township and Range. If the applicant includes multiple contiguous parcels, the legal description may describe the perimeter boundary of the total area, and need not describe each individual parcel, except where different zoning requests are made on individual parcels. A boundary sketch is also required. Collier County has the right to reject any legal description, which is not sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property, and may require a certified survey or boundary sketch to be submitted. B. Property dimensions: Area: 272,250 square feet, or ± 6.25 acres Width along roadway: See attached survey Depth: See attached survey C. Present use of property: Vacant / Developed Single Family Residential D. Present zoning classification: Estates 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 4 SECTION THREE: WAIVER CRITERIA Note: This provision is to cover instances in which it is obvious that any archaeological or historic resource that may have existed has been destroyed. Examples would be evidence that a major building has been constructed on the site or that an area has been excavated. A. Waiver Request Justification. 1. Interpretation of Aerial Photograph The attached aerial shows development on the southern parcel, with surrounding development on adjacent properties and vacant land. 2. Historical Land Use Description: Single-family residential and vacant land. 3. Land, cover, formation and vegetation description: Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum,sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland, but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. 4. Other: ________________________________________________________ B. The County Manager or designee may deny a waiver, grant the waiver, or grant the waiver with conditions. He shall be authorized to require examination of the site by an accredited archaeologist where deemed appropriate. The applicant shall bear the cost of such evaluation by an independent accredited archaeologist. The decision of the County Manager or designee regarding the waiver request shall be provided to the applicant in writing. In the event of a denial of the waiver request, written notice shall be provided stating the reasons for such denial. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the County Manager or designee regarding a waiver request may appeal 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 5 to the Preservation Board. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Preservation Board regarding a waiver request may appeal that decision to the Board of County Commissioners. SECTION FOUR: CERTIFICATION A. The applicant shall be responsible for the accuracy and completeness of this application. Any time delays or additional expenses necessitated due to the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information shall be the responsibility of the applicant. B. All information submitted with the application becomes a part of the public record and shall be a permanent part of the file. C. All attachments and exhibits submitted shall be of a size that will fit or conveniently fold to fit into a legal size (8 ½” x 14”) folder. ______________________________ Signature of Applicant or Agent Frederick Hood, AICP, Senior Planner Printed Name of Applicant or Agent ===================================================================== -TO BE COMPLETED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION- SECTION FIVE: NOTICE OF DECISION The County Manager or designee has made the following determination: Approved on: _____________ By:______________________________ Approved with Conditions on: ____________ By: _____________________________ (see attached) Denied on: _______________ By: ______________________________ (see attached) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 624D3.88 Ac 1102.27 Ac 7400.08 Ac COLLIER BLVDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W Grace Romanian ChurchCollier County, Florida Exhibit F.1 - Aerial with FLUCCS Map X N/A AS SHOWNSHEET NO . DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE E A R T H T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L CEARTH T E C H E N V I R O N M E N T A L , L L C1455 R A I L H E A D B L V D , S U I T E 81455 R A I L H E A D B L V D , S U I T E 8NAPLES, F L O R I D A 3 4 1 1 0NAPLES, F L O R I D A 3 4 1 1 0PHONE (2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 -0 0 3 0 F A X (2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 -0 0 5 4PHONE (2 3 9 ) 3 0 4 -0 0 3 0 F A X (2 3 9 ) 3 2 4 -0 0 5 4 O 0 200 400100 Feet Subject PropertyFLUCCS Mapping110, Single Family Residential624-D, Pine - Cypress - Cabbage Palm (drained) 740, Disturbed Land G:\ETEnv Documents\PROJECTS\COLLIER\Grace Romanian Church\GG Blvd CR 951 Parcel\GIS\FLUCCS Map.mxd / 10:59:02 AM3/31/17 Note:2017 Aerialobtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Digitally signed by RICHARD J. EWING, P.S.M. 5295 DN: cn=RICHARD J. EWING, P.S.M. 5295, o=COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC., ou, email=rewing@cecifl.com, c=US Date: 2017.03.28 13:09:55 -04'00'9.B.8Packet Pg. 783Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph | 850.245.6439 fax | SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239) 434-6060 Email: jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel # 36760720005 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information:  This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources.  Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph | 850.245.6439 fax | SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239) 434-6060 Email: jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel # 36760800006 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information:  This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources.  Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com EXHIBIT “R” COMPARATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS The proposed development known as Grace Romanian Baptist Church is a ±6.25-acre property located in Section 11, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is bound by Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) to the south, 1st Avenue Southwest to the west, Weber Boulevard South to the north, and Golden Gate Boulevard to the east. The subject property is currently zoned as Estates. The subject development consists of two properties to be combined with access points on Weber Boulevard South, Golden Gate Boulevard, and 1st Avenue South. For this analysis, the site will be conceptually developed to the maximum standards using the current project zoning and the proposed zoning amendment. The currently zoned lots consist of the following residential uses at build-out: Single Family Residence (1,201 – 2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Single Family Residence (1,201 – 2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Total: 4,500 sf The newly proposed Development (proposed zoning amendment) consists of the following at build-out: Church 300 seats Total: 300 seats The Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan establishes Levels of Service for the following: Arterial and Collector Roads Surface Water Management Systems Potable Water Systems Sanitary Sewer Systems Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Parks and Recreation Facilities Public School Facilities Each of the areas will be examined for the proposed developments in this summary report. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Arterial and Collector Roads Significantly impacted roadways are identified by the proposed highest peak hour trip generation (net new traffic) and is compared with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update Inventory Report, the peak hour for the project’s adjacent roadway network is PM. Therefore, the PM Peak Hour Trips were calculated using gross square footage for the proposed GPMA (Church at 15,000sf) and dwelling unit for the current zoning (Single Family Residential at 2 units) as this represents highest and best use scenario. Table 1 - Project Trip Generation (Net New) – Average Weekday Development PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA (Total non-Pass-By Trips) 4 4 8 Current Zoning (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) 1 1 2 Proposed Net New Traffic (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) Net Increase/(Net Decrease) 3 3 6 Based on the roadway network link analysis result, the proposed development at build-out is not a significant or adverse traffic generator for the existing roadway traffic at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development generated trips without adversely affecting the adjacent roadway network level of service. Surface Water Management Systems Currently, the neighboring sites are developed with single family homes and not permitted with an agency for storm water management. General development will warrant an environmental resource permit (ERP) through South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The District’s requirement for development is to attenuate 1.5 inches over the entire site during a 25-year, 3-day storm event prior to discharging offsite. The post-development discharge rate for this project allows 0.15 cfs/acre. These are minimum requirements despite the type of development proposed; therefore, neither project will pose a significant or adverse effect on the overall storm water management system. Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Currently, the site contains a vacated house with all utilities privately owned and maintained. The proposed non-residential site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Per Policy 1.5 of the Capital Improvement Element section of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the potable water system level-of-service is based on population growth. The proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth; therefore, the proposed use will have no impact on the potable water facility’s capacity. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Solid waste is provided by Waste Management, a private contract provider. Commercial accounts are charged by the service provider directly with rates set by the Board of County Commissioners through contract negotiation with the provider. Parks and Recreation Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Parks and Recreation Facilities. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Public School Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Public School Facilities. The use will not impact school attendance. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by either of the proposed build-outs. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit “R”- Comparative Level of Service (LOS) Analysis July, 2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Fire and EMS Facilities The proposed build-out will have no measurable impact on Fire and EMS Facilities. It should be assumed that newer buildings will be constructed to current NFPA and building code standards which may reduce the likelihood of related calls. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out conditions. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL NAPLES, FLORIDA APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES Prepared For: Prepared By: April 12, 2017 Collier County Engineering & Natural Resources Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Lower West Coast Service Center 2301 McGregor Boulevard Fort Myers, FL 33901 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com Ea r t h Tech Environmental, LLC 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure 1) below for Location Map. Figure 1. Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication “Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida.” This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2 & 3). The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species. The lists were obtained from two agency publications: 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com v A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication “Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists”, Publication Date: October 2016. v A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication “Notes on Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Plants”, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community. See (Table 1) of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary, transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80’s. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately two (2) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd. West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine – Cypress - Cabbage Palm (drained), 3.86 Acres This is the predominant community on the subject property. It includes bald cypress, pine and cabbage palm in combinations in which no species achieves dominance. The cypress, however, are of generally poor condition. The community was likely a historical wetland, although no other hydrologic indicators of wetlands were observed. Therefore, this FLUCCS has the ‘drained’ designation. Ground cover included a heavy mat of dried slash pine needles and dried leaves. Other vegetation observed includes beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, Dahoon holly, wild coffee, strangler fig, and isolated 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated to be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear- leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property, this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential, Low Density 2.27 624-D Pine – Cypress – Cabbage Palm (drained) 3.86 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: 6.23 Figure 2. Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table 1). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map & Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Table 1. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status FWC/FDA FWS 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus floridanus T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - Snowy Egret Egretta thula T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor T - Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals, Amphibians, Reptiles, & Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - Turkey vulture Cathartes aura DV N - Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV N - Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Gray squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia N, DV N - Armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus OH N Reptiles Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Amphibians Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status None None NA NA - Plants Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? (Y/N) Status Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciulata DV N CE * = protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd, Suite 8, Naples, FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours Task March 23, 2017 2:00 pm 4:00 pm 4.0 (2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 4.0 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 06/26/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31st Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee – $500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee – Small Scale Study – No Fee 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 6 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 11 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 13 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 13 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan .......................................................................................... 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 16 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition .......................................................... 23 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 26 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 4 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection. The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1 – Project Location Map As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for a multi-purpose church related building and accessory recreational area. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2022 planning horizon. The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed trip generation. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5 The associated church multi-use amenities are considered passive incidental to the sanctuary use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Proposed Conditions Church 560 15,000 sf (300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary; sf – square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed t o be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. Trip Generation The project’s site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions) – Average Weekday Note(s): (1) Sanctuary; sf – square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the ad jacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency an alysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: sanctuary Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 – Sunday peak hour of generator, the number of seats variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the purposes of this report. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 – Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Note(s): (1) Sanctuary. Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 15,000 sf(1) 137 5 3 8 4 4 8 Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Church 300 seats(1) 92 91 183 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volume (1) Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 35% SB – 1 NB – 1 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 35% NB – 2 SB – 2 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 30% WB – 1 EB – 1 Note(s): (1) Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 8 Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2016), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2016 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2022. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2016 - 2022) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2016 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2022 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2022 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 1,200 2.00% 1.1262 1,352 166 1,366 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 1,867 2.00% 1.1262 2,103 40 1,907 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 1,660 2.00% 1.1262 1,870 0 1,660 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2016 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)6. 2022 Projected Volume = 2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2022 Projected Volume = 2016 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2022 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5 - Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2016 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 201 6 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build -out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location Exist Roadway Min. Standard LOS Exist Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Future Project Build out Roadway Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 6D E 3,000 (SB) 6D Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 6D D 3,000 (NB) 6D Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 4D D 2,300 (EB) 4D Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2022 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2016 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2022 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project ** % Vol Capacity Impact By Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 3,000 (SB) SB – 1 1,367 0.03% No No Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 3,000 (NB) NB – 2 2,105 0.07% No No Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 2,300 (EB) EB – 1 1,871 0.04% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report; **2022 Projected Volume= 2022 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Weber Blvd is a 2-lane undivided local street under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 30 mph in the vicinity of the project. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right -of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12 Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access – Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 64 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. Site Access – Southbound Weber Boulevard The proposed project is expected to generate 28 vph left-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. It is noted that the Collier County roadway network peaks during a typical work week day. As such, the estimated project’s peak hour traffic occurs on an off peak day. In addition, Weber Blvd. is a low volume roadway serving surrounding residential properties. Based on the fact that the generated traffic is not a high warranting volume and occurs on an off peak day, it is our recommendation not to provide a left -turn lane at this project access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. As part of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection improvements, the Weber Blvd. connection onto Golden Gate Blvd. will be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out access. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13 Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build -out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project accesses on Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 14 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 16 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 17 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 18 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 19 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 20 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 21 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 23 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (2 Sheets) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 24 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 26 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits (2 Sheets) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 27 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Grace Romanian Church – CU Zoning – TIS – June 2017 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 28 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) June 16, 2017 VIA: E-MAIL Jessica Harrelson Jessica@davidsonengineering.com Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Water and Wastewater Service Availability Project: Grace Romanian Church Parcel #: 36760800006, 36760720005 Dear Jessica: The subject project is within the Collier County Water-Sewer District’s (CCWSD) water and wastewater service area, but wastewater service is not readily available to the project. Water service is readily available to the project via an existing 36” RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd S. Potable water is available for domestic use, fire protection, and irrigation, subject to the provisions of LDC 4.03.08 C, the Collier County Irrigation Ordinance (2015-27), and other applicable rules and regulations. Connection to the CCWSD’s water distribution system will be permitted only after the GMD Development Review Division’s approval of hydraulic calculations prepared by the Developer’s Engineer of Record in accordance with the Design Criteria found in Section 1 of the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities Standards Manual. Source pressure assumptions for water distribution system design are prescribed in the Design Criteria. If you have any questions, you may contact me at (239) 252-1037 or EricFey@colliergov.net. Respectfully, Eric Fey, P.E., Senior Project Manager CC: Steve Messner, Division Director – Water, PUD/WD; Beth Johnssen, Division Director – Wastewater, PUD/WWD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting www.davidsonengineering.com January 12, 2018 Collier County Client Services 2800 N Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church CU - PL20160002577 2nd Review To Whom It May Concern, We have included the following items for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Updated Conceptual Site Plan 3. Location Map 4. Aerial 5. FLUCCS Map 6. Survey 7. Right-of-Way easement for roads, drainage and utilities (Enviro) We offer the following responses to comments, issued August 21, 2017: Addressing – GIS Review, Annis Moxam 1. On the Conceptual Plan and Boundary Survey, please add the suffix to Golden Gate Blvd W. Response: Acknowledged. Please see the attached Conceptual Site Plan. 2. On the location map and aerial please add street name Weber Blvd S and 1st Ave SW Response: Acknowledged. Please see the attached Location Map and aerial. Comprehensive Planning, Sue Faulkner 1. The Grace Romanian Church CU petition is contingent upon approval of the companion Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) petition PL-20160002584/CPSS-2017-1. Consistency with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan will be contingent, in part, upon the companion GMP amendment being adopted and going into effect. Response: Acknowledged. 2. The CU Resolution needs to provide for the effective date to be linked to the effective date of the companion GMP amendment. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Response: Acknowledged. Engineering Stormwater Review, Richard Orth 1. Please identify on the on the Conceptual Site Plan all existing drainage easement around the property; to include any maintenance easements along the SR 951 drainage canal. Response: Acknowledged. Please see the attached Conceptual Site Plan. 2. Please consider relocating the sewer absorption system away from the water management areas due to the potential conflict of hydraulic mounding between the two systems. Response: Per conversation with Richard Orth, this comment has been resolved. Final design of the septic system will be done at time of SDP. 3. Please identify the 75- foot setback distances between the SR 951 drainage canal easement and any proposed sewage percolation systems on the Conceptual Site Plan. Response: Per conversation with Richard Orth, this comment has been resolved. Final design of the septic system will be done at time of SDP. 4. Please provide clarification for the areas on the Conceptual Site Plan where portions of the Landscape Buffers overlap water management areas. Response: Per conversation with Richard Orth, this comment has been resolved. Final design of water management and landscape buffers will be done at time of SDP. The proposed CU conceptual plan identifies conceptual locations and not final designs or locations of required construction items. Environmental Review, Craig Brown 1. Provide typical cross-sections where different types of development (single-family and multi-family structures, roads, lakes, etc.) abut preserves. Principle structures must be setback a minimum of 25 feet from the boundary of preserves and accessory structures, a minimum of 10 feet from the boundary of preserves. No site alteration, placement of fill, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10 feet of preserves except where swales are provided in accordance with LDC 4.06.05 J. or untreated stormwater is directed away from preserves (LDC 3.05.07 H.3.). Response: As this Conditional Use application will provide the ability for a church/house of worship to be located on the subject property, the identification of construction level sections that are required within construction drawings at the time of site development plan per the LDC aren’t necessary at this time. Currently, the required setbacks from the proposed preserve area have been provided at this zoning level review. 2. Provide preserve calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained. Exclude vegetation located within existing utility, drainage, and access easements 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) from the preserve calculations (LDC3.05.07 B. - D.). This relates to the Master Concept plan the calculation is discussed in the Environmental Data but not on the Master Concept plan please provide. Clarify what is required and what is proposed to be preserved. Response: Acknowledged. Please see the attached Conceptual Site Plan. 3. Please provide a map illustrating the acreage and location of native vegetation existing on the property. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4) Preserve Selection- Please provide a statement about the preservation area in relation to adjoining off site preservation areas. Response: Acknowledged. Please see the attached FLUCCS map/aerial. 4. Please remove the Pre- Application notes from the Environmental Data Appendix A. Response: Acknowledged. 5. Preserve Setback – The Master Concept plan shows a 30- foot easement along the east boundary. Is there any future construction proposed in the easement please clarify. Will drainage flow to the preserve? Is a berm proposed? Please clarify provide a cross-section. The Master Concept plan shows a road adjacent to the preserve please indicate how close the slope will be to the preserve. Please clarify what the distance is for the setback for the road south of the proposed preserve. The setback distance on the plan is unclear (South preserve boundary) a cross-section is needed. Response: Please see the attached right-of-way easement for roads, drainage and utilities. The applicant does not have any plans for construction in the right-of-way at this time. In addition, the drainage system for the proposed development has not been designed at this zoning phase. All drainage systems/structures will be designed in accordance with the permitting agency’s design regulations at the time of site development plan application. Lastly, the infrastructure setback from proposed/required preserve areas has been designed to be consistent or in excess of the 10-foot setback required per the LDC standard. Again, at this zoning level review, all items on the conceptual site plan are conceptual in nature and will be designed to agency required design standards at the time of site development plan application. Zoning Review, Fred Reischl 1. Approval of the CU is contingent upon approval of the GGAMP Amendment. Response: Acknowledged. 2. Owner shall plant a Type C buffer along the side yards of the subject site. Response: The applicant believed this comment was in error. No type C buffers are required. Provision of Type B buffers are provided per the LDC. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 3. Owner shall maintain a 50-foot side yard setback along the side yards of the subject property. Response: Please see the revised conceptual site plan. Front yards in the E-Estates Zoning District are to be 75-feet, while side yards are required to be 30-feet. The site plan has been revised to reflect these requirements. 4. Lights shall be designed to be directed away from the ROW as well as the neighboring properties. Response: Acknowledged. County Attorney Review, Heidi Ashton-Cicko 1. Miscellaneous Corrections: Please enlarge text on master plan as noted in 7-17-17 review, to be provided by planner. Response: Acknowledged. 2. Miscellaneous Corrections: On the master plan, why is the water management area shaded the same as the preserve area? Response: The conceptual site plan previously reviewed by staff did have similar, yet different, hatching in opposite directions to delineate the difference between the two land uses. To make things more legible and reproduction friendly, the preserve hatch has been changed and provided in a key next to the required preserve calculation. The hatching for the water management areas has been removed; as the text is sufficient enough to identify its conceptual location. 3. Miscellaneous Corrections: On the master plan, please add key for each of the different labeled areas on the master plan such as cross-hatch, light shade and dark shade. Response: With the removal of the water management hatch and the provision of the key box for the preserve area, the applicant believes the attached conceptual site plan as presented is much more legible and reproduction friendly. 4. Miscellaneous Corrections: Please follow up with staff to provide the County Attorney’s office with the conditions of approval. Response: Acknowledged. Stipulations: 1. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Transportation Administrator or his designee. Response: Acknowledged. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 239.434.6060, or by email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Fred Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, Inc. P.O. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002 www.estates-civic.org 05 June 2017 Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 RE: GGEACA Declines Request for Community Meeting regarding proposed Project: PL20160002584, Grace Community Church at 3899 1st Ave. SW; PID 36760720005 & PID 36760800006; and companion PL20160002577. Dear Sir/Madam Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA) has received your request to hold a community meeting with regarding the proposed project of Grace Romanian Church. GGEACA understands this project to be applying for a Zoning Change, Growth Management Plan Amendment and a Golden Gate Master Plan Amendment. We appreciate being included in the proposed changes that may affect the Estates community. We have taken the information you have provided and evaluated it with our group. Concerns for traffic and the need for comprehensive planning in the community are the purpose for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy. Amending the Growth Management Plan through amendments like this is counter to the comprehensive planning being undertaken. As well, there are serious concerns with this project's traffic circulation, traffic impacts to the area, and the impacts to the gateway to Golden gate Estates At this time we have come to the conclusion that it is inappropriate to meet with your group concerning this project. The reason we have come to this conclusion is that the Golden Gate Master Plan is currently undergoing a comprehensive update and we feel it is inappropriate for this project to be considered during the update process. Furthermore, it is GGEACA's position that no applications of this type shoul be considered until after completion of the Golden Gate Master Plan Update. Sincerely, Michael R. Ramsey PresidentGolden Gate Estates Area Civic Association http://www.estates-civic.org Michael.R.Ramsey@embarqmail.com c: Board of County Commissioners, Collier Co. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 1 Jessica Harrelson From:Fred Hood Sent:Tuesday, April 10, 2018 12:32 PM To:ScottTrinity; Jessica Harrelson Cc:KhawajaAnthony; SawyerMichael; AshtonHeidi Subject:RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Trinity,    Understood. I know this is an important issue for the neighbors in the area. We have provided them with this reasoning  that Weber has not been looked at in the past for traffic calming. We will speak to this again in our presentation at the  CCPC and BCC hearing in the future, but I also wanted to make sure you all were aware that this issue will likely be  discussed by the local residents at the time of hearing.     If you wouldn’t mind, I’d like to set up a quick call (when you have some time) just to go over some specifics that they  (the neighbors) asked us about.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner     Main: 239.434.6060 fred@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL  Disclaimer: This e-mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited.   From: ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>   Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 10:49 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>; KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>;  SawyerMichael <Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>; AshtonHeidi <Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Manual that is utilized by County staff includes a list of roadways in Collier County not eligible for traffic calming. Weber Boulevard is included on that list. Therefore, Weber Boulevard is not eligible for traffic calming initiatives. https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=75968 Please see Exhibit A of the attached document. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 2 Respectfully, Trinity Scott Transportation Planning Manager Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239.252.5832 Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]   Sent: Monday, April 9, 2018 12:32 PM  To: KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>; ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Thank you, Anthony.    Trinity,    Please let Fred and I know if you would like to set up a call to discuss.      Jessica Harrelson  Senior Planning Technician      ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: KhawajaAnthony <Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>   Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2018 8:00 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>; ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com>  Subject: Re: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) program is managed by our planning section I copied Trinity  Scott on this email to provide you with a response.    Anthony N. Khawaja P.E.  Chief Engineer of Traffic Operations  Growth Management Division  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 3 2885 South Horseshoe Drive<x‐apple‐data‐detectors://0/0>  Naples, FL 34104<x‐apple‐data‐detectors://0/0>  AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net>  Tel: (239) 252‐8260<tel:(239)%20252‐8260>    On Apr 6, 2018, at 3:21 PM, Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> wrote:    Good afternoon Anthony,    Per the email chain below, can you please confirm if there are any traffic calming options for Weber Blvd?    Thank you.    Jessica Harrelson  Senior Planning Technician    <image001.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL        From: AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net]  Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 3:22 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: KlatzkowJeff <JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>>; KhawajaAnthony  <AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>  Subject: FW: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Fred,    See Mike Sawyer’s email below. I recommend that you contact Anthony Khawaja in Traffic Operations.  He can tell you  whether there are any options for traffic calming on Weber.    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  (239) 252‐8400    From: SawyerMichael  Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 3:13 PM  To: AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 4 Cc: ScottTrinity <TrinityScott@colliergov.net<mailto:TrinityScott@colliergov.net>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Heidi,    Weber does not qualify for our Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) because it currently has a rural  cross section instead of the required urban cross‐section.  Additionally there are no sidewalks on Weber which to a  degree is another consideration in the NTMP program.  Also, there are is no budget/funding for traffic calming in Collier  County.    There are road segments‐streets in the estates which have traffic calming devises however my understanding is that  these were special BCC directed efforts or improvements associated with other roadway improvements projects such as  new bridge construction.    In this case it is possible the Planning Commission could recommend a traffic study be performed by our Transportation  Operations staff regarding excessive speed and trip counts and evaluate any potential improvements.  This study and  improvement evaluation could then be considered by the BCC in their review of this petition with fact/study based  information.    Let me know of follow‐up questions and/or concerns.    Thanks,    Michael Sawyer  Transportation Planning, Principal Planner Collier County Capital Projects, Planning, Impact Fees & Program  Management  2685 South Horseshoe Drive  Naples, Florida 34104  (239) 252‐2926        From: AshtonHeidi  Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2017 2:37 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Fred,    I did not speak to Fred Reischl.  Traffic calming on public streets is handled by traffic operations, outside of the PUD.  I  will see if I can find out who you should contact.    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 5 (239) 252‐8400    From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 2:16 PM  To: AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  Cc: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Heidi,    This was an issue that was brought up at the NIM. As I recall, Fred R. and myself fielded questions about what could be  done to calm the traffic along Weber Blvd. Members of the public had stated that they weren’t getting anywhere with  the County to install traffic calming measures to curb the speeding up and down the road that they were seeing and  experiencing.    In an email from Fred R. on October 13th, he mentioned that any calming measures on specific streets may be looked  and at discussed at the BCC level and that he had spoken with you about researching whether these were items that we  could add to the CU application; maybe as zoning conditions of approval to be voted on by the CCPC and the BCC. The  thought was to identify some measures that would make the adjacent neighbors feel better about the proposed non‐ residential use being permitted along the Weber Blvd right‐of‐way. This would obviously need to be voted on, but I think  his intent was to see how you felt about this or any other measure being added to the ordinance or the new proposed  subdistrict.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net]  Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 11:05 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>; ReischlFred  <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>; SawyerMichael  <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>>; MessamMarlene  <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>>  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 6 Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU‐Traffic calming on Weber    Jessica,    I have been copied on some emails but I am not working on this issue.    Who wants to place traffic calming? What type  of traffic calming?  Has anyone approached Transportation Operations to discuss this?    Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Heidi Ashton‐Cicko  Managing Assistant County Attorney  Office of the Collier County Attorney  2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Suite 301  Naples, FL 34104  (239) 252‐8400    From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 10:01 AM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; AshtonHeidi  <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred and Heidi,    Have you had the opportunity to research the possibility of adding traffic calming devices, along Weber, in conjunction  with the Conditional Use?    Thank you.      Jessica Harrelson  Senior Project Coordinator    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:41 AM  To: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>; Fred Hood  <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Not yet… Heidi is out.    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 7 239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    From: Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 7:17 AM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>; Fred Hood  <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    Do you have an update on the research being conducted on the traffic calming?    Thank you.    Jessica Harrelson  Senior Project Coordinator    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:10 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>  Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Mike said his preference would be a single access along Weber.    He said chicanes or other horizontal traffic calming would be OK, but they must be authorized by the BCC. Heidi is  researching to see if this can be done in conjunction with the CU.    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com]  Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:04 PM  To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 8 Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    I spoke with our client earlier. It’s their preference that we retain two access points. Their reasoning lies in the concern  that we would be creating a bottleneck at the ingress/egress point along Golden Gate Boulevard, and that that may  cause even more of a headache for the traffic flow along the Boulevard.    It’s not a hard no, but it is a concern that they and I share with causing a bigger problem to the Boulevard. Does Mike S.  share any of that concern? I’m sure we can come to some agreement that would be a combination of calming and  access that would make the neighbors happy.    I think we should keep the dialogue open about this issue.    Thanks!    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060    fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: Fred Hood  Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:44 PM  To: 'ReischlFred' <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>>  Cc: Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: RE: Grace Romanian    Fred,    We’ll reach out to the client and get their feelings on this. It may not be an issue for them, but let us confirm.    Thanks,    Frederick E. Hood, AICP  Senior Planner    <image002.jpg>    Main: 239.434.6060  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9   fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com>  www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/>    Naples, FL | Sarasota, FL      Disclaimer: This e‐mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s).  Any  unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail or  attachments is prohibited.    From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net]  Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:35 PM  To: Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>>; Jessica Harrelson  <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>>  Subject: Grace Romanian    Hi Fred & Jessica‐  Is one access point (GG Blvd) acceptable to the church?  ‐Fred    Fred Reischl, AICP  Principal Planner  239‐252‐4211  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104  www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net>  <image004.jpg>    ________________________________    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.  9.B.8 Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Published DailyNaples, FL 34110 Affidavit of PublicationState of FloridaCounties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na-ples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.___________________________________________________________Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 1764054 MEETING OCT 11 MEETING OCT 11 Pub DatesSeptember 26, 2017 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis October 04, 2017 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) ACOSTA, ROMO CARLOS ALBERTO DORIS A ACOSTA 13585 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 AJITHKUMAR, ELEZABETH S 510 13TH ST NW NAPLES, FL 34120---5027 AMBROSE, GAYLE L 3815 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W NAPLES, FL 34120---3040 BAZHAW, BRENDA K 3830 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 BORRELLI, JOHN R 201 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 BROUILLARD, JOHN J & ERIN L 13535 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 BUKOWSKI, THADDEUS A 71 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 BUKOWSKI, WANDA VINCENTA BUKOWSKI EST 8380 WHISPER TRACE LN #J105 NAPLES, FL 34114---0000 CLEM, ANDREW & SHAWN 4110 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2635 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 CORDER, MICHAEL A & LAUREN K 3821 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3027 D'AGOSTINI, DOMINICK J MARTHA L D'AGOSTINI 220 PARK AVE SOUTH PLAINFIELD, NJ 07080---0000 DORTA, CHARLES MANUEL JENNIFER DORTA 81 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3037 FERREIRA, OSCAR F & ADELA OSCAR C FERREIRA 6000 COLLINS AVE #527 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140---0000 GARGIULO SR, JEFFREY DEWEY VALERIE BOYD 4055 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 GOLDEN SR, BILLY M & TERESA W 4040 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2600 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH OF NAPLES INC 6017 PINE RIDGE ROAD # 84 NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 HA, CUC 20 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 HALLOCK, SUSAN C 3960 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 HENRY, JEFF 161 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 HICKEY, BRENDAN F 3870 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 J D & R L EDIE JOINT REV TRUST 13555 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 JORDAN, WILLIAM S 4111 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2640 JOSE, ANU JULIA JOY 100 TRAPHILL DR MORRISVILLE, NC 27560---0000 KEEFER, DAVID DEEATRA MARTIN-KEEFER 3898 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3000 KELLY TR, RENATE S RENATE S KELLY REV TRUST UTD 8/06 291 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 KENNEY, JOHN & STEPHANIE 4110 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2641 KLEIN, RICHARD KYLE MARY MARTICA KLEIN 3871 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 LONG, MARIA E 3835 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 LOUISE V TAYLOR REV TRUST 627 GORDONIA RD NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) MARZUCCO, MERISHCA 3791 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3011 MASSARD, RENE J 1460 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 103 NAPLES, FL 34105---3128 MCCANN, JAMES & BEVERLEY 4111 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 MILLER TR, PATRICK K TERRY B MILLER TR UTD 2/2/99 - UTD 2/2/99 210 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3034 MILLER, ROBERT C 40 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---3054 MOUNTAIN, BRIAN J 21 WEBER BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34120---3039 ONDERKO, RONALD A & DEBORAH J 4075 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2611 PAULICH IV, JOHN & DANIELLE 260 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 PEREZ, HECTOR & JOHANNA 3980 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 PIDGEON, STEPHEN 3961 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 ROTH, STANLEY F & RUBY J 190 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3036 SEARS, WILLIAM M SONIA E MOLINA 2 PRESTON ST NORTH BILLERICA, MA 01862---2428 SPILKER, CHRISTIAN & KELLI 4035 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 THOMAS, KEVIN J JENNIFER E HITE 3830 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 TOBIAS, DAVID PO BOX 1236 ISLAMORADA, FL 33036---0000 VAN DE WERKEN, GARY 181 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3035 Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association PO Box 990596 Naples, FL 34116 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 September 25, 2017 Dear Property Owner, Please be advised that the Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. has filed formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, we are holding a Neighborhood Information Meeting to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the request. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. Please contact me at (239) 434-6060 ext. 2961, or via e-mail at fred@davidsonengineering.com, if you have any questions regarding the meeting or the proposed project. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Frederick E. Hood, AICP Fred Reischl, AICP Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Davidson Engineering, Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Growth Management 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Phone: 239.252.4211 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting 4365 Radio Road · Suite 201 · Naples, FL 34104 · P: (239) 434.6060 · F: (239) 434-6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 1990 Main Street · Suite 750 · Sarasota, FL 34236 · P: (941) 309-5180 M E M O R A N D U M October 23, 2017 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Fred Reischl, Principal Planner FROM: Jessica Harrelson, Senior Project Coordinator RE: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU - PL20160002577 NIM Meeting Minutes A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. The following individuals, associated with the review and presentation of the project, were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Sue Faulkner, Collier County • Fred Reischl, Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting by marking a presentation, reading the following: • Introduction: o Good evening. My name is Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering and I am the land development consultant representing the applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, o The applicant is seeking both a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment application to be reviewed by Collier County for the development of a church. o Here with me tonight is Jessica Harrelson, the Project Coordinator with Davidson Engineering, and Adrian Roman, the President & Secretary for the Grace Romanian Church. o Fred Reischl and Sue Faulkner, with the Collier County, are also in attendance tonight. They are the reviewing planners for Collier County Growth Management. o Per the land development code, tonight’s meeting will be recorded. At the end of my presentation I will be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the proposed development. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) • Size and Location: o The subject parcel is approximately 6.25 acres and is located at the Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards. • Purpose of the Applications: o Two separate applications I mentioned earlier have been filed with Collier County and are being reviewed by several County departments at the same time. o First, is the application to amend the County’s Growth Management Plan. The County’s Growth Management Plan describes the vision for the future of the County and helps to regulate where particular land uses are developed, and to ensure that those land uses are consistent with the goals and objectives that the County has in place. As the County grows and continues to develop, the Growth Management Plan gets amended from time to time. o Based on the size of the subject property, we have filed a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, or SSGMPA. The SSGMPA will amend the future land use zoning of the subject property from Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict, to the Conditional Use Subdistrict, per the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. o The Estates Zoning District permits churches as a Conditional Use, therefore a second application, identifying all the required elements for a conditional use request, per the County’s Land Development Code, has been filed. This application will also provide more specific details and conditions of approval for the subject property. Examples of conditions can be handled with the Conditional Use request are specific to setbacks, building height limitations, landscape buffers, etc. o The approval of both applications will allow the proposed church to be consistent with both the Collier County’s Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan’s vision for the future. • Details of the MCP o As you can see from the proposed master plan, the applicant is seeking to locate a sanctuary as the only principal building on the property with an accessory recreation field to the south. o The proposed sanctuary and accessory field have been designed and placed as close to the Collier Boulevard right-of-way to provide the most distance from adjacent homes to the east and south. o The building pad is bordered by parking and a circulation drive. o Additionally, to provide the most amount of screening from the adjacent homes, we have placed the property’s proposed water management and preserve areas along the eastern portion of the property. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) o The remaining property boundaries will be subject to the County’s landscape buffer screening requirements between residential and non-residential land uses. o The means of ingress and egress to the property will be along Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South. o Per coordination with County transportation staff, these are the two access locations that have been requested. o We held an informal NIM about a year ago to gauge the community’s feelings about the proposed project. o At that time, the concept plan was slightly different with one more access point to the south along 1st Avenue SW. o Since then, the applications have been reviewed by Collier County and we were asked to remove that access point. o While the application is still in review, additional changes can be made based on the feedback we receive from you all and from Collier County staff. o Although this layout looks official, this is not an approved plan yet. We still must finish our review with Collier County before moving forward. The following concerns were stated and questions were asked: 1. Concerns with the additional traffic along Weber Blvd, with also making the point that there is a nearby park, two existing churches and elementary school in the area. 2. County not willing to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd. 3. Why can’t a bridge be constructed off CR 951 (Collier Blvd) to the site, instead of accessing the property off the residential streets? - Fred Hood replied that this was something that could be considered, but the direction of County Transportation, regarding access points to the site, was followed. 4. What are the trip counts, hours of operation? How many accessory uses/buildings? - Fred Hood replied the design of the site is for a maximum 300-seat sanctuary to house the applicant’s congregation only, with no plans for additional services or to lease out the church to other congregations. Fred noted that the recreational field could be open for the enjoyment of the public’s use and was something that the church was considering offering the community. He also stated that there were no additional accessory uses being considered and the Conditional Use application was to allow for the church-use only. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 5. Concerns of outside services, such as child care and alcoholic counseling services. - Fred stated the outside services brought up were not being considered, and would require a separate application to be filed. 6. The applicant then spoke about the congregation, and why they chose the Estates location. 7. An attendee then spoke in support of the church. 8. Is a PUD being sought? - Fred replied that no, a PUD was not being considered and explained the Conditional Use. 9. When are the services? - Fred and the applicant replied with the services days/times. 10. What is the traffic count? - Fred replied that the Sunday peak-hour was 183 trips. 11. Discussions of traffic, ingress & egress are held. 12. Building heights? - Fred stated the site would conform to the current development standards & went over height and setbacks. 13. Are dark skies proposed? - Fred replied that was something the church would look into and take into consideration. 14. Is there the possibility for the church to expand on this parcel? - Fred went over the required open space, stormwater, parking areas, etc. for the site. 15. More discussions regarding traffic, ingress & egress continued. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:13p.m. End of memo. 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 12D Tuesday, September 26, 2017 Naples Daily News + NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: September 26, 2017 ND-1764054 Frederick E. Hood, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Fred Reischl, AICP Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.252.4211 Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net ■ Manage your subscription ■ Find a newsstand to buy a paper ■ 3ODFHDQRELWXDU\FODVVLÀHG ad or press release ■ Submit news ■ Submit a letter to the editor ■ Report a problem www.naplesnews.com/customerservice Boats/Motors/Marine 2018 OUTBOARD MODELS 310, 330, CBR, 350 & 430 www.formulaboatssouth.com 909 10th St. S. Ste 102 (239)331-2104 BOAT AND YACHT DETAIL SeaSide Marine (239) 641-7184 SeaSideMarineFlorida.com CAPTAIN’S LICENSE Naples OUPV-6-pak Oct. 9th 877-435-3187 THE MARINA AT FACTORY BAY Marco Island Slip will accommodate 47’ LOA 19’ Wide; Deep Water Marina, Direct Access to Gulf... No Bridge Issue; Concrete Floating Docks; Water / Electric; Modern Clubhouse; Pump Out. Reduced for Quick Sale $55,000. Call Paul: (239)253-4755 Campers & RV’s WANTED ALL MOTOR HOMES AND CAMPERS. Any cond. Cash Paid. (954)789-7530. Recreational Storage OWN YOUR COVERED RV &/ OR BOAT PARKING SPACE! w ww.hideawayrvcondos.com MIKE PRICE 239-340-0665 Germain Properties of Naples STORAGE: MOTORHOMES RVs, boat, auto. Covered available. (239)643-0447 Transportation Sports and Imports 2014 BMW 320 Black; w/ new wheels; sports package; $19,500. (239) 919-4230 or (239) 298-1656 2017 BMW 640 M Sport Pkg 5K miles; White & black convertible top. $81,000. (239) 919-4230; or 298-1656 Sport Utility Vehicles 2017 INFINITI QX80 Rear wheel drive, loaded; only 800 mi. blue ext/tan int, DVD, $70K obo. (Pd $83K) (239)222-9081 Vans DODGE GRAND CARAVAN 2014. Wheelchair Van with 10” lowered flr, ramp & tie downs. (239)494-8267 Vehicles Wanted A A+ TOP DOLLAR PAID! for Classics Cars, Muscle Cars, & Sports Cars. (239)221-3000 ABSOLUTELY ALL AUTOS - Wanted! Dead or Alive Top $ FREE PICK UP 239-265-6140 CARS, TRUCKS, MOTORCYCLES, TRAILERS. TOP PRICE. (239)682-8687 CORVETTES WANTED Top dollar. Cash today. Call 941-809-3660 or 941-923-3421 STEARNS MOTORS MOST TRUSTED BUYER Since 1977. All Vehicles wanted Rod or Jim (239)774-7360 Vehicles Wanted WE BUY CARS, TRUCKS, SUVS, Etc. Anything from $1,000 thru $100,000. Please call Sam (239)595-4021 Announcements Personals PERSON IN GRAY CAR Involved in accident on 9/21/17 at 41 near NCH, please call (239) 774-0081 Legals Legal Notices LEGAL NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the Naples Planning Advisory Board will hold a meeting beginning at 8:30 a.m., Wednesday, October 11, 2017 in City Council Chambers, 735 Eighth Street South, Naples, Florida, 34102. The public hearings to be considered at that meeting are: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 17-CPA1 Consider an Ordinance adopting Comprehensive Plan Amendment Petitioner 17-CPA1 to amend the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with Florida Statute Section 163-3191. Petitioner: City of Naples Location: Citywide Agent: City of Naples Planning Department CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 17-CU4 Consider a Resolution determining Conditional Use Petition 17-CU4, pursuant to Section 58-933(7) of the Code of Ordinances, to allow outdoor storage of automobile inventory with screening as an accessory use to the permitted use of indoor storage of automobile inventory, on property owned by TT of Naples, Inc., a Florida Corporation and located at 2725 and 2745 Corporate Flight Drive. Petitioner: TT of Naples, Inc., a Florida Corporation Location: 2725 and 2745 Corporate Flight Drive Agent: John M. Passidomo, Cheffy Passidomo VARIANCE PETITION 17-V6 Consider a Resolution determining Variance Petition 17-V6, pursuant to Section 56-93(c)(1) of the Code of Ordinances, to allow for a dock and boat lift to extend beyond the maximum shore normal dimension of 25 feet for a combined pier and boat lift in the Aqualane Shores subdivision, for property located at 221 Aqua Court. Petitioner: Jeff Hewitt Location: 221 Aqua Court Agent: Kalvin & Calvin Marine Construction, Inc. CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 17-CU6 Consider a resolution determining Conditional Use Petition 17-CU6, pursuant to Section 58-503 of the Code of Ordinances, to allow the retail sale of secondhand merchandise in the HC-Highway Commercial Zoning District located at 866 Neapolitan Way. Petitioner: Paul Scrogham Legal Notices Location: 866 Neapolitan Way Agent: Natascha Bondar- Estrella VARIANCE PETITION 17-V7 Consider a Resolution determining Variance Petition 17-V7 for approval of a variance from Section 56-124 to allow more than 50% of the gross floor area to a service station to be devoted to sales of cold drinks, package foods, tobacco and similar grocery items where less than 50% is permitted, on property owned by 7-Eleven, Inc., a Texas corporation and located at 697 9th Street North & 860 7th Ave North. Petitioner: 7-Eleven, Inc. a Texas Corporation Location: 697 9th Street North & 860 7th Ave North Agent: John M. Passidomo TEXT AMENDMENT 17-T3 Consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 58 Article III Division 4 governing airspace protection and land use compatibility. Petitioner: Staff Location: Airport Overlay District TEXT AMENDMENT 17-T4 Consider an Ordinance amending Chapter 2, Division 4, Design Review Board and Section 16-82, Section 16-116 and Section 16-321 of the Code of Ordinances regarding standards and a review process for historic preservation. Petitioner: Staff Location: Citywide ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO APPEAR AND BE HEARD. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by this Board with respect to any matter considered at this hearing will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard. Any person with a disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may call the City Clerk’s office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days before the meeting date. James Krall, Chairman NAPLES PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD Pub: September 26, 2017 NO 1765842 Legal Notice Notice of Intent to Designate Executive Director as Senior Management Service Class Designated Position with the Florida Retirement System: Notice is hereby given that the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District intends to designate the management position of Executive Director as Senior Management Service Class Designated Position with the Florida Retirement System, to be effective upon approval of the Florida Division of Retirement. Comments or questions should be addressed to Chief Financial Officer Becky Bronsdon at (239)-552-1322. Pub: September 26 and October 3, 2017 NO1763491 There’s no place like...here Real Estate Miscellaneous Notice TARPON BAY REALTY NOTICE OF INTENT TO REGISTER FICTITIOUS NAME NOTICE OF ACTION Notice Under Fictitious Name Law Pursuant to Section 865.09, Florida Statutes NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigned, TARPON BAY DEVELOPMENT, LLC desiring to engage in business under the fictitious name of TARPON BAY REALTY located at PO Box 1402, in the County of Lee, in Bonita Springs, Florida 34133, intends to register the said name with the Division of Corporations of the Florida Department of State, Tallahassee, Florida. Dated at Naples, Florida, September 18, 2017. TARPON BAY REALTY Pub: September 26, 2017 No. 1763111 Public Notices Notice of Naples Planning Advisory Board Meeting The meeting listed below will be held in the City Council Chamber, 735 Eighth Street South, Naples, Florida. Regular Meeting - Wed., 10/11/17 - 8:30 a.m. Agenda and meeting packet are available from: City Clerk’s Office, City Hall, 239-213-1015 City website, http//www. naplesgov.com NOTICE Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting (or hearing) will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard. Any person with a Public Notices disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may call the City Clerk’s Office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days before the meeting date. Publish: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 NO 1765855 Tax Deed Application NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that LOURDES M OR CHARLES J ALAIMO holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 10-5586 Property ID#: 40690880108 Description: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 77, TR 136 LESS THE E 200FT OF THE N 200FT AND LESS THE S 480FT OF THE E 205FT., said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE COMPANY Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 8th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1732011 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that FNA FLORIDA LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-4688 Property ID#: 68941840002 Description: QUAIL ROOST UNIT II A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 246, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: RICHARD E GILL EST Tax Deed Application Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 21st day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1732049 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-1 LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-5209 Property ID#: 81320760007 Description: WELLS BLK B LOTS 1-3, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: BRUNO CAMPOS DANNY CAMPOS Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 14th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1731998 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR TAX DEED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-1 LLC holder of the following tax certificate has filed said certificate for tax deed to be issued thereon. Certificate number, year of issuance, description of property, and name in which assessed is as follows: Certificate Number: 15-171 Property ID#: 00117400001 Description: 3 47 29 S 118.5FT Tax Deed Application OF N 148.5FT OF E 135FT OF W 330FT OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4 .37 AC OR 764 PG 658, said property being in Collier County, Florida. Name in which assessed: BARBARA LEE-THOMAS Unless the property described in said certificate shall be redeemed according to law, the property will be sold to the highest bidder at the Collier County Administration Building 7th Floor, Room 711 at 1:00 P.M. on Monday, October 16, 2017. Dated this 8th day of August, 2017. DWIGHT E. BROCK CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT BY:/s/Donna Rutherford Deputy Clerk Donna Rutherford (Seal) September 5, 12, 19, 26, 2017 No.1731982 There’s no place like here Find yours at Real Estate 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8Packet Pg. 856Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) COLLIER BOULEVARDGOLDEN GATE BLVD LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY: 6.25 ACRES DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE: 239-434-6060 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA EXHIBIT ): AERIAL EXHIBIT . SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2017) 0 600 1,200 FEET Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT E (AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd /PUF "FSJBMPCUBJOFEGSPN$PMMJFS$PVOUZ1SPQFSUZ"QQSBJTFS 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) TELTELS89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D)S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C) N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°31'27"W 330.00(S)S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P)S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P) 275.00'(S) N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALKCURB INLETCURB INLETCURB INLETBUS STOPSIGNTELEPHONEPEDESTALTELEPHONEPEDESTALBROKEN ASPHALT AND GRAVELMITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.MITERED ENDSECTION WITH18" R.C.P.CONCRETEAPRONASPHALTENTRANCE300.00'(C)300.02'(S)FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 6279FOUND PK NAILAND DISC STAMPEDDCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 6569NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16(O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820)25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE,UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)30'X30' DRAINAGE,UTILITY ANDMAINTENANCEEASEMENT(O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)1212330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)30' PERIMETER EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239)(O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631)10PLATTED 30' WIDEROAD EASEMENTN00°19'10"E 330.00'(P) N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S) 75.00'(P) 75.00'(S)WOOD POWERPOLE30.00'(C)29.98'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C)S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S)1ST AVE SWRIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTICDRAINFIELD(RESERVED)DEVELOPMENTAREA OUTLINEDFOR SANCTUARY/MULTI-PURPOSEBUILDING300 SEATS MAXACCESSORYRECREATION AREAGOLDEN GATE BLVD.RIGHT-OF-WAYWEBER BLVD. S. RIGHT-OF-WAY 50' FRONT YARDSETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARD SETBACK25' SIDE YARDSETBACK50.0' FRONTYARD SETBACK50' FRONTYARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER15.0' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE DBUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFER15' TYPE B BUFFEREXISTING RIGHT TURN LANEPRESERVE AREA(±0.77 ACRE)WATER MANAGEMENT(RETAIN NATIVETREES AS FEASIBLE)CANALCOLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) 25' PRESERVE STRUCTURE SETBACK 25' PRESERVESTRUCTURE SETBACK14365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084 Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496 GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH 6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84 NAPLES, FL 34119 GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 1DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NO.: A.E.R. A.E.R. 16-0106SHEET NO:OFSHEET TITLE: PROJECT: DATE:REV.DESCRIPTION REVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONCONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN 9.B.8Packet Pg. 858Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 9.B.8 Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 4.5.20189.B.8Packet Pg. 860Attachment: 5-3-18 CCPC Backup (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) AGENDA ITEM 9-B This item was continued from the May 3, 2018, CCPC meeting. You have received the complete packet at the May 3rd meeting. Attached are additional materials. PL20160002577: A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, providing for the establishment of a conditional use to allow a church within an Estates Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for property located on the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion to PL20160002584) [Coordinator: James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner] 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Page 1 of 2 ver.5.7.18 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: MAY 17, 2018 SUBJECT: PETITION CU-PL20160002577, 3899 1st AVE SW COMPANION ITEM: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 PROPERTY OWNER/ AGENTS: Applicant Owner: Agent: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Inc. Frederick E Hood, AICP 6017 Pine Ridge Road #84 Davidson Engineering, Inc. Naples, FL 34119 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant seeks approval for a Conditional Use to permit construction of a new church for the subject parcel, which is zoned E, Estates. A church is listed as an allowable conditional use in the Estates zoning district. There is a companion small scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendment with the petition. SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS: The application was continued to the May 17, 2018 CCPC hearing from the May 3, 2018 CCPC hearings. At the May 3, 2018 hearing, the CCPC requested additional information and clarification regarding proposed conditions of approval related to the project. The clarification items were the specific zoned height and actual height for the steeple feature, maximum square footage area for all structures, list of prohibited accessory uses, maximum square footage for the Pastor’s residence, outdoor lighting as “dark sky” compliant, clustered palms, and the number of parking spaces, and changing the conceptual site plan to address (right turn only on Weber). AGENDA ITEM 9-B 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Page 2 of 2 ver.5.7.18 The revised Conceptual Site Plan and response to the clarification of the proposed conditions of approval requested at the May 3, 2018 hearing by the CCPC was not provided to the Zoning Division until May 8, 2018, which did not provide sufficient time for the planning group to review the revised documents and provide a recommendation to the CCPC prior to the distribution of the agenda packets. The agent will be requested to present the revised conceptual site plan and provide responses to the CCPC questions at the May 17, 2018 meeting. The back-up CCPC packet materials contains the following information requested by the CCPC: 1.Revised Conceptual Site Plan 2.Revised Conditions of Approval (highlighted and clean) 3.Revised Traffic Impact Statement, Trebilcock PREPARED BY: C. James Sabo, AICP Principal Planner, Zoning Division Growth Management Department 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace PROPOSED ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Church Operating Hours: a. Church services shall be limited to Saturdays and Sundays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. b. Church related meetings/gatherings (i.e. weeknight Bible Study) shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 6 p.m. and 9 p.m., for no more than 200 parishioners. 2. The Church is limited to a floor area of 24,000 square feet (including no more than 300 seats). 3. The Church shall provide a maximum of 140 parking spaces. 4. The following accessory uses are prohibited: - Daycare - Food services i.e. Soup Kitchens, catering services open to the public or eating places - Educational Services - Outreach programs, i.e. alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation 5. The following accessory uses are permitted (in conjunction with the Church): Outdoor - Multi-purpose / play area - Gazebos - Covered pavilions Indoor - Pastor’s residence (shall be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet) - Storage Sheds (shall be limited to a maximum of 1,800 square feet) 6. Signage shall be provided for the Church in accordance with the LDC. The location of signs(s) shall be within 350-feet from the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards and will be placed along those rights-of-way. Distance shall be measured from the property lines and or right-of-way or access easement boundaries. 7. Leasing of the church facility, or property, to outside groups is prohibited. 8. Special events (operated by the Church) are limited to twelve (12) events per calendar year. 9. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited. 10. Lighting of the outdoor Recreation Area shall be prohibited. Pastor's residence, shall be lit consistent with typical residential lighting permitted for residential uses within the estates. 11. Site lighting shall adhere to the applicable Collier County Land Development Code Criteria. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace 12. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures (BUG rating of U-0--BUG = Backlight-Uplight-Glare). 13. Site lighting fixtures will have a maximum height of 15-feet, within 50-feet of residential property lines, the Weber Boulevard and 1st Avenue SW right-of-ways. A maximum height of 20-feet of height for lighting fixtures applies to the remainder of the project. 14. Project site light fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines, as applicable. 15. Any Church steeple lighting shall be prohibited. 16. A photometric light level no greater than 0.2 foot-candles will be permitted along residential property lines. 17. Exterior building lighting will allow decorative fixtures in the main entry area (porte cochere, main doorway area) not needing to meet strict Dark Sky criteria. Any building wall pack lighting will be directed downward with shielding. 18. An enhanced 15-foot Type B buffer shall be provided along the abutting residential property’s shared boundaries with the Church property. The enhanced buffer shall provide the following plant materials, in lieu of a wall, and shall reach 80% opacity within one year of installation: • Trees o Installed with 25 gallon, 10-feet tall, 1.75-inch caliper, and placed at 25-feet on center at time of planting. • Hedge o Installed at 5-foot tall, placed 4-foot on center at time of planting. • Areca or Paurotis Palms (clustered) o Installed at 12-foot tall, 12-foot on center, and placed behind the required Type B Landscape Buffer trees at time of planting. 19. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 50-feet for roof type, appurtenances and screening of roof mounted equipment. 20. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 60-feet for a church steeple. 21. Dumpster enclosure shall be placed adjacent to the western edge of the propose Preserve Area. The Church may coordinate with waste management services and Collier County review staff to determine if roll out receptacles may be used in lieu of a dumpster enclosure as required by LDC section 5.03.04. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace 22. This conditional use shall be limited to a maximum of (12) twelve PM peak hour (weekday) two-way trips and a maximum of 240 peak hour (Saturday & Sunday) two-way trips. 23. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace PROPOSED ZONING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Church Operating Hours: a. Church services shall be limited to Saturdays and Sundays between the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. b. Church related meetings/gatherings (i.e. weeknight Bible Study) shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 6 p.m. and 9 p.m., for no more than 200 parishioners. 2. The Church is limited to a floor area of 24,000 square feet (including no more than 300 seats). 3. The Church shall provide a maximum of 140 parking spaces. 4. The following accessory uses are prohibited: - Daycare - Food services i.e. Soup Kitchens, catering services open to the public or eating places - Educational Services - Outreach programs, i.e. alcohol and substance abuse rehabilitation 5. The following accessory uses are permitted (in conjunction with the Church): Outdoor - Multi-purpose / play area - Gazebos - Covered pavilions Indoor - Pastor’s residence (shall be limited to a maximum of 3,500 square feet) - Storage Sheds (shall be limited to a maximum of 1,800 square feet) 6. Signage shall be provided for the Church in accordance with the LDC. The location of signs(s) shall be within 350-feet from the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards and will be placed along those rights-of-way. Distance shall be measured from the property lines and or right-of-way or access easement boundaries. 7. Leasing of the church facility, or property, to outside groups is prohibited. 8. Special events (operated by the Church) are limited to twelve (12) events per calendar year. 9. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited. 10. Lighting of the outdoor Recreation Area shall be prohibited. Pastor’s residence shall be lit consistent with typical residential lighting permitted for residential uses within the estates. 11. Site lighting shall adhere to the applicable Collier County Land Development Code Criteria. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace 12. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures (BUG rating of U-0--BUG = Backlight-Uplight-Glare). 13. Site lighting fixtures will have a maximum height of 15-feet, within 50-feet of residential property lines, the Weber Boulevard and 1st Avenue SW right-of-ways. A maximum height of 20-feet of height for lighting fixtures applies to the remainder of the project. 14. Project site light fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines, as applicable. 15. Any Church steeple lighting shall be prohibited. 16. A photometric light level no greater than 0.2 foot-candles will be permitted along residential property lines. 17. Exterior building lighting will allow decorative fixtures in the main entry area (porte cochere, main doorway area) not needing to meet strict Dark Sky criteria. Any building wall pack lighting will be directed downward with shielding. 18. An enhanced 15-foot Type B buffer shall be provided along the abutting residential property’s shared boundaries with the Church property. The enhanced buffer shall provide the following plant materials, in lieu of a wall, and shall reach 80% opacity within one year of installation: • Trees o Installed with 25 gallon, 10-feet tall, 1.75-inch caliper, and placed at 25-feet on center at time of planting. • Hedge o Installed at 5-foot tall, placed 4-foot on center at time of planting. • Areca or Paurotis Palms (clustered) o Installed at 12-foot tall, 12-foot on center, and placed behind the required Type B Landscape Buffer trees at time of planting. 19. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 50-feet for roof type, appurtenances and screening of roof mounted equipment. 20. Actual building height shall be limited to a maximum of 60-feet for a church steeple. 21. Dumpster enclosure shall be placed adjacent to the western edge of the propose Preserve Area. The Church may coordinate with waste management services and Collier County review staff to determine if roll out receptacles may be used in lieu of a dumpster enclosure as required by LDC section 5.03.04. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace 22. This conditional use shall be limited to a maximum of (12) twelve PM peak hour (weekday) two-way trips and a maximum of 240 peak hour (Saturday & Sunday) two-way trips. 23. For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by Collier County Division Director, Transportation Engineering or his designee. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 05/07/2018 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31st Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee – $500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee – Small Scale Study – No Fee 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 7 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 11 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 12 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 12 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan .......................................................................................... 13 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 15 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition ........................................................ 22 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 25 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 4 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection. The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1 – Project Location Map As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for 24,000 square feet (sf) multi-purpose church related building, accessory recreation area and accessory structures (up to 3,500 sf pastor’s residence and up to 1,800 sf storage sheds). For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2023 planning horizon. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5 The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed trip generation. Consistent with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provisions for church uses, the accessory recreation area and structures are considered passive incidental to the church land use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. In addition, the traffic associated with the existing residence on site is part of the background traffic. As such, no traffic impacts are expected due to the proposed pastor’s residence use. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Proposed Conditions Church 560 24,000 sf (300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary; sf – square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided via one existing right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard. Trip Generation The project’s site trip generation is based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition (most current version). The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project average weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions) – Average Weekday Note(s): (1) Sanctuary; sf – square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 – Sunday peak hour of generator, the GFA variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the operational analysis purposes. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 – Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 24,000 sf(1) 167 5 3 8 5 7 12 Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size (square feet) Enter Exit Total Church 24,000 115 125 240 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volume (1) Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 35% SB – 2 NB – 2 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 35% NB – 2 SB – 3 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 30% WB – 1 EB – 2 Note(s): (1) Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 8 Fig. 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2017), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2017 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2023. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2017 - 2023) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2017 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 1,220 2.00% 1.1262 1,374 86 1,306 Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 1,904 2.00% 1.1262 2,145 42 1,946 Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 1,600 2.00% 1.1262 1,802 0 1,600 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2017 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)6. 2023 Projected Volume = 2017 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2023 Projected Volume = 2017 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2023 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10 Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2017 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 2017 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location Exist Roadway Min. Standard LOS Exist Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Future Project Build out Roadway Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 6D E 3,000 (SB) 6D Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 6D D 3,000 (NB) 6D Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 4D D 2,300 (EB) 4D Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2023 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2017 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project ** % Vol Capacity Impact By Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to Golden Gate Blvd. 3,000 (SB) SB – 2 1,376 0.07% No No Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd. to Pine Ridge Rd. 3,000 (NB) NB – 2 2,147 0.07% No No Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 2,300 (EB) EB – 2 1,804 0.09% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report; **2023 Projected Volume= 2023 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided via one existing right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12 for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access – Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 115 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build-out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project access on Golden Gate Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 14 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 884 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 16 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 885 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 17 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 886 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 18 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 19 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 20 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 21 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 23 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 24 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 26 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church Grace Romanian Church – Conditional Use Zoning – TIS – May 2018 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 27 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church TEL TEL S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P) S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)N00°19'10"E 680.00'(P)N00°28'33"W 680.00'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(D) S89°32'25"W 330.25'(S)N00°19'10"E 330.00'(C)N00°28'48"W 330.09'(S)S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C) S89°31'27"W 330.00(S) S89°40'50"E 660.00'(P) S89°31'27"W 660.20'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)N00°19'10"E 350.00'(P)N00°28'48"W 350.00'(S)6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK 6'± CONCRETE SIDEWALK CURB INLET CURB INLET CURB INLET BUS STOP SIGN TELEPHONE PEDESTAL TELEPHONE PEDESTAL BROKEN ASPHALTAND GRAVELMITERED END SECTION WITH 18" R.C.P. MITERED END SECTION WITH 18" R.C.P. CONCRETE APRON ASPHALT ENTRANCE 300.00'(C) 300.02'(S) FOUND PK NAIL AND DISC STAMPED DCH PSM 6279 FOUND PK NAIL AND DISC STAMPED DCH PSM 3279FOUND 5/8" IRON PIN AND CAP STAMPED LB 6569 NORTH 75' OF TRACT 16 (O.R. BOOK 2559, PAGE 2820) 25' SIDEWALK, DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT (O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820) 30'X30' DRAINAGE, UTILITY AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT (O.R. 2559, PAGE 2820)330.00'(P)330.00'(S)275.00'(P)275.00'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)PLATTED 30' WIDE ROAD EASEMENT N00°19'10"E 330.00'(P)N00°28'48"W 330.19'(S)75.00'(P)75.00'(S)WOOD POWER POLE 30.00'(C) 29.98'(S) S89°40'50"E 330.00'(C) S89°32'25"W 330.00'(S) 30' PERIMETER EASEMENT (O.R. BOOK 104, PAGE 239) (O.R. BOOK 1059, PAGE 631) 1ST AVE SW RIGHT-OF-WAYWATER MANAGEMENT AREA0.30 ACRE SEPTIC DRAINFIELD (RESERVED) DEVELOPMENT AREA OUTLINED FOR SANCTUARY/ MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING (24,000 SF & 300 SEATS MAX.) OUTDOOR ACCESSORY RECREATION AREA AND OR PASTOR'S RESIDENCE (NOT TO EXCEED 3,500 SF) GOLDEN GATE BLVD. W RIGHT-OF-WAY WEBER BLVD. S.RIGHT-OF-WAY75' FRONT YARDSETBACK75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 30' SIDE YARD SETBACK 30' SIDE YARD SETBACK 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 75' FRONT YARD SETBACK 10' TYPE D BUFFER 15.0' TYPE D BUFFER 15' TYPE D BUFFER 15' TYPE B BUFFER 15' TYPE B BUFFER 10' TYPE D LBUFFER EXISTING RIGHT TURN LANE PRESERVE AREA (±0.77 ACRE) WATER MANAGEMENT (RETAIN NATIVE TREES AS FEASIBLE)COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY(PLAT BOOK 4, PAGE 79)COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAYESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT)ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES(DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL)25' PRESERVESTRUCTURE SETBACK10' PRESERVESITE ALTERATIONSETBACK1 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060 F: 239.434.6084Company Cert. of Authorization No. 00009496GRACE ROMANIANCHURCH6017 PINE RIDGE RD., #84NAPLES, FL 34119GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH1DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NO.:A.E.R.A.E.R.16-0106SHEET NO: OF SHEET TITLE:PROJECT:DATE:REV.DESCRIPTIONREVISIONSCLIENT:PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION CONCEPTUAL SITE PLANN REQUIRED PRESERVE NOTES 5.15 ACRES (NATIVE VEGETATION ON-SITE) X 15% = 0.77 ACRES 1. EXISTING IMPACTED AREAS WITHIN THE PRESERVE BOUNDARY SHALL BE RE-VEGETATED PER LDC SEC. 3.05.07 AT THE TIME OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL. 2. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS 4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E.1. 3. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07. 9.B.9 Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: 5-17-2018 CCPC meeting packet - PL20160002577-Conditional Use-Grace Romanian Church (6578 : CU-PL20160002577 Grace Romanian Church) 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.C Item Summary: PL20180000038: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element And Future Land Use Map And Map Series by adding 3.40 acres to the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Activity Center #2 and changing the designa tion of the property from Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict to Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Activity Center #2; and furthermore, recommending transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. The subject property consisting of ±3.4 acres is located on the west side of US 41, approximately 2,200 feet north of 111th Avenue in Section 21, Township 4 8 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is companion to PL20180000037) [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 08/31/2018 8:21 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 08/31/2018 8:21 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Marcia R Kendall Review Item Skipped 08/31/2018 8:12 AM Zoning Marcia R Kendall Review Item Skipped 08/31/2018 8:12 AM Growth Management Department David Weeks Additional Reviewer Completed 08/31/2018 10:03 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/04/2018 10:04 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/05/2018 2:05 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 09/06/2018 10:09 PM Zoning Michael Bosi Review Item Completed 09/07/2018 9:48 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 9.C Packet Pg. 898 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 (ADOPTION HEARINGS) CCPC: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 BCC: NOVEMBER 13, 2018 9.C.1 Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: GMPA CCPC COVER (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC September 20, 2018 Small Scale GMP Amendment [Adoption Hearing] PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 - (Companion PL20180000037) Activity Center #2 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report: PL20180000038/CP-2018-2 2) TAB: Ordinance DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text (and/or maps): PL20180000038/CP-2018-2 3) TAB: Project PL20180000038/ DOCUMENT: Petition/Application Petition CP-2018-2 4) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Legal Ad 9.C.2 Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: CCPC GMPA Table of Contents (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 1 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 SUBJECT: PETITION PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [ADOPTION HEARING] (Companion to Old Collier Golf Club PUD Amendment PL20180000037) ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) APPLICANT/OWNER/AGENT Applicant Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. & Owner: 2550 Goodlette Road North, #100 Naples, FL 34103 Agent: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Attorney: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Hole Montes, Inc. Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 950 Encore Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North Naples, Florida 34110 Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION The subject property comprises approximately 3.4 acres and is located on the west side of Tamiami Trail (US 41), approximately one-quarter mile north of 111th Avenue/Immokalee Road, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. REQUESTED ACTION The applicant seeks to expand Mixed Use Activity Center #2, Tamiami Trail (US 41) ‒ Immokalee Road (CR 846) in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), affecting fewer than ten (10) acres, by amending the: 1) FLUM inset map for Mixed Use Activity Center #2, Tamiami Trail (US 41) ‒ Immokalee Road (CR 846), and 2) Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Index Map. 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 2 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The petition is proposed to expand the Activity Center and encompass an existing commercial PUD tract where commercial development is presently allowed. The companion PUD amendment petition [PL20180000037] will amend this ±3.4 acre Commercial Tract “C” to: revise PUD provisions to allow a retail (new) automotive vehicle dealer as an additional commercial use, allow an additional 100 hotel rooms for a total of 200 rooms, along with a conversion ratio for deriving these hotel rooms from the 50,000 commercial sq. ft. already subject to a maximum trip generation. This GMP amendment, however, would result in the site being eligible to be rezoned to allow the full array of commercial uses – those in the C-1 through C-5 zoning districts. STAFF ANALYSIS FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, ZONING AND LAND USE: Existing Conditions: Subject Property: The subject property, which comprises approximately 3.4 acres, is currently designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, which generally provides for higher [land use] densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. It is the ±3.4-acre (Commercial Tract “C”) portion of the Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and vacant ‒ mostly cleared and partially paved. This project also retains the hotel use allowed from a previous [FLUE Policy 5.1] determination and insubstantial change to the PUD (PDI); adds more room capacity to the hotel [not previously allowed] from a 100-room maximum to 200-room maximum [using a commercial space conversion factor]; and, updates the PUD’s commercial uses to present LDC standards. The subject, Commercial Tract “C”, property is improved only with paved, surface parking area; the developed portion of PUD contains golf course with clubhouse & maintenance facility. Surrounding Lands: North: The Future Land Use Map designates land immediately north of the subject property as Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. It is zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD and is developed with the Old Collier Golf Club; the next property north, at Walkerbilt Road, is zoned C- 4, Commercial General zoning district, and is developed commercially. East: The Future Land Use Map designates land located east of the subject property, across US 41, as Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict; this land is within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #2. This area is zoned Collier Tract 22 [mixed use] Planned Unit Development (PUD/DRI) and is developed with retail automobile dealerships, and the Riverchase Shopping Center. The Future Land Use Map designates lands lying further east and northeast, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. This area is part of the area zoned Collier Tract 22 PUD/DRI and is developed as Collier’s Reserve, a residential/golf course community. South: The Future Land Use Map designates land lying south of the subject property as Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict; within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #2. This area is zoned Plaza 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and is developed with a large retail business (Walmart). West: The Future Land Use Map designates land immediately west of the subject property as Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. This area is zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD and is developed with the Old Collier Golf Club. 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 3 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 In summary, the existing and planned land uses, and current zoning, in the area immediately surrounding the subject property are primarily the commercial uses in Activity Center #2 north of 111 th Avenue and Immokalee Road, and, the Old Collier Golf Club. Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Criteria in Florida Statutes, Chapter 163.3187, to Qualify as a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan (GMP) Amendment: The process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment requires (in part) the following statutory standards be met, [followed by staff analysis in bracketed text]. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. [The amendment pertains to a ±3.4-acre property.] (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. [Thus far, two small scale GMP amendments have been adopted in calendar year 2018 for a total of ±11.15 acres (5.35 + 5.8). A third small scale petition, comprising 6.33 acres, is scheduled to be heard by the BCC prior to this subject petition.] (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government’s comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. [This amendment involves only site-specific Future Land Use Map changes.] (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). [The subject property is not within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. [The amendment preserves the internal consistency between and among GMP elements.] Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 4 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area’s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2.: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 5 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. BACKGROUND, CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS This section typically addresses the amount of [commercial] land needed to accommodate anticipated growth based on projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. This is accomplished through the analysis of the subject property and the surrounding area that includes inventorying the supply of existing commercially-developed and potential commercially-developable land, determining population growth, estimating the amount of commercial development that population will demand, and determining whether a sufficient amount of commercial land, a shortage, or an excess amount, is being allocated to accommodate growth. This small-scale amendment returns the 3.4-acre parcel from being outside the Activity Center, to being inside its boundaries – as it had been previous to the County’s modification of Activity Center boundaries in 2000. Based upon a prior Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict provision, known as “the 75% rule,” when the subject PUD was rezoned in 1999 this 3.4-acre commercial tract was deemed consistent with the FLUE. That provision provided that if 75% or more of a project site was within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center, then the entire site was considered to be within the Activity Center. Staff has determined the data and analysis required in the above statutory provisions are not necessary given the relevant FLUM designation and zoning history of this site, and the findings that: uses allowed by this GMP amendment could be deemed compatible with the surrounding area, there are no infrastructure impact concerns, and there are no natural or cultural resources concerns. Appropriateness of the Site and the Change: Mixed Use Activity Centers in Collier County provide commercial development opportunities at locations that are spatially arranged to encourage and support a healthy business environment, and to discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development. The FLUE directs new commercial development primarily into Activity Centers and gives preference to commercial expansion adjacent to both Activity Centers and other commercial designations. The subject property is located adjacent to an Activity Center and is located near other commercially- zoned land. This amendment does not introduce new commercial development, uses, or activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned. 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 6 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Environmental Impacts: The subject property is ±3.4 acres and vacant ‒ mostly cleared and partially paved. It is not located in a County Wellfield Protection Area. Collier County Development Review Division staff reviewed the Report and provide the following [bracketed] evaluation: [No new text is proposed related to environmental sections of the GMP/CCME. There are no modifications to the existing Preserve areas with submitted (PL2018000037) PUDZ. There is an existing Eagles nest (active eagles CO 36/36A) in the preserve area north of the existing golf course.] [Craig Brown, Environmental Specialist, Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division] Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A. submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit V.E.3), dated March 21, 2018. Collier County Transportation Planning staff reviewed the Analysis and provide the following [bracketed] evaluation: [Capacity is available on County roadways to accommodate (traffic generated by) this project; therefore, the proposal is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. The companion PUD document for this commercial project contains a developer commitment limiting the maximum number of p.m. peak hour two-way trips under any development scenario.] [Michael Sawyer, Project Manager Transportation Planning Section] Public Facilities Impacts: The petitioner submitted a Public Facilities Report, dated May 21, 2018 (Exhibit V.E.1). Staff reviewed the Report and provide the following [bracketed] remarks: • Potable Water and Wastewater Treatment Systems: The subject property lies within the Potable Water Service Area and the North Wastewater Service Area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The subject property lies within a localized wastewater service area identified in the 2018 AUIR with “wastewater collection or transmission system constraints”, which are specifically mapped and addressed therein. [Generally, planned improvements to the Naples Park Constraint area involve splitting the area served between north and south of 111th Avenue N., then constructing a new master pump station and associated infrastructure to serve the (sub)area south of 111th Avenue N. The project will allow greater wastewater flows from the currently- constrained south and, allow a return to normal flows from the north using the existing master pump.] System capacity is confirmed at the time of development permit (SDP or PPL) review, and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval.] [Eric Fey, P.E., Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Department] 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 7 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 • Solid Waste Collection & Disposal: The solid waste disposal service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2017 AUIR notes that the County projects more than 50 years of remaining landfill capacity [as does the pending 2018 AUIR]. • Stormwater Management System: The Facilities Report indicates stormwater retention and detention will comply with the SFWMD requirements, and, State and County standards for off- site [stormwater] discharges will be met. • Park and Recreational Facilities: Parks and recreational facilities are not impacted by the proposed amendment or associated commercial development. • Schools: School facilities are not impacted by the proposed amendment or associated commercial development. • Emergency Medical (EMS) and Fire Rescue Services: The subject property is located within the North Collier Fire District, who’s collocated EMS/fire station is located at 1885 Veterans Park Drive, approximately 1.8 miles to the southeast. No adverse impacts to these safety services result from the proposed commercial development. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05.F. was [duly advertised, noticed and] held, jointly for this small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment petition and companion rezone petition, on July 26, 2018, 5:30 p.m. at the Doubletree Suites hotel meeting facilities, located at 12200 Tamiami Trail North, Naples. Three people other than the applicant team and County staff attended ‒ and heard the following information: The agent (Robert Mulhere) representing this applicant, described the proposed changes to the group, including how the two companion requests (GMPA/PUDZ) cover the automotive vehicle dealership as an additional commercial use, the additional 100 hotel rooms for a total of 200 rooms, along with the conversion for deriving these hotel rooms from the commercial square footage already allowed by the PUD. While those people present showed interest, no one expressed opposition. The information meeting was ended at approximately 5:40 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The property is presently zoned commercial PUD and undeveloped. • There are no modifications to the existing Preserve areas from expanding the Activity Center. • The infrastructure needed to serve the proposed development can be provided without related levels of service concerns. • This amendment does not introduce new commercial development, uses, or activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned. The subject property is located adjacent to an Activity Center and near other commercially-zoned land – and is generally supported by the FLUE. • The proposed amendment will allow rezoning for uses in the C-1 through C-5 commercial zoning districts and those uses may be deemed compatible - based upon a high level review as opposed 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 8 ‒ CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 to the site-specific review conducted by Zoning Services staff for a rezone petition - with the existing and planned commercial uses in Activity Center #2 north of 111th Avenue and Immokalee Road, and, the Old Collier Golf Club, in the area immediately surrounding the subject property. • Based on the explanation of how this small-scale amendment returns the 3.4-acre parcel from being outside the Activity Center, to being inside its boundaries – as it had been previously – support for this amendment has been demonstrated. • A companion rezone petition has been submitted concurrent with this GMPA petition. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS This Staff Report was reviewed by the Office of the County Attorney on August 31, 2018. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and map series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for adoption and transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. PETITION No.: CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Staff Report for the September 20, 2018, CCPC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2018, BCC meeting. G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2018 Cycles & Smalls\2018 Small Scale petitions\CPSS-18-2 AC2 Expnsn\CCPC\CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2.docx 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.3 Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.4 Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance - Activity Center #2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.4 Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance - Activity Center #2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.4 Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance - Activity Center #2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.4 Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: Adoption Ordinance - Activity Center #2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.4Packet Pg. 914Attachment: Adoption Ordinance - Activity Center #2 (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center 9.C.5Packet Pg. 915Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 916Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 917Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 918Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 919Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 920Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 921Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 922Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 923Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 924Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 925Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 926Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 927Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 928Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 929Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 930Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 931Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 932Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 933Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 934Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 935Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 936Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 937Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 938Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 939Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 940Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 941Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 942Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 943Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 944Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 945Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 946Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 947Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 948Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 949Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 950Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 951Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 952Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 953Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 954Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 955Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 956Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 957Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 958Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 959 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 960 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 961 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 962 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 963 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 964 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 965 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5Packet Pg. 966Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 967Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 968Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 969Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 970Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 971Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 972Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 973Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 974Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 975Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 976Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 977Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 978 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5Packet Pg. 979Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 980Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 981Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 982Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 983Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 984Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 985Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 986Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 987Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 988Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 989Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 990Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 991Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 992Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 993Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 994Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 995Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 996Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 997Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 998Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5Packet Pg. 999Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 1000 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity 9.C.5 Packet Pg. 1001 Attachment: Activity Center #2 GMPA Adoption Petition (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) 9.C.6 Packet Pg. 1002 Attachment: GMPA_0038_NDN_CCPC_Ad as posted (6587 : PL20180000038/CPSS0291802 Activity Center #2) AGENDA#9C COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT PROJECT LOCATION i PL2018000003 8/CPSS-2018-2 (ADOPTION HEARINGS) Clerks Office CCPC: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 BCC: NOVEMBER 13, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC September 20, 2018 Small Scale GMP Amendment [Adoption Hearing] PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 - (Companion PL20180000037) Activity Center #2 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report: PL20180000038/CP-2018-2 2) TAB: Ordinance DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit "A"text(and/or maps): PL20180000038/CP-2018-2 3) TAB: Project PL20180000038/ DOCUMENT: Petition/Application Petition CP-2018-2 4) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Legal Ad Agenda Item 9. ‘ ....oft-ire. C0H-1-1.-tay STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 SUBJECT: PETITION PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [ADOPTION HEARING] (Companion to Old Collier Golf Club PUD Amendment PL20180000037) ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) APPLICANT/OWNER/AGENT Applicant Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. & Owner: 2550 Goodlette Road North, #100 Naples, FL 34103 Agent: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Attorney: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Hole Montes, Inc. Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 950 Encore Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North Naples, Florida 34110 Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION The subject property comprises approximately 3.4 acres and is located on the west side of Tamiami Trail (US 41), approximately one-quarter mile . .. %v me I ,- north $ north of 111th Avenue/Immokalee Road, in y9 / Section 21, Township48 South, Range 25 0 9 East. _ . REQUESTED ACTION °" r The applicant seeks to expand Mixed Use4.. G Activity Center #2, Tamiami Trail (US 41) — Immokalee Road (CR 846) in the Future Land Subject Property .. Use Element (FLUE) Future Land Use Map A ,st ,_ `1 1/4_,,, ` per`' Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), affecting fewer than ten (10)acres, by t amending the: 1) FLUM inset map for Mixed Use Activity � ^ Center #2, Tamiami Trail (US 41) — „Ail Immokalee Road (CR 846 and ''Y ), � �_1 � � "j�c ,moa; 2) Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center ' . - I. Index Map. ” lr,mwv€a KKR - 1 — CPSS-2018-2/ PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The petition is proposed to expand the Activity Center and encompass an existing commercial PUD tract where commercial development is presently allowed. The companion PUD amendment petition [PL20180000037] will amend this ±3.4 acre Commercial Tract"C"to: revise PUD provisions to allow a retail (new) automotive vehicle dealer as an additional commercial use, allow an additional 100 hotel rooms for a total of 200 rooms, along with a conversion ratio for deriving these hotel rooms from the 50,000 commercial sq. ft. already subject to a maximum trip generation. This GMP amendment, however, would result in the site being eligible to be rezoned to allow the full array of commercial uses—those in the C-1 through C-5 zoning districts. STAFF ANALYSIS FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, ZONING AND LAND USE: Existing Conditions: Subject Property: The subject property, which comprises approximately 3.4 acres, is currently designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, which generally provides for higher[land use] densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. It is the ±3.4-acre (Commercial Tract "C") portion of the Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and vacant— mostly cleared and partially paved. This project also retains the hotel use allowed from a previous [FLUE Policy 5.1] determination and insubstantial change to the PUD (PDI); adds more room capacity to the hotel [not previously allowed] from a 100-room maximum to 200-room maximum [using a commercial space conversion factor]; and, updates the PUD's commercial uses to present LDC standards. The subject, Commercial Tract "C", property is improved only with paved, surface parking area; the developed portion of PUD contains golf course with clubhouse & maintenance facility. Surrounding Lands: North: The Future Land Use Map designates land immediately north of the subject property as Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. It is zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD and is developed with the Old Collier Golf Club; the next property north, at Walkerbilt Road, is zoned C- 4, Commercial General zoning district, and is developed commercially. East: The Future Land Use Map designates land located east of the subject property, across US 41, as Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict; this land is within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #2. This area is zoned Collier Tract 22 [mixed use] Planned Unit Development (PUD/DRI) and is developed with retail automobile dealerships, and the Riverchase Shopping Center. The Future Land Use Map designates lands lying further east and northeast, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. This area is part of the area zoned Collier Tract 22 PUD/DRI and is developed as Collier's Reserve, a residential/golf course community. South: The Future Land Use Map designates land lying south of the subject property as Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict; within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #2. This area is zoned Plaza 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD) and is developed with a large retail business (Walmart). West: The Future Land Use Map designates land immediately west of the subject property as Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. This area is zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD and is developed with the Old Collier Golf Club. —2— CPSS-2018-2/PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. In summary, the existing and planned land uses, and current zoning, in the area immediately surrounding the subject property are primarily the commercial uses in Activity Center #2 north of 111th Avenue and Immokalee Road, and, the Old Collier Golf Club. Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Criteria in Florida Statutes, Chapter 163.3187, to Qualify as a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan (GMP)Amendment: The process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment requires (in part) the following statutory standards be met, [followed by staff analysis in bracketed text]. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. /The amendment pertains to a ±3.4-acre property.] (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. (Thus far, two small scale GMP amendments have been adopted in calendar year 2018 for a total of±11.15 acres (5.35 + 5.8). A third small scale petition, comprising 6.33 acres, is scheduled to be heard by the BCC prior to this subject petition.] (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. /This amendment involves only site-specific Future Land Use Map changes.] (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). /The subject property is not within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. /The amendment preserves the internal consistency between and among GMP elements.] Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. —3— CPSS-2018-2/PL20180000038 • Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area's proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2.: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. —4— CPSS-2018-2/ PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. BACKGROUND, CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS This section typically addresses the amount of [commercial] land needed to accommodate anticipated growth based on projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. This is accomplished through the analysis of the subject property and the surrounding area that includes inventorying the supply of existing commercially-developed and potential commercially-developable land, determining population growth, estimating the amount of commercial development that population will demand, and determining whether a sufficient amount of commercial land, a shortage, or an excess amount, is being allocated to accommodate growth. This small-scale amendment returns the 3.4-acre parcel from being outside the Activity Center, to being inside its boundaries — as it had been previous to the County's modification of Activity Center boundaries in 2000. Based upon a prior Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict provision, known as "the 75% rule," when the subject PUD was rezoned in 1999 this 3.4-acre commercial tract was deemed consistent with the FLUE. That provision provided that if 75% or more of a project site was within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center, then the entire site was considered to be within the Activity Center. Staff has determined the data and analysis required in the above statutory provisions are not necessary given the relevant FLUM designation and zoning history of this site, and the findings that: uses allowed by this GMP amendment could be deemed compatible with the surrounding area, there are no infrastructure impact concerns, and there are no natural or cultural resources concerns. Appropriateness of the Site and the Change: Mixed Use Activity Centers in Collier County provide commercial development opportunities at locations that are spatially arranged to encourage and support a healthy business environment, and to discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development. The FLUE directs new commercial development primarily into Activity Centers and gives preference to commercial expansion adjacent to both Activity Centers and other commercial designations. The subject property is located adjacent to an Activity Center and is located near other commercially- - zoned land. This amendment does not introduce new commercial development, uses, or activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned. —5— CPSS-2018-2/PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. Environmental Impacts: The subject property is ±3.4 acres and vacant— mostly cleared and partially paved. It is not located in a County Wellfield Protection Area. Collier County Development Review Division staff reviewed the Report and provide the following [bracketed] evaluation: [No new text is proposed related to environmental sections of the GMP/CCME. There are no modifications to the existing Preserve areas with submitted (PL2018000037) PUDZ. There is an existing Eagles nest (active eagles CO 36/36A) in the preserve area north of the existing golf course.] [Craig Brown, Environmental Specialist, Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division] Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A. submitted a Traffic ImpactAnalysis(Exhibit V.E.3), dated March 21, 2018. Collier County Transportation Planning staff reviewed the Analysis and provide the following [bracketed] evaluation: [Capacity is available on County roadways to accommodate (traffic generated by) this project; therefore, the proposal is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. The companion PUD document for this commercial project contains a developer commitment limiting the maximum number of p.m. peak hour two-way trips under any development scenario.] [Michael Sawyer, Project Manager Transportation Planning Section] Public Facilities Impacts: The petitioner submitted a Public Facilities Report, dated May 21, 2018 (Exhibit V.E.1). Staff reviewed the Report and provide the following [bracketed] remarks: ® Potable Water and Wastewater Treatment Systems: The subject property lies within the Potable Water Service Area and the North Wastewater Service Area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The subject property lies within a localized wastewater service area identified in the 2018 AUIR with"wastewater collection or transmission system constraints",which are specifically mapped and addressed therein. [Generally, planned improvements to the Naples Park Constraint area involve splitting the area served between north and south of 111th Avenue N., then constructing a new master pump station and associated infrastructure to serve the(sub)area south of 111th Avenue N. The project will allow greater wastewater flows from the currently- constrained south and, allow a return to normal flows from the north using the existing master pump.] System capacity is confirmed at the time of development permit (SDP or PPL) review, and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval.] [Eric Fey, P.E., Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Department] —6— CPSS-2018-2/PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. • Solid Waste Collection & Disposal: The solid waste disposal service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2017 AUIR notes that the County projects more than 50 years of remaining landfill capacity [as does the pending 2018 AUIR]. • Stormwater Management System: The Facilities Report indicates stormwater retention and detention will comply with the SFWMD requirements, and, State and County standards for off- site [stormwater] discharges will be met. • Park and Recreational Facilities: Parks and recreational facilities are not impacted by the proposed amendment or associated commercial development. • Schools: School facilities are not impacted by the proposed amendment or associated commercial development. • Emergency Medical (EMS) and Fire Rescue Services: The subject property is located within the North Collier Fire District, who's collocated EMS/fire station is located at 1885 Veterans Park Drive, approximately 1.8 miles to the southeast. No adverse impacts to these safety services result from the proposed commercial development. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05.F. was [duly advertised, noticed and] held, jointly for this small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment petition and companion rezone petition, on July 26, 2018, 5:30 p.m. at the Doubletree Suites hotel meeting facilities, located at 12200 Tamiami Trail North, Naples. Three people other than the applicant team and County staff attended — and heard the following information: The agent (Robert Mulhere) representing this applicant, described the proposed changes to the group, including how the two companion requests (GMPA/PUDZ) cover the automotive vehicle dealership as an additional commercial use, the additional 100 hotel rooms for a total of 200 rooms, along with the conversion for deriving these hotel rooms from the commercial square footage already allowed by the PUD. While those people present showed interest, no one expressed opposition. The information meeting was ended at approximately 5:40 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt,AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The property is presently zoned commercial PUD and undeveloped. • There are no modifications to the existing Preserve areas from expanding the Activity Center. • The infrastructure needed to serve the proposed development can be provided without related levels of service concerns. • This amendment does not introduce new commercial development, uses, or activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned. The subject property is located adjacent to an Activity Center and near other commercially-zoned land — and is generally supported by the FLUE. • The proposed amendment will allow rezoning for uses in the C-1 through C-5 commercial zoning districts and those uses may be deemed compatible-based upon a high level review as opposed —7— CPSS-2018-2/PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. to the site-specific review conducted by Zoning Services staff for a rezone petition - with the existing and planned commercial uses in Activity Center#2 north of 111th Avenue and Immokalee Road, and, the Old Collier Golf Club, in the area immediately surrounding the subject property. • Based on the explanation of how this small-scale amendment returns the 3.4-acre parcel from being outside the Activity Center, to being inside its boundaries — as it had been previously — support for this amendment has been demonstrated. • A companion rezone petition has been submitted concurrent with this GMPA petition. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS This Staff Report was reviewed by the Office of the County Attorney on August 31, 2018. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and map series are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for adoption and transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. PETITION No.: CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Staff Report for the September 20, 2018, CCPC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2018, BCC meeting. G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2018 Cycles & Smalls\2018 Small Scale petitions\CPSS-18-2 AC2 Expnsn\CCPC\CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2.docx —8— CPSS-2018-2/ PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 Agenda Item 9. PREPARED BY: DATE: 06t IP) CORBY SC,HMfDT, AI P, PRINCIPAL PLANNER F COMPREHENSIV LANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: �s'� DATE: 11— b IZ5 DAVID VVEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: fro DATE: <'— (P" (6) MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR, ZONING DIVISION PP• S VED BY: DATE: / 7-/I MES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PETITION No.: CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Staff Report for the September 20, 2018, CCPC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2018, BCC meeting. G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2018 Cycles & Smalls\2018 Small Scale petitions\CPSS-18-2 AC2 Expnsn\CCPC\CPSS-18-2 CCPC stff rprt_FNL2 w sig pg.docx —9— CPSS-2018-2 / PL20180000038 Collier Tract 21: Expanding Activity Center no. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 18- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING 3.40 ACRES TO THE MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT ACTIVITY CENTER #2 AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM URBAN, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT, ACTIVITY CENTER #2; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF ±3.4 ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41, APPROXIMATELY 2,200 FEET NORTH OF 111TH AVENUE IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. [PL20180000038] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, PEBB Acquisitions, LLC requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to expand Mixed Use Activity Center #2; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or an area of critical economic concern; and [ 18-CMP-01011/1425503/1]51 Words underlined are added,words streleugh have been deleted. Collier Tract 21 SSGMPA PL20180000038 7/24/18 Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on 2018 considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan on , 2018; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small scale amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The map amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. • SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. [ 18-CMP-01011/1425503/1151 Words underlined are added,words suck gh have been deleted. Collier Tract 21 SSGMPA PL20180000038 7/24/18 Page 2 of 3 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2018. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, INTERIM CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk ANDY SOLIS, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: '`q) Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Activity Center Index Map Activity Center#2 Map [ 18-CMP-01011/1425503/1151 Words underlined are added,words struc'�hrough have been deleted. Collier Tract 21 SSGMPA PL20180000038 7/24/18 Page 3 of 3 cArmor I N CV I ouvvuvao/Vr.J-iu 10-L 1 R 25 E I R 26 E .EE COoNTv JaNITA BEACH RD — °14 � p LEE COUNTYct .......... ..-----.0 Ov O COLLIER COUNTY 20 3 N 03 SUBJECT SITE CPSS-2018-2 y vt 1 4 co 2 3 z 1.- 1,1thAvat, H Immokalee RD ihe z _T z 5 J J CO 11 ri Va rbilt Beach D — G13 12 Golden Gate BLVD W T 1 10 Pin/Ridge RD en 0 L Z c , z Cteen BLVD y etal~ m 14 51 15?I8 m A ' CC C .R,886 m 0 d /%4P......... ...,..___TZ 9 X S Z , R oRD '...... ...lorp. 75 Q 6 --11 — Davis BLVD p MIXED MIXED USE & INTERCHANGE 16 ACTIVITY CENTER 17 m o H INDEX MAP 6 m 7 H Rattlesn- e Ham ock RD Oo 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 F' Miles • AMENDED - JANUARY 25.2005 (Ord.No.2005-03) AMENDED - JUNE 7,2005 (Ord.No.2005-25) 18 — AMENDED - OCTOBER 14,2008 V (Ord.No.2008-59) — AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 13,2011 441111t ra (Ord.No.2011-26) �'%ate. AMENDED - JUNE 13,2017 TRlF y (Ord.No.2017-22) H 1 PREPARED BY:BETH YANG,AICP /14.-..- GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FILE ACTIVITY CENTERS INDEX MAP.MXD F DATE 6/2018 I R 25 EI R 26 E I co W t 7 N u O �/ u.2Fu OC U m p N r p R. 'o W a O _ Sf�0 0 N F W Y3Y ,�^ N(.y. .j O `O<rU- N a H y Ul Z LL WN <N a!i m UN ._,oS W'. ! U!m O2Vii FN 'Nb8_ }YJWZ . mISil rop0ofo Z � M1.s > NW- Wo X s. . I,m ? Z i 8 w - 1lgq N u a (/'y i1 3. o— LLWo ja I a i ce?- 8g — i -'.3 -.;-,0 t eig !i,gelli' b 7 °g Yzt- 2Y • t i vit&S tAIIS alga' ; . . 1 lel klil Oi 1,Wi 1‘311‘W "S ill j"/ lifilt; .44 , t i 1116.111" or ‘, 10111 * 1 :1 1 11111' .1..10 ® -i` , ii+ lit, 4 ,„ . fififeAs k\s. 0 if i cif n , .. Wval in 2 z ) 11, . tail -, ft vO i 0 'a Rz t' o 4e sr, 'eva, *.Yaw. Ip try ..3] 2 ii- ...- J V 13 it 7-7-1- 104 iiiii i ' I;.; f '' '. r. 10 4 ' — .=-- , , lk ;, .. a i. --"-i- oe Y R k OS x _–� __ Ys LL ÷ 21 `: '. 1 ♦. i v*6', c --z---" G5y a� t h .. rig e .` 4 R y k d o f r ® 4196a e e _t= s .* Sn t A 33u y st t: r nil p ® 4•4 41 t.t a t i t 7 e t _ t noc ��A. _ .., ni t 4 _' nw l4! ® 4n w E' e 4 k e Wv i K ad . `9 k. a:` es n fa . � ' a# yv .* I.^ .$ M4 *, „ . x. ., 1 .* :n Dual Pre-App Meeting-PL20180000037(PUDA)&PL20180000038(GMPA)—Bob Mu!here, FAICP,agent; Rich Yovanovich, attorney; Fred Reischl, planner. SCHMIDT Also participating: David Weeks AICP, Growth Management Manager Tuesday, February 6, 2018, 3:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m., Conf. Rm. C. Requested by: Eric Hochman, of Pebb Enterprises Phone: xxxxx; Email: xxx Representing: The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. Folio#: 00157481909; Zoning: PUD, "Collier Tract 21" or,AKA"Beachway" Location: PUD is on W. side of Tamiami Trail N. (US 41) and N. side of 111th Ave. N., in 21-48-25. Project Description: GMPA to expand Activity Center boundary to include 3.4-acre tract in Activity Center #2 (US 41 and Immokalee Road) and a PUDA to add: new car dealership, 100 hotel rooms for total of 200 rooms, and conversion ratio for hotel rooms/commercial s.f. (may update the C-3 uses to allow those of the present LDC rather than those tied to the LDC at time of PUD amendment approval in 1999). Existing Application Name: Collier Tract 21 PUD; developed portion of PUD contains golf course with clubhouse & maintenance facility; commercial tract, subject of this pre-app, is vacant—mostly cleared but contains a paved surface parking area. The PUD commercial tract is presently approved for 50,000 s.f. of all permitted and conditional uses of the C-3 zoning district, in effect at time of approval (1999), and 100 hotel rooms. POST PRE-APP COMMENTS: Current FLUM designation is Urban Residential Subdistrict; almost entire PUD is in CHHA. This GMPA will be a small-scale plan amendment. The amendment procedure requires an Adoption phase only per Florida Statute, while the procedure required of the companion PUDA places it in the same schedule. The PUD commercial tract abuts MUAC #2. It was approved under the original FLUE —when MUAC boundary was 1/2 mile square -which provided that if 75% or more of a project was within the MUAC, then the entire project was deemed within the MUAC. The MUAC boundaries were subsequently changed to be site-specific and excluded the subject commercial tract; unknown if this was deliberate or an oversight. Though there is an argument to be made that this tract should still be considered within the MUAC, staff views it as being comparable to properties deemed consistent by policy. There may be minor Comprehensive Planning issues regarding secondary impacts resulting from possibly assuming certain public facilities' costs associated with project located in CHHA. Agent notified of the need to address, as applicable: • Compliance with the FLUE/FLUM (Urban Mixed Use District); [PUDA] • Compliance with FLUE Objective 5 and its applicable policies, esp. s/s 5.3, 5.6 (GMP consistency clause; LDC compatibility&complementary clause); [PUDA] • Compliance with FLUE Objective 7 and its applicable policies 7.1 through 7.4 (Toward Better Places— Community Character Plan); [PUDA] • Compliance with Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 12.2.5 and 12.2.6, esp. as they pertain to limitations or additional costs associated with "sanitary sewer facilities in the coastal high hazard area [required to] be flood proofed"; Discuss any such limitations and costs with Head of the Public Utilities Department; provide results of/outcomes from these discussions with application materials. [to accompany both GMPA & PUDA application materials]. Note the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) contains additional policies pertaining to the expenditure of public funds for public facilities within the CHHA. Prepare separate narratives to address all impacts to the surrounding area [to accompany both GMPA& PUDA application materials]. Discussion during the pre-application meeting led to the decision (per D. Weeks) that the data and analysis required by FLUE provisions for the consideration of a rezone petition within an Activity Center may be substituted by additional content in the narrative statement accompanying PUDA application materials, in support of the one commercial use to be added. pg.1 Regarding Chapter 163.3167(9), 163.3177, and 163.3184, Florida Statutes, no needs analysis required— just provide a narrative of the zoning and MUAC history. Address the pertinent small-scale plan amendment criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187,text changes will relate directly to the small-scale future land use map amendment. [GMPA] Follow the established format of the FLUE for the map exhibits"to preserve the internal consistency"of the GMP and prepare and include: [GMPA] • A proposed, revised Activity Center#2 Inset Map. Additional discussion surrounded GMP amendment options available to the petitioner, including: establishing a new stand-alone, 3.4-acre Subdistrict abutting Activity Center #2; or, expanding Activity Center#2 through a "glitch" amendment to return the 3.4-acre parcel into its boundaries — as AC #2 had been configured prior to the 1996 EAR-based GMPAs that established site-specific AC boundaries. Staff notes: This GMPA will be a small-scale plan amendment. The amendment procedure requires an Adoption phase only per Florida Statute, while the procedure required of the companion PUDA places it in the same schedule.** For a submitted petition, after the sufficiency review process is complete[outside CityView]and the petition package is deemed sufficient, an electronic version of the entire submittal is needed, preferably in PDF format, preferably on a CD; The County has instituted an electronic (paperless) agenda process for the Board of County Commissioners' hearings. All Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) activities and reviews are arranged directly with the Comprehensive Planning staff/the assigned Project Coordinator; these activities include: reviewing/approving the draft notification to surrounding property owners; reviewing/approving the draft newspaper advertisement; reviewing/approving/ coordinating proposed NIM meeting dates, times and locations; the draft NIM notification to surrounding property owners; accepting/filing applicant-prepared Affidavit of Notification (from NDN), posted Public Hearing sign photograph, and, NIM transcript/minutes/notes and clearly audible in its entirety, an audio/video recording, PLUS, BEGINNING DECEMBER 2017: 3 flash drives containing the full, clear NIM audio recording.** The GMPA pre-app fee is $500.00, $9,000.00 for a small-scale petition, which is non-refundable, plus a proportionate share of the legal advertising costs; for small-scale petitions, there are only two(2) hearings —one(1)each conducted in front of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)and Board of County Commissioners (BCC); one (1), one-quarter page ad is placed in the Naples Daily News prior to CCPC hearing, and two (2) prior to BCC hearing. At present, the total cost for the 3 ads is approximately $3,700.00; the estimated legal advertising costs will be provided to each applicant and payment will be required prior to advertising for any hearings; any refund due the applicant after hearings are held will be provided at that time.** A small-scale plan amendment may be submitted and processed at any time; are limited to parcels less than or equal to 10 acres in size; further, the map amendment cannot result in a conflict between the map and text—there can be no internal inconsistency in the GMP; All studies and analyses include the raw data used to support their conclusions, as copies from source documents, attachments or appendices thereto, to facilitate a thorough substantive review. Be sure of consistency/conformity/harmony with other Goals, Objectives, Policies (GOPs) and provisions in the Element being amended and any other Element of the GMP relevant to the petition, as well as any other applicable regulations(e.g. Coastal High Hazard Area(CHHA), specific LDC provisions);fully explain furtherance of existing GOPs relevant to the petition, and of any other plans or designations which are applicable or relevant to the petition (e.g. a redevelopment plan, corridor management plan, etc.)** It is important to carefully organize the amendment package; be sure all exhibits are consistently labeled, are in the proper order, and are correctly referenced on the pages of the application; For site-specific amendments, be sure all mapping clearly identifies the subject site, includes North arrow and scale, and source; A petition narrative is often helpful; For corporate ownership, it is not acceptable to only list the pg.2 corporation name; In some instances, property is owned by a corporation that in turn is comprised of other corporations; It is necessary to provide a list of individuals as officers or stockholders of the corporation(s) for purposes of full disclosure; The objective of disclosure is to reveal the individuals with an interest in the property(including seeing if any staff or public officials are included).** For a submitted petition, after the sufficiency review process is complete[outside CityView]and the petition package is deemed sufficient, an electronic version of the entire submittal is needed, preferably in PDF format, preferably on a CD. The County has instituted an electronic (paperless) agenda process for the Board of County Commissioners'hearings. Note: **denotes staff information/clarification provided post-pre-application conference. The expectation of staff support for these applications or recommendations for approval are not implied or expressed by comments made during this conference. Notes from this mtg. are foldered in: G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2018 Cycles& Small Scale Petitions\pre-app meetings in 2018\2-06-18 MUAC#2 expansion, along with copies of other informational materials shared with applicant in this meeting. These notes are also uploaded into CityView and made visible there. ....--..., , , 4- . . I A 91 ..t. , , yt ......, "fr y {` 11W IBM! ,r h... I / , ,r Yi,v ####.#001.1# .. Y' --- . , . 0 `-1111211t so I, Inviriekeies ft0 pg.3 4. 4 ,r 0 OLD (EXISTING) CHHA ti t NEW CHHA ON FLUM pg.4 CAI/ County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf,to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL,tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address %of Ownership b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage ofstock owned by each: Name and Address %of Ownership THE OLD COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC. 2550 GOODLETTE ROAD NORTH, SUITE 100, NAPLES, FL 34103 ROBERT D. CORINA,PRES;PATRICK L.UTTER,VP;CHRISTIAN SPILKER,VP MILES C. COLLIER 41.667%; BARRON G. COLLIER 41.667% INGLIS U. COLLIER 16.666% c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address %of Ownership Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address %of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers,stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address %of Ownership Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired Leased:Term of lease years/months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.coiliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Date of option: Date option terminates: _, or Anticipated closing date: I AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form.Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition,I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package.I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application,all required submittal materials,and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN:Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34104 5-21-2018 Agent/Owner Signature Date Robert J. Muihere, FAICP, Vice President Agent/Owner Name(please print) Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 a,`•)sV•1^+1•r!^�'•ri�k.h.c ra•wa•sa Hia• a• a• ate•at• al•/_a• a• a• a•s+l•1 a1vaelt 1 a•ka• a•1 a/l•/rr a..f^ a•.eal1 • •\` 5", M':�M � ��N) N M..• )• •N N M ' '© � \ ( 4\� / �� x , `���!!, 14 w1•,tih•�\A•l1w•IR�w•AA•Rw•��w�•\w•AI7•YA•'�w•RA�IRw•\w• 'w•ISw•�'w�•\w�•�w•�d•'�w•4w•Rw h��w�•IS`wl•,R wl•`la wl•1'�'�� •rt 15 �YM1 a of A -,.:‘ ..,7_ a=lI u� t t 0 riba . _. ..1... _ :. ..•. Ripta . ` 1.- 1 ~. , I ••••- iii , -y •t \•R •• •• ""n•t r•:.\'' .' 7---- C) t'F • f, a=• • ! certify the attached is a true and correct copy of the Articles of Amendment, filed on July 23, 1999, for THE COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC. changing its name - •• to THE OLD COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC., a corporation organized under the O t laws of the State of Florida, as •� rit • : ords of this office. -tt• � N .P•Fr=• ' The document numberp-,0 •\ orporation is P9:a1. - •170. .tt. fit: 7/ -�` �0� ._,; • ..f• ► 0'R; 2580 PG;1197 �s� ;ltd; EC K 1,11) in i1,110; IA 411D5 of COL1IIA COUNTY, !L .•. •"• 0: 1't,'99 a ti :II. 441 ,UT I. BKOCK, CLUE :a :(,tl_= , ,) Uc 111 10.50 -P- �t). '� �1�~ a CO I I5 2.00 •''' Ietn:$HAAOJi :. 1 `�i' COLLIER 1 1 • f �LI =tet• b 103 1 11 1.-,,,,-z. • -• Given under my hand and the "0;. �'t z Great Seal of the State of Florida •P- <t- at Tallahassee, the Capitol, this the 41. Third day of August, 1999 ; ..,,,„ .... ,. .._. „,......„ ..,.. �l ��JJ .•,.._ •[¢i. 1 •n• t. 145--• . • .ins ams �a \.,tiF ,.. 1..,-,4\.•,..s. T.t Itltrr•inr !1 1t•r•i:- au WE '1-__.' x. 3`•'C CIi;•E(.):'. ,, `11. tLI'1't41•11 lit 'tilr - t, — at1; O• I'll t 1%a,•rl1•i».l•vNO •t, rYi �a•lM+.w••M• ?IA!•Na A�a•;Ma 44:6%;.......; •.-. •, •N•Ni•.N•. P _ .•;• .N a•,•Ya-• 4,4°N•,p,:, • iiI� h+`.•,+`�,iK;III�ii =•w• •\wRw• Tri1R-w•+a• Or • - •a'N•se•Icd• •' fIc?• •—IS •Rq• • •—••,'-•` ATTACHMENT "A" *** OR: 2580 PG; 1198 *** ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT FLED TO 99 JLv 23 bu 4:rn 43 ARTICLES OF OF INCORPORATION jSE"-Has r°�'SNIT THE COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC. SEE,FLORIDA Pursuant to the provisions of section 607.1004 Florida Statutes. this Florida profit corporation adopts the following articles of amendment to its articles of incorporation: FIRST: The name of the corporation(the "Corporation")shall be changed to: The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. R. Co 15. 1999. SECOND: These Articles of ' ,... • ' • ' i �, THIRD: These Articles •f •• • ndment were adop -• 't ., sole incorporator without shareholder action and :•• o •e :c on •• re.. ' -•. lini lill IN WITNESS "4:71.1 tit •, • r' �T the sole incorporator of the for the . :.. 0 .t• ••',,: •. ,i,•rpo :{ • ,•s 1. les of Incorporation, has executed Corporation, 1S"day of July, 1999. executed these Articles o •1• ••I•• at • '4 'C IIIc i•• •• , signal ; i .."4:,,.•rator: Te , L. Flora So Incorporator flJ-7/1S/99 - - - • .J g;6',2.-a v2.'a'i_Y 6,..:.a..._.‘a',s'•,_.Y.,. ,0'ef. t•/e2st II Pik I/./_..s.lii r? k•.1/_.. 6 1111 lel•Ai le..Y.•/al.iaI....—....1.,,A6 i.e...Y,I ,6 1(..,,,0/e.-. /..2.,\,Ill Y.Ak..ILL,.%1110.-111.10,.. 4.C.h.al /O.-- a N. 5. •• e.m ••• ...• 0.• ••• '•• re., ,•• '••'.,••• ,••• mi.a. :4.0 'ow.'fore,(•••1 ,... /..,I...0/...,"/..•.(....,,•,•`'(a.'J,:e_ff.‘,01/400•• ..,•..-,I..,..,6.••.•i,1%,,I;',-";Cc'',0,Ci.1,C,111...-/o 0'1-001W:41'1 Isr/(Ific-01 I 07,4 6.-WCC:741Vic-o(CR,At.ecoli,s,-;.(ihicroi cc-wq,i-‘-.7-,ie oc:,,,.,,,,q4,..,44,%,f it 9 i . I. • • ••!., A._ f .1.1• • • di.• • It 0" f •441 . . ::I ti.. • .... • • OF t . vibil .4,:_.. ,to :.,!....., , . . ... • • I:rj •—. 't ii4iii 1 $ , .0.....1 • '40 (.:3------..........\,,,,.. . • ... , ,, ., ,r('------ •11_ - - Department of Otate g. AP, . _ I certify the attached is a true and correct copy of the Articles of Amendment, tlY • 0 •21 OM filed on March 16, 1999, to Articles of Incorporation for TRACT 21 DEVELOPMENT, INC. which chtiNeLl its name to THE COLLIER GOLF CLUB, . ((:)) -------, ./. INC., a Florida corporation, ai-qhq‘91tyS8ra ds of this office. -..",... .,.... -..._.10 The document number of(t'l a/corporation is P980900 170. .(0:. ....0 (I 1 6 4)1 • GP i N • - . . . 4.c „..—..., ..v., k()...... IC#RD ; In Of L ' DS of COLLIER COUNTY, EL •ri• 06/10/1 Eat 0 :21 H7 E. BROCK, CLERK -.Ic .•-:-. C)-2,.), RIC FIE 10,50 7RetnATT .•,,-.; 1 ', : N: HA OW' N 41/4 Or A 0 COLLIER DIVE OP IN )2 EP ,f0._ _..),i 3003 lilta .11V ..u. 0' • • 'Zil • 4 'a ....• .r. ;."1:1' •1:0'•., ...1. ;I:i; •tes-. . _ . f. .::. -P115 Given under my hand and the At.: •.'.• Great Seal of the State of Florida as 4• • . CI:re: at Tallahassee,the Capitol, this the .10... , . •i:• ?If 6 Nineteenth day of March, 1999 I'f• Av.• 1...•,.f.. .,r. fe4-40:p:9). .::• • r• •1:• .A6 .0. 1 ' 1:)'.;- •-- • . ,. 'O...., rog•-' rekleft°1-" 47r"1745 66.,.::.• tiO'I • .... a k.- 1/4... •1:• %b wslv- iitatlivriitv liarrit.:. Inre '...;-'v c t•viz t r il A '.1.-1, te . CR2E022 i 1 99) -... 0::. g)-- , .\ / •.. a./...,,a,,_:_,,a _,..a.,2..‘a . _,Asalt2 •Cjaka,1,2::g100;;Itklic W.,2:1..roAil___„,le N.k., 1,$ -1. 4 41 a,e -i.ci_._1.7 .,,„nr.....k.),,_,,r(0.10/AV?. • 00 •• .. ...• ••• '•• ea.* '••s'S••'Ow.',rm.+'Veva:.••1_••_+(••)(ama,)•••• woo era •• woo A,401.M era_•• ••1,4•••1"••I,••.,T 1- aleT,(=;011• ,,ac,,6"-,,I,C.,,,6..-.s....I...-e,6...-.4,..--;.(6‘,-.:-..(Iiii-;:q4 67,(407:its ti"..iteliri(e1:744\•."-if•%A ip%WO v.6•kJ e•...6(Cia-•%ail 1c2 0'kW.Kir I OZ.-,a;Gvil IVO I '4" "" UK: t:D9 V ru: Malt ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT • TO FILED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 99 MAR 16 AM 9: 20 OF TRACT 21 DEVELOPMENT, INC. IA CA'ili SE,..FLOF�IDA Pursuant to the provisions of section 607.1006, Florida Statutes, this Florida profit corporation adopts the following articles of amendment to its articles of incorporation: FIRST: The name of the corporation(the "Corporation") shall be changed to: The Collier Golf Club, Inc. SECOND: These Articles of Amendtnent -e-ado ted March 15, 1999. THIRD: These Articles of A �t en were ii1 p�+,42b the sole incorporator without shareholder action and shareho ec. ion was not require . IN WITNESS WH ' :CF, i e''`�'" g ,` ". 7 he sole incorporator of the • Corporation, for the pu ease o :me i g h 7 4i o ra‘• i s • rti les of Incorporation, has executed these Articles of ,ls •it 't rtt e •t i t.. ,,o tido this 15th day of March, 1999. Signature by_349,ick porator: ' I /z( Ter. L. Flora So Incorporator • . i Tt.F•3/15/99 - 7 2413813 OR: 2496 PG: 0597 IICOIDID In OIIICIAL IICOODS of COLLIII COINTT, iL 12/241S1 it 01:2218 DIIGIT 1. I10C1, CLIII COLS 7221200.00 Prepared by sad Mara to: IIC HI 100.50 comer DevslopmsatCorporation DOC-.70 50004.40 3003 Thalami Trail North COIIIS 22.00 Naples,Florida 34103 Ret SHALOt IALDMIN Atteatloa: S.Bawwia COL1Ii1 DIVI101g11T 001!680ooi Tat Folio:001547600055001 TANIAIKI ?TAIL N 002 0015748182 011115 IL 11101 his arca I,reserved for rocordin;information SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS INDENTURE,made this nay of 6.+ 1 1998, between COLLIER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation,Grantor,and TRACT 21 DEVELOPMENT. INC.,a Florida corporation,whose address is 3003 Tamlami Trail North,Naples, Florida 34103, of the County of Collier,State of Florida,Grantee, WITNESSETH: That said Grantor,for and in consideration of the sum of TEN Dollars,and other good and valuable consideration of said Grantor in hand paid by said Grantee,the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said Grantee, and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever,the following described land,situated,lying and being in Collier County,Florida,to wit: SEE EXHIBIT"A"ATTACHED HE' + •' i i RATED HEREIN BY REFERENCE cp SUBJECT TO: 1. Taxes for the ye of ''8, .• I subseque y an. 2. Applkable zoai g Is . •an --ad •• s as. 3. That the prem - a e o.. •;n % G ntor. 4. Matters ofpub.e ! (it a. to.1 .. e tb same). S. Less and mice.. -•'�.1L1, G ,,, fel,gas and minerals located on, within an.tea.er the Property, a..• whi , ii ,of been reserved to prior owners. These i'�, are expressly not in ,el . in it onveyance. and Grantor will warrant and defend . , • hereby cony 1 iso st the lawful claims and demands of all persons claiming by,through,or mode I.e ,.`a e I 1;•. , e IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Grantor has hereunto set Grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. COLLIER DEVELOPMENT • CORPORATION,a Florida corporation Print N sae S r , �L ,t Print me s71F1".sVTODIWI YF --7 -/--- Jeffrey M.Bir ice President .. Corporate Seal STATE OF FLORIDA § COUNTY OF COLLIER§ g The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this a6 day of ,1998,by Jeffrey M.Bier,as Vice President of COLL ' DE a PME fib CORPORATION,a Florida corporation,on behalf of s•'. •rporati.. " is i'.all i kno • ' ,.e. �1t.A t S. 41'11 .-- (No Nota ' .lie--Sharon R.Howls• iAND Com,,. Ion Number:CC6446S4 .�yR' re Commission Expiration Date:June'',2001 TRA assaM411.MUM rase 1.r1(2s H0MY canardelmilleintUtiLgal GatsettrrtlCCMMM j 1 011: 2496 PG: 0598 LAND DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL NO.1 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21;THENCE NORTH 89°50'30" WEST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SE U4)OF SAID SECTION 21 FOR A DISTANCE OF 995.63 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 00°09'30" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1 00.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 100.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SEI/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°50'30" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 401.04 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL NO.I; THENCE NORTH 89°50'30"WEST CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1260.12 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 30.00 FEET EASTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SWI/4)OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 01°32'23" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 440.86 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 88027'37" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID EASTERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SWI/4)OF SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 01°32'23" WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 890.00 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE NO. . "51'48" WEST ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF Syr1• ,0 •UARTER OF SECTION 21 FOR A DISTANCE OF 1350.98 FEET TO AN •E,,EASTERLY LINE OF THE WEST ONE-HALF(WI/2)OF THE SAID S d,�,00,,0' T QUARTER • I(a) 6 SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 01"52'47" WE 'T7NG SAID EASTERL • ' FOR A DISTANCE OF 621.76 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION TH ".7I FEET NORT' RL OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF T E •R" >E-HA )OF 1E •UTH ONE-HALF(SI/2)OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER N • / • TI --• . 1 •U. FTE (SWI/4)OF SAID SECTION 21; VI° ; T THENCE SOUTH 89°5713" ES ON S [ 6 • E O' A DISTANCE. OF 1304.52 FEET TO AN INTERSECTIO J 1 .111 T E K F AND PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF SA It •N 21, ID + BE STERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD C-90 • THENCE NORTH 02°13'17" W a LONG SAID RIG •e F V NE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1473.46 FEET TO AN INTERS•" • WITH A LINE • .4t: .ET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTHE• OF SAID SECTI a• THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERL . H 89°33'45"EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE I ' "i AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF BULKHEAD LINE N BED IN PLAT BOOK I,PAGE 16 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 20°30'21"EAST ALONG SAID LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.72 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY, SOUTHEASTERLY, EASTERLY, NORTHEASTERLY AND NORTHERLY CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE AND ALONG SAW CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 400,00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 157°43'50"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11011 7 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY, NORTHEASTERLY, EASTERLY, AND SOUTHEASTERLY CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE AND ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 124°16'03"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1084.44 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 53°58'08"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 505.81 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF LANDS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1355, PAGE 1011, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 00°39'10" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1066.03 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LANDS; THENCE NORTH 89°20'50" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF WALKERBILT ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 33,PAGE 279,PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE SOUTH 00°39'10"EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 60,00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID WALKERBILT ROAD; THENCE NORTH 89°20'50" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 600.21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°21'48" EAST CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 731.07 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LANDS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1219,PAGE 1672,PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA; Page 2 or 12 SECTION 21 011: 2496 PG: 0599 LAND DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL NO.I CONTINUED THENCE SOUTH 00°43'07" EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS FOR A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET; - - THENCE NORTH 89°21'48" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LANDS FOR A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL(U.S.41,S.R.45); THENCE SOUTH 00°43'07" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 505.65 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 8996'53" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.53 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 250.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 62-55'02" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 274.53 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON-TANGENT LINE; THENCE SOUTH 00°09'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 631.93 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°50'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 154.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°09'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 19°50'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 801.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°42'02" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1210.87 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 244.233 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI.BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L. SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 REF:ABB DRAWING FILE N0.6627 Q - J ......., RcV . _ cO r ° cc 0 to v (sf.4 41E CIRC i • ".... .., Page 3 at 23 SECTION 21 I OR: 2496 PG: 0600 n LAND DFSCRIPTION OF PARCEL NO.2 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS — FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SE 1/4)OF SAID SECTION 2 1; THENCE SOUTH 89'50'41 " WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SEI/4) FOR A DISTANCE OF 818.47 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE NORTH 00"40'47" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 12.87 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WALKERBILT ROAD, THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL NO.2; THENCE SOUTH 89°2 1'48"WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF.356.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL(U.S.41-S.R.45); THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE NORTH 00°40'47" WEST ALONG SAW PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 599.13 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF BULKHEAD LINE NO. 3, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK I, PAGE 16, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON-TANGENT CURVE FROM WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 20°56'08"EAST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 400.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53°03'24"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 370.41 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON-TANGENT LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH THE AFORESAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S.41-S.R.45); THENCE SOUTH 00°40'47"EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 630.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 4.790 ACRES OF LAND, ,BESCQ jj,, SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RES 4..".70 OF RE .' 112. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAG IN PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,P AN•EtLA.ND L`*ND-S ; EYOR RICHARD L. SHEPHARD, P.S. .N'+,2474 REF:ABB DRAWING FILE NO.662 n • ' Ec Pate 4 of 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0601 LAND DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL NO.3 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21;THENCE NORTH 89°50'30" WEST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SEE/4)OF SAID SECTION 21 FOR A DISTANCE OF 995.63 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 00°09'30" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 100.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAW SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SE 1/4)OF SECTION 2 1,THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL NO.3; THENCE NORTH 89°50'30" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 401.04 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 00°42'02"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1210.87 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°50'30"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 801.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°09'30"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 89°50'30"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 154.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°09'30" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 631.93 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON-TANGENT CURVE FROM WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 62°11'56"EAST; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 230.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 62°55'02" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 274.53 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 89'16'53"EAST FOR A D —.``% • . FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°43'07"EAST FOR % •W V' • r s ;rT; THENCE NORTH 89°50'30' WEST F 410", CE OF • THENCE SOUTH 45°09'30"WEST a I .1STANC£OF 151.26 ti ; THENCE SOUTH 00°09'30"WEST • ' a TANCE OF 100.00 F. T; THENCE SOUTH 45°09'30"W FO• A i .TAIL ".t I FEE ; THENCE SOUTH 00°09'30"WE •R A DIST •' •F 390.i I FEET, THENCE SOUTH 4S°09'30"WE-T "'—"NTHENCE SOUTH 00°09'30" ES' •R Cut a +0 FE T; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; , E—' CONTAINING 18.415 ACRES O' D,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND 't RICTIONS OF REC Ott' O AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE, C PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLAN ' ' ' AND S • $ RICHARD L. SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.24 111E, cW REF:ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6627 Pop Sof 22 SECTION 21 'x ti OR: 2496 PG: 0602 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.I A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE I!4)OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE I/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)FOR A DISTANCE OF 135,16 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL (U.S. 41-S.R. 45), THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 00°40'47" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1180.12 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 66°24'35"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 271.55 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53°31'16" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 467.06 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 13°53'19"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 135.24 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3695'24" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 126.56 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 49°08'43"WEST FOR A DIS'T'ANCE OF 90.88 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 63°46'32" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 222.62 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 67°04'45"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 7132 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG S + s' •3�AVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A • RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRA •(U �in y ' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 49.86 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 38°30'46"WEST •'• DISTANCE OF 94.02 4� 0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY • URVE, CONCA S• THWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CE* ' . - ? • FOR A A C DISTANCE OF 20.07 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 50.00'37"W STy ' r a5, O POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERL iA f.11it S 'r S•U WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET,A C l , �� AA. I ' F N .:• DISTANCE OF 72.13 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; • THENCE NORTH 5896'31"W + •R A DISTANCE OF .48 EE • A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY • G SAID CURVE, '1: ie• •THEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CEN NGLE OF 04°53'2 ' 9' RC DISTANCE OF 8.53 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 53°23'07"WEST F I Alb • • •.5 TOA POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG '� '•" =►• E SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGL • 'FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 18.41 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 63°56'10"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.57 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°48'22"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 58.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 47°07'48"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.34 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°18'44"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.49 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 35°49'04"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 74.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°26'41"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29,48 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 44°15'45"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.27 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 5.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 147°12'15"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.85 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 77°03'30"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 119.11 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 100,00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07°21'58"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.86 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 69°41'32"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 120.58 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04°20'28" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 75.77 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 74°02'00"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 243.78 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 900.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°12'49"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 427.47 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; rye f of 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0603 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO,1 CONTINUED THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 22.76 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 118°08'04"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 46.93 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 16°53'16"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.80 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25,00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°56'48"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 14.81 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 50°50'03"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 126.39 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 51.63 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 143°55'28"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 129.69 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 86°54'36"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 101.02 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°31'41" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 158.00 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 03°37'05"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 144.55 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 85°36'43" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 149,42 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 148°23'28"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 64.75 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 59°09'40"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.62 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE ANCE SOUTHERLY,OHAVING FEET RADIUS O A POINT OF FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60'59'45" w JAR TANGENCY; V THENCE SOUTH 59°50'35"EAST e '4)• = ANCE OF 5'. '. T UTHWESTE CURVATURE; ING A THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY AL'• :AID CURVE, CONC RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CEN RA . ' a F 08°07'02"FO N RC DISTANCE OF 7.08 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 51°43'33"EA.T FIR A DIS1 . ` e • • FEET 0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALf' ' ' � ii9"R•R HWESTERLY, HAVINGA RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET,A , E L A�I �1(1' AN RC DISTANCE OF 238 59 FEET TOA POINT OF TANG= �f►� .�F. THENCE NORTH IS°54'52"E O• 11 ti ° : POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALON D CURVE,CONCAV= E' Y AVMA RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE 0 IF '05"FOR AN ARC C' 35.42 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; v THENCE NORTH 62°16'13"WEST I!S'l'ANCE OF 114,7 0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALO ' A e� RVE ' • NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL A ° '• ,27°3 `'VIII-°` AN ARC DISTANCE OF 23.95 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 34°49'25"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.05 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; RVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,THENCE AENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°02'54NORTHERLY ALONG SAID "FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 33.20 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 03°13'29"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.14 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 86°I8'54"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.01 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 89°32'23"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 3.07 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 73°17'49"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 63.96 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 16°14'35"EAST FOR A DIS'T'ANCE OF 80.38 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 150.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40°40'16" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 106.48 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 56°54'51"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 161.81 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°46'12"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.76 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 38°08'38"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1.12 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 9,34 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 137°26'21"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.41 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 80°42'17"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.07 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 150.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°02'27" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 42.00 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 64°39'50"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 109,93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; Page 7 of 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0604 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.1 CONTINUED THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°17'14"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.42 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; - THENCE SOUTH 73°57'05"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 141.99 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°48'22" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 85.18 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 57°14'33"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 43.98 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 66°23'10"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 28,97 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 09°08'37"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 23.02 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36°39'19" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 63.98 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 27°30'42"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 54.66 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET.A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°46'56"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 08°43'46"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 88.57 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°31'16"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 53.27 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 39°15'02"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 65°58'46"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.27 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY;HC26°43'45" ET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTH ESTER EAST FOR A 1,)-4,1 THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AIpN► a ► SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF/5.00 FEET,A CENT'. -MI' E OF 63°14'08" ! ' ' RC DISTANCE OF 16.56 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 89°57'52"EAS FO STA I FEE TO POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG ID U , .•4 N VE THER , VING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE O II' ' 0 �r I F I'.St FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; �/ THENCE SOUTH 78°51'22"E .T ^i• I ,. . 2 'i � A 'OINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY a rf.•t 1.'�+. ' E-.NC--- ' I'" WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CE ' L ANGLE OF 69°17' • 'FO' ^ a DISTANCE OF 60.47 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; 't5.4 THENCE NORTH 31°51'12"EA ' A DISTANCE OF 3',F' t2 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG S ' RVE,CONCAVE W 'f' ItL HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41° ''G11� '' AN ARC D '• OF 18.17 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 09°46'56"WEST FOR A e P' 1 Ee��`r'.1 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CUR' , CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 12.50 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 109°24'29"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 23.87 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 80°22'27"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 32.22 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 84°32'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 29.51 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 15°04'54"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.90 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE.OF 20°11'23"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 44.05 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 35°16'17"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.91 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)OF SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45"EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 499.78 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 27.381 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 12-1285K8.DES rase 8 or 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0605 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.2 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)OF SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAW PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) FOR A DISTANCE OF 711,28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 34°09'03"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.15 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°37'25"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 55.90 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47°28'49"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 82.87 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 12°17'40"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.04 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 32°I9'05"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 56.41 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 20°01'25"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 111°03'30"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.38 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 88°57'56"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.45 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID -' .NCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 65.00 FEET,A CENTRAL A s EV: °Cy? I4Y6 ' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 101.20 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 01°49'36"WEST F i 'A 1 STANCE OF 26.0 1 '0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG ' I i ' RVE,CONCAVE EAS •RL HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°2'0 8' • - • ' TAN 0 8.44 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 46°30'29"E .T F I ' - S ' l.� A 'OINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY A • S1 1 D 3i S• UT WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 65.00 FEET,A CE T' II N, `j�I, F s N BC DISTANCE OF 47.16 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; C) �,/ J�t THENCE SOUTH 04°56'17"EA T' R A DISTANCE OF .11 F ET : POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY AWN 1 ` CURVE,CONCAVE .S E' AVING A RADIUS OF 65.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF '' 4" FOR AN ARC fit N 6,81 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 01°03'57"WEST F c '/' ; ANCE OF I1' •• '(� TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID ra ' it•LY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 65.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31°49'13" ••ITI,' ' •'i - ANCE OF 36.10 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 30°45'17"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 196.30 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 65.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°33'22"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 18.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 14°11'55"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 116.87 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 5.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 112°52'40"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 9,85 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 81°1995"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 121.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°20'16"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.77 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 86°20'29"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.95 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY. HAVING A RADIUS OF 3.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°53'33"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.03 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 35°45'58"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 106.64 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°50'36"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 15.44 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 44°36'35"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 41.70 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°07'13"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 40.35 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 67°43'47"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.86 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1492'22"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 24.79 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; Par 9 9222 SECTION 21 I I OR: 2496 PG: 0606 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.2 CONTINUED THENCE NORTH S3°31'25"WEST FOR A DJS'I'ANCE OF 65.63 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 51°23'15"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 8.97 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 75°05'20"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.64 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°13'10" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.27 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 74°41'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 83,85 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 113°36'54"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.83 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 38°55'23"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 68.97 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 93°51'45"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 98.29 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 54°56'22"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.61 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 21°38'31"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.66 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 3397'5l"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.96 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°43'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 131.69 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 04°25'48"EAST FOR A DISTANC_OF 97.27 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CU' c4 TERLV,HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°4T ,,\;a n `' •1 E OF 48.51 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; �*' THENCE NORTH W13'25"EAST 'OW I ISTANCE OF 31.99 e A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY A IN t RYE, CONCA S a THEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CE 'O • FOR A A'C DISTANCE OF 7.39 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 14,THENCE NORTH 74°32'18"E j/ A 'O INT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AL1 a SA D C IN RT WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A C: < ,7"F I$• N DISTANCE OF 27.44 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 58°48'51"EA R A DISTANCE OF 9. 1 F ET 14 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY A ' SAID CURVE, C=';t=A E ,y HWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CEN "r* • NGLF:OF 23°11'21' ^' ' • C DISTANCE OF 40.47 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 35°37'30"EAST FO'+ - IYCE E.6..s TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID • ' ' a e ' .STERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°t ' y•' • ' ARC DISTANCE OF 52.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 05°23'01"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 22.12 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45"EAST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 438.41 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 9.736 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 12-I286K8.DES Page 10 of 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0607 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.3 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) FOR A DISTANCE OF 1185.49 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 33°18'20"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 88.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°08'14"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 38.64 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 55°26'34"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 88.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 52°31'14"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 69.19 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 71°42'12"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.62 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40°26'12"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 70.58 F TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 67°51'37"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.72 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 77°19'40" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.96 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 09°28'03"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 72.41 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURV' • - ASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°16'2 ' . Ofea CE OF 7,22 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 17°44'24"EAST F*' A' STANCE OF 77.80 E A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG 1 • RVE.CONCAVE WES RL' HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 8° • 2SIVITA. - . ' 'TANC .0 16.24 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 00°52'05"W:ST ' • -ti 1' -.:' -' - . O A POINT OF CURVATURE; - THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AL I ( S I R �� N tR� WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CE T'1 L N I 5'" .�, F�1 N C DISTANCE OF 44.20 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; n THENCE SOUTH 5I°30'47"W>' 0 R A DISTANCE OF .44 F•ET ,,,40 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY 1' G SAID CURVE, C2,,;_C F '•! HEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CE ANGLE OF 53°23'17' •.' .T -C DISTANCE OF 93.24 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 01°54'24"EAST F I 'n !1 'ANCE OF 1,4.40 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID b' 4KP+ :Art 'LY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°33'48" aql N 1 NCE OF 41.13 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 25°28'12"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.38 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°17'28"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 14.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 14°10'44"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 76.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°25'35"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.17 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 0S44'51"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 47.81 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°33'14"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 16.00 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 35°48'04"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 4.28 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 75°03'23"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.30 FEE'F TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 69°08'33"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.21 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°46'41"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 63.85 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 20°21'32"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.11 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°43'29"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 45.45 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 14°21'36"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 34.37 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°23'48"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.54 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; Post II of 22 SECTION 21 E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Ex.V.E.1 Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Ex.V.E.1 Potable Water Ex. V.E.1 Sanitary Sewer Ex.V.E.3 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS Ex. V.E.1 Drainage Ex.V.E.1 Solid Waste Ex.V.E.1 Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Ex.V.E.2 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e.water,sewer, fire protection, police protection,schools and emergency medical services. 3. Ex. V.E.1 Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider,and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools,fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Ex. V.F.1 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary,if applicable Ex.V.B.I Coastal Management Boundary,if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport,if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION N/A $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Yes $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Yes Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Yes Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner(See attached form) Yes 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of $250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1'1=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 5 H:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA application(revised 5-21-2018).docx V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Ex.V,A.1 Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Ex.V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Ex.V.A.1 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Ex. V,B.1 Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands,with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL N/A Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE:THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. N/A Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish &Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g.panther or black bear range,avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference F.A.C. Chapter 163-3177 and Collier County's Capital improvements Element Policy 1.1.2(Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? Y Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? N Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5%of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes,indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. N Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use,and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. 4 11:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA application(revised 5-21-2018).docx F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership,or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ): Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy,indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See Attachment "A" for Special Warranty Deed B. GENERAL LOCATION Southwest corner of the intersection of Main House Drive and U.S.41 C. PLANNING COMMUNITY North Naples D. TAZ 77 E. SIZE IN ACRES 3.4± F. ZONING PUD G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN See Exhibit "V.B.1" Future Land Use Map H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict ^ . IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element Capital Improvement Element CCME Element X Future Land Use Element Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) N/A OF THE ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM N/A TO D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Exhibit IV.D.1 (Activity Center Index Map) and Exhibit IV.D.2 (Activity Center#2 Map) E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A 3 H:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA application(revised 5-21-2018).docx II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL,Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership bya CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the B. If the property is owned percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. 100% 2550 Goodlette Road, Suite 100 Naples, FL 34103 Robert Corina, Pres., Patrick Utter,V. Pres; Christian Spilker,V. Pres. C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE,list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE,with an individual or individuals,a Corporation,Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries,or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Date of Contract: 2 H:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA application(revised 5-21-2018).docx APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER: DATE RECEIVED: PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE: DATE SUFFICIENT: This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient,the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant Patrick L. Utter,Vice President Company The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. Address 2550 Goodlette Road North,Suite 100 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34013 Phone Number 239-434-4049 Fax Number N/A B. Name of Agent* Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP,Vice President • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Hole Montes, Inc. Address 950 Encore Way City Naples State FL Zip Code 341 10 Phone Number 239-254-2000 Fax Number 239-254-2099 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. Address 2550 Goodlette Road North,Suite 100 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239-434-4049 Fax Number N/A D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners,architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Norm Trebilcock, P.E. Dominick J.Amico, P.E. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Agnoli, Barber, & Brundage, Inc. 1205 Piper Boulevard,Suite 202, Naples, FL 34110 7400 Tamiami Trail N., Naples, FL 34108 Telephone:239-566-9551 Telephone: 239-597-3111 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Email:amico@abbinc.com 1 H:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\GMPA application(revised 5-21-2018).docx Consistency with FLUE Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of the Collier County, where applicable, and as follows: Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The property is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of a local road, Main House Drive, and an arterial road, US 41. Access will be via an existing access point to Main House Drive. Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. Main House Drive provides connectivity directly to The Old Collier Golf Club, and indirectly to residential and commercial development to the north via Walkerbilt Road, achieving this objective. Page 4 of 4 H:\2018\2018015\PUDA\Resubmittal\Attachment B-Justification&Supplemental SSGMPA&PUD(5-21-18).docx The subject property is located just outside the Mixed Use Activity Center #2, and is designated Urban on the FLUM. As the property was previously found consistent with and considered within the Activity Center boundary, the proposed amendment will be correcting an error on the FLUM and provide consistency between the PUD which allows commercial uses and the GMP. Such uses are commonly found in Urban areas and will be compatible with the surrounding area, as there are developed commercial uses to the north, east, and south of the property. Policy 1.4: Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map shall be designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources;promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. The subject site has been approved for commercial development and is within the urban area. The proposed amendment furthers this policy by allowing infill development of uses compatible to adjacent, existing development, therefore reducing urban sprawl. Additionally, natural resources are preserved as the property is already cleared of vegetation and filled and development will not result in the loss of native vegetation or habitat. Consistency with FLUE Objective 5: Implement land use policies that promote sound planning, protect environmentally sensitive lands and habitat for listed species while protecting private property rights, ensure compatibility of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element. Policy 5.5: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map... The property is bordered on one side by a principal arterial, can be served by Collier County utilities (water and sewer), served by CAT transit services, and all other types of public service facilities. Additionally, the proposed amendment allows uses adjacent to existing development. As a result, the proposed amendment is consistent with this policy in that it reduces urban sprawl. Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The proposed commercial uses are compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. To the north and east is The Old Collier Golf Course, which is also a part of the Collier Tract 21 PUD. To the west, across US 41, is Germain BMW of Naples; catty-corner is the Watermark Grille; and to the south is Wal-Mart Supercenter. �. Page 3 of 4 H.\2018\2018015\PUDA\Resubmittal\Attachment B-Justification&Supplemental SSGMPA&PUD(5-21-18).docx Consistency with Florida Statutes and Collier County GMP: Section 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes: 1. A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: a. The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: The proposed amendment is limited to limited to a parcel approximately 3.40 acres in size. b. The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. The proposed amendment involves a use of approximately 3.40 acres. As it is the beginning of the year, it is safe to assume that Collier County has not exceeded the maximum of 120 acres. c. The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site- specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. The amendment proposes a boundary change to the Activity Center #2 Map to allow development of the subject property with commercial uses allowed per zoning. d. The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of S. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by S. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to S. 380.05(1). The subject property is not located within an area of critical state concern. Consistency with FLUE Objective 1: Promote well planned land uses consistent with Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Subdistricts and the Future Land Use Map to ensure compatibility between the natural and human environments. Policy 1.1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. Page 2 of 4 H:\2018\2018015\PUDA\Resubmittal\Attachment B-Justification&Supplemental SSGMPA&PUD(5-21-18).docx ATTACHMENT B JUSTIFICATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR COLLIER TRACT 21 PUDA& SSGMPA (Revised May 21,2018) Existing Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject property is located at the intersection of Main House Drive and Tamiami Trail North (US 41). The subject parcel is ±3.40 acres in size. The land use designation is presently Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The property is zoned PUD, allowing for golf course and commercial uses. The Collier Tract 21 PUD spreads west to Vanderbilt Drive and in total contains approximately 460.40 acres. The PUD allows for 50,000 square feet of commercial uses and/or hotels/motels not to exceed 100 units. The maximum commercial square footage shall be reduced by every 225 square feet for every hotel room. The surrounding lands, on the east/south sides are designated Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #2 Subdistrict. The lands to the north/west sides are designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The zoning and existing land use on surrounding lands is as follows: North: Zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD, golf course East: Across US 41, Zoned Collier Tract 22 PUD, car dealership South: Zoned Plaza 21 PUD, shopping center West: Zoned Collier Tract 21 PUD, golf course Requested Changes The proposed SSGMPA expands the Mixed Use Activity Center #2 boundary to include the subject property. There is a companion PUD amendment to allow for a hotel with up to 200 rooms and revising the square footage reduction formula to provide for a reduction of 250 square feet of the overall permitted 50,000 SF of gross leasable area for each hotel room permitted, rather than the 225 SF in the existing formula; and to add automotive vehicle dealers (SIC code 5511, limited to automobile agencies (dealers)retail and only new vehicles) as a principal use. Justification for Request Prior to the 1996 EAR-based GMPAs that established site-specific Activity Center boundaries, the subject property was deemed within the Mixed Use Activity center boundary, as 75% or more of the subject property was within the %2 mile square boundary. The boundaries were subsequently changed to be site-specific, and for reasons unknown, the subject commercial tract was excluded from the Mixed Use Activity Center #2. The requested amendment will correct this oversight, and provide consistency between the GMP and the PUD for previously permitted commercial development on the subject site. Page 1 of 4 H:\2018\2018015\PUDA\Resubmittal\Attachment B-Justification&Supplemental SSGMPA&PUD(5-21-18).docx 106. *** 011: 2496 PG: 0618 *** LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.8 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SW 114)OF SECTION 16,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW I/4) OF SECTION 16; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45" EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW 1/4) FOR A DISTANCE OF 1197.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 37°07'15"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 340.08 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 270.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 80°52'46" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 381.14 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 62°00'00"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 348.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 127,84 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 99°07'10"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 221.16 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NON-TANGENT LINE, SAID INTERSECTION BEING WITH SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF SECTION 16; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 896.61 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 5.383 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS 0 ECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,IN Cot—A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLA 'D LAND SU' + .. w RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M. COURSES HEREIN REPRESE T AY' ' .%TATE:ME N HI a TER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAP S. u. REF: ABB DRAWING FILEN''.69; 0 1 I2-1292K8.DES C) , , C� _.A_ OLV cam. 1 I 1 s i I i e 1 1 1 f 1 1 e 1 Z `yI i r- B k 7 t rage 22 of 22 1 SECTION 21 i prY OR: 2496 PG: 0617 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.7 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)OF SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE I/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4) FOR A DISTANCE OF 1489.50 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 00°26'15" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 165.59 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 68°51'48"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1032 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 95°46'21"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 25.07 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 26°54'33"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.92 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF I I°03'40"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.31 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 37°58'13"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 21.38 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE:OF 02°31'l3" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF'0.66 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1395'16"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.57 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 48°42'16"WEST FOR A DI.' ' 41 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG,jW\ $l E NORTHWESTERLY. HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRA i • 't ' ARC DISTANCE OF 12.76 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; mis THENCE SOUTH 85°16'01"WE 'F' ' A DISTANCE OF 46.26 F- T • A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY LO - ID - CAV NO'THEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 5.00 FEET,A CEN RA AN F 1 •°26'10" OR A AR DISTANCE OF 10.16 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; T THENCE NORTH 21°42'10"E ST i I ' A + SOC C • '� f 0 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY u IS D R t; C-, S• T EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CE • �1 .' :1_ ."F• ; -N j I DISTANCE OF 6.39 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; • THENCE NORTH 46°07'I6"EA' r,•R A DISTANCE OF F E A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY A• SAID CURVE, CIS THWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENT •4. 8 GLI:OF 36°08'14"F' . RC DISTANCE OF 6.31 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 09°59'01"EAST FOR JON • ' T TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SA ., x• AVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20,00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE.OF 63°25'33"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.14 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 73°24'35"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.37 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 37°43'37" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.75 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; 1 CONTAINING 0.146 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 I2-1291K8.DES • P•8121 of 22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0616 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.6 CONTINUED THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°57'26"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.13 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 55°52'46"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.86 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°17'09"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1.62 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 46°35'38" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 0.64 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 0.99 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 106°32'39" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1.85 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 0.369 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 12-1290K8.DES nc o� Pip 20 0222 SECTION 21 — c OR: 2496 PG: 0615 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.6 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 114)OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 114) OF SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE 1/4)FOR A DISTANCE OF 135.16 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL(U.S. 4I-S.R. 45); THENCE SOUTH 00°40'47" EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1279,13 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE SOUTH 89°19'13" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 993.27 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 59°57'01"WEST FOR A DIS'T'ANCE OF 1.41 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°56'07" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.23 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 89°53'08"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 39.38 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°55'11"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.17 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 84°11'41"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 106,57 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03°05'54" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 2.70 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 8I°05'47"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 94.53 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°20'26" FO • DISTANCE OF 446 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 'R C. T THENCE NORTH 75°45'21"WEST F1 o.. y‘T TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAI 1 fi7 CONCAVE NO' ;; Y,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF ,A°47;!" FOR AN ARC DISTA E F 1.32 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 71°58'04"W •T F I R ' - N OF 8 FEE TO POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG AlE • + •' •.' Y, VING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE •F i " 5' ~, ' S F .58 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; ' � THENCE a NORTH 65°55'29" a :� � 4.27 T Ery POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALON a ID CURVE,CONCA EAS ER ° AVING A RADIUS OF 0.88 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE 0 I: 5'45"FOR AN ARC ?',T N 'a r 2.12 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 72°40'15"EAS ,i ' DISTANCE OF 0.99 �/O A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID R' 'ONCAVE S Y,HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET.A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°26 0 I Y ' r, e4' E OF 3.00 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 84°06'35" EAST FOR A DISTA OF 7.81 FEET TO A POINT of CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°07'26" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 2.14 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 89°46'00"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 25.84 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°15'05"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.67 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 69°58'55"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 35.35 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°33'25"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7.18 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 49°25'31"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 30.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 61°44'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 21.55 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 68°49'50"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 38.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°55'41" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.13 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 86°45'31"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 19.20 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 21°55'19"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.83 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 64°50'12"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 136.43 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; Page 19of22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0614 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.5 CONTINUED FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°59'46"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.47 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 85°35'10"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 87.79 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 57°13'29"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 39.95 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 28°21'40"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 70.88 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 5.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 80016'24"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7.01 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 51°54'43"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 89.43 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°11'31"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.00 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 34°43'13"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 113.43 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°37'01"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 15.79 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 12°06'11"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 123.79 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAW CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 29°47'25"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 31.20 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 41°53'36"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 20,04 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE' •F39°3 "FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 31.04 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; -CR 0 THENCE NORTH 12°14'53"WEST Fe ' ' ' ' • ` ' TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY A • D CURVE, CON a UTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENT' CLE OF 54°38'39"FOR N A'C DISTANCE OF 57.22 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 66°53'31"WE. +R/4'6 l N •OF 40. FEET'0 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY IO R HEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,ACE • N: e + '� +- + ' 7 R• DISTANCE OF 2.64 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; • �� e PAINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTH 64°12 26 W • THENCE NORTHWESTERLY C SAID CURVE, '• 44' HEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET.A CEN '11 ANGLE OF 12°06'44... ,�R' DISTANCE OF 13.69 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; rr(�� THENCE NORTH 52°15'39"WEST I. 11STANCE OF 221.29 • El' 0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALO �'� CURVE, Ca' ..�L" ORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL + ••• + N ARC DISTANCE OF 11.89 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 29°32'46"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 139.02 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07°10'07"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.75 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 36°42'53"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 129,50 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY. HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE.OF 15°07'06"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7.92 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 51°49'59"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 103.80 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°47'53"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 15.08 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 23°02'06"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 106.60 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°14'31"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 25.26 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 25°12'24"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 36.58 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 73.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 18.393 ACRES OF LAND,MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 12.1289K$.DES Page 11 IAN SECTION 21 6 OR: 2496 PG: 0613 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.5 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAW PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW 1/4)OF SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW 1/4)FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.02 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF VANDERBILT DRIVE(C.R.C-901),THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 02°13'17" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1408,49 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 89°27'36"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 78.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE;THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°57'28" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.45 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 70°34'56"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 82.21 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°05'57"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 10.52 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 50°29'00"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 43.09 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2I°19'54"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.17 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 29°09'06" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 37.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAI r 'o M. AVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL • ' 1 N ARC DISTANCE OF 4.77 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 40°04'29"EAST 'a•' IS'1'ANCE OF 31.74 er A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY A IN • > ' EVE, CONCAV' NO THEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CEN RA A i OR A AR, DISTANCE OF 24.45 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 83°53'40"EA. F% • !3 % 7 A 'OINTOFCURVATURE; �� THENCE EASTERLY ALONG •AI �C'R : d H VING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE 0 0' 2" % (2.)1ST I i E 1 9 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; �1 • THENCE SOUTH 74°35'28"EAS' %' A DISTANCE OF 1' .:0 F;ET .''► POINT OF CURVATURE; ti.THENCE NORTHEASTERLY AL 111.,i AID CURVE, CO� THWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENT' 1- E OF 83°28'09"Fa ' RC DISTANCE OF 36.42 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; -4.'^ • \ THENCE NORTH 21°56'23"EAST FOR A )�,,SI' ' . .d.inV,.1.7, T TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID '!' 4 % 'CAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°18'25" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7,99 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 40°14'48"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 51.08 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42°47'53"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 22.41 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 83°02'41"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 72.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12°21'35' FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.39 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 84°35'44"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 62.25 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.84 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 165°00'36"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 31.21 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 3 THENCE NORTH 69°36'19"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 17.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A 3 RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°38'49"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 9.65 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 41°57'30"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 49.68 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 59°14'13" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 20.68 FEET TO A POINT OF t TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 17°16'43"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 88.99 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48°18'41"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 16.86 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 65°35'24"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.58 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30,00 rap 17 all SECTION 21 •- OR: 2496 PG: 0612 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.4 CONTINUED THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36°08'26"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 15.77 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 67°44'09"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 9.41 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 30°19'17"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 21.17 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 37°24'52"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 16.95 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE. CONCAVE SOUTIIEASTF..RLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17°40'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.34 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 19°44'13"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 69.45 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 38°25'00"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 26.82 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 58°09'13"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 8.23 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 40.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 58°04'50"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 40.55 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 63°45'57"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 52.27 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27049'42" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 97.14 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 88°24'21"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.89 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CU: CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 75.00 FEET,A CENTRAL AN 1 2°tA3'Fr T r►R AN ARC DISTANCE OF 82.10 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; V THENCE NORTH 28°52'26"WEST F c 'L` + ANCE OF 121:5 k TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY A ► -AID CURVE, CONCA • THWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENT' L ® 59°07'17"FOR A A • DISTANCE OF 51.59 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; - - THENCE NORTH 87°59'43" ' ES I T-. 7 F:ET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; *119 CONTAINING 21.578 ACRES►' E�t E•S�' Ly SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AN' •T• CTIO' OF' k►RD. AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE, ' GO PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLA 4; ND LAND SURV .+ RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO. 1 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE A'':C1[S1BAJ y ' • HCH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO.6932 12-1288K8.DES Page 16 o122 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0611 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.4 CONTINUED THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAW CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 80.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 103°59'31" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 145.20 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 71°00'13"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 86.40 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET.A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 22°15'50"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 48°44'23"WEST FOR A DIS'T'ANCE OF 8.06 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 67°20'52" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 63°54'45"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 3.39 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY. HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°44'26"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.78 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 30°10'19"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.93 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 85°11'15"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 89.21 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 64°38'26"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 43.19 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 158°37'04" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 119.57 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 43°15'30"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 121.76 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRALANG " OR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.59 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; K THENCE SOUTH 58°13'25"EAST FO' +�'CE OF '.1 • TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY AL. D CURVE, CON UTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENT• L OF 42°36'29"FOR N A C DISTANCE OF 44.62 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 15°36'56"EAF a R A DIS a .9 FEET 0 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALON S " '4 �e y ,H VING A RADIUS OF 60.00 i1 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE a 0'• &1" •' it '1 F 99 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; r �. THENCE SOUTH 25°09'27"EA• F "IS -.24 L DINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALON t r ��a CURVE,CONCAV ES1 AVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF ti�e'31"FOR AN ARC I.,; .1.15 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 04°35'05"WEST ' ' I!STANCE OF 36.26 ' 4 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAI � ONCAV : V,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°19' ' I i �� CE OF 8.84 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 20°44'00"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 156.50 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°37'26"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.80 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 0006'34"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 123.97 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 66°49'21"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 58.31 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 62°42'46"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 113.48 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY.HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3249'20"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.46 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 84°27'54"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 58.30 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 122°07'53"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 42.63 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 26°35'46"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 97.50 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE.CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36°24'10"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.71 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 09°48'23"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 26.87 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 73°45'47"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.19 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; . THENCE SOUTH 83°34'10"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 72.62 FEET;TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°18'25"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 8.86 FEET TO A POINT OF I"°•L TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 76°07'25"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 45.76 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; Pale 15 of 22 SECTION 21 5 OR, 2496 PG: 0610 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO,4 A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4) OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SAID PARCEL OF LAND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: _ - COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW 1/4) OF SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45" EAST ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW 1/4)FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.02 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY LINE OF VANDERBILT DRIVE (C.R. C-901); THENCE SOUTH 02°13'17" EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 1447.89 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND; THENCE SOUTH 02°13'17" EAST CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 305.41 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1588.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 20°30'21"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 63.73 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.0 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°3I'4I"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 4.82 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 14°58'39"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 143.31 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE EASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°51'00"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 8.60 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 05°07'38"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 81,66 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08°54'49" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 15.56 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 14°02'28"WEST FOR A D ' r; a1' 81 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID • h$.7 ' STERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE � ' FOR '.. ISTANCE OF 18.67 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 24°44'11"WES FO - 1 -NCE OF 127.31 F T A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY . LO.G ... .1 C 1 • CAVE 0 'HWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CE TR L ANGLE.! • '8'00'12" ORA AR' DISTANCE OF 1397 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 32°44'24"W ST 'O' A • .0• 7T 0 POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 1 °"' 'ONC' NIf: HEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CE T - 'GL' ; 0 ."F ' • •DISTANCE OF 15.75 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 5,�` THENCE NORTH 23°42'5W'WE" •• ' A DISTANCE OF -.1;41.1 'E. A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG • RVE,CONCAVE A ' ' AVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF II'. '5 OR AN ARC DIST • 4F 20.43 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 12°00'34"WEST FOR I 4.47,4.. ' ' EET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURV ASTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25°05'17" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 43.79 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 13°04'42"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 114.89 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°43'33" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 20.47 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 01°21'09"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 232.88 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF I5°50'58" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 27.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 14°29'49"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 120.71 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW 1/4)OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE SOUTH 89°33'45" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 478.45 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 75°18'02" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 177.61 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; • THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 130.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°31'04"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 62.44 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 47°46'58"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 238,65 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19°24'34"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 16.94 FEET g TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 28°22'24"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 41.75 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 30.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°22'41"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.48 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 05°00'17"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 76.64 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; Pap 1d of 22 SECTION 21 A OR: 2496 PG: 0609 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.3 CONTINUED THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1248'24" FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.18 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 04°01'52"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 16.10 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 7.50 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 134°24'52"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 17.60 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 49°37'00"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.15 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°57'17"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 9.56 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 38°39'43"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 31.04 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°22'56"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 9.06 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 28°16'47"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 14.55 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE NORTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 5.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 112°42'30"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 9.84 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 39°00'44"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°03'09"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 7.34 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 10°57'35"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 100.92 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAW CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 500.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°49'25" i A A DISTANCE OF 7.19 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; K C THENCE NORTH 11047'00"WEST FO' i ' • OF , TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAI s u; `E,CONCAVE EA HAVING A RADIUS OF 10.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11' r FOR AN ARC DISTAN 0 .07 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 00°04'41"EA ' ' A 1 ST C e 8901 EET T 0 A '°INT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG' °'•N Me, `4 • HA ING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF I• i 'F4 , II�•T • 4 ' 14. /"'"'N:8 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; 4 ((" THENCE NORTH 16°58'20"WE' I -% S •• s .95 " °t INTERSECTION WITH THE SAID NORTHERLY LINE 0 4144ORTHEAST QUA'!ER(, E I • 3 SAID SECTION 21; THENCE NORTH 89°33'45"EAS G SAID NORTHE'st. L N LA' A DISTANCE OF 1107.28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINN CONTAINING 12.965 ACRES OF LA ° ' : I R LESS. `>• SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTR v U '. e, ., , J AGNOLI,BARBER&BRUNDAGE,INC. PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS,PLANNERS AND LAND SURVEYORS RICHARD L.SHEPHARD,P.S.M.NO.2474 COURSES HEREIN REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE AS DIGITIZED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. REF: ABB DRAWING FILE NO,6932 12.1287K8,DES t� { Past 17°I22 SECTION 21 OR: 2496 PG: 0608 LAND DESCRIPTION OF AREA NO.3 CONTINUED THENCE NORTH 27°45'24"EAST FOR A DIS'T'ANCE OF 19.42 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE WESTERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 45°16'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 19.76 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 17°31'14"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 18.75 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 28°52'39"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 12.60 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 46°23'53"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 6.75 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,CONCAVE SOUTHERLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 75°41'41"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 33,03 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 57°54'25"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 13.37 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 1S°00'17"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 6.55 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 42°54'09"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 200.67 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS E OF 50.00 EETEA CENTAL ANGLE ORLY ALONG SAID 13°26'07"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 11.73 FEET TOA POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 5620'16"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 95.33 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; ALONGTHENCE SOUTHWESTERLY A A , HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CE TNGLE OF 04°15'18'FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.71 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 52°04'58"WEST FOR A DISTANCE 0E62.43 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAI1 • CAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL A y '}' + Q' 1 ' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 56.13 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 00°43'10"EAST F a A POINT OF CURVATURE;�' STANCE OF 30.83 ' ' THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG ID ' RYE CONCAVE EASTC Y,OAVING 3.23 FEET ODIUS A POINTF 5 .00 OF FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6° TANGENCY; A 'OINTOFCURVATURE; THENCE NORTH 27°20'07"EA'T F+ ' •4 `' THENCE NORTHERLY ALAN4. SA U' r �� H VING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE 0 2A •. • t! �� • x;21 75 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 02°24'54"EA •R A DISTANCE OF 2 R T T•r •'OINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG : �4`� CURVE,CONCAV -- R AVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 �� FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2 'y- "FOR AN ARC D ,• • 19.16 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 24°22'16"EAST FO .••;; C E OF 19 AO, 0 A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID C•- •yy�'v RLY,HAVING A RADIUS OF 25.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7426'08"F. Mt, 1 ANCE OF 32.48 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 50°03'51"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 7.45 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24°56'31"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 43.53 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 75°00'22"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 56.33 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03°07'40"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5.46 FEET TO RADIUSVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 78°08'02"WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 50.98 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 100.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42°47'24"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 74.68 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THENFEET,AA CENTRAL ANGLE OF 75°19'36" CONCAVERVE,FOR ANARC DISTALRADIUSY,HAVING A CE OF 6.57 FEET TO APOINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 39°58'58"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 115.88 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 50.00 FEET,A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°32'13"FOR AN ARC DISTANCE OF 20,54 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 16°26'45"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 44.39 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; .00 THENCE CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°29'53"FOR CONCAVE DISTANCE LOF.80IFET NG A TODAUPOINIUS OFTOOF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 10°56'52"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 60.08 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; FEET,THENCE CCENT AL ANGRLY LE OF 05°53'24"NG SAID RFOR ANNCAVE EASTERLY,ARC DISTANCE OF 5.141 RADIUS FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 16°50'16"EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 55.63 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; ►•g•l2°r22 SECTION 21 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) COLLIER TRACT 21 PUD i, PATRICK L.UTTER (print name),as VICE PRESIDENT (title, if applicable)of THE OLD COLLIER GOLF CLUB;INC, (company, If a Ilcable),swear or affirm under oath,that I am the(choose one)owner( „tapplloantncontract purchasernand that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s)requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property asa result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches,data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours • for the purpose of Investigating and evaluating the request made through this application;and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. We/i authorize ROBERT.1.MULHERE,FAICP,VICE PRESIDENT,PLANNING SERVICES to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes: • • if the applicant is a corporation, then it Is usually executed by the corp.pres.or v.pres. • if the applicant is a Limited Liability Company(L.L.C.) or Limited Company(L.C.),,then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's"Managing Member.° • if the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant Is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be Identified as the "general partner"of the named partnership. • if the applicant is a trust, then they must Include the trustee's name and the words"as trustee" ''� • In each Instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the f7 s ted I it are true ...) , 2._ Signature 7 Date PATRICK L. UTTER, VICE PRESIDENT THE OLD COLLIER GOLF CLUB, INC. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to(or affirmed)and subscribed before me on d L`A-,aiDt7(date)by QA•re-Ci.zc.L.Ute_ (name of person providing: oath or affirmation), as. V‘cl>~ Q tvc"i-c" who Is personally known to me or who has produced (type of Identification)as identification. r' °LSI-4'). ------1 STAMP/SEAL Signature of Notary Public eYRPV@�� Valerie L.Pike 1, NotaryPublic-StateofFlorida m0), o� Commission#GG22100 9rFOFF1.a�` Expires 08/17/2020 • CP108-COA-001151155 REV 3/24/14 ul ,_ 3 g 8 En 2 . a ti 2 0j I R 25 E I R 26 6 I v .. NR ;6e.* \ • In co e -- .,ff i r i 1LRC U I 1 1 a I - 0 . 1 . 1 _ , I w < ___1 0 2 20' 1 11-Ma UI it C.R.e58 I li- :" Z X co ..: I 1. 4 < LLI it 4 I I ui II X CD .- _ 11 v I ME 2 4 1 3 V CC 1-- 1 i . .,., m. Iiitil — C.R.'846 A.11- ---. ''' .k . 111 i 1m i, a , i CO .... Z — LIJ LU UJ WWII/ M I 11 '; 1 LU 5 ___ — UI 0 c).. — --- __, _ -,- _, 'I, 7111 . mir....i cii . 3.) . ;. . . „, iii bI ,1 1 •IIP 1 .,. .is s 12 ' '-'1 13 C.R.862 10 / i ,/ ,,, J. NI C.R.1896 I 11111 tr.. , . SI 2 -.- C.R.896' i ,..,,v, .,. I . , C 1 6 _I. 1 1 I 2 0 13r.- 1,e4 W §191'--'.1- 1 -..., .. i . V I- I... ILI 1 I • ___I 22 4-.tilik_ - :C.R. 886 IIII , - ........, _ b BIM ..____, I 0 t----i ink. . •cum 2 z '>.< I. _I M 0 A I--.., MI\ I-75 1 M — C) at4 \ S.R.84 0 , 2 i ip, S.R.84 .4,• . 1 1•2 . .2 IA L4 .Y. mw . 9 . :711411.- , 1' '.0 .° •- • 1 —_------ ut 1 17m ; :q2!,i 0 MIXED USE & INTERCHANGE -\ , . 17 1 '2 00 m e-i'.. A -..., i 0 egg V in . NI& C.R.864 1, lir A_ VI ACTIVITY CENTER I I-. INDEX MAP 2.1 1 1 , 0 Milli 1 \ k 1 ' V . . 24 , ,. 0 1 ML 291. 3 NE i r . m m V i5 25 I N SCALE 6 1 . N cr 0 I-• AMENDED - JANUARY 25, 2005 - . ,. 1 5 ';,..,,„. (Ord.Nc. 2005-03) I ! I , i < Z IX — i I 11.1 AMENDED - JUNE 7, 2005 1 18 (Ord.No.2005-25) I , I t 1 a I e ., 1 IX >. — . LU I— AMENDED- OCTOBER 14,2008 . ) ,,,,, I .•- (Ord. No. 2008-59) , I .„ l ....I p AMENDED- SEPTEMBER 13,2011 ' I 1 - 0 c.) UN (Ord.No.2011-26) ' Is , 1 4 ly-- I_ . c &3,N A IA 0 < AMENDED-JUNE 13,2017 lillik - I irri 7 71 (Ord.No. 2017-22) .. ''',..,, 1 All, m 1 15 . '4 12 . _ PREPARED 8Y1 GIN/CAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT it` DATE: 1/2016 FILE: ACCESS-INDEX-2016.0WG I R 25 E I R 26 E I 1 E 4.<441 N o i o I N G _ S O 05 E N 61 'b =E9 g5 o bre N <8 '' I N 0 1 N c O igE m 4; 6 < F i a ry W W C O< 0 W w O _ j W 2 Uj tii �4 w U A0. 3 �- m x H V I,: .Z J oa" a o g - CpZ } 9 Cy 1 �Wo'.� hp y = _ 1— w Co 61 '� X _ > a�,"o 0„ W J F fit o= I LLa -----:0)K i g i5 90i' A g Al k'si*A 1 g 0 AVM 3015N33i] ow. -z w 6 2$ 0.C il 5 .00" � ,, 0 6 '''`\ 444# ig. ....— ♦♦ Ili all q i g 1 , izi-01 Ali* ." j r w WI - I In .2� VIP .-:i g • i 1 i io 0 NI El i 1 ta i ' -: 111 gill Mr g ' W, ;;;::;!! 11 gm iI � , N mml al 1 ; limHZ w eil ._ 0 i NM MIN Wig. �o 42 z cc w I s it a ® ' ■mei .4 W H 115 A \ PP Ill 1111 J � q Noy am 0 E5 LLJ C __ N I]A115 Num MOM W MINIM MOM 4 a -- 2 z6563 MIMI MI - all S -- a -- 7 U `e= O 0 ® I e MIMI g MINE , == 1 ®®4411 T i N O Lu ` m r , 3 N W o a m Q N W. 7 E U • ao ... • 4 O w pp !� Q V D u `+.... U N foo q• g 0 2 0 gb A . ' . ''' CC I o Il 1�Jm [V 04801 mo 1 .4 \ _ x 4 C), al W "'1 1 \ ,' ' \--„, , V 1Oi0,0 ------\• A, , ...._ , i -,�0 SLLm. • '' sf aoUw Wmo0110P 4 Si) w mZLLs H „Iftli_..*--7ft, I CA 4 ' It 0 will el: Z ii v.- -,,.„4111111„,crillait 1 121 , .fi i , IrAs w iNtitA (I 1 - I OR �' W li I memo Pt ��w�wR. MsN =Madan ST — I cn 0 0 0 0 �� Q = a m�. U a Z 8=s mjS CC WOW , 1 / Wm > = U — a� CD { II YatdadT�AA YasAmITN.lb 4aa, iva3 r� a 4t I N a. U H • LLI IIIIII H U a W �N { J▪ p� UQ�{ F, 1. / MIME CC W m J3 J J U 1.-- UJ 00 1 s 0 . s i N G g a y WW 1 W '- O V^ R Ci) dpS_.I� HI- dam wgBJ = gl 1,8 cn • aS > • _ - > W t v CO J ti I -f± r f`` -*- cs. f ,.per 1 t W NU 1 ' Alit - ir' ._,fir ...,, ��. ti yr Ta" r � o g" w6 "�„ .°. ... iicP .-- . _ a :ns^ 1 •-, ti *@x. ` { y {- N H 7�S�" � .--N1,,— , erre Z _ N s' = c I j s�°.' J µ r F.. 'z s ` d W �^ N wrt 2 P' l . - y .• '' :- a \Ab d I . yti , a w (-cc:: rpt tllYP� u FG � o 7 O J. �lh4 -�o'o! wre O ��1ifp411��4M1 o - �" '"'" a w ' 0 \ . _ ¥ 1- | § 2 . . ■ k 1 e § ntg _ irit t:- k . 5 / w ` L ee ) k ; ; `, ° q q . \) , 111111' ;7y` ��e _ t \` ' �f ~ � « ~ : i \ $ 01.1 41VP k ■ Tik, ° \ , . 4� �) -� \)\7/) 111111#4 - / 40 ` \ ��/ k immillir ® ®11r 4 4$.4 a : ,441* ,��VP '� , _» �5 AA.- . . ° z§ E 2 . % : &} k ) lit41 " ; 4en _| 41 ` ( \\/ . ƒ E� ;1l� /\// Vr, ° F� r p. iwza _a . a J ` ` 2 / / 2 ] ; / \ 2 [ } (.1 03 < ) r\ ; ..... a_ \ \ # ( cc W N W I. < : m o Z 3 N .-- W 0 o X U a J >. N N Q F o 0 f— > = s m i� W H U = & O a U uj x W Q — U y _ J Z _ g85 CO < O U 0 (/) sa cc x = O s5 � 2 U U I : T G m W Hi11,, /F' d J >��'',� ,r , I k — Z 1 co \ cc r cc f f� H 11 1 \ i 1 ✓ V mi t � z i ti IF 11; S t) 41,.(4,4 co-!L.'t g r lf 1l dl _ { t ''' r i * ,, \-/'—') ' ' \ - 131 \' . zi • t\� � �' Ott { , r , 1 J iiiiitikotinj - - _ i� _ 'i; r -.o ri �l Lt�n ) -- a60 (/ W 1 No"TT77 — . N HII y' + mom*--- N Q' of) I 1-� I w 4 a ' ir- `-,H ' 0 > , -- __.- / ,- _ - a I i a — ) {��" ®444 s W 2 m e o a. w Q ; N y W N P N O p g m cc 0 o W U co o F W OJ ? U `1. J Z F W gig PR o o O sQa 1. t- o III I-co Ill• CO 0 3 00tx a w 7 awig w< Z C o W (/J}F• Q J f J m 2 to cc 5 O OJ K yy FE y m cn W d. OW Ww F W a H co a LL LL o W J p - W Q O ZW WF 007 C.1 � a N �_ U 0 OJ -0 a• - W J 0 t'Ili V O Z In F'I U J Ill Q tL 1 . . > U W mc.) OH a. .5. W = . W . - ~ W . V LL Om.O W S 0 O 0 N 2 N a m 0 J O W Z W - W U J _ U 7 O. ti F- f' 7 • ID . . • • X W O. fV vi 4 O. W r / nil 1 I 1-' ,' m !" :-.---1 _� 7.I^ �J , w J� _ ttnulnuimhfi T 2 Z ��• Q " , ==V=iii` I allllU IIIIf11111111R1111111 ����� t'- e3;2 gdNEE I .°a� _ .„d1. , . � o :,..... „...„,......... „ ,. , . , . . „....,...„:.g ILI,,, "1.- 9 I`1ai ” �� 4,7,,I.717:: �..... `• 4' ,,,yam J W ., 7 ) 1 I ma t 5un.....01 , "m--t-.. W F a;�/iy° . `., y "M.-.1-4:2 = 43,..- �j Fw it:, 0 mi...._ 0 ce_ ,, ,i 5 - ""'"" L 4t:4 .07.I. 0 W 'lArtQ Z i * se, A: g pl=14kJi-----,amwmATOPF,75:-Iiiir I � SIE I JUN= w, �: � � .�.. '�� � .•';"��►� s :, � PrO 1.3s s si: 4 . ix AkNt- iimr----_:.. T. : .1/411 /- w Vile '-! ..,-leil 4: el.7 .,,I 4 :I fl'' Pm, t,:,,',. 7'w 4,w ., ,,,t, -1;.e vy..';..es**/ A: 8 z 2 fir, N 0 . . l'1,11'�Ma a: I ..,��. toil n YF47 t � °. 2 W o J 1 4t-'; J la IIILIVI, TIC.: It Z IL rig11,-iNi-E. V.Z-_-:. "it" )f-L--_-,K,------ ti W o aCV cc rt; �► ,'� mm,: ,i1 1M = --• _-:A._.0.,____ - ; �p a rf CX Ili \ 1.4"c. N, .4,61,4,i ,. ta-_,,_„,„_,.„_._,_,._____ ._t irm 0 os ir, r---ImpL r# a 2 -..... ;',1111 oh, .\_,-;I:. I p, 1 Li]. �i .... , - JSir , ,.t: . . 4 U tj en 4111:'‘' . ------...--' 16 6‘6j1106•101110 WI 1116°4\ 0°a fx y aW U' Y '>Q xa OW Z f- § J - 0� _ g2 s a oEa $gg5' .§ 3 N i N G g a4.,,,, . b t Rg 3 St 0 L&o ''i!'. o a �o o = or — R?A E °° 44 FC O Z M OZ i�59a S ¢ N 0 p tV sad< k �6t O Z W D p p A s _ gam W QO• > N � 5-0.8 3 W F— W p Q ¢z Esq A ae J (n Z M J r. Z << gr,g4 —+g ag W tae gg9 k z_ 0z0Q J 111 4 03 5 ! s 14•1 CD 0LL o I . 5 wo xa _ gQ!t $ o"Q SJO60 T aO i U z2-2a ? g $ ..a tiO ....,,,,.§D mW � yg =Omqq. H< i i F- M, a ;s� i z i W O W W Li- Li r 'er Lt. i 3 T et, ,51D ' {: O�y \ i uj• YJ w8 y 3. i r 'F J i } 'f fir' �a P" ��+��444 y o o3i 8 # t 74 ; ° . 1 — [ç: '.; ;; ;:: :s •ear. • i N _ ,�., � a ... ... - r 4t . NQ. } ,,43 L Q Z Ce W 0 r,-%'Yti�k'1 "� v .> gis sc. - 44014440 1 . �v5 % Q g3�Y i t .: r a s ice ,x �,'V- y r� •, ,N, . ,,,,' 1 9,& . - ,--,7 ' .e, , , , ., .rt ®®®41E EXHIBIT V.E.1 COLLIER TRACT 21—ACTIVITY CENTER#2 PUBLIC FACILITIES REPORT Collier County Public Utilities will provide water service for potable and fire protection needs as well as wastewater service. The subject property is within the North Service Area. The county has sufficient capacity to provide water and sewer service. The proposed uses will have no impact on potable water or wastewater treatment capacity. According to the Collier County 2017 AUIR, currently there is an existing landfill capacity of 17,244,316 tons, and a ten-year landfill capacity requirement of 2,625,495 tons. The estimated life of the landfill is 50 years. This is adequate to accommodate additional tons per capita generated by the proposed project. Stormwater retention and detention will comply with SFWMD requirements, and State and County standards for off-site discharges will be met, resulting in no adverse impacts to stormwater management(drainage) level of service. The adopted level of service for schools is based upon permanent FISH capacity: 100% for high school Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs); 95% for elementary SCAs; and 95% for middle school CSAs. The subject site is within the E7 Northwest Area 1 CSA for elementary schools, the M4 Northwest Area CSA for middle schools, and the H4 Northwest Area CSA for high schools. The E7 CSA includes three elementary schools,Naples Park, Pelican Marsh, and Sea Gate. They have a combined FISH capacity of 2,450 students, a 2016/2017 peak enrollment of 2,034 students, and a projected 2021/2022 enrollment of 2,080 students (85%capacity). The M4 CSA includes two middle schools, North Naples and Oakridge. They have a combined FISH capacity of 3,361 students, a 2016/2017 peak enrollment of 3,015 students, and a projected 2021/2022 enrollment of 2,977 students (89%capacity). The H4 CSA includes two high schools, Barron Collier and Gulf Coast. They have a combined FISH capacity of 3,606 students, a 2016/2017 peak enrollment of 3,888 students, and a projected 2021/2022 enrollment of 4,000 students (111% capacity). According to the Collier County Public Schools CIP, enrollment at Gulf Coast High School is being monitored. The proposed expansion to the Mixed Use Activity Center #2 will not increase the population, and will not increase demands for emergency medical services. An EMS/fire station is located at 1885 Veterans Park Drive, approximately 1.8 miles southeast of the property. The subject site is within the North Collier Fire District. See attached Traffic Analysis for transportation impacts. H:\2018\2018015\SSGMPA\Resubmittal\Exhibit E-I-Public Facilities Report(revised 5-21-2018).dOCX Tremicock piannine•enuineerinu Traffic Impact Analysis Collier Tract 21 (fka Old Collier Hotel) Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) Collier County,FL 03/21/2018 Prepared for: Prepared by: Hole Montes Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 950 Encore Way, Suite 200 1205 Piper Boulevard,Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-254-2000 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee—$500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee–Small Scale Study–No Fee EXHIBIT "V.E.3" Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Ott 3 . *'ENS. zC�i,� _: No 47116 :-"f• *• • * •* = Norman J.Trebilcock DigitallysignedbyNorman J.Trebicock P.E 47116 DN:cn=Norman J.Trebilcock P.E 47116, • - o=Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA,ou=Nomnan 1:4-33 STATE OF :w; P.E.47116 J.trebikocic email=ntrebilcock@Uebilcockbiz,c=US Date:2018.0323 0924:07-04'00' ��i �• .< 0RIO• \ �� .10 Norman J.Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. This item has been electronically signed and FL Registration No.47116 sealed by Norman J.Trebilcock,PE using a SHA-1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA authentication code. 1205 Piper Boulevard,Suite 202 Printed copies of this document are not considered Naples, FL 34110 signed and sealed,and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies. Company Cert.of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 12 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Table of Contents Project Description 4 Trip Generation 6 Conclusion 9 Appendices Appendix A: Collier Tract 21 PUD Master Plan and Project Site Aerial Overlay 10 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist(Methodology Meeting) 13 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Manual Calculations 19 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Project Description The Collier Tract 21 project is an existing approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 1999-97, as may be amended. As depicted in the approved PUD Master Plan, the Tract "C" Commercial land use category is allowed on approximately 3.4 acres.The subject project is located within Tract C of the approved PUD. The project site is located northwest of the intersection of US 41 (SR 45) and Immokalee Road (CR 846), approximately 0.25 miles north of Immokalee Road, south of Main House Drive, in Section 21 Township 48 South, Range 25 East, in Collier County. Refer to Fig. 1 — Project Location Map, which follows, and Appendix A: Collier Tract 21 PUD Master Plan and Project Site Aerial Overlay. Fig.1—Project Location Map orr�3 ie e<ur. PROJECT z • r' eSParx Watna^S4pecr;ter[i - %Ida Sceppe; 0 GO The Collier County approved ordinance currently allows the site (PUD Tract "C") to be developed for a maximum of 50,000 square feet (sf) of C-3 commercial uses or a 100 room hotel. This project proposes two potential scenarios to be included in addition to the currently allowable uses. As illustrated in the Collier Tract 21 PUD resolution dated November 16, 1998, if a hotel with accessory uses is developed, the maximum square footage of the commercial use will be reduced by 225 square feet for every hotel room added. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 The first additional proposed PUD development scenario proposes a 200 room hotel on the existing vacant parcel as a substitute to commercial land use. Any accessory uses are considered incidental to the hotel operation and are not included in the trip generation analysis. The second additional development scenario proposes a maximum 30,000 sf car dealership facility in lieu of the hotel or commercial uses. Consistent with Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) 2.03.03.C, for C-3 zoning (as allowed in the PUD resolution), shopping center is used as the allowed comparison to the proposed use. The development program is illustrated in Table 1A. Table 1A Development Program Potential Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Total Size Scenarios Code Approved PUD* Shopping Center 820 50,000 square feet Proposed PUDA Scenario One Hotel 310 200 occupied rooms Proposed PUDA Automobile Sales 841 30,000 square feet Scenario Two Note(s): *Or Hotel not to exceed 100 rooms. Further traffic analysis is performed for the hotel use based on the approved PUD conversion that stipulates commercial use reduction of 225 square feet for every hotel room added (development of a 100 room hotel in lieu of 22,500 sf of commercial use). The remaining 27,500 sf of commercial use would then be converted to the additional 100 rooms of hotel. The traffic impact of the additional 100 hotel rooms versus the shopping center use is illustrated in Table 1B. Table 1B Traffic Impact of Remaining Commercial Land Use Potential Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Total Size Code Approved PUD* Shopping Center 820 27,500 square feet Proposed PUDA Hotel 310 100 occupied rooms Note(s): *Remaining available square footage after conversion for the first 100 hotel rooms. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 5 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on November 29, 2017 via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting). Access to the site is from an existing full-access opening onto southbound US 41. For the purposes of this rezone application, no changes to the previously approved access are requested. Trip Generation The project provides the highest and best use scenario with respect to the project's proposed trip generation. The project's site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, and the software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version). The ITE rates and equations are used for the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE—OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Manual Calculations. Based on ITE recommendations and Collier County Traffic Impact Statement(TIS) Guidelines, no reductions for internal capture trips have been taken into consideration. The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the pass-by reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. As such, pass-by trips are not deducted for operational-access analysis (all external traffic is accounted for). Consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, shopping center pass-by rates should not exceed 25% for the peak hour and the daily capture rates are assumed 10% lower than the peak hour capture rate.This analysis calculates Shopping Center LUC 820 pass-by daily rates at 15%and AM and PM peak hour rates at 25%. No pass-by reductions have been considered for the Hotel or Automobile Sales land uses. A trip generation comparison between ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition versus 10th Edition is provided. The results of this comparison for the PM peak hour are illustrated in Table 2. As a conservative approach and since this is a zoning application it is our recommendation to use the most current ITE 10th Edition guidelines. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 16 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Table 2 Estimated Unadjusted PM Peak Hour—ITE Trip Generation Manual Comparison Potential ITE Land Use ITE TGM*9th ITE TGM* 10th Development ITE Land Use-Size Code Edition Edition Scenarios Two-way PM Pk Hr Two-way PM Pk Hr Approved PUD Shopping Center 820 377vph 325vph 50,000 square feet Proposed PUDA Hotel Scenario One 200 occupied rooms 310 140vph 146vph Proposed PUDA Automobile Sales 841—9th Edition glyph 76vph Scenario Two 30,000 square feet 840—10thEdition Note(s): *ITE TGM=Institute Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual The new PUDA — development scenarios trip generation is illustrated in Table 3A. The trip generation analysis based on allowed conditions is shown in Table 3B. The new net external proposed trip generation (Table 3C) shows total proposed most intense traffic conditions versus existing allowed (the difference between Table 3A and Table 38). Table 3A Trip Generation* (Proposed PUDA Conditions)—Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total PUDA Scenario One—Hotel 200 occupied rooms 2,446 72 52 124 72 74 146 Proposed Scenario Two— 30,000sf Automobile Sales 835 41 15 56 30 46 76 Note(s): *ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition. Table 313 Trip Generation* (Approved PUD Allowed)—Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Approved PUD 50,000sf Shopping Center Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total External Traffic 3,752 110 67 177 156 169 325 Total Pass-By 563 28 16 44 39 42 81 Net External Traffic 3,189 82 51 133 117 127 244 Note(s): *ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 As illustrated in Table 3A, the proposed Scenario One— Hotel has the greatest traffic impact of the two proposed scenarios. As such, Scenario One development is used in the traffic analysis for this project. In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this report, the potential project's traffic impact is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour net external traffic generated as a result of the proposed PUD amendment (as shown in Table 3C). Table 3C Trip Generation (Estimated New Net External Traffic)—Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Proposed PUDA* 2,446 72 74 146 Approved PUD 3,189 117 127 244 Net External Traffic New Net External Traffic (743) (45) (53) (98) Net Increase/(Net Decrease) Note(s): *Most intense traffic impact for the two proposed scenarios. An additional trip generation comparison is calculated between the additional 100 room hotel (Table 4A) and the remaining 27,500 sf of commercial use available based on the approved PUD conversion (Table 4B). The new net external proposed trip generation for the remaining commercial conversion to hotel (Table 4C) shows total proposed conditions versus existing allowed (the difference between Table 4A and Table 4B). Table 4A Trip Generation* (Proposed Additional 100 Room Hotel)—Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Hotel/100 Occupied Rooms 1,223 36 26 62 36 37 73 Note(s): *ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 18 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—T!A—March 2018 Table 4B Trip Generation* (27,500 Square Feet Commercial)—Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center/27,500sf External Traffic 2,499 103 63 166 100 109 209 Total Pass-By 375 26 16 42 25 27 52 Net External Traffic 2,124 77 47 124 75 82 157 Note(s): *ITE Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition. Table 4C Trip Generation(Estimated New Net External Traffic)—Average Weekday D 24 Hour Two- Develop PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Hotel/100 Occupied Rooms 1,223 36 37 73 Shopping Center/27,500sf 2,124 75 82 157 Net External Traffic New Net External Traffic (901) (39) (45) (84) Net Increase/(Net Decrease) Conclusion As illustrated in Table 3C, from a traffic stand point, the proposed rezone development scenarios are less intensive when compared to the maximum allowed under current zoning conditions. The additional trip generation analysis for the remaining commercial land use converted to hotel illustrates that the additional 100 hotel rooms is less intensive when compared to the 27,500 sf commercial uses as depicted in the Table 4C. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting to determine turn lane requirements, as applicable. Based on the results of this analysis,the development shall be limited to 244 net external two- way PM weekday peak hour trips, allowing for unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway network. Please note that for the purposes of calculation of the weekday PM peak hour trip generation for this project,the most current ITE Trip Generation Manual shall be utilized. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 19 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 Appendix A: Collier Tract 21 PUD Master Plan and Project Site Aerial Overlay Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 110 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Collier Tract 21 PUD—Approved Master Plan (S y r DRIVE n a 11 1114N163 5 i j ii \,.________,...... . , ....A,,,...1 i ci/ x 0 ° _,..,,,Th 0 I 4 ,4.Et 1 4 \- ......... us...,---, 19 '4111111111.1141.) ' *II 3 ( . 911 1 ._; 1111 dll o A 0 0 t 4I, 'as 71Y51 mva»'1 a sn b LE I/4 11114.11116 ,, i gli:> °1 r-4. I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 111 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Subject Site—Aerial Overlay W o0 tOU 1'w J m M cn glij w ., it << AL R a I` 44- ', , W F 0 ./.. ; ... '}' • r+ ' . , . .. �' " °; , t-, .•,4fi •VWi.2. Ert i . • <3 7'.4za�tt ati.,.d c7 . s .. „, .v.fi..X; :..�r ;_2..Eiks:a— '" x .. gay _ r-r ._9�g1iA r :.,7,) C z;,.... li . _ 1.,. • ._, t v._ - - -fr- -_w_ J Li • a sof".F o .. - i ' W it -''•,,'. iYl! !3 F5 O O ''.%M . ^. - a t o 14 'e��a4�N4A, al a s., # "1 .- m ♦t 1t«oEL 1: i O ,,— . ' "-Y - o . J J J t E o .-,.� �'• o tJ� ��.,� -r > Bdit•::P j►# , .� '-i Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 112 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 113 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 i 1 INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply,or N/A(not applicable). Date: November 29.2017 Time: N/A Location:N/A—Via Email People Attending: Name,Organization,and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer.Collier County Growth Management Division 2) Norman Trebilcock.TCS 3) Ciprian Malaescu.TCS Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title:Norman Trebilcock.AICP.PE Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Address&Telephone Number: 1205 Piper Boulevard.Suite 202.Naples.Fl.34110:ph 239-566-9551 1 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager Organization&Telephone Number.Collier County Transportation Planning Department Ph:239-252-2926 Applicant: Applicant's Name:Hole Montes Inc Address:950 Encore Way.Suite 200.Naples.FL 34110 Telephone Number:239-254-2000 Proposed Development: Name:Collier Tract 21 PUDA-Rezone Location: On the west side of US 41 at Main House Drive,approximately 0.25 miles north of Immokalee Road in northern Collier County(Refer to Fie.1). Land Use Type:Commercial—Retail.Hotel.Car Dealership ITE Code#: LUC 820.LUC 310.and LUC 841 Description: Existing PUD allows for 50.000sf of commercial development or a maximum 100 room hotel. Per the PUD,if a hotel with accessory uses is developed,the maximum square footage (of commercial use)will be reduced by 225 square feet for every hotel room.allowing for a maximum of 222 rooms. This application proposes a 200 room hotel on the existing vacant parcel as a substitute to commercial land use.Any accessory uses are considered incidental to the hotel land use Page 1 of 5 i a 1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Collier Tract 21-GMPA-TIA-March 2018 operation and are not included in trip generation analysis. Consistent with Collier County Land Development Code(LDC)2.03.03.0 for C-3 zoning(as allowed in PUD ordinance2 shopping center is used as the allowed comparison to the proposed use. An additional development option is proposed to consist of up to 50,000sf Car Dealership facility in lieu of the hotel or retail uses. Zoning Existing:approved PUP—per CC Ordinance#99-97 Comprehensive plan recommendation:No change Requested:To allow proposed development scenarios Fig.1—Project Location Map AL PROJECT Go Findings of the Preliminary.Study: The report is proposed to consist of a trip generation comparison between the allowed uses vs.the proposed scenarios. Since estimatedproposed project net new traffic volume is negative, this study qualifies for a Small Scale TIS —no significant operational or roadway impacts or work within the county right-of-way. Trip Generation—Traffic report will provide maximum trip generation cap in regards to estimated two-way PM peak hour traffic impact. Report will include a trip generation comparison ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th versus 10`1'Edition. We recommend using ITE 10th Edition provided that the County has implemented the use of this Edition at the time of the rezone submittal. Internal capture rates are not considered in agreement with ITE standards and CC ITS Guidelines.Shopping Center(LUC 820)PM peak hour average pass-by rate is 34%per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3`I Edition. Consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures.shopping center pass-by rates should not exceed 25%for the peak hour and the daily capture rates are assumed 10%lower than the peak hour capture rate. This analysis calculates Shopping Center LUC 820 pass-by daily rates at 15%and AM and PM peak hour rates at 25%. Page 2 of 5 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 115 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Study Type: (if not net increase,operational study) Small Scale TIS ® Minor"IIS 0 i Major TIS 0 Study Area: Boundaries:East—US 41(SR 45). Additional intersections to be analyzed:N/A Build Out Year:2022 Planning Horizon Year:2022 i Analysis Time Period(s): Concurrency — Weekday PM Peak Hour: Operational — AM/PM Peak Hour Future Off-Site Developments:N/A Source of Trip Generation Rates:J1E 9th Edition:ITE 10`h Edition. Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:N/A Pass-by trips:N/A Internal trips: Transit use:N/A Other:N/A ° Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements:2022 Methodology&Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates:Collier County traffic counts and 2017 AUIR Site-trip generation: OTISS—ITE 9th Edition Trip distribution method:Empirical Engineer's Estimate—refer to Fig.2 Traffic assignment method:project trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate:historical growth rate or 2%minimum Turning movement assignment:N/A Fig.2—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage (PROJECT ''-- 5096 I ' 150%I n ,. Eila 1VAI Go Page 3 of S Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 116 Collier Tract 21–GMPA–T!A–March 2018 Special Features:(from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A Queuing:N/A Access location&configuration:N/A Traffic control:MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs:N/A On-site parking needs:N/A Data Sources:CC 2017 AUIR;CC Traffic Counts Base maps:N/A Prior study reports:N/A Access policy and jurisdiction:N/A Review process:N/A Requirements:N/A Miscellaneous: N/A Small Scale Study–No Fee X Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1,500.00 Methodology Fee$500 X Includes 0 intersections Additional Intersections-$500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the application. SIGNATURES Normal/I,Trebitcocle Study Preparer—Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 4 of 5 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 117 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule i = Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review,Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. 9 Methodology Review-S500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement,including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study.The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review"-$750 Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:optional field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation,distribution,and assignment,concurrency determination,confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way,review of site access and circulation,and preparation and review of"sufficiency"comments/questions. "Major Study Review"-$1,500 Fee(Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency eviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination,confirmation of committed improvements,review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of traffic growth analysis,review of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis,review of site access and circulation,neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any necessaty improvement proposals and associated cost estimates,and preparation and review of up to two rounds of"sufficiency" comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the"Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-5500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 5 of 5 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA page I 18 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Manual Calculations Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 119 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 Approved PUD Development Scenario—ITE Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition vs 10th Edition Protect Name: Collier Tract 21-Shopping Center No: i Date: 11/23/2017 City: i StateProvince Zip/Postal Code Cooney: Client Nuns: Analyst's Nana: Edlien: ITE-TGM 9121 Edtlon WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE . i Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit ' 820-Shopping Center(General UrbaniSuburban) 50 m 2164 2164 63 39 181 1% t Reductics 0 0 0 0 0 0 'demi 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by 325 324 16 10 45 49 Nm-pass-by 1639 1840 47 29 136 147 Total 2164 2164 63 39 181 1% Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! Total internal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pass by 325 324 16 10 45 49 I Told Non-pass-by 1639 1840 47 29 136 147 (f) fCWSOF1O,aiteasabbArea a ) PERIOD SETTING ;, DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,ci ck sl Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-SHOPPING CENTER ANALYSIS NAME: (Weekday LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 820-Shopping Center t 1000 Sq.Feet GroslE) iif 50 General Urban/Suburban Weekday !Best Fit(LOG) Eli2164 2164 4328 n(T)=0.65Ln(X)+5.83 , TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click Add Notes above. The it icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 4328 C:396649 3679 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA P a g e I 20 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,dick A Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-SHOPPING CENTER ANALYSIS NAME: AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE ,,.._�j,, � 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Feet Grosv 50 General Weekday,PeakHoLlvtlBestFrt{LOG) 1-1�� 63 39 102 UrbanlSuburban nO=0.61 Ln(X)+2.24 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,dick d Add Notes above. The hi icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND LISE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 102 25 26 76 PERIOD SETTING f DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click A'Add Notes above. PROJECT,AME: COWER TRACT 21-SHOPPING CENTER ANALYSIS IIAME: PM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOC ENTRY DOT TOTAL VARIABLE ,,.�� 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Feet Grose 50 General Weekday,Peak HodvgBest Rt(LOG) a4 181 196 377 UrbanlSuDurban t ��LLn(T)=0.67Ln(X)+3.31 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,dick Al Add Notes above. The t icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to - data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 377 dC:14' 94 283 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 121 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Project Nmc Collier Traci 21-Shopping Carter-ITE 10t1 Edition Na Date: 11)29/2017 Citi StateProvince: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Client Nemec 1 AnalystsNme EttUots ITE-TOM 10th Edition i DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAL(HOUR LAND USE SIZE .' Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 820-Shopping Center(General UrbaWSubutbah) 50°J 1876 1876 110 67 156 169 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Irtemal0 0 0 0 0 0 ! Pass-by 281 282 28 16 39 42 Nm-pass-by 1595 1594 82 51 117 127 Tod 1876 1676 110 67 156 169 1 Tod Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Total Irdmal0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Tod Pus-by 281 282 28 16 39 42 Tod Non-passby 1595 1594 82 51 117 127 -jl (9 101009 R.GU PERIOD SETTING , DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of:ne number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,dick Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME. COJJER TRACT 21-SHOPPII4G CENTER-:TE 10Th EDITION ANALYSIS NAME'(Dally LAND USE INDEPENCeNT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE .---------- 820-Shopping Center 11000 Sq.FL GLA in 50 General 1 Weeldey I'�16est FR Q (LOG) l 1876 1876 3752 UrbanlSuburbant LSj�i(T)=0681.0)+5.57 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click*Add Notes above. The it icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 3752 15 563 3189 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I22 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-SHOPPING CENTER-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS NAME: (AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Ft.GLA El 50 General (Weekday,Peak Hol v�Best Fit(LIN) Q, 110 67 177 UrbenJSuburban t T=0.5(X).151.78 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click A Add Notes above. The kill' icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BYk PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 177 CD3644 133 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click A Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-SHOPPING CENTER-ITE 10111 EDITION ANALYSIS NAME (pm Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Ft.GLA v 50 General [Weekday,Peak Hock F8(LOG) 156 169 325 UrbanlSuburban '"''LLn(T)=0.74Ln(X)+2.89 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click 4/Add Notes above. The 40 icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 325 (25 I% 81 244 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 123 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 PUDA Scenario One—Hotel—ITE Trip Generation Manual 9'Edition vs 101h Edition Project Names Cdlier Tract 21-Hctel No: Date: 11/73/2017 City: State/Province Zip/Postal Coda: county: Client Nene: Analyst's Namr Edition ITE-TOM 9th Edition WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAR HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Extt Entry Exit 310-Hotel(General Urban/Suburban) 2000 892 892 78 56 69 71 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 II-ten-el 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 892 892 78 56 69 71 Total _ _.._..... .. _. 892 892 78 56 69 71 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non-pass•by 692 892 78 56 69 71 ` (1)OcagedRasnx PERIOD SETTING ; DATA PROVIDED BY ITE l Soecify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 44 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COLLIER TRACT 21-HOTEL ANALYSIS NAME: Weekday LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel (Occupied Rooms v 200 General (Weekdayv Average 0)y&92R) eg2�) S'8-'107 ®� Urban/Suburban l 8.92 S)in-I ssTiiIsr 17,C 1-,,,,u c r_cr'i.y. PERIOD SETTING J DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PR7JECT NAME COWER TRACT 21-HOTEL -NALYSIS FAME: AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE General ( Average Q, 78 56 134 310-Hotel Occupied Rooms 0200 Urban/Suburban t Weekday,Peak Hot.,- l 0.67 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 124 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—T!A—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING , DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click a Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-HOTEL ANALYSIS NAME: pM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel `Occupied Rooms ❑v, 200 Urban/SubGenerarban`Weekday,Peak Hol vd,Average 0 7 ElCil 69 71 140 r Project Name CdllerTract 21-Hotel-ITE 10thEdltlon Na Date: 11292017 City: State'Proltnce Zip/Postal Code Country. Client Name Ansysta Name Edetbrc ITE-TOM 1001 Edition DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 310-Hotel(General Urban/Suburban) 200 e1 1223 1223 72 52 72 74 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Irtemal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 a 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 1223 1223 72 52 72 74 Total 1229 1223 72 52 72 74 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal a a 0 0 0 0 Tod Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tod Non-pass-by 1229 1223 72 52 72 74 (11 Oka piedRoma l PERIOD SETTING y DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click Add Notes above. ' PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-HOTEL-ITE 10TH EDITICN ANALYSIS NAME: Dally LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel (Occupied Rooms 012".03 General (Weekday diAverage 1=i)0l22?(') J2'a() 1.146('' Urban/Suburbant di 12.23 f-1110.' -r11?o: cir_.c..-. rid,: 5 I:i.i:til i. c.s.u so C ::Uli'y. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 125 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click !i Add Notes above. FROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT21-HOTEL-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS Ni-ME: IAM Peak Hour l LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel [Occupied Rooms Eli 200 General (Weekday,Peak Hol,1=-r9Average ❑v 72 52 124 Urban/Suburbanl 0.62 PERIOD SETTING `ar DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAGE: COWER TRACT21-HOTEL-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYS,S NHAIE: PM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel Occupied Rooms v❑ 200 General f weekday,Peak Hol! Average 1:04 72 74 146 Urban/Suburban4 0.73 PUDA Scenario Two—Car Dealership—ITE Trip Generation Manual 9'Edition vs 10th Edition Project Name Collier Tract2l-Automobile Saes No: Date: 3200018 City: StaWProvtece Zip/Postal Code Country: Curt Name Analyses Nam: Edtiom RE-TOM 981 Edition WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 841-Automobile Sales(Conant UrbaNSuburban) 30 rl 485 484 44 14 32 49 1 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 !Memel 0 0 0 0 0 0 Passdb 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 485 484 44 14 32 49 Total 485 484 44 14 32 49 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totallntmgi 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Henpassby 485 484 44 14 32 49 ! r1) foeosa Feet GNsa Flaw Area Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 126 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TlA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING v DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click.d Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRE-.CT21-AUTOMOBILE SALES ANALYSIS N;,ME: Weekday LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 841-Automobile Sales (1000 Sq.Feet GrosIf ) 30 General Weekday � Q Average l 485 484 969 Urban/Suburban 32.3 1 PERIOD SETTING v DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Varable,T€me Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click-:Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COLLIER TRACT 21-AUTOMOBILE SALES ANALYSIS^DAME: AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VAPIABLE 841-Automobile Sales [1000 Sq.Feet Gross 30 General Weekday,Peak Ho © Average Eli 44 14 58 Urban/Suburban 1.92 ! PERIOD SETTING r DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click.i3 Add Notes above. PROJECT FAME: COLLIER TRACT 21-AUTOMOBILE SALES ANALYSIS RAJ„E: PM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 841-Automoble Sales 1000 Sq.Feet Gros'-'J 30 General [Weekday,Peak HoL v Bes[Fit{LIN} a32 49 81 Urban/Suburban T=1,91(X)+23.74 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 127 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 Project Name: Collier Tract 21-Automobile Saes-ITE 10th E61ion No: Date 3/20/2018 City: Stas/Province Zip/Postal Code County: Client Name { Analyst's Name Radom ITE-TGM 10th Edon 1 DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Extt Entry Exit Entry Exit 840-Automobile Sales(New)(Genera Umalubulban) 30°] 418 417 41 15 30 46 ReQution 0 a 0 0 0 Cl Internal 0 0 0 a 0 0 pays-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 418 417 41 15 30 46 1 Tota 418 417 41 15 30 46 ' I Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tota haemal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non-ass-by 418 417 41 15 30 46 co 1000 Sq.FL GFA PERIOD SETTING v DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click-3 Add Notes above. PROJECT N,ME. COWER TRACT 2'-,,'JTOMOBILE SALES-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS NAME. Daily LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY DOT TOTAL �� VARIABLE 840-Automobile Sales(New) 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA El 30 General (Weekday Average a° 418 417 835 UrbaNSuburban i L=tJ 27.84 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click RI Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-A.UTOIAOBILE SALES-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS N'JAE: AM Peak Hour LAND USE INCEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 840-Automobile Sales(New) 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA Ei 30 General l Weekday,Peak HoLiJAverage El)a41 15 56 Urban/Suburban 1.87 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 128 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—T1A—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING ,' DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PRO.,ECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-AUTOMOBILE SALES-ITE 10Th EDITION ANALYSIS NAME: l PM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 840-Automobile Sales(New) l 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA 9 30 General (Weekday.Peak Hol Best Fit(LIN) 30 46 76 Urban/Suburban t T=1.8(X)+21.6 Additional Analysis—Traffic Impacts based on approved PUD Land Use Conversion—ITE Trip Generation Manual 1O 'Edition l Project Name Colter Tract 21-Hotel-100 mans-ITE 10th Edition No: Date 111212017 Cl,:l State/Province 20/Postal Code Country: Came Name Analyst's Name Edition ITE-TOM 10th Elton DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HCIJR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 310-Hod(Central Urba daublaban) 10011 612 611 36 26 36 37 ^\ Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 612 611 36 26 36 37 Tod 612 611 36 26 36 37 ` Tod Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tod Nonpass-by 612 611 36 26 96 37 (f)Occul AORo vm PERIOD SETTING , DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-HOTEL-100 ROOMS-ITE 10TH EDITIOI ANALYSIS NAME. pp* LAND USE INDEPENDENT/ SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel Occupied Rooms ❑v 1C001 General I Weekday ^!Average CO°3:7:) 611/I "20'11 Urban/Suburban ��13 1223 (5 ind c1 s:i,..)f :+mg^. India r s f >> -1-k, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 129 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING ,, DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click Id Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME COLLIER TRACT 21-HOTEL-100 ROOMS-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS NAME: IAM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel (Occupied Rooms v 11-,-7 General (Weekday,Peak Ho 0'Average El 0 36 26 62 �- Urban/Suburban t 0.62 (:) :dkr',aiZ ou C.0..ge. PERIOD SETTING ✓ DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click,t±3 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COLLIER TRACT 21-HOTEL-100 POJMS-ITE 0TH EC—IOP. MALYSIS NAME (PM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 310-Hotel Occupied Rooms Q HodAverage General ((Urban/Suburban I,Weekday.Peak HodAverage 0.73 36 37 73 �� "C, aci,,a:eC si.-AIT C. dry 3. Project Name Dealer Tnat21-SSCerter27,500st-ITE1C"15000, No: Date 11/292017 City: StXMrovince Zip/Postal Coda: Country: Client Nam Anew's Name EON= ITE-TGM 105 EdOon DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Ext Entry Exit Entry Exit 60-Shopping Caner(General Urban/Suburban) 27.5 0, 1250 1249 I 103 63 100 109 Reduction 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 0 a Pass-by 168 187 j 26 16 25 27 Non-pass-by 1062 1062 - 77 47 75 I 82 _.... , _.... Total 1250 1249 2 103 I 63 �W 103 Total Reduction 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 Tota Internal 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 Total Pass-by 188 187 26 16 25 27 Tota Pion-pass-by 1062 1062 1 77 i 47 75 82 (0 1007 sS R ofd i Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 130 • Collier Tract 21—GMPA—TIA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING c, DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME. CC$JJER TRACT 21-SHCENTER 27,500SF-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS NAS:E: Daily LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Ft GLA nv 27.5 General Weekday t L-ltt8est Fit(LOG) QI 1250 1249 2499 UrbanlSuburban l �Ln(T)=0.68Ln(X)+5.5g TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the pre4ous section.To record any notes,click At Add Notes above. The it icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 2499 C=336375 2124 PERIOD SETTING f DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME: COWER TRACT 21-SHCEATER 27,5005F-ITE LOTH EDIT1CN ANALYSIS NAME AM Peak Hour LAND USE INDEPENDENTSZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EAT TOTAL 820-Shopping Center 1000 Sq.Ft.GLA v�!27.5 General I(Weekday,Peak HoBESt Flt(LIN) 103 63 166 Urban/Suburban t T=0.5(X)+151.78 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click el Add Notes above. The icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. • LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-Bl% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 166 Q% 42 124 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I31 Collier Tract 21—GMPA—PA—March 2018 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. PROJECT NAME COLLIER TRACT 21-SHCENTER 27,50DSF-ITE 10TH EDITION ANALYSIS NAME: (PM Peak Hour 1 LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE LOCATION TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE 820-Shopping Center (1000 ,,.�jj�� Sq.Ft.GLA w 27.5 General (Weekday,Peak Fit(LOG) slve 100 109 209 Urban/Suburban l ""'"''LLn(T)=0.74Ln(X)+2.89 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS EXTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of Pass-by Trips for each Land Use.The percentage will be reduced from the total number of External Trips from the previous section.To record any notes,click 4 Add Notes above. The icon preceding the Pass-by%value indicates data provided by ITE.Clicking the icon changes a custom Pass-by%value to data provided by ITE. LAND USE EXTERNAL TRIPS PASS-BY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-BY TRIPS 820-Shopping Center 209 25 52 157 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 32 SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS (CHAPTER 8,COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen(15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s)must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code,Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s)must be securely affixed by nails, staples,or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post,or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY,PERSONALLY APPEARED Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 AND PL20180000037 Hole Montes, Inc. , 950 Encore Way SIG ATURE OF APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O.BOX Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Naples, FL 34110 NAME(TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY, STATE ZIP STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 24th day of August 20 18 by Robert J. Mulherepersonally known to me or who produced as identification and who did/did not take an oath. (f��,�i oo.�"'''' _ STEPHANIE KAROL � Yy,uku�'\a/v`� fit�y pUe,, ' 1`v-: Notary Public•State of Florida Signatu of Notary Public • . Commission M FF.939980 -��At My Comm.Expires Marg,2020 Stephanie Karol 8grxlsdtlNouph National NagarAssn. — — — — — — J Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) Rev.3/4/2015 f 1 tt ii u iw a..,7',..,,,-. t t�t,. t. '2.. • « 0• N=cj m - lid t ...` a4. �a a 5 la 't 'yYva���'� M 'OC E_iia i Is 9 co t -/IA�lam.. , _.a - g.,_ v� � r t 40,Z ° Et a *-lie )-y m .1.. ...ra.c es E, gg 0., Q P "I' � }y}.1 rt e W� Sa y v ..y �a "` _; t g 21tr; �a ,rid, Wti a : 4 '- f5la a'z '; t. 2 n+ m , , Nilf '-',' Z Viii`° '- Z. Iii g a"C ,Fa ' 2 ..eva W- o oy to ,,#, ,`,Tr a ....... - gig o +-is is NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE(S) Not,ce s hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission,sitting as 1',e loca olann.•rt agency zein 1n?i.u•;in nunurirt A.ri.i c ry COuroii,will hold a public meeting on September 20,2018::nn rn n+nw:r lit al 9;O0A.M- the 7runru of County Cr-nmissiorrers Chamber Floor,Cc.,nty(,ova-nmenr Center.3299 East Tamlami T'a ,Staples,F_. p_•ocse o-The hear.ng is to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER OE COLLIER COUNTY.F7 t1ItIDA A MINDING ORDINANCE NO.89-05,AS AMENDED,THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAG F.til E\1 PIAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE.LAND USE EI.FYIFNT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING 3A0 ACRES 'TO THE MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SLBUISrRI(T ACTIVITY C F..NTER N2 AND CHANGING TETE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPEIm FROM URBAN,MIXED 1lSt DISTRICT,URBA-N RESIDENTIAL AL 51131.115 I RMA1-?LEAN,COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,MIXED Us t. ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISIRICE ACrtvTI'Y(ENTER 42;AND FURTHERMORE,RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL or T11H ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECOVO341( OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN E:ITF.CTIVE DATE.. THF.SURIF.CT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF X3:4 ACRES IS LOC:ATE:D ON THE WEST SIDE OF l-' 41,APPROXI LATELY 2.200 FEEI NOR'T'H OF 111TH AVENUE IN SECTION 21.TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST',COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. IP1.20180000(1381 A AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF c(D1.I.iER rOLNTY,FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO,99.07,'FITE COLLIER TRACT 21 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY ALLOWING AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE DEALERS AS A PRINCIPAL USE,ALLOWING A HOIEI.EP 10 200 ROOMS INSTEAD OF 100 ROOMS,AND BY REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE COMMERCIAL. PARCEL BY 250 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH HOTEL ROOM INSTEAD IDE 225 SQUARE FEET AND ESTABLISHING A TRAFFIC TRIP CAP TOR THE COMMERCIAL TRACT;AND RY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL,CONSISTING EW 1.4-1.ACRES OF THE 267.44 ACRE PIM,IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF(IS 41 AND APPROXIMATELY 2.20$I ELT NORTH OF 11 ITEC .W ENUE IN SECTION 21.TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST COLLIER court rY,FLORIDA. IPI.2fl I Hee000371 �.. 't 41'1 PROJECT 5 LOCATION ( If • 11 All interested partes are invited 10 appear and bo`ward. Copies of the propose:t ORDINANCE(S)will be made available for inspcciion at the MID Zoning D-isio-r.Compreher•sive Panning Ser:cir: ,:RNC N ;{ciseshoe D�.. Naples,between the hears of 8:00 A.M.and 5:00 PM..Monday through I riday.Furthermore.the materials wit be made available for:nsoection at the Caller County Clerk's Office.Fourth Floor-Collier County Government Center: 9299 East remain Iran.Suite 401 Maine,One week prior to the sched.Sted nearing.Any r iestons pertaining to the documents should be drooled led to the WAD Zoning Division,Comprehensive. Planning Section.Written comments filed with.he Clent to the Boards office onor to September 20,2018,v.,1 rte read and considered at the public nearing. It a person Geodes to appeal any cie, l indite ay the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered al sus.-11 meeting or heating,.he will r=eed a recc-d of the:proceeding,and for sucrr purpose hr.ray reed to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testmony and ev'dence upon which the appeal is to be eased. It you are a person walla disability who needs any accommodation in order to parttime in this proceec+.ng.yo- are o,are entitled,at no coat to yo,.,to the provisitx'of cella>n assistance. Please contact the Collier'Co,.-rty Facilities Management Dvislon.located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East.Suite t01.Naples,FL 34117-5356,(230)252 8329,at :east two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening deuces for the rtearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Ma-x P.Strain,Chairman Cc er County i'lanrr,g C rim'^>ssier AugJst J1,2018 E417209000s. 12A 3 FRIDAY,AUGUST 31,20113 1 NAPLES DAILY NEWS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE(S) Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission,sitting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council,will hold a public meeting on September 20,2018 commencing at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber,Third Floor,County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.89-05,AS AMENDED,THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING 3.40 ACRES TO THE MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT ACTIVITY CENTER#2 AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM URBAN,MIXED USE DISTRICT,URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN,COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT,ACTIVITY CENTER#2;AND FURTHERMORE,RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF±3.4 ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41,APPROXIMATELY 2,200 FEET NORTH OF 111TH AVENUE IN SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. (PL20180000038] AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.99-97,THE COLLIER TRACT 21 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY ALLOWING AUTOMOTIVE VEHICLE DEALERS AS A PRINCIPAL USE,ALLOWING A HOTEL UP TO 200 ROOMS INSTEAD OF 100 ROOMS,AND BY REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE COMMERCIAL PARCEL BY 250 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH HOTEL ROOM INSTEAD OF 225 SQUARE FEET AND ESTABLISHING A TRAFFIC TRIP CAP FOR THE COMMERCIAL TRACT;AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL,CONSISTING OF 3.4+1-ACRES OF THE 267.44 ACRE PUD,IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41 AND APPROXIMATELY 2,200 FEET NORTH OF 111TH AVENUE IN SECTION 21,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. (PL201800000371 ,J , ?1,) PROJECT %glG LOCATION 95 Ol RII vE Immokelee RD t p 8 RD All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCE(S)will be made available for inspection at the GMD Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section,2800 N.Horseshoe Dr., Naples,between the hours of 8:00 A.M.and 5:00 P.M.,Monday through Friday.Furthermore,the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office,Fourth Floor,Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail,Suite 401 Naples,one week prior to the scheduled hearing.Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the GMD Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to September 20,2018,will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division,located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 101,Naples,FL 34112-5356,(239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P.Strain,Chairman Collier County Planning Commission August 31,2018 ND-2098805 0 PROOF O.K.BY: 0 O.K.WITH CORRECTIONS BY: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY•SUBMIT CORRECTIONS ONLINE ADVERTISER:BCC_COMPREHENSIVE PLANNI PROOF CREATED AT:8/23/2018 9:06 AM SALES PERSON: Ivonne Gori PROOF DUE:- PUBLICATION:ND-DAILY NEXT RUN DATE:08/31/18 ND-2098805.INDD SIZE:3 col X 9.25 in 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.D Item Summary: PUDA-PL20180000037: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 99-97, the Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development by allowing automotive vehicle dealers as a principal use, allowing a hotel up to 200 rooms instead of 100 rooms, and by reducing the allowable commercial parcel by 250 square feet for each hotel room instead of 225 square feet and establishing a traffic trip cap for the commercial tract; and by providing an effective date. The commercial parcel, consisting of 3.4+/- acres of the 267.44 acre PUD, is located on the west side of US 41 and approximately 2,200 feet north of 111th Avenue in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is a companion to PL20180000038) [Coordinator: Timothy Finn, AICP, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Tim Finn 08/31/2018 8:44 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 08/31/2018 8:44 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 09/04/2018 9:14 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/04/2018 10:24 AM Zoning Michael Bosi Review Item Completed 09/05/2018 8:32 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/05/2018 2:01 PM Zoning Camden Smith Review Item Completed 09/11/2018 10:48 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 10:34 AM Zoning Camden Smith Review Item Completed 09/12/2018 2:25 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 9.D Packet Pg. 1003 PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 1 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20180000037 COLLIER TRACT 21 COMPANION ITEM: PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2 ______________________________________________________________________________ Owner/Applicant: Agent: The Old Collier Golf Club, Inc. Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP 2550 Goodlette Frank Road North #100 Naples, FL 34103 Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to amend Ordinance Number 99-97, as amended, the Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD). GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 3.4+/- acres of the 267.44-acre PUD and is located on the west side of US 41 and approximately 2,200 feet north of 111th Avenue in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County (see location map, page 2). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petitioner seeks to amend Collier Tract 21 PUD, approved via Ordinance #99-97, to allow automotive vehicle dealers as a principal use; allowing a hotel up to 200 rooms instead of 100 rooms, and by reducing the allowable commercial parcel by 250 square feet for each hotel room instead of 225 square feet and establishing a traffic trip cap for the commercial tract. 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1004 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 2 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1005 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 3 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding boundaries of Collier Tract 21 PUD: North: Developed golf course within Collier Tract 21 PUD, with a current zoning designation of Collier Tract 21 PUD and is approved for golf courses and lakes. South: Developed commercial with a Walmart Supercenter, with a current zoning designation of Plaza 21 PUD and is approved for commercial uses. East: Tamiami Trail North, a six-lane arterial roadway, and then an automotive vehicle dealership (Germain BMW), with a current zoning designation of Collier Tract 22 and is approved for commercial, office, residential, and recreational facilities. West: Developed golf course within Collier Tract 21 PUD, with a current zoning designation of Collier Tract 21 PUD and is approved golf courses and lakes. Google Maps 02/2017 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1006 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 4 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed amendment. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any amendment petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP. Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, as identified on the Future Land Use Map within the GMP. This petition is not consistent with text-based Urban Residential Subdistrict or Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict provisions; it relies, in part, on a companion Small-Scale GMP Amendment to the FLUE provisions toward achieving consistency with provisions of the Urban Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict. That amendment [ref. PL20180000038/CPSS- 2018-2] expands Activity Center #2 to include the subject PUD Commercial Tract “C.” This commercial tract was originally approved based upon a former FLUE provision that allowed flexibility in the boundary of Activity Centers. Based upon the analysis of the current petition, the proposed PUD Amendment to (a portion of the) the Collier Tract 21 PUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP, contingent, in part, upon the companion Small-Scale GMP Amendment being adopted and going into effect. The PUD Ordinance needs to provide for the effective date to be linked to an effective date of the companion GMP Amendment. (See Attachment B – FLUE Consistency Review.) Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP using the 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states, “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1007 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 5 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” The proposed commercial PUD Amendment request on the subject property was reviewed based on the applicable 2017 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the PUDA will generate approximately 146 PM peak hour two-way trips which are a reduction of approximately 98 PM peak hour two-way trips compared to the approved PUD which generates approximately 244 PM peak hour two-way trips. Because the applicant intends to retain the approved allowable uses the trip limit provided with this PUDA request is at the higher 244 PM peak hour two-way trips limit. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments: Roadway Link 2017 AUIR Existing LOS Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction 2017 AUIR Remaining Capacity Tamiami Trail North (US41) Wiggins Pass Road to Immokalee Road D 3,100/North 173 Immokalee Road Tamiami Trail North (US41) to Goodlette Frank Road C 3,100/West 1,049 Tamiami Trail North (US41) Immokalee Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road D 3,100/North 762 Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected trips for the proposed PUD within the 5-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Transportation Planning and Comprehensive Planning Staff agreed regarding interconnection to the south noting the following sections of the GMP and LDC: Transportation Element Policy 9.3, which states: “The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network. The LDC shall identify the circumstances and conditions that would require the interconnection of neighboring developments, and shall also develop standards and criteria for the safe interconnection of such local streets.” 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1008 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 6 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 LDC 4.07.02.J.4 4. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to encourage smooth traffic flow and minimize hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Merging and turn lanes and/or traffic dividers shall be required where existing or anticipated heavy traffic flows indicate need. The interconnection of collector and local streets within the PUD to adjacent lands or developments shall be required except where determined by the County Manager or designee that interconnection is not feasible or warranted due to existing development patterns, transportation network needs, or the like. Interconnection of local streets shall be designed to discourage through traffic, and not adversely impact local streets in the neighboring residential areas. Where streets within the district intersect adjoining streets, visibility triangle shall be maintained. While the petition does not propose vehicular interconnection to the south , Transportation Planning Staff agrees that interconnection is feasible and agrees with Comprehensive Planning Staff’s recommendation to allow for intercconection. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD are being made. The petition is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the “PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC’s recommendation. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading “Zoning Services Analysis.” Drainage: The proposed PUD Amendment request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through the environmental resource permitting process with the South Florida Water Management District. County staff will also evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at the time of site development plan (SDP) and/or platting (PPL). Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD are being made. Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review is required since there is an active eagle nest (CO 36/36A) located within the PUD just north of the golf course. The active nest is located within the PUD. (See Attachment C.) However, the area of proposed revisions is currently outside of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 660-foot protection zone. There are no modifications to the existing Preserve areas. 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1009 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 7 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 Landscape Review: There are no deviations for landscape requirements associated with this PUDA. The proposed changes to the PUD do not affect the landscaping standards identified in the original PUD. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends Approval of this PUD request. Utilities Review: Public Utilities staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Zoning Services Review: Staff has evaluated the uses proposed and their intensities, and the development standards such as building heights, setbacks, and landscape buffers. Staff also evaluated the building mass, building location and orientation, the amount and type of open space and its location, and traffic generation/attraction of the proposed uses. The amount of allowable square footage for this commercial tract (Tract “C”) is 50,000 SF, which includes all the Urban Residential Subdistrict permitted and conditional uses of the Commercial Intermediate (C-3) District as of December 20,1999 and hotels, and motels, and golf course, and lake tract uses. The subject property is designated Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict as identified on the Future Land Use Map within the GMP. It shall be noted that the proposed automotive vehicle dealer and the motel/hotel intensity changes are not consistent with this subdistrict. As such, this petition relies on a companion Small-Scale GMP amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Map to achieve consistency with the provisions of the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. This amendment, (PL20180000038/CPSS-2018-2) will add the 3.40-acre Tract “C” into the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict Activity Center #2 and thereby changing the FLUE Map designation of Tract “C” from Urban, Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict to Urban, Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Activity Center #2. The proposed amendments within the Collier Tract 21 PUD will be consistent with the amendments in this Urban, Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict to Urban, Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict. Furthermore, there are public facilities and services available consistent with the levels of service adopted in the GMP, and as defined and implemented through, the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. With regard to development standards, the subject property is generally similar with the Collier Tract 22 and Plaza 21 PUDs with side yard setbacks, maximum heights, minimum lot sizes, and required landscape buffering. (See table below for Development Standards) Moreover, the rear setback for Tract “C” is less restrictive than the neighboring PUDs, and the front setback is slightly more restrictive. Regarding minimum floor areas, the Tract “C” property allows less square footage than the aforementioned PUDs. In essence, the development standards of Tract “C” are generally consistent with the surrounding properties with only marginal differences such as front and rear setbacks, and minimum floor areas. As stated in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section, there is an existing automotive vehicle dealership (Germain BMW) directly to the east of the subject property and a Walmart Supercenter directly to the south. The applicant is proposing a luxury car dealership and 200 hotel units for Tract “C” and would not be out of context with the 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1010 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 8 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 existing higher intensive uses and therefore would be compatible with the community character of immediate surrounding neighborhoods. Development Standards Front yard setback Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 30 feet from US 41 plus 5 feet for each story in excess of one story Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 25 feet Plaza 21 25 feet from US 41 and 20 feet from 111th Ave North Side yard setback Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 15 feet Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 10 feet Plaza 21 25 feet Rear yard setback Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 15 feet Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 25 feet of which a landscape area of 10 feet shall be provided adjacent to non-commercial land uses Plaza 21 25 feet Minimum floor area Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 700 s.f. Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 1,000 s.f. Plaza 21 1,000 s.f. Maximum height Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 50 feet Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 80 feet or 50 feet for a shopping center Plaza 21 45 feet Minimum lot size Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 10,000 s.f. Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 7,500 s.f. Plaza 21 15,000 s.f. Landscape Buffer Collier Tract 21 - Tract “C” Commercial 15-foot vegetative buffer along US 41 Collier Tract 22 – Commercial/Office “CO” Land Use Tract 15-foot landscape buffer along US 41 and a 5-foot landscape buffer between an outparcel and/or shopping center Plaza 21 30 percent open space for entire PUD 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1011 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 9 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08”: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and is of the opinion the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area provided the companion GMPA is adopted. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report on page 4. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report, the proposed changes to the PUD do not affect the landscaping standards of the original PUD. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. No deviation from the required usable open space is being requested, and compliance would be demonstrated at the time of SDP or PPL. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1012 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 10 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the next development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner, and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will continuously be addressed when development approvals are sought. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. All future development proposed on the Collier Tract 21 PUD would have to comply to the LDC and other applicable codes. The petitioner is requesting one deviation to the LDC. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable”: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the (FLUM) and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is currently zoned PUD and would remain as such. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. This petition does not propose any change to the boundaries of the PUD. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1013 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 11 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 necessary. The proposed change is not necessary; however, it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to include the proposed uses and development standards that are specific to the subject parcel. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed PUD Amendment is not anticipated to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed PUDA request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage on this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). County staff will evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at the time of SDP and/or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated the changes proposed to this PUD Amendment would seriously reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1014 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 12 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The addition of the automotive vehicle use and allowing a maximum of 200 hotel rooms instead of 100 rooms is not anticipated to serve as a deterrent to the improvement of the adjacent property. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. If the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without amending the PUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed uses, associated development standards, and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1015 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 13 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process, and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD Document. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The PUD was approved via Ordinance 99-97 without any deviations. The petitioner is now seeking to add one deviation, and this deviation has been directly extracted from the proposed PUD ordinance, itemized in Section 5 (see Attachment A – Proposed Ordinance). The petitioner’s justification and staff analysis/recommendation for this deviation are listed below. Deviation #1: (Parking Spaces Required) “Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC section 4.05.04.G., Parking Spaces Required, to allow a Luxury Auto Dealership (SIC CODE 5511) to provide 65% of the parking required for a non- luxury dealership. For the purposes of this deviation, a Luxury Auto Dealership shall be any automobile dealership that qualifies as a “Luxury Dealership” for Road Impact Fee calculations.” Petitioner’s Justification: LDC section 4.05.04.G does not distinguish between luxury auto dealerships and non-luxury auto dealerships. Luxury dealerships experience less customer activity than non-luxury dealerships, and thus require fewer parking spaces. The nexus is provided by the Collier County impact fee schedule under the Road impact fee category. Road impact fees are assessed at the rate of $10.94692 per sf for a Luxury Dealership and $16.87814 for a non-Luxury dealership. Based on the ratio between these road impact fees (the basis of which is trip generation), it is logical that the parking requirement for luxury dealerships should be 65% of a non-luxury dealership since they generate 65% less traffic. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1016 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) PUDA-PL20180000037; Collier Tract 21 Page 14 of 15 Revised: September 12, 2018 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on July 26, 2018, at the DoubleTree Suites by Hilton Naples, Sorrento Ballroom – Salon A at 12200 Tamiami Trail North. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:30 p.m. and ended at 5:40 p.m. The applicant’s agent explained the request for the proposed PUD Amendment. Robert Mulhere FAICP, the agent, gave a presentation and answered questions from attendees. It was discussed that the changes are to allow: 1) a new car dealership as a principal use 2) Allowing 200 units instead of 100 units for motels and hotels 3) If a hotel is developed then the maximum square footage would be reduced by 250 square feet for every hotel room from the maximum 50,000 square feet on the commercial tract. There were also general discussions about the general location of the commercial tract. No commitments were discussed at this NIM meeting. A copy of the sign-in sheet and NIM summary are included in Attachment D. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, the project requires review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) as there is a Bald Eagle nest. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on September 12, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: A) Proposed Ordinance B) FLUE Consistency Review C) Eagle Nest location D) Backup Materials 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1017 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.1 Packet Pg. 1018 Attachment: Staff Report Collier Tract 21 Final [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.2 Packet Pg. 1019 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Zoning Ordinance (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.2 Packet Pg. 1020 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Zoning Ordinance (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.2 Packet Pg. 1021 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Zoning Ordinance (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.2 Packet Pg. 1022 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Zoning Ordinance (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.2 Packet Pg. 1023 Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Zoning Ordinance (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) ‒ 1 ‒ Growth Management Department Zoning Division C O N S I S T E N C Y R E V I E W M E M O R A N D U M To: Timothy Finn, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section From: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section Date: Aug 10, 2018 Subject: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review of Proposed Planned Unit Development Amendment Petition PETITION NUMBER: PL20180000037 [REV:3] PETITION NAME: Collier Tract 21 Planned Unit Development (PUD) REQUEST: This petition seeks to amend (a portion of the) the Collier Tract 21 PUD in accordance with provisions of Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistricts (MUAC), specifically for ±3.4 acre Commercial Tract “C” to: revise PUD provisions to allow a retail (new) automotive vehicle dealer as an additional commercial use, allow an additional 100 hotel rooms for a total of 200 rooms, along with a conversion ratio for deriving these hotel rooms from the 50,000 commercial sq. ft. already allowed, and, update the permitted and conditional C-3, Commercial Intermediate zoning district uses already allowed, to those of the present LDC rather than those tied to the LDC at time of PUD amendment approval in 1999. LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of ±3.4 acres, is located on the west side of Tamiami Trail (US 41), approximately one-quarter mile north of 111th Avenue/Immokalee Road, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) within the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The subject property abuts property (to the south) designated Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict #2, Tamiami Trail (US 41) ‒ Immokalee Road (CR 846). This petition is not consistent with text-based Urban Residential Subdistrict or Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict provisions; it relies, in part, on a companion Small-Scale GMP amendment to Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Future Land Use Map Series to achieve consistency with provisions of the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. That amendment [ref. PL180000038/ CPSS-2018-2] expand Activity Center #2 to include the subject PUD Commercial Tract “C”. This commercial tract was originally approved based upon a former FLUE provision that allowed flexibility in the boundary of Activity Centers. The data and analysis required by the FLUE for consideration of a rezone petition within an Activity Center are specified in the Factors to Consider During Review of a Rezone Petition provisions of the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. During the Pre-Application Conference Comprehensive Planners 9.D.3 Packet Pg. 1024 Attachment: Attachment B - FLUE Consistency Review (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) ‒ 2 ‒ determined that the data and analysis required by the FLUE may be substituted by additional content in the narrative statement accompanying PUDA application materials, in support of the one commercial use to be added (because the site is already zoned to permit all but one new use being requested and an increase in number of hotel units beyond the number presently permitted). Applications support document, “Attachment B – Justification & Supplemental Info, [dated 5-21-2018]”, which explains FLUE-specific changes that took place in the past and affected Mixed Use Activity Centers County-wide, including the subject property. Given the justification presented, staff does not find it necessary to address the “factors to be considered” listed in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new development to be compatible with, and complementary to, surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. The County recognizes Smart Growth policies and practices in its consideration of future land use arrangements and choice-making options. FLUE Objective 7 and Policies 7.1 through 7.4 promote Smart Growth policies for new development and redevelopment projects pertaining to access, interconnections, open space, and walkable communities. Each Policy is followed by staff analysis [in bold italicized text]. Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of the Collier County, where applicable, and as follows: Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [This site fronts Tamiami Trail (US 41), classified as an arterial road in the Transportation Element, but no direct connection with US 41 is proposed. The northerly boundary of the property runs along Main House Drive, an existing local roadway, which provides the connection to US 41.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [The site is proposed as a single development project. Given the small size of the property and scale of the proposed development, a loop road or drive is not feasible.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [This request seeks permission to place new, and more-intense, commercial development next to existing commercial development. Vehicular interconnection (to the north and west) is proposed via local roadways, Main House Drive and Old Collier Golf Club (drive), then onto Walkerbilt Road. The approved Collier Tract 21 PUD Master Plan depicts pedestrian interconnection (to the south) between the existing, abutting commercial development (Walmart store), with the notation, “Possible pedestrian access – subject to mutual agreement between owners”.] 9.D.3 Packet Pg. 1025 Attachment: Attachment B - FLUE Consistency Review (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) ‒ 3 ‒ This petition does not propose vehicular interconnection (to the south) with the existing, abutting commercial development (Walmart store). Staff observes, however, that there is a vehicular interconnection between Walmart and the commercial development on its south side (McDonalds restaurant, a bank, an office building). Further, the subject Commercial Tract “C” allows uses of the C-3, Commercial Intermediate zoning district (retail, office, personal services, institutional uses), uses which are generally complimentary to the Walmart store; a vehicular interconnection appears to be appropriate and could provide convenience for users of both sites. Given the example of the abutting commercial development agreeing to vehicular interconnection previously, interconnection with the subject property is feasible and is recommended.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [This Policy is mostly not applicable given that this is a commercial development. A sidewalk is currently found along the frontage of the site, on the west side of US 41. No deviation is requested pertaining to sidewalks; therefore, the project will be subject to LDC requirements for provision of sidewalks.] REVIEW OF PUD DOCUMENT: Section I, Property Ownership and Description, 1.6, Statement of Consistency, [revisions, dated 7-13- 2018], describes the PUD’s consistency with the Growth Management Plan, as required by the LDC. Review of Statement of Consistency The existing Collier Tract 21 PUD Statement of Compliance is revised to indicate that it’s consistency is unchanged by the property’s inclusion within Activity Center #2 (per the companion Small-Scale GMP amendment). No other revisions to the PUD document held Comprehensive Planning implications. CONCLUSION: Based upon the above analysis, the proposed PUD amendment to (a portion of the) the Collier Tract 21 PUD may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, contingent, in part, upon the companion Small-Scale GMP amendment being adopted and going into effect. The PUD Ordinance needs to provide for the effective date to be linked to an effective date of the companion GMP amendment. cc: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services Section David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Michael Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division G: Comp\Consistency Reviews\2018 G:\CDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews\2018\PUDA\PUDA-PL2018-037 Collier Trct 21 R3_FNL.docx 9.D.3 Packet Pg. 1026 Attachment: Attachment B - FLUE Consistency Review (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) Collier Tract 21 PUD. Nest CO-36/36A 330’ and 660’ nest protection zones. 9.D.4 Packet Pg. 1027 Attachment: Attachment C - Eagle nest location (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1028Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1029Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1030Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1031Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1032Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1033Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1034Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1035Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1036Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1037Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1038Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1039Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1040Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1041Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1042Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1043Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1044Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1045Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1046Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1047Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1048Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1049Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1050Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1051Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1052Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1053Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1054Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1055Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1056Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1057Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1058Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1059Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1060Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1061Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1062Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1063Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1064Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1065Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1066Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1067Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1068Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1069Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1070Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1071Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1072Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1073Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1074Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1075Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1076Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1077Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1078Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1079Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1080Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1081Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1082Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1083Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1084Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1085Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1086Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1087Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1088Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1089Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1090Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1091Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1092Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1093Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1094Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1095Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1096Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1097Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1098Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1099Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1100Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1101Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1102Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1103Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1104Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1105Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1106Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1107Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1108Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1109Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1110Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1111Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1112Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1113Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1114Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1115Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1116Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1117Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1118Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1119Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1120Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1121Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1122Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1123Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1124Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1125Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1126Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1127Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1128Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1129Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1130Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1131Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1132Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1133Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1134Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1135Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1136Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1137Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1138Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1139Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1140Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1141Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1142Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1143Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1144Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1145Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1146Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1147Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1148Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1149Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1150Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1151Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1152Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1153Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1154Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1155Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1156Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1157Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1158Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1159Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1160Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1161Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1162Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1163Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1164Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1165Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1166Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1167Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1168Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1169Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1170Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1171Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1172Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1173Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1174Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1175Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1176Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1177Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1178Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1179Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1180Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1181Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1182Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1183Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1184Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1185Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1186Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5 Packet Pg. 1187 Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5 Packet Pg. 1188 Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1189Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1190Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1191Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1192Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1193Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1194Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1195Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1196Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1197Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1198Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1199Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1200Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1201Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1202Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1203Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1204Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1205Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1206Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1207Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1208Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5 Packet Pg. 1209 Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1210Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1211Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1212Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1213Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1214Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1215Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1216Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1217Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1218Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1219Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1220Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1221Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1222Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1223Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1224Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1225Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1226Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1227Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1228Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1229Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1230Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1231Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1232Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1233Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1234Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1235Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1236Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1237Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1238Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1239Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1240Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1241Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1242Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5 Packet Pg. 1243 Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1244Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1245Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1246Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1247Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1248Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1249Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1250Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1251Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1252Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1253Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1254Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1255Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1256Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1257Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1258Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1259Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1260Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1261Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1262Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1263Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1264Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1265Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1266Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1267Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1268Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1269Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1270Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1271Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1272Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1273Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1274Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1275Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1276Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1277Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1278Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1279Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1280Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1281Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1282Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1283Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1284Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5Packet Pg. 1285Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 9.D.5 Packet Pg. 1286 Attachment: Attachment D - Backup Materials [Revision 1] (6507 : Collier Tract 21 (PUDA)) 09/20/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.E Item Summary: An ordinance providing for establishment of a Water Pollution Control and Prevention Ordinance, providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 87-79, as amended, and Resolution No. 88- 311; providing for inclusion in code of laws and ordinances; providing for conflict and severability; and providing for an effective date. Meeting Date: 09/20/2018 Prepared by: Title: Manager - Pollution Control – Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management Name: Danette Kinaszczuk 08/24/2018 10:13 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - IF, CPP & PM – Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management Name: Amy Patterson 08/24/2018 10:13 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Camden Smith Review Item Completed 08/24/2018 12:36 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 08/27/2018 5:39 PM Zoning Michael Bosi Review Item Completed 08/28/2018 11:13 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 08/29/2018 5:00 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig Review item Completed 09/05/2018 2:06 PM Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management Amy Patterson Additional Reviewer Completed 09/11/2018 10:07 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Skipped 09/12/2018 10:37 AM Zoning Judy Puig Review Item Skipped 09/13/2018 9:56 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 09/20/2018 9:00 AM 9.E Packet Pg. 1287 Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance 08/16/2018 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: POLLUTION CONTROL GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 SUBJECT: PROPOSED POLLUTION CONTROL ORDINANCE ______________________________________________________________________________ REQUESTED ACTION: Pollution Control staff requests that the Planning Commission sitting as the Environmental Advisory Council provide a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioner of the proposed Pollution Control and Prevention Ordinance, consolidating, repealing and replacing Ordinance No. 87-79, regarding the Transportation and Disposal of Sludge and repealing Resolution No. 88-311 regarding fees for sludge transportation and disposal permits. This proposed ordinance will be in addition to Ordinance No. 89-20, the existing Collier County Water Pollution Control Ordinance. Collier County has a Phase II National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. Element Three of Collier County’s NPDES MS4 permit requires a “regulatory mechanism for the detection and elimination of non - stormwater discharges.” The January 2015 audit report (Attachment 1) of Collier County’s NPDES MS4 program by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) indicated that the existing ordinances used to regulate discharges are insufficient and requires Collier County to “review existing ordinance and/or develop a new ordinance which defines and prohibits illicit discharge to the MS4.” Ordinance No. 87-79 (Attachment 2), Transportation and Disposal of Sludge was adopted to regulate the transportation and disposal of sludge to ensure that such activities do not endanger public health or the quality of the waters of the County. In the 31 years since Ordinance No. 87 - 79 was adopted; definitions, standards, and federal and state regulations have changed making the current ordinance outdated and redundant in some aspects. The proposed new ordinance will update, clarify, and add environmental protections which reflect current regulations, practices, and the goals of the Pollution Control Program; and protect Collier County’s natural resources. Ordinance No. 89-20 (Attachment 3), the Collier County Water Pollution Control Ordinance was adopted to establish and fund a County water pollution control program which focused on sewage as the primary pollutant. This Ordinance was adopted with a county-wide referendum and allows the County to levy county-wide up to one-tenth of a mil for a water pollution control program. 9.E.1 Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Staff Report - 08-16-18 Pollution Control Ordinance (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance 08/16/2018 Because of the funding authority, this Ordinance is not proposed for repeal and will be in addition to the proposed ordinance. In the 29 years since Ordinance 89-20 was adopted; definitions, standards, and federal and state regulations have changed making the existing ordinance outdated and ineffective. The proposed new ordinance will reflect current regulations and practices, the goals of the Pollution Control Program, and protect Collier County’s natural resources. The proposed ordinance includes: Additional and updated definitions; Updated laws and regulations; Specific language prohibiting illicit discharges; Requirements for reporting and remediating discharges of pollutants; Emphasis on pollution prevention through public outreach/education and best management practices; and Provisions for enforcement. Resolution 88-311 (Attachment 4) addressing fees associated with sludge transportation licenses and disposal permits will be repealed. The proposed ordinance is Attachment 5. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: This proposed ordinance is consistent with the goals and objectives of Collier County’s Growth Management Plan Conservation and Coastal Management Element and the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element. Additionally, the County’s Watershed Management Plan and the Floodplain Management Plan support the proposed ordinance. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Although a NIM is not required for adoption of this ordinance, considerable effort was put into soliciting input from the various stakeholders. Those stakeholders include the regulated community such as business owners that handle hazardous materials in wellfield protection zones, biosolids haulers, wastewater treatment plant operators and the members of the Property Owner Association Presidents, area utilities, Development Services Advisory Committee, as well as the Florida Department of Health, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and Big Cypress Basin. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDAITON: The proposed ordinance was unanimously approved by the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) on May 2, 2018 with a recommendation that the following language be added to Article VI, Section 2: “Pre-existing residential permitted properties shall not be required to implement structural BMPs to existing drainage structures.” Keeping in mind that this section only applies if permit requirements are not being met or reasonable best management practices (BMPs) are not being implemented, it is staff’s recommendation to leave the language as written. 9.E.1 Packet Pg. 1289 Attachment: Staff Report - 08-16-18 Pollution Control Ordinance (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance 08/16/2018 If DSAC’s proposed language was included in the ordinance, all existing residential developments would be exempt from any potential requirements to implement any structural pollution prevention BMPs. This will prevent Collier County from being able to address point source pollution flowing into our stormwater system while still being required to meet state mandated water quality standards associated with a Basin Management Action Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This Ordinance is presented to the EAC in accordance with Sections 2-1193(a), (c) and (j), which read as follows: The powers and duties of the EAC are as follows: (a) Identify, study, evaluate, and provide technical recommendations to the BCC on programs necessary for the conservation, management, and protection of air, land, and water resources and environmental quality in the County; (c) Advise the BCC in developing and revising, as appropriate, local rules, ordinances, regulations, programs, and other initiatives addressing the use, conservation, and preservation of the County's natural resources; (j) Assist in the implementation of any new programs, ordinances, and/or policies adopted by the BCC which deal with the conservation, management, and protection of air, land, water, and natural resources and environmental quality in the County; COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on August 15, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation that the Planning Commission sitting as the EAC provide a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioner of the proposed Pollution Control and Prevention Ordinance, consolidating, repealing and replacing Ordinance No. 87-79, regarding the Transportation and Disposal of Sludge and repealing Resolution No. 88-311 regarding fees for sludge transportation and disposal permits. 9.E.1 Packet Pg. 1290 Attachment: Staff Report - 08-16-18 Pollution Control Ordinance (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) Prepared rr,W o.t", ?//a//,t' Danette Kinaszczuk, Pollution Control Manager Capital Pro.ject Planning, GMD Reviewed By:Date: t/t,ftp Approved By: Petition Number. N/A Staff Report for 0912012018 CPCC meeting NOTE. This petition has not been scheduled for a BCC meeting yet. o^",7f,tfte,-, Amy Pattfson, Director GroMh Management Department 9.E.1 Packet Pg. 1291 Attachment: Staff Report - 08-16-18 Pollution Control Ordinance (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOB MARTINEZ CENTER 2600 BLAIR STONE ROAD TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2400 RICK SCOTT GOVERNOR CARLOS LOPEZ-CANTERA LT. GOVERNOR JONATHAN P. STEVERSON SECRETARY February 10, 2015 Leo Ochs, Jr. County Manager Collier County 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Subject: Collier County Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) FLR04E037 Cycle 3 Year 1 Audit Report Dear Mr. Ochs: An audit of Collier County Phase II MS4 Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) elements was conducted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department), on January 22, 2014 under the State’s federally approved National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program. Based on the findings in the audit, the Department has determined that Collier County has satisfied SWMP elements as required by the Generic Permit for Discharge of Stormwater from Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (Rule 62-621.300(7)(a), F.A.C.) and as specified in your approved Notice of Intent (NOI) for coverage under the generic permit. Please note that the findings in the report are limited to the specific elements of the SWMP that were reviewed during the Audit. The Department has summarized the associated Required Improvements and Recommendations in the table below. Anything that is not listed is considered to be sufficient based on the documentation shown during the audit. BMP Number BMP Description Required Improvements Element 3- Illicit Discharge Regulatory mechanism for the detection and elimination of non- stormwater discharge Review existing ordinance and/ or develop a new ordinance which defines and prohibits illicit discharge to the MS4 Needs Implementation Immediately Element 6 – Municipal Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Preventing pollutant runoff from MS4 operator activities Identify the point of discharge from the wash rack located at the Municipal Maintenance Yard inspected by the Department. Needs Implementation Immediately 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1292 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BOB MARTINEZ CENTER 2600 BLAIR STONE ROAD TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2400 RICK SCOTT GOVERNOR CARLOS LOPEZ-CANTERA LT. GOVERNOR JONATHAN P. STEVERSON SECRETARY BMP Number BMP Description Recommendations Element 3 – Illicit Discharge Informing businesses of hazards associated with illegal discharges The County’s outreach program currently addresses Small Quantity Generators only. The Department suggested to use the same educational information and insert the material into the business license application package. This way the County will address all types of businesses that have the potential of illegal discharge and improper disposal of waste. Element 4 – Construction Site Runoff Regulatory mechanism for construction site runoff The County should reference the policy that is applicable to requiring site plans and controls on construction sites. Element 6 - Municipal Pollution Prevention and Good Housekeeping Preventing pollutant runoff from MS4 operator activities The Department suggests the addition of an inspection and maintenance program for all Municipally own facilities. Responses to the required improvements above, including a short plan for implementation, are due within 30 days of receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (850)- 245-7523 or Candace.Richards@dep.state.fl.us. Thank you for doing a great job implementing your program. Sincerely, Candace Richards MS4 Phase II Coordinator NPDES Stormwater Program Cc: Steve Preston, Collier County Danette Kinaszczuk, Collier County 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1293 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1294 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1295 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1296 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1297 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1298 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1299 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1300 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1301 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1302 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1303 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1304 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1305 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1306 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1307 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1308 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1309 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1310 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1311 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 1 of 20 ORDINANCE NO. 2018-____ AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AND PREVENTION ORDINANCE, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 87-79, AS AMENDED, AND RESOLUTION NO. 88-311; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Article VIII of the Constitution of Florida authorizes Florida counties to exercise broad home rule powers; and WHEREAS, Section 125.01(1), F.S., provides that the legislative and governing body of a County shall have the power to carry on County government and that said power includes, but is not restricted to, a number of powers set forth in Section 125.01, so long as any powers exercised are not inconsistent with general or special laws; and WHEREAS, Section 125.01(1)(t), F.S., provides that a county may adopt ordinances and resolutions necessary for the exercise of its powers and prescribe fines and penalties for the violation of ordinances in accordance with law; and WHEREAS, Sections 125.01(3)(a) and (b), F.S., recognize that the enumeration of powers in Section 125.01(1), F.S., incorporates all implied powers necessary or incident to carry out those powers and that Section 125.01, F.S., shall be liberally construed in order to effectively carry out the purpose of the section and to secure for counties the broad exercise of home rule powers authorized by the State Constitution; and In 1984 in order to establish a pollution control program, Collier County approved the levy of one-tenth of a mill, and in 1988 in order to protect Collier County’s water resources for all pollutants, Collier County approved a county-wide referendum that maintained the county-wide millage of one-tenth of a mill as described in Ordinance No. 89-20; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 403, F.S. and its authority in Section 125.01, F.S., the Board enacted Ordinance No. 87-79, as amended, Transportation and Disposal of Sludge, and 89- 20, Collier County Water Pollution Control Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Board desires to supplement and amend these Ordinances and enhance their enforcement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that Collier County adopts an ordinance that reads as follows: 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1312 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 2 of 20 Article I. GENERAL Section 1: Title and Citation This Ordinance shall be known as and may be cited as "The Collier County Water Pollution Control and Prevention Ordinance.” Section 2: Findings The Board of County Commissioners hereby makes the following findings: A. It is necessary to regulate activities that have the potential to create hazards or public nuisances, pollute or otherwise adversely affect the quality of groundwater, surface waters, or other natural resources of Collier County; and those activities are defined herein; B. The Board recognizes that Collier County and its residents rely on groundwater and surface water for drinking water supplies and that certain land uses can contaminate ground and surface water; C. Thirty-three percent of Collier County’s surface waterbodies currently are verified as impaired by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP); D. Total Maximum Daily Loads have been assigned by FDEP. The Board recognizes it is in Collier County’s best interest to prevent further degradation of our waterbodies and water supplies; E. Collier County has a Phase II National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. Collier County’s MS4 permit and Chapter 62-624 F.A.C. require a regulatory mechanism for the detection and elimination of non- stormwater discharges; F. Because private Stormwater Management systems generally outfall to Collier County’s or a municipality’s MS4 and therefore affect the MS4’s water quality, it is in the best interest of Collier County to regulate the water quality discharging from those private systems. G. Collier County is an area that depends on tourist’s dollars and the quality of Collier County’s water and other natural resources directly impacts Collier County’s economic sustainability and growth; H. In 1984, in order to establish a pollution control program, Collier County approved the levy of one-tenth of a mill after a County-wide referendum, and in 1988 in order to protect Collier County’s water resources for all pollutants, the residents of Collier County approved the maintenance of the millage of one-tenth of a mill by County-wide referendum as described in Ordinance No. 89-20; 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1313 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 3 of 20 I. Section 163.3177(6)(d)2.b. F.S. requires local governments through its Growth Management Plan “to protect the quality and quantity of current and projected water sources and waters that flow into estuarine waters or oceanic waters and protect from activities and land uses known to affect adversely the quality and quantity of identified water resources.” J. Section 403.182 F.S. allows local governments to adopt Ordinances relating to local pollution control programs that are “stricter or more extensive than those imposed by this Act [the Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Act in Section 403.011, et seq. F.S.].” K. This ordinance supports goals and objectives of the Drainage Sub-Element and the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element, of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the Watershed Management Plan, and the Floodplain Management Plan. Section 3: Intent It is the intent of Collier County to allow for growth while protecting, preserving, and restoring our groundwater, surface waters, and other natural resources through monitoring, pollution prevention, education, and restoration programs. This ordinance authorizes Collier County with the right but not the duty to enforce all relevant state regulations in addition to local Ordinances. Relevant state regulations include but are not limited to: A. Water: Chapter 62-43 F.A.C. Surface Water Improvement And Management Act; Chapter 62-302 F.A.C. Surface Water Quality Standards; Chapter 62-303 F.A.C. Identification of Impaired Surface Waters; Chapter 62-304 F.A.C. Total Maximum Daily Loads; Chapter 62-520 F.A.C. Ground Water Classes, Standards, And Exemptions; Chapter 62-522 F.A.C. Ground Water Permitting And Monitoring Requirements; Chapter 62-532 F.A.C. Water Well Permitting And Construction Requirements; Chapter 62-555 F.A.C. Permitting, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Public Water Systems; Chapter 62-762 F.A.C. Aboveground Storage Tanks; Section 403.067 F.S., Establishment and Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads. B. Waste Materials: Chapter 62-710 F.A.C. Used Oil Management; Chapter 62-701 F.A.C. Solid Waste Management Facilities; Chapter 62-730 F.A.C. Hazardous Waste; Chapter 62- 740 F.A.C. Petroleum Contact Water. C. Stormwater: Chapter 62-25 F.A.C. Regulation of Stormwater Discharge; Chapter 62-621 F.A.C. Generic Permit for Discharge of Stormwater from Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems; Chapter 62-624 F.A.C. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems. D. Wastewater: Chapter 62-600 F.A.C. Domestic Wastewater Facilities; Chapter 62-604 F.A.C. Collection Systems and Transmission Facilities; Chapter 62-610 F.A.C. Reuse of Reclaimed Water and Land Application; Chapter 62-640 F.A.C. Biosolids; Chapter 62-699 F.A.C. Treatment Plant Classification and Staffing; 64E-6 F.A.C. Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1314 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 4 of 20 E. Clean Up Requirements: Chapter 62-770 F.A.C. Petroleum Contamination Site Cleanup Criteria; Chapter 62-625 F.A.C. Pretreatment Requirements for Existing and other Sources of Pollution; Chapter 62-777 F.A.C. Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels; Chapter 62-780 F.A.C. Contaminated Site Cleanup Criteria; Chapter 62-782 F.A.C. Dry Cleaning Solvent Cleanup Criteria. F. Chapter 386 F.S., Particular Conditions Affecting Public Health. G. National Fire Protection Association 30: Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code; National Fire Protection Association 30A: Code for Motor Fuel Dispensing and Repair Garages; National Fire Protection Association 400: Hazardous Materials Code; Chapter 62-761 F.A.C. Underground Storage Tank Systems. H. Any orders issued by the state or federal government including orders issued by the Secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Section 4: Applicability The provisions of this Ordinance shall apply to, and be enforced in, the unincorporated areas of Collier County. This Ordinance shall apply to, and be enforced in, any municipalities within Collier County that agree by resolution of the governing body of the municipality to have this Ordinance apply and be enforced in the municipality. Section 5: Definitions For purposes of this Ordinance, the definitions contained in this section shall apply unless otherwise specifically stated. Words used in the present tense include the future tense, words in the plural number include the singular, and words in the singular include the plural. The words “shall,” “will,” or “must” are always mandatory and not merely discretionary. Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) shall be defined per Section 62-40.210 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, the document that sets forth the activities, schedule, and funding sources by which point and nonpoint dischargers will reduce pollutants discharged to impaired waters and meet the total maximum daily load established for those waters. Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be defined as structural and non-structural schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, general good housekeeping practices, pollution prevention and educational practices, maintenance procedures, and other practices to prevent or reduce pollution. Biosolids shall be defined per Chapter 62-640 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, the solid, semisolid, or liquid residue generated during the treatment of domestic wastewater in a domestic wastewater treatment facility, formerly known as “domestic wastewater residuals” or “residuals.” Not included is the treated effluent or reclaimed water from a domestic wastewater treatment plant. Also not included are solids removed from pump stations and lift stations, screenings and grit removed from the preliminary treatment components of domestic wastewater treatment facilities, other solids as defined in subsection 62-640.200(31), F.A.C., and ash generated during the incineration of biosolids. Biosolids include products and treated material 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1315 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 5 of 20 from biosolids treatment facilities and septage management facilities regulated by the Department. [FDEP]. Biosolids Management Facility shall be defined per Chapter 62-640 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, a biosolids treatment facility, a septage management facility regulated by the Department [FDEP], or an application site. Biosolids Treatment Facility shall be defined per Chapter 62-640 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, a facility that treats biosolids from other facilities for the purpose of meeting the requirements of this chapter, before use or land application. Biosolids treatment facilities can also treat domestic septage and combinations of biosolids, domestic septage, food establishment sludges, wastes removed from portable toilets, and wastes removed from holding tanks associated with boats, marinas, and onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems, before use or land application. Closely Regulated Facilities shall be defined as those facilities or property regulated by the provisions of this Ordinance or any FDEP rule cited herein. Collection/Transmission Systems shall be defined per Section 62-604.200 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, sewers, pipelines, conduits, pumping stations, force mains, and all other facilities used for collection and transmission of wastewater from individual service connections to facilities intended for the purpose of providing treatment prior to release to the environment. Collier County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (CCMS4) shall be defined as the MS4 owned, operated, and maintained by Collier County. Commercial shall be defined as property devoted in whole or part to commerce, that is, the exchange and buying and selling of commodities or services. Commercial Sewage Waste shall be defined per Section 64E-6.002 F.A.C, as it may be amended from time to time, non-toxic, non-hazardous wastewater from commercial facilities. Examples of establishments included in this definition are commercial and institutional food operations, commercial laundry facilities with no more than 4 machines, and animal holding facilities. Construction Activity shall be defined as activities resulting in land development or redevelopment including but not limited to clearing and grubbing, grading, excavating, and demolition in any zoning district. Discharge shall be defined as any spilling, leaking, seeping, pouring, pumping, emitting, emptying, or dumping of a Pollutant. Domestic Wastewater shall be defined per Section 62-604.200 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, wastewater derived principally from dwellings, business buildings, institutions, and the like, commonly referred to as sanitary wastewater or sewage. When industrial wastewater is combined with domestic wastewater for treatment, determination of whether the treatment plant 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1316 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 6 of 20 is designated as domestic shall be in accordance with the definition of domestic wastewater provided in Rule 62-600.200, F.A.C. EPA shall be defined as the United States Environmental Protection Agency or its successor. FDEP shall be defined as the Florida Department of Environmental Protection or its successor. Flow Through Stormwater Management Systems shall be defined as the portion of an otherwise publicly owned Stormwater Management System that passes through and serves a privately owned area and which the care and maintenance of that portion is the responsibility of a private entity. Groundwater shall be defined per Section 62-40.210 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, the water beneath the surface of the ground, whether or not flowing through known and definite channels. Hazardous Substance shall be defined per Chapter 403.703, F.S., as it may be amended from time to time, any substance that is defined as a hazardous substance in the United States Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 94 Stat. 2767. Hazardous Waste shall be defined per Chapter 403.703, F.S., as it may be amended from time to time, solid waste, or a combination of solid wastes, which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may cause, or significantly contribute to, an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness or may pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly transported, disposed of, stored, treated, or otherwise managed. The term does not include human remains that are disposed of by persons licensed under chapter 497. Illicit Discharge shall be defined as substances not composed entirely of Stormwater that may directly or indirectly enter a Stormwater Management System or Waters of the State, except as exempted in Article II, Section 2 and Article III, Section 3. Illicit Connection shall be defined as any physical connection, actual or potential flow discharge, or other condition that could allow non-Stormwater to enter a Stormwater Management System whether on the surface or subsurface. Regardless of whether the illicit connection had been previously allowed, permitted, or approved by an authorized enforcement agency or, any drain or conveyance connected from a commercial or industrial land use to the stormwater system which has not been documented in plans, maps, or equivalent records and approved by an authorized enforcement agency. Impaired Water shall be defined per Section 62-40.210 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, a water body or water body segment that does not meet one or more of its designated uses due in whole or in part to discharges of pollutants, and has been listed as impaired by order of the Secretary in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 62-303, F.A.C. Industrial shall be defined as a business engaged in industrial production or service, that is, a business characterized by manufacturing or productive enterprise or a related service business. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1317 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 7 of 20 Inspector means an individual designated by the Collier County Manager or his/her designee to administer and enforce this Ordinance. Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) shall be defined as a publicly owned stormwater management system that consists of conveyances including roads with drainage systems, detention ponds, retention ponds, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains designed or used for collecting, storing, treating, and/or conveying stormwater. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Storm water Permit shall be defined as a permit issued by EPA (or by a State under authority delegated pursuant to 33 USC § 1342(b)) that regulates stormwater. Nonpoint Source Pollution shall be defined as pollution from any source other than from any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyances, and shall include, but not be limited to, pollutants from agricultural, silvicultural, mining, construction, subsurface disposal and urban runoff sources such as fertilizer. Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal System Transportation Permit (OSTDSTP) shall be defined as a permit issued by the State of Florida, Department of Health that gives approval to a person to transport liquid waste associated with food operations, domestic wastewater, or domestic septage within the boundaries of the State of Florida. Person shall be defined as any individual, association, organization, partnership, firm, joint venture, corporation or other entity recognized by law and acting as either the owner or as the owner's agent. Pollutant shall be defined as a substance that alters the chemical, physical, biological, thermal and/or radiological integrity of soil, stormwater, groundwater or surface water. Anything which causes or contributes to pollution. Pollutants may include, but are not limited to: paints, varnishes, and solvents; oil and other automotive fluids; non-hazardous liquid and solid wastes and yard wastes; refuse, rubbish, garbage, litter, or other discarded or abandoned objects, ordinances, and accumulations, so that same may cause or contribute to pollution; floatables; pesticides, herbicides, nutrients, and fertilizers; hazardous substances and wastes; wastewater, sewage, septage, grease, portable toilet, and holding tank wastes, biosolids, and pathogens; sediment; dissolved and particulate metals; animal wastes; wastes and residues that result from constructing a building or structure; and noxious or offensive matter of any kind. Treated reclaimed water is not considered a pollutant. Private Stormwater Management System shall be defined as a stormwater management system owned by a non-public entity or individual. Reasonable Assurance Plan (RAP) shall be defined as a waterbody restoration program that ensures water quality standards will be restored as referenced in Chapter 62-306 F.A.C. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1318 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 8 of 20 Residential shall be defined as real property that is zoned for residential use including single family, multi-family and mobile home units, excluding property owned by property owner’s associations. Person Responsible for Site Rehabilitation (PRSR) shall be defined as the real property owner, the facility owner, the facility operator, the discharger, or other person or entity responsible for site rehabilitation. Septage shall be defined per Chapter 62-640 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, a mixture of sludge, fatty materials, human feces, and wastewater removed during pumping of an onsite sewage treatment and disposal system. Excluded from this definition are the contents of portable toilets, holding tanks, and grease interceptors. Septage Management Facility shall be defined per Chapter 62-640 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, a stationary facility that treats only domestic septage or combinations of domestic septage, food establishment sludges, wastes removed from portable toilets, and wastes removed from holding tanks associated with boats, marinas, and onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems, before use or land application. Sewage shall be defined as domestic wastewater and/or commercial sewage waste. Site Specific Alternative Criteria (SSAC) shall be defined as a water quality criterion developed for a particular waterbody or segment of a waterbody, designed to more accurately reflect site specific conditions, and adopted by FDEP. Sludge shall be defined per Chapter 403.703, F.S., as it may be amended from time to time, includes the accumulated solids, residues, and precipitates generated as a result of waste treatment or processing, including wastewater treatment, water supply treatment, or operation of an air pollution control facility, and mixed liquids and solids pumped from septic tanks, grease traps, privies, or similar waste disposal appurtenances. Stormwater shall be defined per Section 62-40.210 F.A.C., as it may be amended from time to time, the water that results from a rainfall event. Stormwater Management shall be defined as the use of structural or non-structural practices that are designed to reduce stormwater runoff pollutant loads, discharge volumes, and/or peak flow discharge rates. Stormwater Management System (SMS) shall be defined as either or both of the public or privately owned systems of conveyances including roads with drainage systems, detention ponds, retention ponds, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains designed or used for collecting, storing, treating, and/or conveying stormwater. Surface Water shall be defined per Section 373.019, F.S., as it may be amended from time to time, water upon the surface of the earth, whether contained in bounds created naturally or 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1319 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 9 of 20 artificially or diffused. Water from natural springs shall be classified as surface water when it exits from the spring onto the earth’s surface. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) shall be defined per Section 403.031, F.S., as it may be amended from time to time, the sum of the individual wasteload allocations for point sources and the load allocations for nonpoint sources and natural background. Prior to determining individual wasteload allocations and load allocations, the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body or water segment can assimilate from all sources without exceeding water quality standards must first be calculated. Transporter shall be defined as a person or business that transports sewage, septage, grease, or biosolids within Collier County. Transporters include those licensed by Collier County and those permitted by the Florida Department of Health. Transportation License (TL) shall be defined as a license issued by Collier County that gives approval to transport sewage, septage, grease, or biosolids within the boundaries of Collier County. Wastewater Treatment Facility shall be defined as a Type I, Type II or Type III Wastewater Treatment Facility. Wastewater shall be defined per Section 62-604.200 F.A.C., which means the combination of liquid and water-carried pollutants from residences, commercial buildings, industrial plants, and institutions together with any groundwater, surface runoff or leachate that may be present. Article II. GENERAL POLLUTION CONTROL AND PREVENTION Section 1: Prohibitions Discharge of Pollutants is prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any Person or governmental entity to Discharge or cause to be Discharged Pollutants into any Surface Water, canal, bay, lagoon, estuary, or other waterway, lake, pond, drainage ditch, groundwater, wetland, onto the ground, or into a Stormwater Management System (SMS). Section 2: Exemptions A. Herbicide application in a manner compliant with Best Management Practices (BMP), label instructions, and by a licensed applicator for treatment of algae or aquatic plants in lakes, ponds, or drainage ditches shall not be considered a Pollutant Discharge. B. Fertilizer application in a manner compliant with local ordinances, BMPs, label instructions, and per FDEP’s Green Industries Best Management Practices, in areas that are not in or upstream of impaired waterbodies. C. A Pollutant Discharge resulting from the wash down of a motor vehicle accident scene, if ordered by the incident commander to ensure public safety, shall not be considered a 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1320 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 10 of 20 Pollutant Discharge. However, the wastes from the wash down need to be disposed of properly by the Person Responsible for Site Rehabilitation (PRSR). D. A sheen resulting from minimal discharge of fuel or lubricating oil from the accidental sinking or foundering of a small vessel, provided the PRSR undertakes or arranges for salvage within 1 hour of knowledge of the incident. E. Aquifer recharge projects consisting of rainwater, treated stormwater or reclaimed water are not considered pollutant Discharges. Section 3: Requirements to Prevent, Control, and Reduce Pollutants by the Use of Best Management Practices. The owner or operator of a Commercial or Industrial facility/activity or owner of Residential property shall provide, at their own expense, reasonable protection from accidental Discharge of Pollutants or other wastes into the environment through the use of structural and non-structural BMPs. Further, any owner or operator responsible for a property or premises, which is the source of an Illicit Discharge, may be required by Collier County to implement additional structural and non-structural BMPs to prevent the further Discharge of Pollutants. Article III. POLLUTION PREVENTION AND MAINTENANCE OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Section 1: All Activities A. Any Discharge into the Collier County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (CCMS4) shall meet all applicable local and state water quality standards, TMDLs, BMAPs, and SSAC. The County may require more restrictive quality standards in certain areas dependent on the water quality of downstream water bodies. B. Every Person owning property with a private SMS or with a Flow Through SMS shall maintain the SMS, including structures, as permitted; and free of debris, excessive vegetation, sediment, obstacles or anything that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the private SMS. Section 2: Prohibitions A. Illicit Connections are prohibited. 1. The construction, use, maintenance or continued existence of Illicit Connections to a SMS shall be prohibited. 2. This prohibition expressly includes, without limitation, Illicit Connections made in the past, regardless of whether the connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing at the time of connection. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1321 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 11 of 20 3. A Person shall be in violation of this ordinance if the person or business connects a line conveying any substance, other than rainwater, to a SMS, or allows such a connection to continue. 4. A Person shall be in violation if the Illicit Connection is re-established without the prior approval of Collier County. B. Suspension due to Illicit Discharges 1. Emergency Situations. Collier County may, without prior notice, order the immediate termination or suspension of any activity if it presents an imminent and substantial danger to health and safety, the environment or a SMS. If the violator fails to comply with a suspension order issued in an emergency, the local governmental entity or enforcement agency with jurisdiction as determined by the local governmental entity or enforcement agency may take such steps as deemed necessary to prevent or minimize damage to the environment or to minimize danger to Persons. Section 3: Exemptions The following are exempt from this Article: 1. Discharges specified in writing by a governmental agency with jurisdiction as being necessary to protect public health and safety such as utility injection wells. 2. Dye testing after written notification to the authorized enforcement agency. 3. Any non-stormwater Discharge permitted under a NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the EPA, provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted by the EPA for any Discharge to the SMS. 4. The following discharges, provided it does not cause a violation of water quality standards: neutralized potable or reclaimed water line flushing; diverted stream flows; rising ground water; ground water infiltration to storm drains; uncontaminated pumped ground water; foundation or footing drains (not including active Groundwater dewatering systems); crawl space pumps; air conditioning condensation; springs; non-commercial washing of vehicles or boats using non- toxic, non-hazardous, biodegradable, phosphate free cleaners; natural riparian habitat or wetland flows; neutralized swimming pools or pool overflow from properly functioning systems; uncontaminated roof runoff; firefighting activities; and any other water source not containing Pollutants. It is the responsibility of the discharger to prove the Discharge does not contain Pollutants. Section 4: Proof of Compliance with Permit A. Any Person subject to a NPDES stormwater discharge permit shall provide proof of compliance with said permit upon request in a form acceptable to Collier County prior to the allowing of Discharges to the MS4 and at anytime thereafter. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1322 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 12 of 20 Article IV. SEWAGE, SEPTAGE, GREASE, BIOSOLIDS, AND TRANSPORTATION OF THOSE MATERIALS Section 1: Prohibitions A. It shall be unlawful for any Person to transport Sewage, Septage, grease, or Biosolids without first having obtained a Transportation License (TL) for vehicles and trailers unless exempt under Article IV, Section 2 of this Ordinance. Rental vehicles and trailers are required to be licensed. B. It shall be unlawful for any Person to accept or process Sewage, Septage, grease, or Biosolids regardless of amount without first having obtained permits, and/or applicable development orders, from the state regulatory agency and Collier County, or providing proof of exemption. C. Biosolids. 1. It shall be unlawful to dispose of Biosolids anywhere other than a facility approved by federal, state and local regulations. 2. It shall be unlawful for any Person to operate, modify, or expand any Biosolids Management Facility or Biosolids treatment facility in Collier County without first having obtained a valid permit from FDEP. Section 2: Exemptions A. If a Transporter currently possesses a valid Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal System Transportation Permit (OSTDSTP), then Collier County waives the TL requirement. The Transporter must furnish a copy of their OSTDSTP to Collier County within 10 days of request by Collier County. Transportation within Collier County must cease immediately upon revocation of an OSTDSTP. B. Transportation vehicles or trailers that are utilized in a declared state of emergency are exempted from the TL requirement. However, vehicles or trailers used during a declared state of emergency must be water tight. C. Persons that transport four cubic yards or less per one-way trip of a dewatered Sewage, Septage, grease, or Biosolids material are exempted from the TL requirement if the material is being hauled to a Class I landfill. D. Class AA Biosolids are exempt from Article IV. Section 3: Transportation License A. An applicant shall submit an application for a TL through Collier County. B. A TL may be issued by Collier County after the applicant has demonstrated that all of the following requirements are met: 1. Signed application, notarized statement, occupational license and monthly reports from the previous 12 months, if applicable, have been received and approved by Collier County. 2. Passing a vehicle or trailer inspection shall be conducted by Collier County staff, to verify compliance with Sections 4.A. 1 and 2 of this Article. This inspection 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1323 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 13 of 20 shall be scheduled by the applicant, conducted prior to material being hauled, and may be required to be conducted within the boundaries of Collier County. 3. The vehicle or trailer displays the applicant’s name, telephone number in at least three inch high letters and assigned TL numbers on the driver’s side, passenger side, and rear of the vehicle. 4. After the application is deemed complete and approved by Collier County, Collier County shall issue the license and may deliver it to applicant by electronic transmission such as email. Section 4: Transportation License Conditions A. The licensee shall be subject to the following conditions for the duration of the TL: 1. All vehicles and trailers used to transport Sewage, Septage, grease, or Biosolids shall be maintained so that they remain product tight and do not spill or leak. The vehicles or trailers shall have a functional tarp or top. 2. The licensee’s name, TL number, and telephone number shall be displayed in at least three inch high letters on the driver’s side, passenger side, and rear of the vehicle. 3. All licensees will maintain accurate daily records of the amounts of Sewage, Septage, grease, and Biosolids transported on a daily basis and submit these reports to Collier County. Failure to submit monthly reports by the 15th of the following month may result in license revocation. 4. The TL shall be valid for 12 months, and requires annual renewal and inspection in accordance with Section 3. 5. Any licensee who Discharges anywhere within the boundaries of Collier County, shall immediately report the Discharge to Collier County. 6. Penalties for operating in Collier County without a TL are described in Article VIII, Section 5. 7. The licensee shall give written notice to Collier County within 5 business days of any changes to the information submitted in the application package. 8. Failure to meet any of the above conditions shall result in TL revocation for up to 12 months. Section 5: Annual License Fee There will be no fee associated with the TL. Section 6: Otherwise Unpermitted Sewage Facilities This section is for those facilities that receive or process Sewage, Septage, grease, portable toilet, and holding tank wastes, and/or Biosolids that are not required to obtain a permit or have been exempted by a state regulatory authority. A. Facilities not permitted by a state agency must have a pre-treatment permit if within the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD) and if the facility Discharges to the CCWSD Collections System. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1324 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 14 of 20 B. Collier County shall have the right to enter these facilities with reasonable notice for the purpose of determining compliance. Article V. WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES AND PRIVATELY OWNED SEWAGE COLLECTION AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS Section 1: Wastewater Treatment Facilities and Associated Collections/Transmission Systems Wastewater Treatment Plants are permitted and regulated by FDEP. With the exception of Collier County facilities, Pollution Control may inspect Wastewater Treatment Plants and report the findings to the FDEP. Section 2: Private Sewage Collection and Transmission Systems Septic systems are not considered private Sewage Collection and Transmission Systems. A. Private Sewage collection and transmission systems, including but not limited to lateral lines, clean outs, and lift stations, must be maintained so that backups and sanitary sewer overflows do not occur. B. All private lift station wells must be locked or the entire private lift station must be fenced and locked. C. The owner of private Sewage collection and transmission systems must have a maintenance agreement with a licensed contractor that responds twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week, three hundred and sixty five days per year. D. The maintenance contractor’s name and contact information must be posted on all private lift stations and reported to Collier County Pollution Control within five business days if the contractor or contact information changes. Article VI. WATER QUALITY EVALUATION AND MONITORING Section 1: Water Quality Monitoring A. Groundwater: Collier County will select, evaluate and refine a network of Groundwater monitoring sites. Pollution Control shall collect groundwater samples and evaluate Groundwater data. B. Surface Water: Collier County will select, evaluate and refine a monitoring network of surface water sites that best represent the ambient conditions within the unincorporated areas that do not fall under state jurisdiction. Collier County shall collect surface water samples and evaluate surface water data. C. Collier County may perform water quality monitoring within any municipality within Collier County that agrees by resolution under Article 1, Section 4, and that agrees to pay Collier County for the cost of monitoring within the municipality. At its discretion, Collier 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1325 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 15 of 20 County may perform water quality monitoring on any property for any Person that agrees to pay Collier County for the cost of monitoring on said property. Section 2: Monitoring Of Stormwater Discharges This section applies to all facilities that have stormwater discharges associated with Industrial, commercial, Residential, or Construction Activity and will become effective if permit requirements are not being met or reasonable BMPs are not being implemented. If a private SMS discharges to the CCMS4 that is declared impaired by FDEP or is upstream of an Impaired Waterbody, or the downstream waterbody has an adopted TMDL, Reasonable Assurance Plan, BMAP, or SSAC, the discharger may be required to monitor the water at the relevant outfall at the County’s discretion to determine if the discharger is meeting the established criteria and not causing any further impairment. Further, the discharger may be required to reduce the pollutant load being Discharged to the greatest extent possible, from the private SMS to the CCMS4. Article VII. WATER SUPPLY WELLS Section 1: General Well construction is regulated under Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 90 Natural Resources. Failure to comply with Chapter 90 Natural Resources shall be a violation of this ordinance. Section 2: Public Water Supply Wells Public water supplies are regulated by Collier County Land Development Code Section 3.06.00 Groundwater Protection, as amended. Failure to comply with LDC Section 3.06.00 shall be a violation of this ordinance. Section 3: Private Water Supply Wells To protect Residential private wells and those wells in proximity, Discharges of Pollutants onto the ground and into Groundwater or Surface Waters are prohibited. Article VIII. RIGHT TO ENTER, ENFORCEMENT AND FEES Section 1: Authority to Enter and Inspect A. Right of inspection. This Section provides an adequate substitute for notice by limiting the place, time and scope of inspections. Inspections of Closely Regulated Facilities may take place without prior notice during normal business hours as defined below for the purpose 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1326 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 16 of 20 of determining compliance with pollution regulations. Inspections of Closely Regulated Facilities may take place outside normal business hours; however, access would be granted by the owner or by legal authorization. 1. It shall constitute a violation of this Section to hamper or interfere with an Inspector’s official duties. 2. Inspectors shall identify themselves as Collier County Inspectors to owners, operators, or designated representative(s) present during the inspection. 3. Inspection reports: Inspectors shall record relevant field observations. Upon request, copies of inspection reports and/or results of laboratory analyses for samples collected by an Inspector may be sent to the owner or operator. 4. Inspection of Closely Regulated Facilities: a. Inspectors are authorized to inspect Closely Regulated Facilities at any time between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, without prior notice for the purpose of determining compliance with this Section and other ordinances, regulations, and permit requirements that govern pollution. The Inspector may inspect the premises and all devices, contrivances, processes, or operations relevant to the Discharge of Pollutants to Surface Water, Groundwater, the ground surface or Stormwater. b. Inspection of Closely Regulated Facilities may be made at times other than those described in subsection A.4.a of this section, with the owners’ or operator’s permission or legal authorization. c. Inspections shall be made for the purpose of determining compliance with this Ordinance, and FDEP or Collier County permits and permit conditions, and consent orders and BMPs. The scope of all compliance inspections shall be limited to these purposes. d. Failure to provide access: Failure of an owner or operator of a Closely Regulated Facility to provide the County Manager or his/her designee with immediate access to the facility shall be a violation of this Ordinance. 5. Inspection warrants. At times other than specified in this Section, and at facilities and other properties that do not require permits and are not otherwise closely regulated, inspection can be made by consent or by means otherwise available by law. If consent is denied, Inspectors may obtain an inspection warrant pursuant to Florida Statutes. 6. Search warrants. If statutory grounds exist, or if there is probabl e cause to suspect a criminal violation, Inspectors may contact the appropriate law enforcement personnel to obtain a search warrant and may aid the officer, if required pursuant to Florida Statutes. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1327 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 17 of 20 B. Compliance testing 1. Inspectors shall be authorized to obtain sample(s) or conduct test(s) or order owners or operators to obtain sample(s) or conduct test(s) to determine compliance with this article. 2. The responsibility to provide adequate sampling locations shall rest upon the owner of the premises. 3. All compliance testing shall be conducted in accordance with Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., which defines quality assurance and quality control activities. C. Operating records required 1. A Person responsible for the operation of any facility that may be a source of Discharge of Pollutants, shall conduct such tests and maintain such records as prescribed by the County Manager or his/her designee to give evidence that any discharges are in compliance with this Ordinance. Such test data and records shall include the monitoring data available unless otherwise specified in writing by the County Manager or his/her designee. Such test data and operating records shall be available at all times for inspection by the County Manager or his/her designee, and reports that contain these records and data shall be filed with the County Manager or his/her designee upon request. 2. Copies of all records that are required to be maintained at the facility by FDEP regulation, EPA regulation, or County ordinance shall be available for inspection at all times. D. Corrective actions and documentation. Parties responsible for violations of this Ordinance shall take corrective actions to return the property to compliance within the timeframe specified by the County Manager or his/her designee and provide records documenting actions as directed by the County Manager or his/her designee. Failure to provide records or documentation directed pursuant to this this Ordinance is a violation of this article. E. Temporary disconnection of water service. The County Manager or his/her designee is authorized to order the water purveyor to cease water service to a connection where continued water service will allow an Illicit Discharge to continue unabated by the responsible party or party occupying a subject property. This action is only authorized to abate a situation that poses a risk to public health, safety, and welfare as determined by the County Manager or his/her designee, such as Sewage, Septage, or septic tank system discharge in areas of public access, or where the water service is to a Commercial or Industrial business or facility, with the exception of a medical service facility. The property owner or responsible party shall commence mitigation, as approved by the County Manager or his/her designee, of the Illicit Discharge within one hour of notification by the County Manager or his/her designee. When the Illicit Discharge remains unmitigated, the 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1328 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 18 of 20 water purveyor shall, within one hour of notification by the County Manager or his/her designee, discontinue such water service. The water purveyor shall, within one hour of notification by the County Manager or his/her designee, reinstate water service, provided the purveyor has no cause to withhold service. The water customer shall be responsible for any fees for the disconnection or resumption of water service charged by the water purveyor. Section 2: Remediation A. Any Discharge of Pollutants must be reported to Collier County Pollution Control and, if applicable, to the state regulatory agency. B. Any Discharge of Pollutants must be remediated by the PRSR. C. The PRSR shall take action to ensure no reoccurrence, including but not limited to, implementing additional or amending BMPs. D. Ongoing or intermittent pollution that causes one-time pollution at a level less than the soil or water cleanup target levels or surface water quality standards set forth in Chapter 62- 770 F.A.C. Petroleum Contamination Site Cleanup Criteria; Chapter 62-777 F.A.C. Contaminant Cleanup Target Levels; Chapter 62-780 F.A.C. Contaminated Site Cleanup Criteria; Chapter 62-782 F.A.C. Dry Cleaning Solvent Cleanup Criteria; and Chapter 62- 302 F.A.C. Surface Water Quality Standards or in TMDLs, BMAPs or SSAC, shall be analyzed on a case by case basis to determine if it is causing a cumulative pollution problem. This determination shall be made by Collier County using the best available science. If it is determined that a cumulative pollution problem exists, the PRSR shall be required to cease discharging and remediate affected areas. E. PRSR failure to clean up and/or prevent pollution is a violation of this ordinance. Collier County has the right but not the duty to contract for remediation and bill the PRSR , provided the County gives the PRSR 3 days prior written notice to commence clean up and the PRSR fails to do so. Section 3: Fees Any associated fees are in accordance with the Land Development Code, Growth Management Department Fee Schedule and the Collier County Water-Sewer District’s rate resolutions. Section 4: Compliance with State and Federal Permits The issuance of a license in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance is not intended to preclude the right or authority of any other State or Federal agency from requiring separate permits in accordance with rules and regulations of that agency. In a case where multiple permits are required, the most stringent stipulations and requirements of each permit shall govern the work permitted under this Ordinance. Section 5: Penalties If any person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, or other entity fails or refuses to obey or comply with or violates any of the provisions of this Ordinance, such person, firm, corporation 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1329 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 19 of 20 or other entity, upon conviction of such offense, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment not to exceed Sixty (60) days in the County Jail, or both, in the discretion of the court. Each violation or non- compliance shall be considered a separate and distinct offense. Further, each day of continued violation or non-compliance shall be considered as a separate offense. Nothing herein contained shall prevent or restrict the County from taking such other lawful action in any court of competent jurisdiction as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation or con- compliance. Such other lawful actions shall include, but shall not be limited to, an equitable action for injunctive relief or an action at law for damages. Further, nothing i n this Section shall be construed to prohibit the County from prosecuting any violation of this Ordinance by means of a Code Enforcement Board or Special Magistrate established pursuant to t he authority of Chapter 162, F.S. and Ordinance No. 2010-4. All remedies and penalties provided for in this Section shall be cumulative and independently available to the County and the County shall be authorized to pursue any and all remedies set forth in this Section to the full extent allowed by law. SECTION TWO: REPEAL OF ORDINANCES NO. 87-79, AS AMENDED AND RESOLUTION NO. 88-311 Collier County Ordinance No. 87-79, Transportation and Disposal of Sludge, and all amendments thereto and Resolution No 88-311, establishing fees, are hereby repealed in their entirety. SECTION THREE: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION FOUR: INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES This Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish that result, and the word "Ordinance" may be changed to "Section", "Article", or any other appropriate word. SECTION FIVE: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Secretary of the Department of State. 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1330 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) 08/16/2018 Page 20 of 20 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on this the _____ day of ______________, 2018. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA __________________________ BY:_________________________________ , Deputy Clerk , Chairman Approved as to form and legality: __________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1331 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance) Assessment and Cleanup Small Spill Scenario (<25 gallons) SPILL CHARACTERISTICS SIMPLE COMPLEX (hand excavation-simple) (equipment excavation-complex)$150.00 $1,000.00 Transportation and disposal of contaminated media $175.00 $1,500.00 Analytical Sampling (if required)$250.00 $1,250.00 Project Management and Reporting (if necessary) $500.00 $1,000.00 TOTAL POTENTIAL COSTS $1,075.00 $4,750.00 Medium Spill Scenario (25-100 gallons) SPILL CHARACTERISTICS SIMPLE COMPLEX (hand excavation-simple) (equipment excavation-complex)$600.00 $4,000.00 Transportation and disposal of contaminated media $700.00 $6,000.00 Analytical Sampling (if required)$1,250.00 $2,500.00 Project Management and Reporting (if necessary) $1,000.00 $2,000.00 TOTAL POTENTIAL COSTS $3,550.00 $14,500.00 Large Spill Scenario (>100 gallons) SPILL CHARACTERISTICS SIMPLE COMPLEX (hand excavation-simple) (equipment excavation-complex)$2,500.00 $15,000.00 Transportation and disposal of contaminated media $5,000.00 $15,000.00 Analytical Sampling (if required)$3,000.00 $10,000.00 Project Management and Reporting (if necessary) $2,500.00 $10,000.00 TOTAL OTHER ASSETS $13,000.00 $50,000.00 LABORATORY TEST ANALYTICAL METHOD COST Agricultural Facilities 8 - RCRA Metals 200.7 / 7470 $84.50 Organochlorine Pesticides 8081 $85.00 Organophosphorus Pesticides 8141 $100.00 Herbicides 8151 $125.00 $394.50 Petroleum Storage / Distribution Facilities BTEX+MTBE 8260 $50.00 PAHs 8270 $110.00 TRPHs FL-Pro $70.00 $230.00 VOCs 8260 $100.00 SVOCs 8270 $155.00 TRPHs FL-Pro $70.00 8 - RCRA Metals 200.7 / 7470 $38.00 $363.00 Kjeldahl nitrogen - total 351.2 $19.00 Ammonia as N 350.1 $11.00 Chlorophyll SM10200H $32.00 Nitrate as N 353.2 $9.00 Nitrite as N 353.2 $9.00 Phosphorus total 365.4 $20.00 Dissolved oxygen --$32.13 $132.13 Copper 200.7 $8.00 $8.00 Enterococci 1600 $11.14 Total Coliforms/Escherichia coli (P/A) 1604 $7.87 DNA --$100.00 $119.01 Pet Waste Stations $140.00 each Adaptive Pond Management Site Specific Lessen Fertilizer Application Saves Money on Fertilizer Florida Friendly Landscaping Site Specific Table 1 - Potential Costs Best Management Practices Water Quality Monitoring and Laboratory Analysis Automotive Maintenance / Repair Nutrient Impairment Copper Impairment Bacterial Impairment 9.E.2 Packet Pg. 1332 Attachment: Attachments 1 - 6 CCPC (6524 : Proposed Pollution Control Ordinance)