The URL can be used to link to this page

Ex-parte - Taylor 05/08/2018 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA May 8, 2018 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. Recommendation to approve petition PL20160003084/CPSS-2016-3, a Growth Management Plan Small Scale Amendment specific to the Mini Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict. (Adoption Hearing) (This is a Companion to Agenda Items 9.B and 9.C) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence se-mails ®Calls Meeting with Bob Mulhere, Jerry Starkey & Fred Pezeshkan on Monday, May 7, 2018, Meeting with David Wheeler(FDOT) and Mark Strain on Monday, March 12, 2018, Meeting with Edwin Fryer and Linda Penniman on Thursday, February 22, 2018, NIM Meeting on Wednesday, October 18, 2017, various meetings, emails and calls with staff 9.B. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive land regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by providing for: Section One, Recitals; Section Two, Findings of Fact; Section Three, Adoption of Amendments to the Land Development Code, more specifically amending the following: Chapter Four-Site Design and Development Standards, including section 4.02.06 Standards for Development in Airport Zones, to exempt the Mini-Triangle Subdistrict of the Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District of the Growth Management Plan from the Height Standards for Development in Airport Zones; Section Four, Conflict and Severability; Section Five, Inclusion in the Collier County Land Development Code; and Section Six, Effective Date. (This is a companion to Agenda Items 9.A and 9.C). NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Meeting with Bob Mulhere, Jerry Starkey & Fred Pezeshkan on Monday, May 7, 2018, Meeting with David Wheeler (FDOT) and Mark Strain on Monday, March 12, 2018, Meeting with Edwin Fryer and Linda Penniman on Thursday, February 22, 2018, NIM Meeting on Wednesday, October 18, 2017, various meetings, emails and calls with staff 9.C. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a General Commercial District in the Mixed Use Subdistrict of the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District Overlay (C-4-GTMUD-MXD) zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit development in the Mixed Use Subdistrict of the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District Overlay (MPUD-GTMUD-MXD) zoning district for a project known as the Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA May 8, 2018 Mini-Triangle MPUD to allow construction of up to,with a mix to be determined by maximum allowable traffic generation, 377 multi-family dwelling units, 228 hotel suites, 111,000 square feet of commercial uses and 90,000 square feet of general and medical office uses, 150 assisted living units, 60,000 square feet of self-storage and 30,000 square feet of car dealership; providing for maximum height of 168 feet, on property located near the southern corner of the intersection of Davis Boulevard and Tamiami Trail East in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 5.35± acres; providing for repeal of conditional use resolutions; and by providing an effective date. [PL20160003054] (This is a companion to Agenda Items 9.A and 9.B) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence se-mails ®Calls Meeting with Bob Mulhere, Jerry Starkey & Fred Pezeshkan on Monday, May 7, 2018, Meeting with David Wheeler (FDOT) and Mark Strain on Monday, March 12, 2018, Meeting with Edwin Fryer and Linda Penniman on Thursday, February 22, 2018, NIM Meeting on Wednesday, October 18, 2017, various meetings, emails and calls with staff CONSENT AGENDA 16.A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 16.A.10. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Tract 88, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. 61 Replat, Application Number PL20170004263 X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE l !Meetings (Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls 16.A.11. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Addison Place, (Application Number PL20170004121) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. ® NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ❑Correspondence e-mails ❑Calls Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA May 8, 2018 16.A.12. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Spanish Oaks Phase Two, Application Number PL20180000292. X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings I 'Correspondence Fie-mails I 'Calls 16.A.15. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat of Inland Village, Application Number PL20170003955. ❑ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings I 'Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls GrecoSherry From: StrainMark Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:46 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: 1 of 3 emails These are for the Trio project that will be combining their entrances with the mini-triangle project. F'DF YDF Trio TIS.PDF Trio SDP (partial).pdf Mark/ 239.252.4446 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 GrecoSherry From: StrainMark Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:47 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: 2 of 3 emails These are for the mini triangle project where the turn lane(s)would be considered. FGF PGF PGF Mini triangle site Mini triangle Mini triangle plan 4-3-20... boundary curve,.. Revised TIS-03... Mark, 239.252.4446 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 Trebilcock planning•engineering Traffic Impact Statement Gateway Mini Triangle Planned Unit Development and Growth Management Plan Amendments Collier County, FL 03/29/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Hole Montes, Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 950 Encore Way 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 Collier County Transportation Review Fee—Major Study—$1,500.00 Gateway Mini Triangle–PUDA and GMPA–TIS–March 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. Digitally signed by Norman J. Norman J Trebilcock P.E.47116 `,`��,t, . DN:cn=Norman J.Trebilcock �t �� P.E.47116,o=Trebilcock ••%`Q,, �.. .RFej/111•• Consulting Solutions,PA, � Q�;•��G E 1V SF•.0'0•� Trebilcock ou=Norman J.trebilcock, 2p:. No 47116 ••: email=ntrebilcock@trebilcoc k = c=US * * P.E. 47116 Date:217 .03.29 07:01:47 —0 -04'00' • STATE OF ALU: 0c<•S•.4.O R X 0 P c. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. , S;�NAto -t t%% FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 2 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table of Contents Project Description 4 Trip Generation 6 Trip Distribution and Assignment 8 Background Traffic 10 Existing and Future Roadway Network 11 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network Link Analysis 12 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis 13 Improvement Analysis 15 Mitigation of Impact 15 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 16 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 18 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition 25 Appendix D: US 41—from Goodlette Rd. to Davis Blvd. Traffic Data 33 Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits 39 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Project Description The Gateway Mini Triangle development is an approved Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Davis Boulevard (SR 84) and Tamiami Trail East (US 41 [SR 90]). The project is approximately 5.35 acres in size and is located in Section 11,Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. The project is located within the US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). The US 41 TCEA is designed to reduce the adverse impact transportation concurrency may have on urban sprawl control policies and redevelopment. Proposed development located within the boundaries of the South U.S. 41 area are exempt from transportation concurrency requirements so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies enumerated in the Land Development Code (LDC), as applicable. Refer to Fig. 1 — Project Location Map, which follows, and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Fig. 1— Project Location Map Naples Municipal r ..a: Aeon r PROJECT - cth die 01. Consistent with the approved Collier County zoning districts and uses, the existing subject site is currently zoned General Commercial District (C-4) which provides the opportunity for the most diverse types of commercial activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational attractions. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Upon approval of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and Plan Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) applications, the project will be developed as a mixed-use project as shown in Table 1, Proposed Development Program. The proposed principal uses are illustrated as follows: - Residential—Multi-family—up to 210 dwelling units. - Commercial — up to 152 hotel suites; up to 74,000 square feet of Retail, Restaurant, Movie Theater, Personal services; up to 60,000 square feet of professional or medical office use. - Permitted uses based on a conversion matrix —Assisted Living Facility (ALF); Indoor air- conditioned passenger vehicle and self-storage; New Car Dealership; any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the forgoing list of permitted principal uses. The units and square footage provided above may be adjusted from the stated units and square footages as provided in a Land Use Conversion Table —this document is submitted as a separate item. The project provides the highest and best use scenario with respect to the project's proposed trip generation. For the purposes of this analysis, Medical Office is conservatively used, as it generates higher traffic volumes than the General Office use. Table 1 Proposed Development Program ITE Land Use Development Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Residential Multi-Family Residential Condominium/Townhouse 230 210du* Hotel Hotel 310 152 rooms Retail Shopping Center 820 74,000sf** Office Medical-Dental Office 720 60,000sf** Note(s): *du=dwelling units. **sf=square feet. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2021 planning horizon. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on November 14, 2016, as illustrated in Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist. Connections to the site are proposed as follows: on US 41— northern entrance —right-in/right- out/directional median left-in access; southern entrance — right-in/right-out access; on Davis Boulevard — western entrance — right-in/right-out access; eastern entrance — right-in/right- out/left-in access (proposed dual left directional median). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 15 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 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: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. The estimated project trip generation associated with the proposed development is illustrated in Table 2. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. Per Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture trips should be reasonable and should not exceed 20% of the total project trips. For the purposes of this report, the software program OTISS is used to generate associated internal capture traffic. The OTISS calculation procedure follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, Volume 1, User's Guide and Handbook, Chapter 7—procedure for estimating multi-use trip generation internal capture, aka "triangle method". As illustrated in Table 2, calculated internal capture values are below the county limits. 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. 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 to be assumed 10% lower than the peak hour capture rate. This analysis calculates shopping center daily pass-by trips at 15% of the gross external traffic with AM and PM peak hour at 25%of the gross external trips. Pass-by trips are not deducted for traffic operational analysis. As such, the total external generated traffic illustrated in Table 2 is computed for the site access turn lane analysis. Table 2 Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions)—Average Weekday(1) Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA-PUDA 10,221 258 189 447 407 468 875 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 6 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Total Traffic Internal Traffic (1,300) (15) (15) (30) (56) (56) (112) External Traffic 8,921 243 174 417 351 412 763 Pass-By Traffic (743) (18) (11) (29) (53) (56) (109) Non-Pass-By Traffic 8,178 225 163 388 298 356 654 (Net New External Traffic) Note(s): (1)For more details on Trip Generation calculations,refer to Appendix C. In agreement with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TI5) 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 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this TIS, the surrounding roadway network link concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic generated by the project (Table 2,Total Non- Pass-By Traffic). The site access turn lane analysis is calculated based on the estimated traffic during the weekdayAM and PMpeak hour. Based on the trip generation results, projected PM peak hour traffic is more intense than the AM peak hour traffic (both egress and ingress traffic). As such, the PM peak hour traffic is used in the project access turn lane sizing (PM Peak Hour Enter — 351 vph; Exit—412 vph). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Trip Distribution and Assignment Projected traffic generated by the proposed development is assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. Based on the estimated PM peak hour total net new external traffic, the assignment of proposed site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour, and is graphically depicted on Fig. 2 — Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour Distribution PM Peak Hr Project Traffic CC Roadway Link Link IDAUIR # Roadway Link Location of Project Vol. (2) Traffic Enter Exit Tamiami TrailN Goodlette Rd.to Davis A 40% Eastil�(US 41) � Blvd. SB—119 NB—142 Tamiami Trail East 91.0 Davis Blvd.to Airport Rd. 20% (US 41) NB—60 SB-72 Davis Blvd. 12.0 US 41 to Airport Rd. 40% WB 119 EB-142 (SR 84) Note(s): (1)Not a Collier County monitored roadway. (2)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 18 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Fig. 2— Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE N ri:3^fry:. # 40% 40% 20% Geo ale PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PM PK HR N 1 40 INBOUND (40) OUTBOUND Naples Murtrossal Airport (EB-Peak SB-Peak (142) Direction) Direction �`". _ '•..� (142) 154-671 (;2) `=� (SB-Peak Direction) Go gie Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 9 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Background Traffic Future projected background traffic volumes are calculated based on approved growth rates and trip bank volumes for the segments of the roadway network in the study area, as shown in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The higher of the two determinations, is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. It is noted that the US 41 (SR 90) segment from Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) to Davis Boulevard (SR 84) is located within the City of Naples corporate limits. The Level of Service (LOS) Standard for City streets is evaluated by comparing the two-way traffic volume at peak hour, peak season with the designated roadway capacity as set forth in the City of Naples Comprehensive Plan. For US 41 (SR 90), the City is consistent with the State's policies for LOS and adopt LOS D, except for the segment of US 41 between Four Corners and Davis Boulevard which is set at LOS E (as illustrated in FDOT Collier County Level of Service Spreadsheet). As illustrated in FDOT 2015 Historical AADT Report, historic traffic for the US 41 segment from Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) to Davis Boulevard (SR 84) shows a negative annual growth rate for this segment (year 2006 —AADT 64,000; year 2015 —AADT 52,000). Based on Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance, a minimum of 2%growth rate is considered. Calculations of projected peak hour, peak direction background traffic volume (without project) for the future build-out year 2021, are illustrated in Table 4A and Table 4B. Table 4A City of Naples Traffic Count Analysis(US 41/East of Goodlette Rd. to Davis Blvd.) Traffic 2021 Peak Hour Date of Traffic Seasonal 2015 Annual Growth 2021 AADT Peak Direction K and D Count Count(1) Adjustmentm AADT Growth Factori3> Background Factors(5) Background Rate Traffic'' Traffic (%/yr) (trips/hr) March 67,397 0.92 62,005 2015 June 2015 45,270 1.14 51,608 September 45,449 1.12 50,903 2015 December 54,976 0.96 52,777 2015 Average 54,323 2.0% 1.1262 61,000 K=9; D=55.9 3,069 Note(s): (1)As illustrated in the 2015 City of Naples Traffic Counts. (2)FDOT 2015 Peak Season Factor Category Report. iii Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)6. (4)2021 Projected Volume=2015 AADT x Growth Factor.FDOT-AASHTO rounding standards. isi Refer to Appendix D. (6)2021 Peak Hour Peak Direction=2021 Projected AADT x 0.09 x 0.559. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 110 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 City of Naples 2015 Traffic Counts and FDOT traffic factors are illustrated in Appendix D, for US 41 roadway, segment located from Goodlette-Frank Road to Davis Boulevard. Table 4B Background Traffic without Project(2016—2021) 2016 AUIR Projected 2021 Projected 2021 Projected CC Pk Hr,Pk Dir Traffic Pk Hr,Peak Dir Pk Hr,Peak Dir Roadway AUIR Roadway Link Background Annual Growth Background Trip Background Traffic Volume Traffic Volume Link Link Location Traffic Growth Factor Bank ID# Volume Rate w/out Project w/out Project (trips/hr) (%/yr)* (trips/hr) (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank*** Tamiami Goodlette Rd Trail East(1) N/A to Davis Blvd N/A N/A N/A 3.069 N/A N/A (US 41) Tamiami Davis Blvd Trail East 91.0 to Airport Rd 1,580 2.0% 1.1041 1.745 47 1,627 (US 41) Davis Blvd12 0 US 41 to 1,520 2.0% 1.1041 1,678 14 1,534 (SR 84) Airport Rd Note(s): (1)Not a Collier County monitored roadway.For more details refer to Table 4A. *Annual Growth Rate—estimated for 2008-2015 peak hour,peak direction traffic volumes,or 2%minimum. **Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)5.2021 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2021 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume+Trip Bank.The projected 2021 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). Future projected 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. As no such improvements are identified in the Collier County 2016 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and projected future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 111 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2016 Peak Dir, Future CC AUIR RoadwayLink Exist Min. Roadway Link Standard Peak Hr Project Link ID# Location Roadway(1) LOS Capacity Build out Volume Roadway Tamiami Trail N/A Goodlette Rd.to Davis 8D E 3,600(SB)(2) 8D East (US 41) Blvd. Tamiami Trail East91 0 Davis Blvd.to Airport 6D E 2,900(SB) 6D (US 41) Rd. Davis Blvd. 12.0 US 41 to Airport Rd. 6D E 2,700(EB) 6D (SR 84) Note(s): (1)2U=2-lane undivided roadway;4D,6D,8D=4-lane,6-lane,8-lane divided roadway,respectively;LOS=Level of Service. (2)Not a Collier County monitored roadway. Capacity is consistent with similar type roadway. 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, project's impacts are significant on all roadway segments within the analyzed area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at year 2021 future conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate proposed development traffic. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service, illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the studied roadway network. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 112 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS)—With Project in the Year 2021 Roadway 2021 Peak %Vol. Min LOS Min LOS 2016 Peak Link,Peak CC AUIR Dir,Peak Capacity exceeded exceeded Roadway Roadway Link Dir,Peak Hr Dir,Peak Hr Link Link ID Location Capacity (Project Hr Volume Impact without with Volume Volume w/Project By Project? Project? ** Project Yes/No Yes/No Added)* Tamiami44 Goodlette Rd.to 0 Trail East N/A 3,600(SB) 119 3,188 3.31% No No (US 41) Davis Blvd. Tamiami Davis Blvd.to Trail East 91.0 Airport Rd. 2,900(SB) 72 1,817 2.48% No No (US 41) Davis Blvd. US 41 to Airport (SR 84) 12.0 Rd. 2,700(EB) 142 1,820 5.26% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report. **2021 Projected Volume=2021 background(refer to Table 4B)+Project Volume Added. ***Not a Collier County monitored roadway. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the site are proposed as follows: on US 41 — northern entrance — right-in/right- out/directional median left-in access; southern entrance — right-in/right-out access; on Davis Boulevard — western entrance — right-in/right-out access; eastern entrance — right-in/right- out/left-in access (proposed dual left directional median). For more details refer to Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. The site access turn lane analysis is calculated based on the potential future total external traffic during the weekday AM and PM peak hour, as illustrated in Table 2. Based on the trip generation results, the generated PM peak hour traffic is more intense than the AM peak hour traffic (both egress and ingress traffic). As such, the PM peak hour traffic is used in the project access turn lane sizing (PM Pk Hr Enter—351 vph; Exit—412 vph). For the purposes of this analysis, the adjacent property to the west is included in this report. This development named Trio Hotel is currently under permitting process and consists of a 12-room resort hotel, 24 Multi-Family dwelling units, 3,145 square feet of office space and 11,798 square feet of quality restaurant space. Site access turning movements associated with this project have been incorporated in this report as illustrated in the Traffic Impact Statement for Trio Hotel, dated April 15, 2016. The estimated overall trips at the Mini Triangle site access locations are illustrated in Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 113 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Project Accesses—Northbound Tamiami Trail East(US 41) This segment of US 41 has an Access Management Classification of 3. The established spacing standard for posted speed of 45 mph is 440 ft between driveway connections. The directional opening spacing is 1,320 ft. Based on these criteria, these are non-conforming driveways. The Northern access is proposed to be redeveloped into a left-in/right-in/right-out access by extending the existing directional median for a total of approximately 360 feet. Based on the posted speed limit of 45 mph on US 41 in the vicinity of project, the right-turning threshold volume for warranting a right-turn lane is 80-125 vph, according to the FDOT Driveway Information Guide. The project is expected to accommodate 68 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80— 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated northbound-right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Based on FDOT Design Standard, Index#301 —design speed of 45 mph, the minimum turn lane length is 185 ft (which includes a 50 ft taper) plus required queue. Required turn lane storage length is determined consistent with the number of turning vehicles likely to arrive in an average two-minute period within the peak hour, as illustrated in the guidelines from FDOT Florida Intersection Design Guide Chapter 3.12.12. The existing directional median is proposed to be extended 50 feet for a total length of approximately 360 feet. The left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 85 vph left turning movements during PM peak hour. Consistent with FDOT criteria, the southbound left-turn lane should be 260 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 75 ft storage) to accommodate the overall projected traffic at build out conditions. As such, the proposed left-turn lane is adequate to accommodate proposed traffic. The Southern access is proposed as a right-in/right-out connection. The project is expected to accommodate 17 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Project Accesses—Eastbound Davis Blvd. (SR 84) This segment of SR 84 has an Access Management Classification of 5 with a posted speed of 45 mph. The established spacing standard is 245 ft between driveway connections, 660 ft for directional median openings, and 1,320 ft for full median openings and signals. Based on these criteria, the proposed driveways are non-conforming connections. The Western access is proposed as a right-in/right-out connection. The project is expected to accommodate 35 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 114 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 The Eastern access is proposed to be redeveloped into a dual left directional median and allows for left-in/right-in/right-out turning movements. The project is expected to accommodate 35 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. The westbound directional median left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 141 vph inbound left turning movements during PM peak hour. At the minimum, consistent with FDOT criteria, the left-turn lane should be 310 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 125 ft storage) to accommodate projected traffic at build out conditions. The eastbound directional median left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 41 vph outbound left turning movements during PM peak hour. At the minimum and consistent with FDOT criteria, the left-turn lane should be 235 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 50 ft storage) to accommodate projected traffic at build out conditions. Improvement Analysis Based upon the findings of the capacity and level of service analysis of this report, the estimated traffic impact is significant for the surrounding roadway network at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway surplus capacity to accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed development, without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service at future year 2021 build-out conditions. Regardless, concurrency will be measured at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP)/Construction Plans and Plat (PPL) submittals when more specific development parameters are available. At such time, should sufficient capacity not be available, the Developer may be required to assist the County with roadway link and intersection improvements in such a manner as to provide sufficient capacity. Based on the results of the site access turn lane analysis, turn lanes improvements maybe recommended at the analyzed project site access locations. A more detailed evaluation of applicable access points and nearby intersections will be performed at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP)/Construction Plans and Plat (PPL) submittals, as applicable. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. Though the project is located within the US 41 TCEA, and because the project does not have LOS deficiency issues, we do not anticipate needing to exercise TDM strategies outlined in the LDC to mitigate for project transportation impacts. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 115 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 116 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 WatA*0 I f F rill La 3AP401V1Ot�3WWOO r fg ° Q d EL�mw g 0 x -3 Lu 3 a sv= CO 2 I p t < m , 4, 1 r II I • 5 ' Z t in vu \ K la 1 ' / I. 1E13 a 0 / a f rZ ` / 90 //, "°/ / x W a 6 m j r a m 5 L3 alb �Zo 0. PJ 81-2 4 4 A H Z ..44 is Q 1 Qo z z — H 'i a f 4411t Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 117 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 118 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 INITIAL MEETING CIIFL KI.IST Suggestion: Use this appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements arc overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Date:November 14,2016 Time: 2:00 nm Location: Collier County Growth Management 2685 S. Horseshoe Drive. Naples. FI 34104 People Attending: Name,Organization.and Telephone Numbers • 1 I Michael Sawyer.Collier County Growth Management Depautmcnt 2) Norman Trebilcock.TCS 3) Daniel Doyle.-ICS 4) Stephen Baluch-Collier County Growth Management Department 5) Trinity Scott Collier County Growth Management Department 6) I curie Beard - Collier County Growth Management Department 7) Lorraine Lantz Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization R) Mark Clark-FDOT(via email) 9) Deborah Snyder- DKS Associates(via email) ) Study Prevarer: Preparer's Name and Title:Norman Trebilcock,AICP.PE Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Address &Telephone Number: 1205 Piper Boulevard. Suite 202. Nantes. FI 14110,nh 239-546-9551 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title: Michael Sawyer.Project Manager Organization:Collier County Transooriation Planning Department Address&Telephone Number:2855 S.Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL,34104:nh.239-252- 2926 1%pi,hcant: Applicant's Name:hole Montes_Inc. Address: 950 Encore Way.Naples,FL 34110 Telephone Number:(239)254-2000 Proposed Development: Name: Gateway Triangle \iini-triangle Location: South of I)av is Blvd., north of US 41 and approximately 500 feet east of the jnterse cion of Davis Blvd.and ITS 41,Naples.rt. (refer to Fie. I) Page 1 of6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 119 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 Land Use Type: Residential.Hotel General Office.and Shopping Center ITE Code #: 151 (Mini-storage): 230 (Residential Condominium): 310 (Hotel): 445 (Multiplex Movie Theater);710(General Office): 820(Retail - Shopping Center); 841 (Automobile Sales) Description: Residential 210 MF du:Hotel 152 rooms:General office 60.0ksf(Includes 20.Oksf automobile storage. 10.Oksf display): Retail - Shopping Center — 73.0ksf (Includes 32.5ksf movie theater). Zoning Existing:C-4 GTMUD-MXD Comprehensive plan recommendation:N/A Requested:GMPA PUDZ approval Fig. 1-Location Map 11N PROJECT Findings of the Preliminary Study: Since estimated new project traffic is greater than 100 two-way peak hour trips,this study qualities for a Major Scale TIS.The TIS will include AM-PM peak hour trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments and significance test(based on 2°'o 20 o.'3°o criterion), Internal capture-consistent with ITE residential,office and retail rates. Pass-by rates are assumed as follows:25%-AM-PM peak hour. 1500 Daily. Roadway link analysis is determined based on estimated project new PM peak hour traffic -net external(non-pass-by). Operational site access-turn lane analysis is based on proposed net external traffic build- out conditions AM-PM peak hour generated traffic. Turn lane design speeds:Davis Blvd. and US 41-45mph posted speed limit, Page 2 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 120 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 The project is located within the Collier County Transportation Concutrcncv Exception Area(WEN). Study'Tyne: Small Scale TIS ❑ Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS Study Area: Boundaries:Davis Blvd.and I'S 41 Additional intersections to be analyzed:NA Build Out,Planning Horizon Year(s):2021 Analysis Time Period(s):AM-PM Peak Hour Future Off-Site Developments:ti_A Source of Trip Generation Rates:ITE LUC Data -ITE 9s'Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:NA Pass-by trips:Per ITE,CC Guidance.un to 25%for shopping center. Internal trips(PUD):Per ITE.CC Guidance,up to 20"0 maximum. Transit use: . Other:N/A Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: 2021 Alethodoloiry&Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates:CC 2016 AUIR:CC Traffic Counts Site-trip generation:OTISS Software—ITE LUC 151.LUC 230.LUC 310.LUC 445.LUC 710.LUC 820 and LUC 841 Trip distribution method:Consistent with April 15,2010'115 for the"Trio Hotel at Davis Blvd.and Tarniami Trail East(US 41)—refer to Fie.2 Traffic assignment method: Protect trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate:historical growth rate or 2%minimum Turning movements:see Findinr attic Preliminan Studs Page 3 0l 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 121 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Fig.2—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE 11 N PROJECT 40°6 40% < > 2096 "` Special Features:(from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A Queuing:N/A Access location&configuration:One right-in/right-out access onto westbound US 41.one directional left,right-in/right-out access(shared with Trio Hotel)onto westbound US 41. one possible shared(site to east)directional left,right-in/right-out access onto eastbound Davis Blvd,one right-in/right-out access onto eastbound Davis Blvd(west side of site)and proposed interconnects with properties east and west of the proiect—coordinate with FDOT on US 41and Davis Blvd access locations. Traffic control:MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs:WA On-site parking needs:per CC LDC Data Sources: ITE Trip Gen.;2016 CC AUIR;CC Traffic Counts Base maps:N/A Prior study reports:N/A Access policy and jurisdiction:CC/FDOT Review process:N/A Requirements:N/A Miscellaneous:N/A Page 4 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 122 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Small Scale Study- No Fee Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1500.00 N Methodology Fee$500 N 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 Norw.AW rreb6LCOGI . Study Preparer--Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 5 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 123 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Collier County. Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will he paid incrementally as the development proceeds, Methodology Review, Analysis Review,and Sufficiency.Reviews Fees for additional meetings or other optional services arc also provided below. Methodology Review-$500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement.including review of submitted trip generation estimate( 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,concunency determination.confurnation 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"commentsrquestions. "Major Study Review"-$1500 Fee(Includes two intersection anahsis and two sufficiency reviews) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation special trip generation andor trip length study. distribution and assignment. concurrency determination. confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data colle:ted/assemblcd.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 andior recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "\lajor Study Review-- "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-S500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 6of6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 124 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (7 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 125 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 W M O . O ' Q O O O Q ry O M 6, m O a O ' Q 0 S Na: a 0 0 I Y Ill W 0- M F a pppp in o g O 2 0 0 0 O Q ry O N 2 N 1,[ O m O & Q O N i W g 2 IL ; izzzzzri : i ; N I o .. V E C Z C U4- 8' m i m o N o m m o 0 0 § F o N gag Ro o g o a A o o m ni a m N ,- I Y a W W m O H O . 0 0 0 . N 0 A g O - O Z 0 0 - O m 0 1IYY . v m N_ 0 N Q £ a N r n 0 ZE a m E J I 9 8 E m 4 E r. z � av �a a = E = a o � E = aio a fat : � . e v - m .8' m c m .4' m a n s 2- • . 'm 2. 2 g : 4 {E�$gpggi = o i m c ELo N c e 15 m o a i 'o m �h i 'coo . Ti -a is = a z . a az $, a = az $, CC `= az y� a = d 0 g V 6 0, n Li 2 S o e o i- LLQ' :. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 126 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:Weekday Page 1 of 2 PERIOD SETTING ,+ DATA PROW:MOOTtit Specify the independent Variable,Time Penod and Calcutat on Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Tripe generated in the analysis.To record any notes,click Add Notes above pgKt;i tAAiE•. kRni •r.;r;1 t 1 wr,N,-Y_I ANAL.t: lobe Iwo I DEPENDENT LANDUSE �. VARIABLESIZE 7112E PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL. Q CgIdpB18eIR/TOvmh0lrse Dn.Or g Lines iVli 2}0�' 1 WIUday V......... y'� III 613 1227 (,�310-1401e1 Roane -�yrl lei �gto0lday zits MEM* y)• 021 621 1242 rr^^-- -r3 } 4,820-Shopping center 11000 Se Feet Griat—r � 7a weekday �i Sell Look LIP Vaky 1 2752 2732 5584 , _ _lrL.'.15i. _.. 1 u eris r + .113 4 720-Medical-Demel°ince EGO Sd..reel GrlrBal 60 Weekday _ .... 'Pi Al"" F3. 1084 1004 2168 Budding (� >�Mil. 30.13 01 indicdes nee rut of range TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of trips that occur between the Land Use on the left and the Land Use on the right The table below displays the total number of trips that have been reduced horn a particular Land Use The total number of Internal Trips for each Land Use will be deducted from the adjusted Entry Tops and Extt Trips from the previous section To record any notes,click the icon above.For recommended values see the ITE Handbook or NCHRP M 230-Reside teat CondomouunvTon,gtouue 310-Hotel Ext 613 Dement,Eke 0 .--`0. 101 Balanced. 0 Demand Entry- (0 }76 10) Entry 621 Entry 614 Demand Entry 0 ..::j6 (0h Balanced. 0 Dement,Est l0 )it Lot Ext 621 230-Resmemlal Condomamurn'Taw tiousej 920-Shopping Conte Ent 613 Demand Ek/1 38 _..'16 12331 Balanead 233 Demand Entry: i��_ (201) Entry 2792 Entry 611 Demand5n1ry 33 96 12031 financed 200 Demand Exit. 11 (307) Ext 2792 230•Residential CondondniumTowmouse 720.Medicel42ental Office Building Extt 613 Demand Ext. 10 j16 101 Balanced 0 DemarwEntry 0 91. rOr Entry 1084 Entry 614 Demure Entry 13 1. (II) eeWreod: 1F Demand Ex( 2 96 122, Exit 1064 310-Hotel 820-Shopping Center Ent 621 Demand Exit YO B1 Balanced 0 Demand Entry 0 '+a 101 Entry 2792 Entry 621 Demand Ertly rci. (0) Ba maced 0 Demand Ext 0 6 ,Or Ext 2792 310-Hotel 720-Medical-Oental Oncee Building Ext 621 Demand Erre :0 +) 101 Baianced 0 Dement,Entry 0 96 10r Entry 1084 Entry 621 Demand Entry l-1 (0) Balanced 0 Ormond Eos 0 % IOr Ext 1064 820-Ohoppeog Center 720-Medical-0artat Mea Building Ext 2792 Demand Exit: 'a )o 184) Balanced 84 Demand Entry 15 1, 11631 Entry 1004 Entry .73; Demard Entry ri-111I (142) Balanced. 112 Demand Ext 22 16 12381 Ext 1064 230-Residential CodemtrItmdTewnhouse https: o1isstraI1ic.cotn:proiectstudv?projected I5389&siudv 46134 12192016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I 27 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:Weekday Page 2 of 2 !10-Hotel 1020.Shopping'.720-Medical• Total Catllr Dental Onlce Bottling Entry 614(100%) 010%) 200(03%) 18 3%) 221(36%) 393(64%1 Ent 613(100%) 0)0%1 233(3M) 0)0%) 233(38%) 380(62%) Total 1227(100%) 0 10%) 436 (36%) 18 11%) 454)37%) 773(63%) 310•Hotel INTERNAL TRIP_ TOTAL TRIPS720•Medi<al• EXTERNAL TRIPS 230•Residential 820•Shopping Dental office Total 1 Condominium/Townhouse Center Building Entry 6211100%, 0)0% 010%. 0.0'%%I 0(0%) 6211100%) Eatt 62)1100%) 070%, 0'0%1 0,0%, 0(0%) 621(100%) Total 12421100%1 0 ,096, 0 .0%, 0 10'%,, 0(0%) 1242(100%) 820-Shopping Center 720•Nodical. EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 310•Hotel Dental OBke Total CondomintumTownhouse Waling Entry 2792 1100%, 233,8%, 0(0%) 112(4%1 345 02%) 2447 988%) 808 2792(1009.1 20317%, 0)0%) 84(3%) 287(10%) 2505(90%) Total 55871100%, 436 18%3 0 (0%) 196 (4%) 632(11%) 4952(89%) 720•Medical-Dental Office Building INTERNAL TRIPS TOTAL TRIPS EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 310-Had 820.OhePping. Tad CondomtnlunYTownhouse Coat ■88Y 1084(100%) 0 096, 0(0%) 64(6%) I 84(8%) 1 1000(92%) 6* 1064(100%) j 8,2%.1 0(0%) 112(10%) 130(12 ) 954)88%) Tad 2188(100%) 1 18 11%, 0 (0%) 100 (8%) 214(10%) 1954(90%) 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 0 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 230-Residential Condominium/Townhouse 773 (8 t% 0 773 310-Hotel 1242 1111% 0 1242 820-Shopping Center 4952 %10 743 4209 720-Medica-Dental O(7ce Building 1954 frig, 0 1954 Print Preview Save Analysis Nips:, otisstrallic.cotn'projectstudv. rojectid=15389&stud\r=46134 12 19'2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 128 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:AM Peak Hour Pagel oft PERIOD SETTING ,r DATA PROVIDED BY ITS 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.tick* Add Notes above. I OEPENDENI LAND USE INO Site Mead PSD } MLRM106 r� ENTRY SALT TDTAt {�23 O Ra4idwilal IDtraMt1T 1A160 310'n Vseeknty Pant FiotME t'AOIcly VdiY7 t6 ARIALILZ 77 9',1 COndOmmWm/fownnoup L.i, Vika ��!!��Tt L11L13s0AL+IfJtl+036ti C,310•Note 1...pr. ej is? 'Weekda/Peak nn AIS Hid 46 33 61 Shopping Sq 1R/ day kf V t1 el 49 130 tJ,820- Centel 1000 Fed CMos TY" 'Weak .Peak MOL Vl Grepn LootlpVY�I _`'0,7,0.01 1"i.720 Dorsal Office 1000 sq FM s.±.21 60" i WOak00y P.m HOL}yl s_A00iagO��^-''�}�j 0 113 30 143 ding • 111 nee*s s¢e od 03 range __... f TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of trips that occur tbedveen the Land Use on the left and the Land Use on the right The table below displays the total number of trips that have been reduced from a particular Land Use The total number of • Internal Trips for each Land Use will be deducted from the adjusted Entry Trips and Exit Trips from the previous section To record any notesclick the- icon above For recommended values see the ITE Handbook or$CHRP 684 230-Residetoat ConauminlumTownhouse 310-Motel Eat 77 Demand Eat 0 _Rix (0) Balanced. 0 Demerit Fall:i 0 5 ;0, Entry 48 Entry 16 Demand Entry 0 :% 101 Balanced 0 Demand Ea+- 6 44 iO Em 33 230-Residential CondeminWn Townhouse 020-Shopping Center Eat 71 Demand E4. 03 'i 1411 Betenced. 7 Dar60piEfOr(1i (7) Entry 81 Entry 16 Demand Entry 31 % 45) Balanced: 5 °emended, (0) Exit 49 • 230-Residential C0n0amiMumcrowmh0use 730-111Ss*OMMaI Oahe Building Ext 77 Demand Exit 0 4, i0, Bafenood. 0 Demand Er16yi 10.--1% (0) Entry 112 Entry 16 °emend Entry 2 % ill, Balanced. 0 Demand Ed, int (1/ Exit 30 310•Hotel 020•Snapping Center Eat 33 Demand E3C 0 -% (Di Balanced. 0 121011I0t0(01y'F—!'6 (01 Entry 81 .m i• —� Entry 48 Demand Entry. 0 % (0( Beamed: 0 Oelt li. 101 Exit 43 310.Motel 7M.mossmi406air Dmr.Building End 31 Demand Ent 0 96 101 Balanced. 0 Demand Ely: '14 iCI Entry 113 Entry 48 Demand Entry 0 .w ,0:: Balanced 0 Demand Ext: 14._. 94 i01 Ext 30 030-Shopping Center 120.Medical.0ental Office Building Ext 49 Demand el 3 '4. I1. Balanced: t Owri6ldeYdry: .0.1 11. 135t Entry 1.3 Entry 81 Demand Entry 2 5e. HCl fiamnced. 2 OOM6M0rtt3 (),m Eat 30 230-Residential Condominium/Townhouse EIT 1 TRIPS E47Etrf4HL MOPS h i,.tliotisstratlic.conl rojectstudV? rolcciid-153X9&study-46135 1219201(1 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 129 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:ANI Peak Hour Page 2 of 2 318•NabiI 820-Shopping' 720-.Medica). Total cenbr Dentl DTs. Building Entry 16(100%) 0(0%) 6(31X) 0!0%) 5(31%) 11(69%) Exit 77 1100%I 040%) 718'0.) 0(0%) 7(9%) 70)91%) Total 93(100%.) 0 (0%) 12 113%1 0 (0%) 12113%) 81(87%) 310-Hotel INTERNAL TRIP 720•Medica). EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 820-Shopping Dema)Orme Total Condominium/Townhouse Center Budding Entry 48(100%) 0(0%) 0)0%) 0(0%, 0(0%) 48(100%) Exit 33)100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0,0%1 0(0%) 33)100%) Total 81(100%) 0 (0%) 0 10%, 0 i0.%) 0(0%) 81(100%) 820•Shopping Center INTERNAL TRIPS 720-Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 310-Hotel Dental Mks Ted CondomlniunsTownhouse Building Entry e1,100X, 7(9%) 0)0%) 2)2%) 9(11%) 72(89%) Exit 49 000%, 6(10%) 0(01) 1(2X) 6112%1 43(88%) Total 100 1100%i 12 (9%) 0 (0%) 3 (2%) 15(12%) 115(88%) 720-Medical-Dental Office Building INTERNAL TRIPS TOTAL TRIPS EXTERNAL TRIPS 230•Re.fO.stY 819•N0111 Rs• Com(onM in8.M►OMIM. Cady Ta0t1 Baby i 113(100%) E 0(0%) 0(6%) 1(1%1 1(1%) I 112(99%) La i 30(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 2(7%) 2(7%) 29(93%) — Total 143(100%) 0 10%) 0 (0%) 3 (2%) 3(2%) 140(98%) 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 0 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 PASSOY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS-e9 TRIPS 230-ResldeMid Condominium/Townhouse 81 I1 l9, 0 81 310-Hotel 81 GE:)* 0 81 820-Shopping Cerner 115 (20 $ 29 86 720.Medical-Denlal Office Building 140 r.--), 0 140 pr.,..)'.fir . t+' Imps: otisstral7ic.conrprojeostudv°proje tid I5339&studc 46135 12%19/2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 130 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:PM Peak Hour Page 1 of 2 PERIOD SETTING DATA PROVIDED BY ITE i Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period.and Calculanon Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Trips generated in the armtyere.To record any notes,dick• Add Notes above ... .....`: PIAN*Har t LANC!ISE yAw RA NDENT SL2E Tr61E P50000 ME'ntdfl ENTR4 ENT TOTe.t r3,cZ onAan umRe>r use 01.II011elm Ell Mb' f weekdry.Peek Fb1 .--_ ` 14 36 110 0 310•HOW 'Roane 4 Weekday.Peak.,_�11Awge He 40 45 01 2' '"'!'sdj] OR no-Shopon9 cema 1000 Sq Feel Groaiti ft' 1 W.- eekday Peds •Z kd r 233 235 490 ..6666ee��t1.. �.._ =MET 1+ L{720.Medica,-Dem401nc, � Building10005q Feet GrOS.S 813 ikoc ay.PMlr fi10pR L0at b*VYIVf 62 132 194 TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTER NAL TRIPS Specfy the percentage of trips that occur between the Land Use on the left and the Land Use on the right.The table below displays the total number of tips that have been reduced from a particular Lana Use.The total number of Internal Trips for each Land Use wit be deducted from the adjusted Entry Trips and Exit Trips from the previous section To record any notes ckck the- icon above For recommended values see the ITE Handbook or p1CHRP 684 230-ROadanttal Candomin WmTownhouse 310-Rohn Exit 36 Demand Eads. 0 't it)) BOlalced. 0 Demand DSO: 1}'!k t0i Entry 4b Entry 74 Demand Entry 0 'e t0, Balanced. 0 Demand Fat =jfa lel Era 45 230-Residential CendanMNunOTownhousa 020.Shopping Centro Eel 36 Demand Ead. 63 5 +19, Balanced 14 Demand EMI:(—"") 171) Entry :35 Entry 74 Demand Entry 31 'x. 023, Balanced 23 DemandEnl, ,t(init 1311 Exit 255 030-Resl0Ontlal ContlamMlu.Town00008 720-Meatal-0a0tal Or7)0*at whoop Exit 36 Demand Exit. 0 0* i0! BNgnmd. 0 Demand Entry: ,0 5 i0' Entry 52 Entry 74 °Amend Entry 12 5 i1+ Barenned 1 Demand Est: �2� 5 13:, Eat 172 310•Hotel _ 820.Shopping Corner Noland Exit 45 Nold Exit L(��'' 11�%'�04 Balanced 0 Demand E11W '„0 5 {0; Entry 235 Demand Entry 45 Entry: l (0) Balanced. 0 Den.nd Est 10 5 i0. Exit 255 4 310.Metal 721.M.Nca-0artal ORfee Butidmg Exit 31 o....,4Ent '0 ,:5 tO) Balanced: a Dag. Balt': 0_......,i► (0) Entry 52 Entry 46 Oemem o Entry: Liii,.: 16 101 Balanced r 0 0001111101100E !!b 101 Exit II; 020.Shopping Centro71�''�� 720•MCNeal-0antal Bete.Building Dimond Exit 233 Exit trJ (a1 D 1000ad: 0 Oeg*U WhirWhir (161 Entry 5: mFz Entry 215 Deand Entry: :% 15' Balenes4 6 ossiam6E: f60) Eat 132 230•Rost denial Condeuelmlumlownbousa 10 CAL TRIPEW1ETit4AlTRIPS 557501401 TRIPS httes:lrotisstraffic.comi ro ectstnd ?? ruitectia=1S389RcstLtd}=4613 1219 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 131 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:PM Peak Hour Page 2 of 2 390.180Itei 1820•Shopping hopping i 720.Oelna1 Medica.l- j I Total 00% Building Entry 74(100%) 0(B%) 23(31%) 1(1%1 24(32%) 00168%) Exit 361100%) 0(0%) 19(53%) 0(0%) 19(53%1 17(47%) Total 110(100%) 0 (9%) 42 (30%) 1 I1%) 43(39%) 67(61%) 310.Hotel INTERNAL TRIP., TOTAL TRIPS720•Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 020-Shopping Dental Olfice Total CondonemuMTownhouse Center Building Entry 46(100%) 0(0%) 0A%) 0 10%, 010%) 461100%) Exit 45(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%1 451100%) Total 911100%) 0 (0%) 0(0%) 0 (t)%) 5(0%) 91(100%) 020•Shopping Croner INTERNAL TRIP 720•Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 310•Hotel Dental Office Total Condominium/Townhouse Building Entry 235 1100%) 19(8%) 0(0%) 5(2%) 24(10%) 211(90%1 Exit 2551100%) 23(9%) 0(0%) 8(3%) 31(12%) 224(90%) Total 490(100%) 42 (9%) 0 (0%) 13 (3%) 55(11%) 435(09%) 720•Medical-Dental Office Building INTERNAL 7R1F- TOTAL.TRIPS EXTERNAL TRIPS 130•Residential 310•HotM 020-Shopping Total CondoMniunaTownhWee Center Entry I 82(90%) 1 01O%1 0(0%, 8115`%1 8(15%) 44)05%) Exit ! 132(100%) I 111%) 010%) 5(4%1 615%) 126(55%) ( rural 181(100%) I 1 (1%) oro%, a n%, ,a 19%, 170 t92%t 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 Q 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 PASSBY% PASS-BY TRIPS NON-PASS(05 TRIPS 230-Residential Condominium/Townhouse 67 (0 % 0 67 310-Heel 91 ("ri% 0 91 820-Shopping Center 435 0(25 I% 109 326 720-Medical-Dental Office Building 170 (7-1,6 0 170 r'r Save Analysis - haps: otic trallic.cont pro)ectstudy 9prujeLtid 15389&study 46136 12 19 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 132 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix D: US 41 - from Goodlette Rd. to Davis Blvd. Traffic Data (5 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Pa g e 1 33 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 N QY IL' O 00 O n to O c� to O N W• O CO0V nbn Vc0 COOmb m N V nn Mm V MOn VOmO1D � O r r t~N N h m in pg Lo r n U) tD ID 0 N Cl) 0 CO V CO N V tIS CON m CO CO N o t NMM M M M torte N CD r h tT .it t0 N 00 10 M CO CO 1D I- h t0 a) a) 1D f0 0 h C CO tr LT )' pp M � � 10 I � �p 2L .O- er 10V "1.100 M.JaN OM 10eM- toMOAOro eco �Nyy ppe- a) CO to p0 N M1 Moo N ID��Dyy) MQ;3 M ttO �tp0 X N N N UI O t0 'sir': ,— M M W MON O O 00 m M W MO W CO Ul g N CO V V V V mp.-N m r 00 O V V r co R of co-of 00 Q co-r n f0 W to to n n M N 2 a CC RS F- Y 2 co O 7 NIN Net tpM � �jm ntp nnm CO m0N n NCOco Is WNWQ� MCD ^ w V O CO M V m p OIL) '7 110 CO CO CO O CO O O O r r V = WO co..Om 1A MO r hTN Ma MmM 10 erN VMMmV u) (0 V OV CD 1OnCI O I- >, d S r N M M M co-,r,,,_ N _>, V 1 U ti 41 (c4� 4 inAO app n 12p CO ID tF--F- �F- pV N $ t0�0) 01N(0 F-er er ..p-Mr r co co fO O MM shy COp 0) w Mt^r- � tO N ch1fO M 0)008 N 8 -NOO I!01f/ O MMrNM 33NON L ON MOOncOn V).=M�refUlM V M V N V MMnc000OcoODloiRofo:o +" N N V MMM 101.- .- r C I ui ~• QY4• W V p0pp1 CO CO CO ppr 1001 pMpM 1f1DOD p0p0 0e{0 (O� CI N lC D U+ O c0 r tp O t0 -ri- N V w M N N M V Ne- M N M O N C R U V M t0 CO r 0 C N 'L ie a z r N N N N N co'I tM a 7 coF- W51 g FN` 4mica T. oto 0 co �Ny r co co �n co coo 00 pop to er r r co eco co co n p.p-o- Opo co W O i7 N414Til ON 0 � 2 :2 a77,s M M7- M M001^0 fOV 10NV ODO) d U1N .n-N M M N CO O-,1nN V M M N N co-M N r M N M Ip M e t0 U1 V'M co of r 111�r L W f ID 1 Q cl al. p NONN D Tn ° ppppOpppp cpppp p CO r) W• 0U � M ) NM0M N M N N N M N N ER M M VO 7 M r a N 10 p N Z �L r N O 1 U 0) M It) h 0 0 i M M O r W M tm0_m C7 CO-RIM W 8 St § N b O 4 O .t O) Q ti N t0 ' t0 00 N R M O Cif 0) D) pGpp McyOIMIV .- M co R V V h r 0)M .- U) n N M 0 n n to M N M MO L). 7N CO00 N M „ M N .4)n or er co co N co er N N co N M10 N V to t0 er co 00 V CV 10 N 1 R y 1 • a�5c 7 co O V r N II O..f..e l vv oo M 0 N to N to N V n r- CO t0 CO N O h R 0 t0 O 10 er d 1..., W 0 NMM M 0.1... F- 10'1 "to 10) a-- n O) V' a 0:1 CO V 100 M M CO 1N0 r CO CCO CDtD 10 CO tUO t0 CO CO V Ul r In r 1 CU i () in n fO p(00 V N IF. 1.-JU) CV p C� tp �Ny 10 �o L Q2§'Q" ti6V 4tO O 4.14 N „ODe 0 M 10 I- h CO 88 MCO co W NU)•r-OcQID ONDN coOO) 0o0_ • c NM4444 �.1�W cor000 V V 10 Na 10 MM co V 00,0n t00 fD conn M co 0) ce >° w Q _ c R Q' 0 .-.m > 1D w 0 J O 2' Q' w » V) o > KOU w � ea CO Gm - CPreazoZ W comp!) 0 jF- COZ3 H Q W Q W LL IL > LL LL rg it LU LU 0 O J Q' Z W z 0.' J 3 W D Q W 3 ,... .“2 W- W F R' CeM 7 Q J OrOOQOOIOp W reOZwoapinz0ZJwzZW > WOW pz1- O ZWztom3ugxzDIzO > ox = zwF- wQawwa Za = wjO O W J 1000 - F- Q - OU) Q > c) > a F » F- 0FOdu)> O 00 _ _ r _ —YU. at IL = CA1LYQ QF- U) < < cr) < A001LQa. I J O V V V V VttZJ C w 0 Z O W J Z = - x z = O m = O a ccz -) = Q N 0 0 Cl) U) U) co U)I 0 0 0 c 0 re N re J 0 Q F- O F- w )- ce F- F- M tY O Q 0 F- W W U' U' 777 ) D. OI0 0NOLLOtdnrt) OODMU) OUMOU) C) VZ I LL I-- O W I LL z F-• M O to m O M 0.V n coO O M V O N m n N COO N m n O M N O M CO MMM V V V .7V ID 0 Um m tn n n n n M CO 00 CO O QQn3 IOF-7 1 I- OMZ 1 0 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 134 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 2015 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 0301 US 41, N OF SR 951 MOCF: 0.89 WEEK DATES SF PSCF 1 01/01/2015 - 01/03/2015 0.95 1.07 * 2 01/04/2015 - 01/10/2015 0.94 1.06 * 3 01/11/2015 - 01/17/2015 0.93 1.04 * 4 01/18/2015 - 01/24/2015 0.91 1.02 * 5 01/25/2015 - 01/31/2015 0.90 1.01 * 6 02/01/2015 - 02/07/2015 0.88 0.99 * 7 02/08/2015 - 02/14/2015 0.87 0.98 * 8 02/15/2015 - 02/21/2015 0.86 0.97 * 9 02/22/2015 - 02/28/2015 0.86 0.97 *10 03/01/2015 - 03/07/2015 0.86 0.97 *11 03/08/2015 - 03/14/2015 0.86 0.97 *12 03/15/2015 - 03/21/2015 0.88 0.99 *13 03/22/2015 - 03/28/2015 0.90 1 01 *14 03/L29/2015 - 04/04/2015 0.92 1.03 "is'"VITQ5-/NTit"=b1Tfi7Mit B.A VD/-- 16 04/12/2015 - 04/18/2015 0.97 1.09 17 04/19/2015 - 04/25/2015 0.99 1.11 18 04/26/2015 - 05/02/2015 1.02 1.15 19 05/03/2015 - 05/09/2015 1.04 1.17 20 05/10/2015 - 05/16/2015 1.07 1.20 21 05/17/2015 - 05/23/2015 1.08 1.21 22 05/24/2015 - 05/30/2015 1.10 1.24 23 05/31/2015 - 06/06/2015 1.11 1.25 24 06/07/2015 - 06/13/2015 1.13 1.27 25 06/14/2015 - 06/20/2015 1.13 1.27 26 06/21/2015 06/27/2015 1.14 1.28 -a7/---a6r217/bi5--a7/1Ir2Me''--f.IC 1.#t--- 28 07/05/2015 - 07/11/2015 1.14 1.28 29 07/12/2015 - 07/18/2015 1.14 1.28 30 07/19/2015 - 07/25/2015 1.14 1.28 31 07/26/2015 - 08/01/2015 1.13 1.27 32 08/02/2015 - 08/08/2015 1.13 1.27 33 08/09/2015 - 08/15/2015 1.13 1.27 34 08/16/2015 - 08/22/2015 1.13 1.27 35 08/23/2015 - 08/29/2015 1.14 1.28 36 08/30/2015 - 09/05/2015 1.14 1.28 37 09/06/2015 - 09/12/2015 1.14 1.28 -39--A/L20/22�. p9/26 _1..10 X34-- 39 O�J2D Ol 09/26/20151.1 1.24 40 09/27/2015 - 10/03/2015 1.08 1.21 41 10/04/2015 - 10/10/2015 1.06 1.19 42 10/11/2015 - 10/17/2015 1.04 1.17 43 10/18/2015 - 10/24/2015 1.02 1.15 44 10/25/2015 - 10/31/2015 1.01 1.13 45 11/01/2015 - 11/07/2015 0.99 1.11 46 11/08/2015 - 11/14/2015 0.97 1.09 47 11/15/2015 - 11/21/2015 0.97 1.09 48 11/22[[/2015 - 11/28/2015,2 / 1 0.960Q 1.08 "25?) -3kf06720ii"-WAIM:i ""6.91 1 07$"" 51 12/13/2015 - 12/19/2015 0.94 1.06 52 12/20/2015 - 12/26/2015 0.93 1.04 53 12/27/2015 - 12/31/2015 0.93 1.04 * PEAK SEASON 03-MAR-2016 11:17:49 830UPD 1 0301 PIGSEASON.TXT Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 35 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 , H X H H • W CC " I n2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 M • Z 11 o N a1 .0 o U) .0 0 0] o ') en b N 111 01 CO 0) 0 ' e 0 II M r, 01 0) P O W r1 e1 P 111 P N P m N 0 . W 0 r, ri r1 CO 02 P1 W W W 2 W W 0) W W 0. 0. W W W n _ 0N O .. N 01 a er, O NN. N P N N N N 01 X H II a V 11 U) 0 N U in O1 In U1 N U• N N U c W II U1 U) N U) U) in N U)U) U)U1 0 U1 U !n 1 U} U1 U) UI O a 11 4(I 4 a 11 0 U) In 0 0 U) 0 0 0 0 U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 2 w °0! 0) 0) a) CO a, 0) 0) a, 0) o a a, a w 0) X u co 4 b W n ..G7 CNN a X H 0 o H D, 0 U U U V U U U U U U U U U V U U W O Z '.• 2L u h O O 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 3 R a 0 II UU) O O O O NN O O O NO O O O O O O s w 311 r+ r) PN N 111 101 1e um o or o m 1n >120 H CO 414110) n n r N P N In VI tf 00 1 a2 N 11 a. H If.-i 0 0 0 0 •1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X W ] a z 11 w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H a 3 z 0 0 N 0 0, N 0 0 a1 N O 0 0) N N 0 0 0) 0 0 Cu H.1 01 r. N 01 U) N 10 CO CO W 0 .-1 P U) P 0 11 W H W F 0 N .-1 N .-1 .-1 N r1 N 01 01 01 N H 0 NU a 0 aHW 3 W W 0 11 3 3 3 3 3 In 0) m 3 3 W U 3 0) 3 z c0+)CO H r, CC m 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 6 ll Z m 0 0 0 o r o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >•a.y N, H•>0 0 P m N U) 0 1n 0 U) P 0 0 0 0 0 N a 11-. 0 r, N CO b N r ,0 CO 1` 10 0 01 P 10 P 01 'yH a O 2 0 N H N .- N 1 N N N r, 01 01 rM 0 O% Ha 0waw. Z W 1r V) EoC7 000) 0) 0) 0) 0) 040) 040) 0) 040) 0) 040) N N(gC4 • a II a C11 U) 04 X U1 U) U) 0 3 Z a2 11a Z z N O 0 H U1 U U1 V z O7[r I W 11 W U) U .00) 0000 to 11 m 0 a 11 H0 • U) .0 U1 0 V H W a O 2 n a H a 0 U co 0 0 zUa aQ 10 H F W U u U W 0 0 0)0.,u2 0) 0 11 0 N N w .-1 0) 1r a a 0 Cu �U) II a 10 01 01 a a 0 Ga CO a H Cu uF •.a 0 W 0 0 a 0 0 a) 0) H 01 1.0 aCO a) H N 00 0 u O 0 U a tK Cq] u ? Cqy . L1 - qq u2 0)11-• . c4CO 3 .fir 0) 10 a ? 0 2 0 2 P W� IIS w of 0 a o ' 0 1 0X0) N 2 511 0 1� 0) Co, CO P a P a 7 w 0 m 1 ca) 04 a 4 6 CC a a H a H 0 co co £400)0 a m (7, a £ w 2 CO 0 0) O 0 W0 WF U N N a w .+ CO O r, 0, a a z 2 L"). co a Cua r COQ 0 - co tad Cu 2 0, a a o N 1 1� o Ir O 1-+ CO H H A V o 0 1 0 H COCOcO 0 a 2 2 m moa 1ch - v CO z 1 `. n 20 W W W r, 2 a a 2�.I rl a a H04H 1 O O 1 W 1 a s Cu OZO0 Cl co - en U W£02 E m w U p o a H W m H o U o U o 4O G] 2rt W O O H 0) CC a roa N • W 3 R. 1 1 w - wa. z 2 2 Vy o z a a o 14 H W •w aa n O H O H C1 Iwi n - wa s a a a H W a Z N., 01 01 3 01 £ 0 O H - O HH O H 0ZH0 0 0 1) 1 P P P P O O W o a 0 a co P a w b 2 O r1 n 1 1 0 0 1 h a 2 1.L' w £au U H 11 1 1 a) 0 P 0) • a 0) w 3 CO NH£H ON n1 N 0 . 0 a) 0 0 - ., ., .t 4 0 X a 0 U co 1ax� 11 0. \ 0 - ., U) a • '. 2 U 2 •• U 11 00) 001 001 0 001 t5•i 001 m 14 COPCO 04 0. 011 04 45))01 0 v .1 W 11 11 a c+) 01 II 1 01 z m0U2 0 01110) 0) 010) 0) 0) 0404140) 0) 0) 0) 01010) m 0 11 CO CO 0 1 CO N 0) V a N Co 0 CO V CO 0 - 0 H CO 03 11 01a00 ., O H1,}a• IIH H aa•H42.7 0 o 0)F N H 00 W[L as I, U WWH= £ W IIP P r1 m P m N- 00 0 0 l.) U) N N CO 01 H a F 11-1 1 Cr, 0 r~, .Nr 0N, .P-1 r0, r0, `x11 rr, .n-1 I-1 N rr, .4 .n-1 CO 0)0)0 .G CO 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a e r. I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 136 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 A 1 W E.M H h c: 0000000000000000 W o O W W H.O.O W m N W a N..0..a Q V P N N N N N N N N N W In m W m N W N W H =M04 H0 2224 HOZ a 0Q000.0w.or0000000 Xtr 4m O mNr.ONaWNVO..HrNrr H II IIOL U Inwlnlnlnil)Inwill.Orrwrrw cnaXW WIn N N to In U)ul In W 111 Lilt()N N In N W d ❑ ‹aHaa NEm4 ....W Z a 0 0o0oo.0an1ON000000 co r.,)co 0 N 0 0000 0 N m W a N C O C N O* W W W IY Hw . H 0 U Z V mmmmm0000000m00.. k.f10C.. F Lu H 0 W .............. .HH u W W 0. 004 <x Y a,QQ�� 00C' H x •-a H4 H F al.W.1 ZHtnzoz wHQ 0 Cl HunH O H‹ Z 0000000000000000 cn H N N CAu .. .. O0o0o00 000 00000 0 In .N '.L2 H 0001!)OONtnmmmm mom r7W•� . W z0.' W V .Dr.OIn MM,43 W..NOOm0W.O 4HW E00 W N N N N N N N N MN m m N N N N 4 g F.. 4H. W ❑ saaaxxsxsaaaaaaa ^i HEN WCC 0 II 0 0 c4 aC00 a) Wa(.L' 4QN W ti C1WS OH H 0 0000000000000000 HOS.H. a 4 .. 0000000000000000 4zx2C C.. 0 H oMMMO01n0olnlno0U)OIn O.OH W U .O.Olnalntn.0 W Nr1000 WN W EOW WW NNNNNNNNmmmf')NNNN OWW�.-. .. .. . H V 0 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW Il II II wUm9H W .. 0 m .7 m uwuUwuvuuuuuuuuu C)1 a 0O a F 0000000000000000 .7 0 U m 00000000000000000 w F O W[no000In.n0O.nln000 U NNHOOON.Oma.-IOW WNN RC Vltnlnu)InWNIn.p.0.8.Oln V)InN G. Cl a 0 Cl c� >L .. x 0 N W W . WM.NN..00 W N.&u 44e NNH0 , O H d ' .-..-.rf.-.,-tr.0000000000 14C.) 0000000000000000 - V 0 3. , NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA P a g e 1 37 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 FDOT Florida Traffic Online Identify Information Page 1 of 1 Site Information Feature 1 Road Name TAMIAMI TRL Site 030124 Description SR 90/US 41,SOUTHEAST OF CR 851/GOOD LETTE RD NP24 Section 03010000 Milepoint 12.34 AADT 52000 Site Type Portable Class Data Yes K Factor 9 D Factor 55.9 T Factor 4 TRAFFIC REPORTS (provided in format) Collier County Annual Average Daily Traffic Annual Vehicle Classification Historical AADT Data Synopsis 030124 Vehicle Class Histo Print this window. Close this window http: Ilto.dotst.tte.11.us«ebsite I lorid*1rt11icOnlin,display:AttributeDataA1l3.aspx 11 21 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 38 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits (3 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 139 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 '— .- I ,wiwasisiNER7is, a ` co D z` i i ''. i W Z ` ri315 aa ,.I. 1 -4 IS " 4 , -� t— MW O 1 , W 44 I -` / I ate _ ---- — / !\\ \`\ J N ii _ / c, E // p s 1 �t�i /�:' 8 t o — 32 ,1T /J ,� 32% /% p / co, 11i -C1 �� `� / , H 8 / V $ � I I ! U , e8 / v� i �.i • . x I • = q / / I 1 ,, Vppp�` / it ®Y 1 ��/ / s It I' 4 ....,1 I ili�J� / // / h I 46* / 3 W 1 ,! 11 �, , At��,t,iIt '/ xy lIf/I r O,'--ht� ' ;t/ i } I rr , i Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 140 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 NORTH KT.& Davis Boulevard 14—11 v, T PM PEAK ENTER/EXIT = 74 VPH/43 VPH o a 'bid ut V i3 �8 LEGEND 34 --Ilk PM Peak Hour Project Traffic JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 2B April 15, 2016 (•3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 141 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 s i —nHI- ZOO , Q 0 _ � .Zi , r m' W ° co ,- Ym - H I $ m O i z, i F 4 � i ��' aa c� �pi« � - - - -I_- - quo W t — a L -g. ,� a MN N n o - f / \ N` � e I \ \)57 O 8 / Si I I ' I __, cE.t ' o ; F r._ < gP y i1/ie '6' 1/ P11 N .Q� I1 y f S / L') / e'' If 11� ` c0 -•i , / i i I ' I, r'sg;:s. r-.1,, r'"--. /1, / / . .. ' , I J , " �1 0. _ �.�� +,� . a ,, y II • , i ,, .Q.:;, ,,..,., ... • , , / - - , - IP' /. i wo JO k ;' Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 142 N LEGAL DFSCRIPDOM PFR TITLE COMMITMENT i - —1.7.-13 DAVIS BOULEVARD ._.®.xovm.®maigvvia.xrm..mBmv. T ti ° li F A1 10 -9y 5°¢^ I R�'I F 1 A A5 ° 15 le P1 IF IT IF to _ v.'sv iI as y .. 1 oe L __q,= ...—^_.. } :.` t_—yam II T " 11 lei �.�m ®.a .Y4MRFL 1 s.�wr ._air It.iI '. ;a €r E 'a_es rte.. g¢re �'r'f9� IT: .1 :rIIm , . N 0 5 Jj .J/ 5N. sr- '11 o \� w �'� `'®�� a'r"- ,C"e I'III .I.,� >a..lmac lmNUS .I�sa�� o nc c • '44, ran. 7 �� i I, ®..e e...::. �,RFoulc al eirl 4/% `� 1 ®xiei ® ids v...4me sA `�° �\ ::rte F�/ '1 'I a """... C �..� J �� iys a \\ // .CTdI NOTE:SEE SHEET 3 FORN4f �v 1174:41N. // ] J ' l____ VAX ® a. lE4!MERE ARDyOTy,� � \ / % 11 wx_® PARCEL 2 AND 3 LEGAL I I DESCRIPTION DETAILS AND °ds4 / J / I F ® .x wm. COMPARISONS S T J/ } .®v.x.mvxevums . N. 1 :If m —_ __......__v _ — .. \\\ JJ* , I s+vl.m.®s.mu wn rwr _ a �`�\�� / o nw N ma BOUNDARY SURVEY NM Ix:' Rc ,moN-I43 Fn°nF HOLE MONTES GATEWAY TRIANGLE zOISOsz Am man arxr,>:ur.en.umss SHEET 1 OF 3 u.v i.._. ..a a..r 11-905-L'F nxat. rn t III DAVIS BOULEVARD �r V DWI.WILE P sem= I k EPARCEL I ls ' N. /'' -J� yb -.= : x S. Ft r % / 7 i % .a . 2 q M1 a % u r _ _ 6• / • z i t+in k -1<' rna a ` Roza sr.¢ mz utmal1z/1e .. amok..�w.w.= -Ru EXISTING CONDITIONSIII. 0/12/1 GATEWAY TRIANGLE zamasz e[ta/i• HOLEMONTES mama ,.. .... tt-sm-3sE `.a a'""g PE 4"` SHEET 2 OF 3 W.>�.n.. 11 N LESS & EXCEPT DEED VERSUS CALCULATED DETAILS Maas sm. cm sass ',asp am sm.. am sm..ms MIT61TI m man Mor ma onnt• ma mama am M Mu NM Ma =TM ma morn an PARCEL 2&3 DEED VERSUS CALCULATED DETAILS M Mal* ma MS Ma. MI MS Orala SIM MI"Ma MY Ma imallaS Ma NS!WM OM SIMS Ma Ms EMT aa se MOM am % MI •.. a a.a a °...,a... a. IOC._ — y/ .. •SS•% PMCEL I • • ear ''-„,ar--",:„ rib,,,,„,,,, ,„„ i ....... .. . ..... . ... .„ ,i,,.. .._ , .„,,,,,,,, ,, , I �, r 1 % „,, „, N. tbrcte .N N. Fi _ r l it,m an '''./12/15 �o...an = DETAILS TO LESS & EXCEPTS env,. MI "a^.a "° ui 1 ..... a ... AND PARCEL 2&3all .,a •.M.a A Sank semis ere a ' °°e° GATEWAY TRIANGLE �a,coe Oil HOLE MONTES -Male—:x e.a®s w.iae amnas SHEET 3 OF 3 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT Y. E ;g gZ P TO SDP - PL20150001929 :: TRIO P. XiEi pig MIXED-USE PROJECT RESIDENCES I HOTEL I RETAIL c11 �° 0- J•1P SECTION 11 TOWNSHIP 50 S RANGE 25 E WLL: lip { a lii COLLIER COUNTY NAPLES, FLORIDA OW Iv COLLIER ! til SITE PARAMETERS GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET INDEX I0 I IPJ{ SITE DATA v15E6DLc OWNERS vwGA u�TC SHEET NO. SHEET TITLE {1 124 SQ.FMA 6 ieiGATEEUTEeP C e�H'.u' M3 TOTAL AREA BARB �'��F ao ,9"i ;NATEL R aP SDP-1 PLA" , <�,v BUILDING AREA E 4886 SDP-1.1 STD DETAILS PROJECT ENGINEER: PROJECT SURVEYOR: IMPERVIOUS-PARKING GARAG "o0 IMPERVIOUS•PAWN" .527 iis01e 3410ITE NO.204 E O1 SDP-2 WATER MANAGEMENT PUN Newtiuc. .wscmDwuccw.x6.DD uai42-3 a Brt DETAILS POLYPUS 27,061 0.62 31.40 AGENT: PROJECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: SDP-3 UTILITY PLAN ZONING rEso f PweiDwo zoo .1o3 DETAILS w(81FROren:Cacrwu.1301100IneaGATEWA.nwmzamfm M0V11R60 3 0S LO8 34109 00 RIa FLORIDAsm..: LITIOTT %WTe 33 RA BLVD THEN 02 DrmuwuD LEGAL DESCRIPTION-PARCEL TD:00386880009,P00386840007 r EROSION CONTROLnwu , 1 SOUTH- W.rtwpwl TRAIL MST,T"6N em DE NAPLES ZONED RD " iD s"lrmsoui"RAUGE z6 FAST rouie2 COUNTY, 1 OFFR RIGHT-Of-WAY WAY IMPROVEMENTS u oRicD.,..z D°s e1e°fmcot8arow" DIMENSIONAL STANDARDSA6800 1011400160480040zeu00012 0RoiwiluH60 3Wa—f011 111a0003' REVISIONS « REQUIRED weo En rNtec..D"iNE soui"IRLI RIGHT DFwn'UNE OF DAVISDATE REVISION O - w"ouG E INE •z , _ 07222016 PER CC COMMENT LETTER DATED O]/192016 81.15.LOT WIDTH TNCOS"ELLANDSS.CCORDEOiN OFFICIAL RN89ECOR 'BOo slaxx r0 gi MIN.MOOR AREA T 1r 1,1 aro R.eoOv ,w wiEEu1TI050 rlT"i r"[1q¢mi043610 T'u4f 0]262017 SDP AMENDMENT NM LOT DEP. NM N/A FMws6ou�iti 09/052017 PER CC COMMENT LETTER DATED 0824201]hsatHT OF ZVI UK OF TAMIAMI ..S D66540D.143rs EALDNc DRc"TCF wAFi"6N663Nisw 1ao.10 10232017 PERCC COMMENT LEITER DATED 101942017 III111��///31122gg 6c iC o Nc¢neia. loToeo omn 101"oris snE 11 ue�c'w�s FroTME iu Df GENERAL NOn3 l' BLDG.ZONED MAX. HEIGHT mACTUAL BLDG.HEIGHT N/As 2710Eis wo°ON AREA OF ureoufrmravom w,TeLV B6,zJv sD.aE TETT ORE Be�v6s oFNT of 00 (94eE"sro «n 083 gAtagg 206 1E BUILDING SEPARATION le/-0. ,;re BEARINGS FLORIDA STATE PLANEGRIDSYSTEM-FLORIDAEAST ONE. oEW pioKo 1N ROVAL OF "ELL " FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION 9.0'NAVEL 9.0'NAVD VICINDY MAP ON LATTTUDEE 26.8'16.3104' LONGITUDE-81446152.7838. ` PARKING CALCULATIONS-PER CC LDC 4.02.166511® I 3 66160FOR r"MAINTENANCEori �-5 pm oo''"RESIO EoiwufELO iurw uexr - BTM"" G rir se NAGEii fusTzuCTuzE.D' ��,To6aMow ro 111 1 ' Mi ,u e n °° a„4 i6.w"DDER 6 0011 00000 � R6_; . _ Nciroi°RE?li,SFD6"vAZ,aldic 03032 6 ql DENSITY-Pa¢Lecammw®p ' TOTAL w6bns$u6"mAvrOVACes 4._ V _._ - �aE: :4UNITS ALLDwAxE � 3 '6654000 REQUIRED PROVIDED --- rt66 RNw sz uNo6uLown66E �� TOTAL'ARCING SPACES 234 r°oia-iB9u«inavovlDDEDOS 00 BUILDING INFORMATION Simi ATE GARAGE SPACES i •„�._ f,m.�-- ” c tAOTus�SP r PARKING SP E ��asT C-1 ge' .A. I it Ill 4 MI 4 NI 4 lil X i i friii 4 Si 4 GI INSEASEMMNAMIleaszizo: c. .,c /,r 4- -- --- Z"' DAVT2C41=124.)R 841 F021 L I Air / 11.111" -- '311/11 ". ...-A,45::'------=‘""'„_; ,.... .-— „„— — —cc—,,„ ----..4 111182,1 1:11,1111 W iNs 4 , , \ ..... .= pie ,4,,,0....5...._.,...,,,7 ..70 1- -1 irs.7 .:4 ,,.Fe t.1..:i.: I 7--'7::.7,77.:.:...............,....._.......l.l'': '...17 ...:7....../.______::::....7....,.7:.,.::..1.1...,...-7-::: 1==,'.„NORTH) ‘:Ni:...iii!p61:"‘,11 III;7,;44 1 Iiiiii. 1 I ii 41 A7 I 1111 1 • .. . Cj 11 4 ....... i DIM OM 4 N ,, #, • ,0,, ,„„ il 1 a. a 12 Ni : °I -1 , ... s•, .`, , ' ' ll ' N',..a N `Z.-,s, N N \k N '''''."-,a,„ i H N (..44 ; -,•,,,,.. , q '''' '.:' —I I ,....,,,, 7.= : 1". = —7,--Z..°. id ,1 I- - le _ ...... . _... N .... , . "" """. ...., in - 640.0anele SISSIMILIMMITS a •••:::::,,,, ..,.. i Etaff Ern tr4:".77'''....- , N N •, '\ i — 1 VIM'1 „,, ..%...'"r...... . \ 1 ;:"`""”" ..T . SDP-1 ......... ° 00... ine 4„7::,,:111 1 11 :, . „...,..0, _......D:0,07:_cr77,1,11 .....___.__:::,. : ,,r-1:::„.„57:.... ssh811.com" le:1.0 ti:,1,ri,1![1-111:21.u11;t1145:1)11:1.:111,1,.1.1.11 ,0„.. , . , ., >t i ilio ______________—= z.... V lili' iiii 1110 !:, ,,,, „,,,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,0 ..!•. . 10'‘. !T.A,,fi.- — 11112I — cm!! I 01IMMOMMLICRIMICNIS '', ,• ...V' Mg.t:Z2.9 I 1 e—• 1 "zmwrmazhvganurxeng.,=. ...,., . ... ,.... ,,, ,,,, WinlAIMMINIMIXIMIMGAIMAYMIS 0 ''.;.' N '''N:%:<''''1 ' ‘ 'r. 'el "" 1 rour.o.mun am m„.m•..4,,,hcwoor.sr. sap ,se ,me ,+rtier ous.snuwat,coo —.... „-- ar...::1Z...-=‘,...---1=rf,"....1f.r.—•1=Z::: '',,, ..,,,......,.. '•----?-7—t."-'-"V"..z-,—"="-447,..C-1-- '.- "i"---r e k-• ETEI:17;1 _;, . :,[1:1E:I. IN -:•.!! 1 N N Ell °1 ?.......................r,=._=—.....: •!:. N . ----.-------- gii;8 , NORTH IHIST .... , SDP—2 „...., JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING SERVICES TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT METHODOLOGY REPORT For Trio Hotel (Davis Boulevard & Tamiami Trail East, Collier County, Florida) April 6,2016 Revised April 13, 2016 Prepared by: JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. 471 1 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 341 19 (239) 227-2355 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 27830 (PROJECT NO. 160316) 4-13-zoi JAMES KS, P.E. DATE FLORID REG. No. 43860 M � 0 1 1 I a° I rn c 1 a ' a I ----------------i // Longboat Drive ' ---r Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue I ( Outrigger Lane o I l�h�ana Blvd ' '` Horseshoe Dr N. / Progress P enue vI ' Domestic 9Ye nue E I I \Horseshoe Dr S. ' N I ' Ente rise Ave Enterprisevenue o I NORTH o I a' Na Airport I Exchange Avenue I N.T.S. 0 IL. I / U * o' 'Propspect Ave ui ` a J. Radio Road 11 8 �,�,■,. I Naples Airport iligarealislalll ili �U 0 Estey Ave 0 010wA/�Ii o 111511111.-,...400 2 ' 101 m PigLiiV Davis Boulevard - _MOM __ Mill 61 Galdes Blvd N•G`R N E ♦ m N a Harrison Rde a .< Co 0 t5 X a 0. E a a0 a `a 0 . o � o ci o 0 a a \ / LEGEND 6-LANE ARTERIAL OMR 0111M0 010M 4-LANE ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR OLLECT G 2-LANE ARTERIAL 2-LANE COLLECTOR/LOCJ4L \l'Ir i RNL ROAD — • JMB�p TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel Project Location & April 6, 2016 Roadway Classification FIGURE 1 Ma / / I • • / : I • / I / niman _ _ v‘ • / t7mC■! - AMER • / Scope of Project Raze existing 4-bay tire&auto service land use Construct the following uses: Table A Proposed Land Use Proposed Land Uses Size Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 d.u.'s Resort Hotel 12 Rooms Single-Tenant Office 3,145 s.f. Quality Restaurant 11,798 s.f. Project Generated Traffic Trips will be estimated based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,9th Edition.In order to determine the project`s net new traffic,the estimated trips for the existing tire/auto service center were subtracted from the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses. That is, Proposed Development Trips less Existing Land Use Trips =Net New Trips Table B Net New Trips Generated (Proposed Trips Less Existing Trips) New AM New PM New Daily Peak Hour Peak Hour (ADT) (vph) (vph) Existing Trips N/A 8 14 (Refer to Table IB) Proposed Trips N/A 39 83 (Refer to Table IA) Net New Trips N/A 31 69 • 2 MS TABLE 1A TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel • PROPOSED LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 230 Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 Units 330 Resort Hotel 12 Rooms 715 Single Tenant Office 3,145 s.f. 931 Quality Restaurant 11,798 s.f. Land Use Trip Generation Equation Code Trip Period (Based upon S.F.) Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 230 Daily Traffic(ADT)= Ln(T)=0.87Ln(X)+2.46= 186 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.80Ln(X)+0.26= 16 vph 3 / 14 vph 17%Enter/83%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.82Ln(X)+0.32= 19 vph 12/6 vph 67%Enter/33%Exit= LUC 330 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.35(X)+7.42= 72%Enter/28%Exit= 12 vph 8 /3 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.49(X)= 43%Enter/57%Exit= 6 vph 3 / 3 vph ********************************************************************************* LUC 715 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=11.65(X)= 37 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=1.8(X)= 6 vph 5 /1 vph 89%Enter/11%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=1.74(X)= 5 vph 1 /4 vph 15%Enter/85%Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 931 AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.81(X)= N/A 10 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=7.49(X)_ 67%Enter/33%Exit= 88 vph 59 /29 vph Pass-by Trips per ITE= 44% 40% Pass-by Rate per Collier County New AM Peak Hour(vph)= (AM)x(%of New Trips) 6vph 3 /3 vph New PM Peak Hour(vph)= (PM)x(%of New Trips) 67%Enter/33%Exit= 53 vph 36 / 17 vph Total.Proposed Land Use New Trips AM Peak Hour(vph)= 39 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= 83 vph 51 / 31 vph f TABLE 1B TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel EXISTING LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule • 848 Tire Store 4 bays Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 848 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=2.1(X)= 8 vph 5 /3 vph 64%Enter/36%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=3.54(X)= 14 vph 6 /8 vph 42%Enter/58%Exit= Ml Project Traffic Distribution The project's net new traffic was distributed to the surrounding road network based upon logical means of ingress/egress,current traffic patterns in the area and population densities. The distribution assignments were agreed to at the project's methodology meeting.Table 2A and Figure 2A provide a detail of the traffic distributions based on a percentage basis. Area of Significant Impact The area of significant impact was determined based upon Collier County's 2%,2%and 3%criteria(i.e.,if the project's traffic is 2%or more of a roadway's adopted level of service capacity,then the project has a significant impact upon that link). Table 2A describes the project traffic distributions and the level of impact on the surrounding roadways.Roads that were identified as being within the project's area impact are shown in Table 2A. 2015 thru 2018 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions In order to establish 2015 thru 2018 project build-out traffic conditions,two forecasting methods were used. The first traffic forecasting method was the County's traffic count data was adjusted for peak season conditions,peak hour conditions,peak direction,and an annual growth rate was then applied.The peak season/peak hour/peak direction factor as shown on Table 2B was derived from the 2015 Collier County AUIR Reports. The annual growth rate was also obtained from the 2015 AUIR Report.Using the annual growth rate,the 2016 background traffic conditions were determined,which are depicted in Table 2B. The second traffic forecasting method was to add the vested trips(trip bank)identified in the 2015 AUIR report to the adjusted peak season,peak hour and peak direction traffic counts. The 2018 vested trips"+"background traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2B. The greater of the two values produced by the two forecasting procedures was then considered to reflect the 2016 background traffic. The net new project generated traffic was then added to the background traffic. 3 Mg t of I t I I rI aI I I QI I I �-- .I--i-- -4.4.444.4.I_ _ _ _ all Longboat Drive —'f--rt —r /-.-' Clipper Way I Mercantile Avenue I I I Outrigger Lane 1 s 1 sohma^n ghrd Progress /ire rr Horseshoe Dr N. / 1 3 • {0On Domestic 9ya nue o0 ` I `Horseshoe Dr S. I •c ° I m 1 -oI Enterprise Ave Enterprise• menue o 1 Z NORTH 1 CI Na Airport Exchange Avenue E r a I N.T.S. 4ml Propspect Ave I (41 0 1 Radio Road D gl [ ... 01011.41■ Naples Airport sum- 11,rr ....U saillosig,.. Naas a Estey Ave o Boulevard 11111111.=11160 0011110,91 �■ gO9 Iii 40%� 4-- Davis SWIM _ i_ __ ow `Q9 Galdes Blvd iii 441SB -o E IN. m rn d Harrison Rdo 0 m 0 3 a o E Y c a a. J o u, e ils. o0 c r , E m 0 o a ` LEGEND 00%• PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT J�p IM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. ` Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 2A TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION April 6, 2016 Mq tal 2 O O O i. 2 2 2 § c * * CS• / � V a. - 66 2 0• G@ # E / w qN .14 0 L w 2 a x _ " a. CI" z . • 2 x 7r � a a, 0 = k . 0 0 0 CL 7a. q r 2 LI- 4 0 ® / $ / / � N Et2 § / §. .R 0 0 E 2 i o2R2 � 77 LU / on Ua. L a. 2 a▪ l co kc ■ Go 00 t in 4 . I 2 0t 3 ƒ 57 gc E Jm � § \ ° § E w k R q k 0 2 a D. / § . ] - k k ƒ ƒ w M.I° a & 0. t. g 7 2 e , = , . / k i 17 7 / § .0 4,1 e o a ■ © - V Y CI ƒ am 1- ± V y 0 $ * E 12 a § R § it, / 2 p a § \ 0 a e _ _ al o0 0 0. ttl . W \ RI %\- % § t § w o> . % w $ 2 N - $ 2iNn \ \ CO < 1- C ) o O Q le % .a,% w w w e « J 7 0 0 0 CD 2 f L.L.N 1- / / / od tO \ J .2 § / CD / R > e _ N a s. 0 } # z / 7f 7 § / . E a2 I- k k taCI R g e Zrs 2P. f oa 02 co in0 k ui Mt% 3 O O Nco 2 = LO1V V V O m' a x a c t ' 2 o o V V o) 0 N O Q Y `' a' 'P tD 0 Cy 3 A0 G 0 O O O m a x > a o = g> _ O 0 0 Q O O 0 a a N 01 0 N N N S 6- CO C? x Q G N O O JCYGm co VA N 1 0 p a > m a } m ...i a .. Q c c pl w a z z Q I- a x > r a Y a a 0 U Z d .c" a o1 w a C.) °) 0 $ N 0 O n G W a a O > C> c N Oc° �N �I V OJV V J a 0 a m CO .:( LUz CD a. 51w w I— J m o o c 4 aO = $ 0 0 N scc a ICI cD w 0 Q a a m CO cn oI V V o COEt ._ c eo 0 — 0 9 0 _ g n m o 0 N N � - a � 4, a > a x a V CC V V a a V Q o o 23 EL > Q 'Q ca o F- > a E. CI m 07 V, co N § g O O N C) RIA > ~ o 0 m E N a0 es a w M 1 2_ JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING SERVICES TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT For Trio Hotel (Davis Boulevard & East Tamiami Trail, Collier County, Florida) July 25,2017 County TIS ReviewFees TIS Methodology Fee =Previously PaidJamesDigitally TIS(Minor Study)Review Fee = $750.00 signed by M . James M. Banks Date: Prepared by: 2017.07.26 JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Ban 08:07:55 -041001 471 1 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34119 �� ,,, N401111.1.1/,,,,,,,�',/ i CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO. 27830 BA ��`i ,.GENSE� • ''. (PROJECT NO. 1 6031 6) �1Z.'�\ �' i 8 6 , W OF Zeal 4/ ,,, :I.,, 5CP" 4.,,it_ As , F! a. 4011 JAM 7 . BANKS;- e . -•—•• !� $ FL■`; •A REG. NO. ° rl®NN��``�*N'4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Conclusions 2 Methodology 3 Scope of Project 3 Table A-Previous Land Uses 3 Table B-Proposed Land Uses 4 Figure 1 -Project Location&E+C Road Classification 4.1 Site Plan , 4.2 Project Generated Traffic 5 Table C -Net New Trips Generated 5 Table IA-Proposed Land Use Trip Computations 5.1 Table IB Existing Land Use Trip Computations 5.2 Existing+Committed Road Network 6 Project Traffic Distribution 6 Area of Significant Impact 6 Figure 2A-Project Traffic Distribution 6.1 Table 2A-Area of Impact/Road Classification 6.2 2016 thru 2020 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions 7 Table 2B -2016&2020 Link Volumes 7.1 Table 2C-2020 Link Volumes/Capacity Analysis 7.2 Figure 2B -Project Traffic Assignment 7.3 Appendix 8 1 Conclusions Based upon the findings of this report,it was determined that the proposed Trio Hotel will not have a negative impact upon the surrounding road network.It was verified that all roadways,within the project's area of influence, currently have a surplus of capacity and can accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed mixed use development. As determined,the road network will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service for 2020 project build-out conditions and will not create any off-site transportation deficiencies that need to be mitigated. Site Access on U.S. 41 The site has an existing access on E. Tamiami Trail(U.S.41)which is a right-in/out and directional left-in median opening. Within proximity of the site, E. Tamiami Trail is a 6- lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Left-Ingress Turn Lane The existing left turn lane is approximately 280'in length,which is adequate to accommodate the proposed land uses'traffic demands. The Florida Department of Transportation(FDOT)requested that an evaluation of the left turn lane queue be based upon the use of the PPM's formula Q=[(2.0)(DHV)(25)]/N.Using this equation assuming an N value=30 and DHV= 19 vph(refer to page 7.3),the results are that a storage of 50' needs to be provided in conjunction with the minimum deceleration+taper per FDOT's standard index 301 which is 185',which gives a total length of 235'. The existing length of the left turn lane exceeds FDOT's minimum standards. Therefore, it is the report's conclusion that no additional improvements to the left turn lane are necessary. Right-Ingress Turn Lane A right ingress turn lane is not warranted and cannot be constructed due to right-of-way constraints. Based upon the low volume of traffic expected to turn right-in(refer to page 7.3), a turn lane is not warranted. It should be noted that E.Tamiami Trail is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH and the outer travel lane is intended to accommodate both thru and right turning movements at low volume driveways. Site Access on Davis Boulevard The site has an existing full access on E. Tamiami Trail(U.S.41). Within proximity of the site,Davis Boulevard is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Left-Ingress Turn Lane A left-ingress turn lane will be constructed based upon FDOT's Standard Index 301 which requires a total deceleration and taper length of 185'. The project's left-in peak demand is 33 vph(refer to page 6.3). Using the PPM's formula Q=[(2.0)(DHV)(25)]/N results in storage of 60'be provided in conjunction with the deceleration+taper which results in a total turn lane length of 245'. 2 Right-Ingress Turn Lane A right ingress turn lane is not warranted and cannot be constructed due to right-of-way constraints. Based upon the low volume of traffic expected to turn right-in (refer to page 7.3),a turn lane is not warranted. It should be noted that Davis Boulevard is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH and the outer travel lane is intended to accommodate both thru and right turning movements at low volume driveways. Methodology The study's methodology was reviewed by Mr. Stephen Baluch and Chad Sweet with Collier County's Transportation Planning Department. The accepted methodology is attached(refer to pages M1 thru M12). Scope of Project Trio Hotel is a proposed multi-story structure and parking structure that will consist of a 24-room resort hotel,48 multi-family dwelling units, 2,040 square feet of specialty retail and office space and 10,100 square feet of quality restaurant. The site,which is an acute triangle shaped parcel, is located on the east side of the Davis Boulevard & E. Tamiami Trail intersection, within Collier County. The site was previously developed with a fast food restaurant(i.e., Burger King) and a 4-bay tire and auto service shop. The Burger King has been razed and the auto service shop will be as part of the proposed redevelopment. Access to the site will be maintained via the site's existing easternmost access to E. Tamiami Trail and its easternmost access to Davis Boulevard. The westernmost accesses to the site will be removed as part of the project. Table A Previous Land Uses Previously Constructed Land Uses Size Fast Food w/Drive Thru 3,200+/-s.f. Tire& Auto Service 4-Service Bays 3 Table B Proposed Land Uses Proposed Land Use Size Resort Hotel 24 Rooms Multi-Family 48 d.u.'s Specialty Retail & 2,040 s.f. Professional Office Quality Restaurant 10,100 s.f. (2 restaurants) 4 t of I 1re a' I lirig- I 'a I L„,•.0"*""" i.00sollifIIIIIIIII 111111111•11111 4r, MM. 111111•111.11111111111110 ell �i Longboat Drive Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue I ' [ Outrigger Lane c �achmartn Blvd 1 '/ Progress enue c I FlI Horseshoe Dr N. / 3 o Domestic ite nue n' I I \Horseshoe Dr S. r$ 1 Ente rise Ave Enterprise avenue a 1 I 0 NORTH S n I �I Nap Airport Exchange Avenue U I N.T.S. 0 `rt I1 1 Propspect Ave ui 1 e 1 Radio Road • 1 31 I- • I uI-ta. Naples Airport ■/"�w� IP a11i' yo Estey Ave �.n4..1i1i1i1Vml 0_ ' a'la Davis Boulevard llalimej.• gni.4 .1. amer 4MIIIIND 01111111 , ... Galdes Blvd s`A, N ` ` O d e E m a.. Harrison Rdo a o o a 3 -43 a o E 3 a: o° ;° in . o r o 0 <1 0 \N/ LEGEND 6—LANE ARTERIAL 4—LANE ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR ` 2—LANE ARTERIAL `GS+ 2—LANE COI t£CfOR/i OCAL ,j RAIL ROAD — • • — ` JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. ` Trio Hotel Project Location & Roadway Classification FIGURE 1 April 15, 2016 1lrn 3 I 1 I I I •• + 1 ! 'I I I -' 11 . I 1 1 1I I I 1 ;x • i d i yls 12 Ili iz; : II III ` • II } Ei •j 11111 ill - -- i I ' I I i" ; /• / • . 111 ' • 4, ti / 1 41 , kr //ya a 11 / / • p 1 , L.11.111j0F g ',1 - ' .'...,..-/ "" , / ,sqr // // i'::. I 012 I /..z-4'i. . ..,k 8 as F �P/�`/ g / �... 1 " \ : 1,1 i IA u . .;d / gtVitittftlif , // . / / HUI x 1 \ INFAr / /// / /s iaaa . , I f�ii i �/ /, /11/'Amml illy /' ii \ 4,2" • Project Generated Traffic Traffic that can be expected to be generated by the project was estimated based upon the guidelines established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,9th Edition. That is,historical traffic data collected at similar land uses was relied upon in estimating the project's traffic. It was concluded that Land Use Codes "Residential Condo/Townhouse" (LUC 230), "Resort Hotel" (LUC 330), "Specialty Retail" (LUC 826), and "Quality Restaurant" (931) were most appropriate in estimating the proposed land use trips; and"Tire Store" (LUC 848)was used to estimate the existing land use trips. In order to determine the project's net new traffic,the estimated trips for the previous land use were subtracted from the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses. That is, Proposed Development Trips less Previous Development Trips=Net New Trips Table lA provides a detail of the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses and Table 1B for the previous land uses. The following is a summary of the results. Table C Net New Trips Generated (Proposed Trips Less Existing Trips) New AM New PM New Daily Peak Hour Peak Hour (ADT) (vph) (vph) Existing Trips N/A 8 14 (Refer to Table IB) Proposed Trips N/A 59 111 (Refer to Table 1A) Net New Trips N/A 51 97 • The report concludes that the project will generate less than 100 net new trip ends during the weekday highest peak hour.As such, the report investigates the traffic impacts associated with the project based upon the criteria set forth by the Collier County Government's Traffic Impact Statement Guidelines for developments generating"less than 100 trips",which is identified as a minor study. • 5 TABLE 1A TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 230 Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 Units 330 Resort Hotel 48 Rooms 826 Specialty Retail 2,040 s.f. 931. Quality Restaurant 10,100 s.f. Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 230 Daily Traffic(ADT)= Ln(T) =0.87Ln(X)+2.46= 186 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T) =0.80Ln(X)+0.26= 16 vph 3 / 14 vph 17% Enter/83% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.82Ln(X)+0.32= 19 vph 13 / 6 vph 67% Enter/33%Exit= LUC 330 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.35(X)+7.42= 24 vph 17 / 7 vph 72%Enter/28% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.49(X)= 24 vph 10 / 13 vph 43% Enter/57%Exit= LUC 826 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=44.32(X)= 90 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=6.84(X)= 14 vph 7 /7 vph 48%Enter/52%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=2.4(X)+21.48= 26 vph 12 / 15 vph 44% Enter/56%Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 931 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=89.95(X)= 908 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.81(X)= 8 vph 5 /3 vph N/A PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=7.49(X)= 76 vph 51 / 25 vph 67% Enter/33% Exit= Pass-by Trips per ITE= 44% 44% Pass-by Rate New Daily Traffic(ADT)= (ADT)x(%of New Trips) 509 ADT New AM Peak Hour(vph)= (AM)x(%of New Trips) 5 vph 3 / 2 vph N/A New PM Peak Hour(vph) = (PM)x(%of New Trips) 42 vph 28 / 14 vph 67% Enter/33% Exit= ********************************************************************************* Total New Trips Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = 59 vph 30 / 29 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= 111 vph 63 / 48 vph 5. 1 TABLE 1B TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel EXISTING LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 848 Tire Store 4 bays Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit WC 848 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=2.100= 8 vph 5 /3 vph 64%Enter/36%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=3.54(X)= 14 vph 6 /8 vph 42%Enter/58%Exit= Existing+Committed Road Network Figure 1 and Table 2A provide a detail of the surrounding E+C road network. Table 2A depicts the minimum level of service performance standards and capacity for the roads within the project's are of influence. There are no planned capital improvement projects within the project's area of impact. Project Traffic Distribution The project's traffic was distributed to the surrounding roadway network based upon logical means of ingress/egress; current and future traffic patterns in the area; location of surrounding businesses and commercial centers. Figure 2 and Table 2A provide a detail of the traffic distributions based on a percentage basis and by volume. The project traffic assignments were agreed to as described in the attached methodology report. Area of Significant Impact The area of significant impact was determined based upon Collier County's 2%,2%and 3%criteria(i.e.,if the project's traffic is 2%or more of a roadway's adopted level of service capacity,then the project has a significant impact upon that link). Table 2A describes the project traffic distributions and the level of impact on the surrounding roadways. Roads that were identified as being within the projects area impact are shown in Table 2A. 6 oI I cc a, I a' I 1{s --r- Longboat Drive / Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue I `'_ ( Outrigger Lane - ' I0 hmann 6Wd Progress A enue I Horseshoe Dr N. / o' . 0 Domestic ti nue o 1I `Horseshoe Dr S. I 1o I gI Ente rise Ave Enterprise-avenue o. I NORTH I Y �� Nap Airport Exchange Avenue S KIS. DI 00 �i 1 `r mI I Propspect Ave vi , 0 a Radio Road ININIIPPIPO WO _a I Naples Airport ONr�� 114111116 •oa Estey Ave �■>��t, o ��■u_a■mi 11a„ o BVII*pa 9 40% _ ION g3� f---► Davis Boulevard I119".II* _ _ _ __ _ 41444j`p9 Galdes Blvd 4%T '' 17♦ 47 4n o E m iTi a o Harrison Rdo -o 0 47 0 3 a 0 E 0 c o° o ` co m to \` o c m 0 o a. LEGEND ` 00% PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT \ 1 JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 2A _ April 6, 2016 6. ( c tt R F 0 00 c g zz rn_ r) c m 04o N. o d rn co n ,0 •00 Ts o R O N Nc\I N ..+ Y U 0. OO DIW W Z L 0 _ m = Y -c rn 0) 0 Q d a. a r r- N- 0 z 4 O i W EL d I— C.) S'a N p p, NNQ. daQ � - U- 0 a) Nc, o 0 a p O 0 0 a III a` I- ev V. ns N fYm c MI a U G J 0 ID 3L0 00 CO H1_- _.. O Y N CO N W ..4a O o > v, CleY Z OI0 LLE LU O. a � .c 8 l 0• c ` (0 COC ' c x W W M CO CO Q' a iXa o tY & a u .2 y • g Q II a --E� m c IF > F > > • s c E p m > ON E o •5 LI 0 Lc 13 u L 0 0 p a r a; Y C 03 CL• z O 0 CUE ro ro m r F )= o •mco m m w C > r a` a` o al .2- 2016 thru 2020 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions In order to establish 2016 thru 2020 project build-out traffic conditions,two forecasting • methods were used. The first traffic forecasting method was the County's traffic count data was adjusted for peak season conditions,peak hour conditions,peak direction, and an annual growth rate was then applied. The peak season/peak hour/peak direction factor and annual growth rate were derived from the 2016 Collier County AUIR Report. Using the annual growth rate,the 2020 background traffic conditions were determined,which are depicted in Table 2B. The second traffic forecasting method was to add the vested trips (trip bank)identified in the 2016 AUIR report to the adjusted peak season,peak hour and peak direction traffic counts. The 2020 vested trips "+" background traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2B. The greater of the two values produced by the two forecasting procedures was then considered to reflect the 2020 background traffic. The net new project generated traffic was then added to the background traffic. Table 2C provides a summary of the 2016 thru 2020 traffic conditions and the roadways' level of service and remaining available capacity.As shown,all project impacted roadways will continue to operate at the County's adopted minimum level of service thresholds at project build-out. 7 a 0 GoE.C rr^^ H O to F a V/ }4 O Y 0 0) 0 .,_10 LO 14W o N w ° 71.1 > 2 7 a. C- a. -J O a / 0. m 'C 'rC a ' R C° Z w N J 0 o c .., Jto N = N 2 a o r COW < �. O Y 0) ta. r a ° a Co I-- 0 Ch O a d a m I a e o S o � O O p ft 0 1111 LV N N 0 re 0 5 Ox. tel Ltl LLl LU N a 06 to cc, ceP- 1N 0 N N Q t— > CO CO R1.0 R v v o x a .0 a I— .E p m O N E cc co r 5 0 o Q CV O) d ~ 0 •N W F n 71 C 7 L. O N Q S (1)1 N v m O1 U 0 0 1 p I C➢ Ct. Y a c 3 3 y O O N 0 = Cl) ,r, (.0p 'O y .- .- Lo N •3 N a V o O O O a0 aL Y > a. Cl) > _ 8. a 0 0 0 t w m a a a N N N N J ; 5 CV 'CC0 ii O `- • u, o el 04 Z G 4 .Y Yco Q N m a a a Y a L. V a z° o� w Q a. -. o Q m i xrn o �e a a V a` a- o W 2 J O 0 N °' _ o o u, W a a a a N J Z Q 'J Y "a oI w w w I-- }. CO Q c 0 O C Q N =d O Q.O O N f0 '- Y a N- Q a Y m > Q am Ce o 3 0 = 4, fl' N COOO op N N f0 ` a - in r a Y a V ▪ a O cc 2- t a o o -oa Q .2. CO O I- .7. ..° "E 0 al m y E o ' Fes- �S• a O O N O, 'O co co d• it o a0 N M co > F- a w ?. 2 • NORTH N.I.S. 36 Davis Boulevard 18 �? 2S Tod` PM PEAK ENTER/EXIT = 91 VPH/62 VPH ate' T v c a 3) 79 LEGEND 34 --P. PM Peck Hour Project Traffic JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 2B TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT July 25, 2017 1.3 APPENDIX Support Documents 8 JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING SERVICES TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT METHODOLOGY REPORT For Trio Hotel (Davis Boulevard & Tamiami Trail East, Collier County, Florida) April 6,2016 Revised April 13,2016 Prepared by: JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. 471 1 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34119 (239) 227-2355 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 27830 (PROJECT No. 160316) / 4-i3-zoic JAMES KS, P.E. DATE FLORID EG. No. 43860 M � of I I cc cI It a I ---------------i4440.1 1111110 =IMP .10 . MOM IN Longboat Drive I -r Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue J Outrigger Lane v c I`�hmana Blvd I ` Progress Acme ce i I Horseshoe Dr N. / �,Q� •0 1 Domestic f ve nue o (Horseshoe Dr S. 1 I I I irr I Ente rise Ave Enterprise enue _c o u 0 NORTH Icl Nap Airport I Exchange Avenue o I N.TS.. ' U mI I Propspect Ave I vi sr I o ` Radio Road I 3�1 -. ...... I NaplesgialiPlilialli Airport s111 Mililing y Estey Ave o walli Atgis m iviiirn Pin�: ic N. Davis Boulevard Games Blvd in N� la 1 E Z.CO N O Harrison Rdm v L. 0 0 a 00 £ 1 o 0 cr) `a 0 en g c q( I � / CO o 0 a LEGEND `N/ 6-LANE ARTERIAL , ,- - ` 4-LANE ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR G 2-LANEUARTERIAL \r.'S' 2- NE COLLECTOR/LOCAL ' RAIL ROAD — . . — \ JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel Project Location & FIGURE 1 Roadway Classification April 6, 2016 Ma / `i • / I // I ! / v, airvf ,i I • • / I '. / I / - tioNL : v.11 •t /> ' . , f ..._ Alma . • • . . / • -.: ,/ / 1 .. , . .. • i.,/-7 Scope of Project Raze existing 4-bay tire&auto service land use Construct the following uses: Table A Proposed Land Use Proposed Land Uses Size Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 d.u.'s Resort Hotel 12 Rooms Single-Tenant Office 3,145 s.f. Quality Restaurant 11,798 s.f. Project Generated Traffic Trips will be estimated based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,9th Edition. In order to determine the project's net new traffic,the estimated trips for the existing tire/auto service center were subtracted from the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses. That is, Proposed Development Trips less Existing Land Use Trips =Net New Trips Table B Net New Trips Generated (Proposed Trips Less Existing Trips) New AM New PM New Daily Peak Hour Peak Hour (ADT) (vph) (vph) Existing Trips N/A 8 14 (Refer to Table IB) Proposed Trips N/A 39 83 (Refer to Table 1A) Net New Trips N/A 31 69 • 2 M5 TABLE 1A TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel PROPOSED LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 230 Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 Units 330 Resort Hotel 12 Rooms 715 Single Tenant Office 3,145 s.f. 931 Quality Restaurant 11,798 s.f. Land Use Trip Generation Equation Code Trip Period (Based upon S.F.) Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 230 Daily Traffic(ADT)= Ln(T)=0.87Ln(X)+2.46= 186 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.80Ln(X)+0.26= 16 vph 3 / 14 vph 17%Enter/83%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.82Ln(X)-}0.32= 19 vph 12 /6 vph 67%Enter/33%Exit= LUC 330 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.35(X)+7.42= 72%Enter/28%Exit= 12 vph 8 /3 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.49(X)= 43%Enter/57%Exit= 6 vph 3 /3 vph LUC 715 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=11.65(X)= 37 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=1.8(X)= 6 vph 5 /1 vph 89%Enter/11%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=1.74(X)= 5 vph 1 /4 vph 15%Enter/85%Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 931 AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.81(X)= N/A 10 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=7.49(X)_ 67%Enter/33%Exit= 88 vph 59 / 29 vph Pass-by Trips per ITE= 44% 40% Pass-by Rate per Collier County New AM Peak Hour(vph)= (AM)x(%of New Trips) 6 vph 3 /3 vph New PM Peak Hour(vph)= (PM)x(%of New Trips) 67%Enter/33%Exit= 53 vph 36 /17 vph Total.Proposed Land Use New Trips AM Peak Hour(vph)= 39 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= 83 vph 51 / 31 vph TABLE 1B TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel EXISTING LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 848 Tire Store 4 bays Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 848 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=2.1(X)= 8 vph 5 /3 vph 64%Enter/36%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=3.54(X)= 14 vph 6 /8 vph 42%Enter/58%Exit= • Ml Project Traffic Distribution The project's net new traffic was distributed to the surrounding road network based upon logical means of ingress/egress,current traffic patterns in the area and population densities. The distribution assignments were agreed to at the project's methodology meeting.Table 2A and Figure 2A provide a detail of the traffic distributions based on a percentage basis. Area of Significant Impact The area of significant impact was determined based upon Collier County's 2%,2%and 3%criteria(i.e.,if the project's traffic is 2%or more of a roadway's adopted level of service capacity,then the project has a significant impact upon that link). Table 2A describes the project traffic distributions and the level of impact on the surrounding roadways.Roads that were identified as being within the project's area impact are shown in Table 2A. 2015 thru 2018 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions In order to establish 2015 thru 2018 project build-out traffic conditions,two forecasting methods were used. The first traffic forecasting method was the County's traffic count data was adjusted for peak season conditions,peak hour conditions,peak direction,and an annual growth rate was then applied.The peak season/peak hour/peak direction factor as shown on Table 2B was derived from the 2015 Collier County AUIR Reports. The annual growth rate was also obtained from the 2015 AUIR Report.Using the annual growth rate,the 2016 background traffic conditions were determined,which are depicted in Table 2R The second traffic forecasting method was to add the vested trips(trip bank)identified in the 2015 AUIR report to the adjusted peak season,peak hour and peak direction traffic counts. The 2018 vested trips"+"background traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2B. The greater of the two values produced by the two forecasting procedures was then considered to reflect the 2016 background traffic. The net new project generated traffic was then added to the background traffic. 3 M $ 1 o I 1 Io ix cp I a. I I t aI 1 I -- -_,001000'_' •• 14imHi_ _ _ _ _ Longboat Drive Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue I I 1 Outrigger Lane v v I a o I �,�gc,rnann Bwd I Progress / enue te I "�`' ,Horseshoe Dr N. / o P Domestic ge nue o 1 I `Horseshoe Dr S. 1 1§I Ente rise A e Enterprise Ivenue 35 a m I NORTH 1 Y �` Nap Airport Exchange Avenue N.T.S. �I I I "1 I / Prosect Ave a mi P P I vi 1 0 m gi 1 Radio Road F ....■ stirs Naples Airport unillellillial 11 'aiI � o Estey Ave ■��2010111.1.”.1111`. O diii co I*•IONai \ 4i- —► Davis Boulevard 4,1C`Og Galdes Blvd 7 N 1 V E S. m i% O Harrison Rde o D O a0 E at C a as o Io n m O C <-F)2 t m O 15 a. LEGEND 00% PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 2A TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION April 6, 2016 M M at cm - 0 00 c Ez zz at _ U) mo o eZ i Qm CM if - 0 00 o as £ m N & N .... N IS d a IT 31 ul 41 Z L_ 0 F- IF X 02X1N No Qi > r r t O z • •v ` 'L d I.. ' -xl att � W3 a o z la A N 0 Q Q 0 No . o TS mo a0 W Q t a v N N re m c W a n o J m " , ,0 0 00 1- w .J a. 0 o Z. X Y Z E!cl w w G. a. v, -la tn al o tri 0 CI 0 CX W w 14 a, a CC O re & 0 3i Q C g Cain O ro > E c '5 Q. a Q ai w O C a. z v m - mm• . m it t- 0 0 .03 d mmu, Ias n ni fit i° k _ & gs � Ly-46 - m k o 2 Ls k # a « $ ' » V CL- el r4.CO a. a _ I- a $ "" V k $ c. 13 $ CO 1 / k t - - . cc k s § 2 0 7 § e EL M W i. 0 1 \ K 2 / �. 0 \ § > CO z kt gi k ts- © ,WNI- w r < "6' % . < m t _ n a © % . lw mu 4N1 - Jga N - a tm < t- » — - cia _ ILO § w - p CV 2 ƒ 0 / k c‘i IX o \ i 2 / # l 2 § 3 . • ° k • k o R q 1- G CO• k o En • 1. in j M!1 L Q Go N 2. = _ OI U 0 0 m rg a Y a L S = o 0 o W Y (MD (7 0 15 N .� l9 0 U O O O m a x > a o L L _ 0 0 0 rCR al 0 a a N N N (0 L .5 0 _L ✓ _ CI 4 co N O CO N a ° ' m U) a 40. 0 Z L L CI Q ani = N o �c a _ • m a a c 0 U Z at a01 Lu a O 16X U OL Y x G N 0 W a a a L ` c• o - UNJ /• _ P O NorIa -v 00 lii .J > D a m Ca QzYaolwIII1(1 LU F- J m ICC 0• 't, N R L Y a Lo W W c O co a a m a O ca OI 0 0 0 COCe LC a o a (n O O O T coO O Cl N A o a x a v EL a o a E 't Q o o -0 & •ti CO c I- j E o m (ON E G .• 5 F- 0 O O N Qf Aea m It 00 03 E Nco O ~ 2 ow Mi JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING SERVICES TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT For Trio Hotel (Davis Boulevard & East Tamiami Trail, Collier County, Florida) July 25,2017 Co TIS y ToS Fees ames Digitally TIS MethodologyReview Fee =PreviouslyPaid D I I to TIS(Minor Study) Review Fee = $750.00 signed by MJames M. Banks • Date: Prepared by: 2017.07.26 J MB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. B a n CJ 08:07:55 -04'00I 4711 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34119 t,,�gNN 11 n ,,,q,,, CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NO. 27830 �� ,# BAN` ''j/'''' ,,s• (PROJECT No. 1 6031 6) p S. Nay' g6 I � � W y F � F JAM- ;�� . BANKS `•�' .•� Q $.. FL■ •A REG. No. It IOWSwt l�� .,,,,IiiitusI s T TABLE OF CONTENTS Conclusions 2 Methodology 3 Scope of Project 3 Table A-Previous Land Uses 3 Table B-Proposed Land Uses 4 Figure 1 -Project Location&E+C Road Classification 4.1 Site Plan , 4.2 Project Generated Traffic 5 Table C -Net New Trips Generated 5 Table lA-Proposed Land Use Trip Computations 5.1 Table 1B Existing Land Use Trip Computations 5.2 Existing+Committed Road Network 6 Project Traffic Distribution 6 Area of Significant.Impact 6 Figure 2A-Project Traffic Distribution 6,1 Table 2A-Area of Impact/Road Classification 6.2 2016.thru 2020 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions 7 Table 2B-2016&2020 Link Volumes 7.1 Table 2C-2020 Link Volumes/Capacity Analysis 7.2 Figure 2B-Project Traffic Assignment 7.3 Appendix 8 1 Conclusions Based upon the findings of this report,it was determined that the proposed Trio Hotel will not have a negative impact upon the surrounding road network. It was verified that all roadways,within the project's area of influence, currently have a surplus of capacity and can accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed mixed use development. As determined,the road network will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service for 2020 project build-out conditions and will not create any off-site transportation deficiencies that need to be mitigated. Site Access on U.S. 41 The site has an existing access on E. Tamiami Trail(U.S.41)which is a right-in/out and directional left-in median opening. Within proximity of the site,E. Tamiami Trail is a 6- lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Left-Ingress Turn Lane The existing left turn lane is approximately 280'in length,which is adequate to accommodate the proposed land uses'traffic demands. The Florida Department of Transportation(FDOT)requested that an evaluation of the left turn lane queue be based upon the use of the PPM's formula Q=[(2.0)(DHV)(25)]/N.Using this equation assuming an N value=30 and DHV= 19 vph(refer to page 7.3),the results are that a storage of 50' needs to be provided in conjunction with the minimum deceleration+taper per FDOT's standard index 301 which is 185',which gives a total length of 235'. The existing length of the left turn lane exceeds FDOT's minimum standards. Therefore, it is the report's conclusion that no additional improvements to the left turn lane are necessary. Right-Ingress Turn Lane A right ingress turn lane is not warranted and cannot be constructed due to right-of-way constraints. Based upon the low volume of traffic expected to turn right-in(refer to page 7.3), a turn lane is not warranted. It should be noted that E.Tamiami Trail is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH and the outer travel lane is intended to accommodate both thru and right turning movements at low volume driveways. Site Access on Davis Boulevard The site has an existing full access on E. Tamiami Trail(U.S.41). Within proximity of the site,Davis Boulevard is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. Left-Ingress Turn Lane A left-ingress turn lane will be constructed based upon FDOT's Standard Index 301 which requires a total deceleration and taper length of 185'. The project's left-in peak demand is 33 vph(refer to page 6.3). Using the PPM's formula Q=[(2.0)(DHV)(25)]/N results in storage of 60'be provided in conjunction with the deceleration+taper which results in a total turn lane length of 245'. 2 Right-Ingress Turn Lane A right ingress turn lane is not warranted and cannot be constructed due to right-of-way constraints. Based upon the low volume of traffic expected to turn right-in(refer to page 7.3),a turn lane is not warranted. It should be noted that Davis Boulevard is a 6-lane divided urban corridor having a posted speed limit of 45 MPH and the outer travel lane is intended to accommodate both thru and right turning movements at low volume driveways. Methodology The study's methodology was reviewed by Mr. Stephen Baluch and Chad Sweet with Collier County's Transportation Planning Department. The accepted methodology is attached (refer to pages M1 thru M12). Scope of Project Trio Hotel is a proposed multi-story structure and parking structure that will consist of a 24-room resort hotel,48 multi-family dwelling units, 2,040 square feet of specialty retail and office space and 10,100 square feet of quality restaurant. The site,which is an acute triangle shaped parcel, is located on the east side of the Davis Boulevard &E. Tamiami Trail intersection,within Collier County. The site was previously developed with a fast food restaurant(i.e., Burger King) and a 4-bay tire and auto service shop. The Burger King has been razed and the auto service shop will be as part of the proposed redevelopment. Access to the site will be maintained via the site's existing easternmost access to E. Tamiami Trail and its easternmost access to Davis Boulevard. The westernmost accesses to the site will be removed as part of the project. Table A Previous Land Uses Previously Constructed Land Uses Size Fast Food w/Drive Thru 3,200 +/- s.f. Tire& Auto Service 4-Service Bays 3 Table B Proposed Land Uses Proposed Land Use Size Resort Hotel 24 Rooms Multi-Family 48 d.u.'s Specialty Retail & 2,040 s.f. Professional Office Quality Restaurant 10,100 s.f. (2 restaurants) 4 0 I 1 I I I H ir________ 0_ -e g ,r110 IIIIIIINIM MINIM MINIM MN Longboat Drive .--------------i Clipper Way Mercantile Avenue 1 [ f Outrigger Lane o Blvd �� Progress oenue ao Iron' [ Horseshoe Dr N. / a I 0 Domestic kye nue o 1 I Horseshoe Dr S. M [ I \ Enterprise i se venue [ Ente rise Avevv e rP� a I o o NORTH 01 of Na Airport I Exchange Avenue I R.T.S. 0 v 1 0[ [Propspect Ave [ 1 -c, 1 Radio Road 1 81 [ - 1.00.11115 [ ■' Naples Airport We ■%��A .1 /1111 a 9 Estey Ave 0111114-imom co q'!.**1laj1�� Davis Boulevard! i i a q4/1Games Blvd `G`R1. N 15 E E m a Harrison Rdm a o ra 0 0 a a ao E o c re `a. 0 tilt tc 0 o m co a ` LEGEND 6—LANE ARTERIAL IMO IMAM sem 4-LANE ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR ` 2—LANE ARTERIAL \r'S2-tANE COLLECTOR/LOCALi RAIL ROAD - • -- JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. ` Trio Hotel Project Location & Roadway Classification FIGURE 1 April 15, 2016 -; I I I II :i I I ::j II 1 II ' III I I ax s= I � f 1 i s i �S I E .- i$? III � ( aE I I !o I1j • I l j _ I$ HI L____.= •,:.:,:•s;,..:,-..: I 1 41 `ls: / Lil i .... h i 1 L Whill.jja""M.. , / / / / / ole I - / /Ns 4,-/ ii !y I 1 I 1 0 a; g Fair /y? t / 01 1 , :,1,i 11 � r z sc ; / i 11 1 1 \ -w,esi4::,-(61 ,1*-;'(:,',,,-. .,,,,,,-.4.' / IIt / / I I 1111,4400 ,, / / / ..'• 1111, al no PI I I I i, I �i // /1.: 1 �� // tl1fi111 1 // 4.?/' Project Generated Traffic Traffic that can be expected to be generated by the project was estimated based upon the guidelines established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,Trip Generation Manual,9th Edition. That is,historical traffic data collected at similar land uses was relied upon in estimating the project's traffic. It was concluded that Land Use Codes "Residential Condo/Townhouse" (LUC 230), "Resort Hotel" (LUC 330), "Specialty Retail" (LUC 826), and "Quality Restaurant" (931) were most appropriate in estimating the proposed land use trips; and"Tire Store" (LUC 848)was used to estimate the existing land use trips. In order to determine the project's net new traffic,the estimated trips for the previous land use were subtracted from the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses. That is, Proposed Development Trips less Previous Development Trips =Net New Trips Table 1A provides a detail of the estimated total trips for the proposed land uses and Table 1B for the previous land uses.The following is a summary of the results. Table C Net New Trips Generated (Proposed Trips Less Existing Trips) New AM New PM New Daily Peak Hour Peak Hour (ADT) (vph) (vph). Existing Trips N/A 8 14 (Refer to Table 1B) Proposed Trips N/A 59 111 (Refer to Table 1A) Net New Trips N/A 51 97 • The report concludes that the project will generate less than 100 net new trip ends during the weekday highest peak hour. As such, the report investigates the traffic impacts associated with the project based upon the criteria set forth by the Collier County Government's Traffic Impact Statement Guidelines for developments generating"less than 100 trips",which is identified as a minor study. • 5 TABLE 3.A TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 230 Residential Condo/Townhouse 24 Units 330 Resort Hotel 48 Rooms 826 Specialty Retail 2,040 s.f. 931 Quality Restaurant 10,100 s.f. Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 230 Daily Traffic(ADT)= Ln(T)=0.87Ln(X)+2.46= 186 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T)=0.80Ln(X)+0.26= 16 vph 3 / 14 vph 17% Enter/83% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= Ln(T) =0.82Ln(X)+0.32= 19 vph 13 / 6 vph 67% Enter/33%Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 330 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph)= 1=0.35(X)+7.42= 24 vph 17 /7 vph 72%Enter/28% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.49(X)= 24 vph 10 / 13 vph 43% Enter/57%Exit= LUC 826 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=44.32(X)= 90 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph)= T=6.84(X)= 14 vph 7 / 7 vph 48% Enter/52% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=2.4(X)+21.48= 26 vph 12 / 15 vph 44% Enter/56%Exit= LUC 931 Daily Traffic(ADT)= T=89.95(X)= 908 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.81(X)= 8 vph 5 /3 vph N/A PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=7.49(X)= 76 vph 51 / 25 vph 67% Enter/33%Exit= Pass-by Trips per ITE'= 44% 44% Pass-by Rate New Daily Traffic(ADT)= (ADT)x(%of New Trips) 509 ADT New AM Peak Hour(vph)= (AM)x(%of New Trips) 5 vph 3 / 2 vph NjA New PM Peak Hour(vph) = (PM)x(%of New Trips) 42 vph 28 / 14 vph 67% Enter/33% Exit= ********************************************************************************* Total New Trips Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = 59 vph 30 / 29 vph PM Peak Hour(vph)= 111 vph 63 / 48 vph 5. 1 TABLE 1B TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Trio Hotel EXISTING LAND USES Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 848 lire Store 4 bays Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 848 Daily Traffic(ADT)= N/A AM Peak Hour(vph}= T=2.1(Xj= 8 vph 5 /3 vph 64%Enter/36%Exit= PM Peak Hour jvph)= T=3.54(X}= 34 vph 6 /8 vph 42%Enter/58%Exit= 5.2. Existing+Committed Road Network Figure 1 and Table 2A provide a detail of the surrounding E+C road network. Table 2A depicts the minimum level of service performance standards and capacity for the roads within the project's are of influence. There are no planned capital improvement projects within the project's area of impact. Project Traffic Distribution The project's traffic was distributed to the surrounding roadway network based upon logical means of ingress/egress; current and future traffic patterns in the area; location of surrounding businesses and commercial centers. Figure 2 and Table 2A provide a detail of the traffic distributions based on a percentage basis and by volume. The project traffic assignments were agreed to as described in the attached methodology report. Area of Significant Impact The area of significant impact was determined based upon Collier County's 2%,2%and 3%criteria(i.e.,if the project's traffic is 2%or more of a roadway's adopted level of service capacity,then the project has a significant impact upon that link). Table 2A describes the project traffic distributions and the level of impact on the surrounding roadways. Roads that were identified as being within the projects area impact are shown in Table 2A. 6 aI I 1 1 aI I t ao I .�I IIP MIMED MINIM 1111111010 OM Longboat Drive TClipper Way Mercantile Avenue I ( Outrigger Lane •` o chrr�a^^ BI"d 1 /_ Progress °ieenue ce Horseshoe Dr N. / ° I o Domestic g4 nue o ' I \,Horseshoe Dr S. c o �_ a ag ' I Ente rise Ave Enterprise venue c I S o NORTH V 1 �� Nap Airport Exchange Avenue s MSS. ` U • 2I I Propspect Ave I ui ` o Radio Road I- 11110111" I Tf$a Naples Airport ° Estey Ave o Ai -�1 mown i3al ‘Nak 40% •••f---► Davis Boulevard NO `Qy Galdes Blvd E 44406 m N a° Harrison Rdd -o °o c 0 a a E v o C to m a o c r m o T, `` LEGEND 4 00%0. PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. ` Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 2A April 6, 2016 6. 1 Cu Cu C'' Cu0 CJ £ Z ZZ rn_ to II N 0o 0 0 I a £ o O O U 2 Q 13 N N N - U) U o Q !! 17 6 0. Z L Q ..�.� I- C) 1 0) 17) a a o- > t- r c 0 Z 4 v L L a .. a 3 w I— ✓ U L +- lizT a 61) = Q aL(? Lr) co a °- a B. N � O 0 N ' 0 0 Q 'p � �• OO Q W o. 1- ,i- (-4 N W o c W a p0 w � � -3 Cl) ai 0 = s o Co OO Q ~ O Y > > N. N N F- W -1 Q. Y of D LLE LL CL a N .ow o I 0 � �cc i (0 (00 • E; c X LU L1! el CO CO Mr o ix 2 I1 o y g 11 - O Q a > F m c E p m _. o w. Ch o d H a Q O m 0 0 csi LI ao `.' rn '0c RI a z• o o — V a A ro ro m ~ B. F- )- 0 , E A m m w ro > r 2016 thru 2020 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions In order to establish 2016 thru 2020 project build-out traffic conditions,two forecasting • methods were used. The first traffic forecasting method was the County's traffic count data was adjusted for peak season conditions,peak hour conditions,peak direction, and an annual growth rate was then applied. The peak season/peak hour/peak direction factor and annual growth rate were derived from the 2016 Collier County AUIR Report. Using the annual growth rate,the 2020 background traffic conditions were determined,which are depicted in Table 2B. The second traffic forecasting method was to add the vested trips (trip bank)identified in the 2016 AUIR report to the adjusted peak season,peak hour and peak direction traffic counts. The 2020 vested trips "+" background traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2B. The greater of the two values produced by the two forecasting procedures was then considered to reflect the 2020 background traffic. The net new project generated traffic was then added to the background traffic. Table 2C provides a summary of the 2016 thru 2020 traffic conditions and the roadways' level of service and remaining available capacity.As shown, all project impacted roadways will continue to operate at the County's adopted minimum level of service thresholds at project build-out. 7 a 0 r= 1,- (/) N .Y ,0" co t COO CN ND W1 a N d V 2ca d > u4. 4. m •i a J o 0 a Y4 T, m 0. v a > Nmz 0 J C j 00 G ›- try o = g tri 2 G to O O 03 H p 0 a m a - M I Ql o o e 0 a 0 = O O O Et 111 N CV . 0 O re y Cal W W WN a Oa W E ¢ N o N V"' N Q > � r LO .F. N cc v o w a t a0 o > � E O N O O ti r =N G>i F 3 0N 02 to c06 f r C1 Ili 71 _ .5L O 0 O = V In o v Y m OI U U U N •= co Q J M a x a. .+ _ o O• = m m m 0) 0 8 y d a N .3 al 0 ` O O O On a x > CL CO > x` o IS o 00 t iia a N N N co J 5 ;0; p Z 0.1 O a CO x a (00 n N I- < N m a a y H ti a •cplw V a z a a m a = xrn o y a > a V a a W z 2 � y 'n1 w a a J 0 0 Lo LNL1 aatix a ix >N fyiJ Y a13 Z DJw w w H a Q N =N O G V O O N co .- y a � .^- r �( a. x (V > O a m cc o ,_ _ 3 O r = d a N OO OOD N N m a r LO r' a` > a. (Y V a o ir a t Q EL o m o I- > 73 CO a0 o V, > Iro • 0 0 0 N 0) b Ne > ~ O co m •_ M 4, > I- CI w 7. 2 NORTH N.T.S. 36 Davis Boulevard 18 r._,. N N o,1)� PM PEAK ENTER/EXIT = 91 VPH/62 VPH L a Qi,vT X04, 0 N R 3) v 79 �8 LEGEND p 34 --ID, PM Peak Hour Project Traffic JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, IND. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 2B July 25, 2017TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT APPENDIX Support Documents 8 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 11:27 AM To: FryerEdwin Cc: Ispenniman@gmail.com; TaylorPenny Subject: RE: Mini Triangle Development Application Good afternoon, Commissioner Taylor is available on the following dates and times at our office (3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, Fl 34112): Thursday, February 22, 12 PM and after Friday, February 23, 9-10 AM or after 2 PM Wednesday, Febrauary 28 9-1 PM Please inform me which of the above mentioned date and time works best for all of you. Thank you. s/ierrj Clreco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov as of December 9, 2017 Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter From: FryerEdwin Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 8:38 AM To:TaylorPenny<Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov> 1 Cc: GrecoSherry<Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov>; Ispenniman@gmail.com Subject: Mini Triangle Development Application Dear Commissioner Taylor: Following up on an email I received from Vice-Mayor Penniman yesterday evening, I am writing to request a meeting among the three of us to discuss the pending Mini Triangle Mixed Use Development PUD, and the associated proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code. As I believe you know, the developers' petition was partially heard by the Planning Commission at its meeting last Thursday, and has been continued to our meeting of Thursday, March 1. The Vice-Mayor appeared and testified. I am copying Sherry with the request that you ask her to provide me and Linda with a couple of alternate dates and times for a meeting, and your preferred location. I am available most any time the week of the 19th and the first three days of the week of the 26th. Below is some more detailed background if you wish to peruse it before our meeting: Recent Background Several Planning Commissioners, including me, expressed serious misgivings about the potential that should a market downturn occur in the future, there was no practical way for us beforehand to assure that the project would remain "high-end and first-class" as the developers themselves have characterized their present intentions. Even if the developers' goals of a premier project were achieved, the substantial increase in traffic expected from this development alone (875 additional PM peak hour trips on the East Trail and Davis) would increase traffic congestion immediately and leave very little additional capacity for subsequent developers. There is no present plan to widen either the East Trail or Davis at the Mini Triangle. Under the application in its present iteration, the developers would have the option of using a "conversion matrix" to increase permissible residential density from the current 12 dwelling units per acre to 39. And, at the requested building height of 168 feet (approximately 16 stories above ground) intensity would soar and currently-required open space and buffering would decline. 2 As Vice President of the Old Naples Association Board, I have heard many expressions of concern from our members over the Mini Triangle Project. Just when we seem to have succeeded in moving the City's proposed Stn Street North "Lane Diet" off the front burner, along comes another prospect of substantial traffic congestion, this time from points east, potentially backing up traffic all the way to 5th Avenue and then possibly northward on US 41. Best regards. Ned 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. 3 GrecoSherry Subject: Gateway Triangle Location: Commissioner Taylor's office Start: Mon 2/26/2018 12:00 PM End: Mon 2/26/2018 12:30 PM Show Time As: Tentative Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Not yet responded Organizer: CasalanguidaNick Required Attendees: ScottTrinity; CohenThaddeus; OchsLeo;TaylorPenny; GrecoSherry Meeting to discuss traffic and development restrictions tied to RFP 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 GrecoSherry Subject: NIM meeting Triangle -Jerry Starkey Location: The Club @ Naples Bay Resort, 1800 Tamiami Trail East Start: Wed 10/18/2017 5:15 PM End: Wed 10/18/2017 6:15 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny i GrecoSherry Subject: Bob Mulhere, Jerry Starkey, Fred Pezeshkan - Mini-Triangle Location: Taylor office Start: Mon 5/7/2018 2:30 PM End: Mon 5/7/2018 3:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Mini Triangle Development Application, Ned Fryer& Linda Penniman Location: 2950 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 202-1, Naples FL 34103 Start: Thu 2/22/2018 12:00 PM End: Thu 2/22/2018 12:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: TaylorPenny Required Attendees: FryerEdwin; Linda Penniman Importance: High Good afternoon, After speaking with both of you, we are changing the location of the meeting to the above mentioned location. Thank you. Commissioner Taylor is wondering if you would like to meet at either the County office, photography office (2950 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 202-1) Naples, FL 34103 or City Hall. Please advise which would work best for you. Thank you. This will confirm out meeting on the above mentioned date and time at our office. Thank you. GrecoSherry Subject: David Wheeler FDOT and Mark Strain (Mini Triangle and Racetrac) Location: conf call, we will call them Start: Mon 3/12/2018 12:00 PM End: Mon 3/12/2018 12:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny Mark Strain x 4446 Wheeler cell 863-370-3021 1 GrecoSherry From: GarciaShirley Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 9:43 AM To: GarciaShirley Cc: GrecoSherry; BrownleeMichael Subject: FW: Agenda package Attachments: BGTCRA Agenda Package 5-1-2018.pdf Sorry for the late submittal, with last weeks redevelopment plan update going on we are a little behind. If you need to pick up a printed packet Naomi will have it all printed out by this afternoon. Please stop by the office and pick up your packets at your convenience. Thank you, Shirley From: ScottTami Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 9:26 AM To: GarciaShirley<Shirley.Garcia@colliercountyfl.gov>; NaomiHutchesonVEN <Naomi.Hutcheson@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: ForesterDebrah <Debrah.Forester@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject:Agenda package Good morning ladies, Shirley, Please forward the BGTCRA agenda package to out board members and post on website. Naomi, Please place the attached pdf to the appropriate project file and make copies for our board members. Thank you, Tami Scott 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 Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency AGENDA May 1, 2018 6:00 PM Chairman Maurice Gutierrez Karen Beatty, Peter Dvorak, Larry Ingram, Ron Kezeske, Steve Main, Shane Shadis, Michael Sherman 1. Call to order and Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. April 3, 2018 (attachment) 5. Community/Business—Presentations a. Mattamy Homes- Matt Hermanson, P.E. Grady Minor 6. Old Business a. Vacant Lots—Jennifer A. Belpedio, CAO b. Code Enforcement—Jamie French, Deputy Department Head, GMD c. Public Art- Laura Burns, Ad Hoc committee recommendations Murals—Executive Summary from CAO (attachment) d. 17 Acres - Staff update e. Redevelopment Plan - Workshop update,Next steps f. CDBG Grant—Fire Suppression Phase 2- Staff update (attachment) g. Walking Audit Report—(attachment) 7. New Business a. Advisory Board Application—Dwight Oakley (Attached)Action Item b. Budget Review -Attachment (Action Item) c. Website Update/Community Outreach Offices: 3570 Bayshore Drive, Unit 102,Naples, Florida 34112 Phone: 239-643-1115 Online: www.bayshorecra.com el.e.a/1:1/0",, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU 8. Staff Report a. Project list update by Staff b. Financials 9. Other Agency's a. Collier County Sheriff Department b. Collier County Code Enforcement 10. Commination and Correspondence a.Advisory Board Vacancy—Gateway Triangle Resident/Business Owner 11. Public Comment 12. Staff Comments 13.Advisory Board General Communications 14. Next meeting date: June 5, 2108 15. Adjournment Offices: 3570 Bayshore Drive, Unit 102,Naples, Florida 34112 Phone: 239-643-1115 Online: www.bayshorecra.com Ilk), Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU Agenda item 4,a—April 3, 2018 meeting minutes BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE APRIL 3, 2018 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman, Maurice Gutierrez at 6:03 p.m. at the CRA Office, 3750 Bayshore Drive, Unit 102,Naples, FL 34112 I. Roll Call: Advisory Board Members Present: Maurice Gutierrez,Karen Beatty,Mike Sherman, Steve Main, Shane Shadis and Peter Dvorak. Excused Absence: Larry Ingram. Absent: Ron Kezeske. CRA Staff Present: Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator, CRA; Tami Scott, Senior Project Mgr.; and Debrah Forester, CRA Director;Naomi Hutcheson, Administrative Assistant; Tim Durham,Executive Director of Corp Business Ops. II. Pledge of Allegiance: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chairman Gutierrez III. Adoption of Agenda: Debrah Forester requested that the two murals on the Agenda for review, items 6(d) and 6(e), be moved forward due to the number of attendants at the meeting for those particular items. She also requested the addition of a Draft Letter for the Community Redevelopment Agency's (CRA)Advisory Board to review under Agenda item VII.New Business. Peter Dvorak, Vice Chair, made a motion accept Amended Agenda wherein the Mural Issue will be addressed before the Community Presentation and to add the Draft Letter under New Business. Second by Karen Beatty. Passed Unanimously. IV. Adoption of Minutes: Peter Dvorak, made a motion to accept March Minutes as is. Second by Karen Beatty. Passed Unanimously. V. Murals: A. BCC Mural Recap: Maurice Gutierrez, Chairman, gave a brief recap on the mural discussion that occurred during the joint meeting between the CRA and the Board of County Commissioners(BCC)on April 3rd, 2018 at 1:00pm. Both Boards are in accordance that until a firmly established process is in place for Public Art in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, no further applications will be accepted. The two current murals may remain intact as is. The Boards are comfortable with the murals despite contentious issues revolving around them. They ask only a formality of paperwork to resolve the issue. Debrah reinforced this by stating the information she gamed from the Code Enforcement Office after the joint BCC/CRA meeting. All 1 itot, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA.Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU future and current mural projects have been put on hold until an official process is established. No new code cases will be established on the current murals. The CRA Board has the right to either put the current code cases on hold until such a time that an appropriate process is established, or they can vote to keep the murals as they currently are and close the code cases. Eric Short from Code Enforcement reiterated that the Code Department could close the cases without any additional work from the property owners by voting to keep the murals as is, and submitting the meeting minutes to the Code Enforcement Office. If the CRA does not want to keep the murals as they currently are, they can vote to put the code cases on hold. B. Future Applications: Peter Dvorak made a motion to recognize no additional applications for murals be accepted until formal standards have been set. Second by Mike Sherman. Passed Unanimously. C. Mural Review-Jaron Fine Jewelry,3784 Bayshore Drive: Peter Dvorak made a motion to approve the Jaron building mural at 3784 Bayshore Drive as is. Second by Steve Main. Passed Unanimously. D. Mural Review—Diane Sullivan,3248 Bayshore Drive: Peter Dvorak made a motion to approve the Diane Sullivan building Mural at 3248 Bayshore Drive as is. Second by Steve Main. Passed Unanimously. VI. Community/Business Presentations: A. Mini Triangle-Presentation by Bob Mulhere, FAICP Hole Montes: Debrah Forester introduced Bob Mulhere from Hole Montes, who did a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed development and the revisions to the rezoning application since he presented in November. Based on comments received, the developer has been asked to revision the mix of uses and eliminate the proposed matrix. They will be presenting at the April 5th Planning Commission and the May 8th BCC meeting. They are currently on schedule to close in late 2018. The presentation included the basics of how the conversion matrix worked using trips generated by uses in tandem with the Collier County Department of Transportation's (DOT) formulas to calculate PM Peak Hour Trips. The presentation included charts indicating minimums and maximums of unit type allowances in relation to estimated vehicular traffic projections as well as an overview of project design, information on the negotiations with the Naples Airport in relation to building height(projected final height 168ft), and multiple conceptual images. The contract for the parcel was finalized in 2016, the CRA gave their unanimous support in November 2017, and they have met with the CCPC on February 15th, March 1st, and will again on April 5th, 2018. It goes before the BCC on May 8th, 2018. Debrah Forester asked the CRA Board to consider a recommendation on the proposed changes made to the plans since the November 2017 meeting. Peter Dvorak made a motion to support the Mini Triangle as presented with the 2 Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU changes adopted since the November meeting. Second by Steve Main. Passed Unanimously. VII. Old Business: A. Vacant Lots: Debrah Forester gave a quick refresher on the Vacant Lot issue with Lend Equity—represented by William Rose—and the Love&Legacy Lots (Previously being handled by Cal Montenegro). Jennifer Belpedio in the County Attorney's Office has been discussing the issue with Mr. Rose. Mr. Rose has been informed that the CRA did not approve the $10k per lot offer previously presented. Staff provided a counter offer of$10,000 plus a profit share of 6% of the sales price. Mr. Rose's attorney has reached out to Ms.Belpedio and said the profit share was unacceptable and then a suggestion of $15k per lot was offered. Tim Durham reported that he had spoken briefly to Ms. Belpedio just prior to the meeting and the $15,000 per lot appeared to be their final offer. Should the CRA accept the offer, details including the timeline would be established wherein Lend Equity would pay $15k per lot for five lots immediately, with the additional lots divided into groupings to be paid in 6 month increments. Should they not complete construction as outlined,a penalty would be built into the terms. And if they didn't complete the first set as outlined, the terms of the proposal would be terminated. General disappointment amongst the CRA that neither Jennifer or Mr. Rose were in attendance. A community member, Justine, asked why they were not on the open market? Community Member Carla Corbin asked why the issue was not settled. Vice Chair Peter explained that the deeds were clearly drawn up with the CRA under BCC, which included a reverter claus. However suspect transactions have incurred a large legal mess. Peter personally advocates for an upfront settlement that allows the issue to be done. He would like to reject the $15k offer, even if it is upfront, as that is less than the CRA paid to acquire the properties and the land is worth significantly more now. He believes that a counter offer should not be accepted unless is begins with a 2 or 3. Tim interjected that staff was eager to move towards closure and that the CRA is in a much stronger financial position now than when they sold the lots originally. Karen Beatty requested the CRA refrain for negotiations until the different parties can show up to a meeting. She also suggested enforcing the reverter clause and taking the property back. Mike Sherman feels the Board has been too lenient. That there was nothing written down to allow the transactions that happened with the deed and that the lending company does not have a case. The lots cannot be utilized as leverage. Steve Main would be willing to accept an upfront offer of$50k-$75k for each property, otherwise he presented a motion to assert the CRA's Rights and take the titles back, just like the deed states. Second by Karen Beatty. Passed Unanimously. 3 elk)" cz . B4,0 Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU B. 17 Acres-Staff Update: Debrah Forester and Tim Durham provided an update on the project, stating they have been meeting weekly with Arno, who is very enthusiastic about the project. No additional proposals were received by the March 19th date. Additional due diligence regarding the financial commitment has taken place and Arno has decided to change financial partners. He is working with the new group to obtain the financial commitment needed and they are doing their own due diligence on the project. The committee discussed the opportunity of including the CRA office and public meeting rooms in the new development and requested including some language in the Purchase and Sale Agreement to include the CRA office. It was suggested the office be located in a commercial building and meetings held in the theater. Mr. Gutierrez inquired of the gathered public what their preference was in the location of the CRA office and monthly meetings. It was recommended to keep the CRA Office on Bayshore Drive, and future meetings could either be held in the coming theater or at the Naples Botanical Gardens. Steve was under the impression the office had been taken off the plans. Debrah Forester mentioned that Arno continues to work through the plan details that will be presented during the rezoning of the property but the terms should be the same as what was presented to the CRA Board in February 2018. Tim added that he is meeting weekly with Arno who is very enthusiastic about the project. The item is scheduled to go back to the CRAB on April 24th,2018. Once all the preliminaries are finalized and approved the other financial party's name will be made available. C. Redevelopment Plan: Debrah has sent out Save-The-Dates to the CRA Board members in regard to the April Redevelopment Plan meetings. Tami Scott, Sr. Project Manager, went over the current proposed schedule. Wednesday, April 25th, 2018 is an invitation only kick off meeting from 12:30 to 2:30 pm at the Naples Botanical Garden Conference Room. Attendees have been asked to RSVP as it will be a catered working lunch. Several Stakeholder meetings are scheduled on Wednesday evening and throughout the day on Thursday, with small focus groups in mind. While these meetings are open to the public, they will be focused and fact finding, covering predetermined areas of attention for the Redevelopment Plan. The big meeting for the entire community will be on Thursday, April 26th, 2018 at 6pm at the Naples Botanical Gardens Buehler Auditorium. Karen Beatty inquired as to whether the Bayshore Beautification MSTU would be having its own meeting. Staff is unsure that there would be enough turnout to justify the separate time slot and space, but that the current schedule is a draft and will be tweaked and polished and a finalized copy sent out prior to the meetings. VIII. New Business: A.Reappointments: i. Ron Kezeske: Ron Kezeske was absent from the meeting. Shirley Garcia mentioned that he does not wish to re-apply. His term is up in 4 it, cz . 7340 Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU May. His spot is now considered open. Discussion took place regarding the vacancy. He was the business representative for Davis Blvd. Steve Main's business has moved during his current term to Davis Blvd. Mr. Main stated he would be willing to move laterally to the David Blvd Board position and allow his Bayshore Business position to be opened for further applicants. Shirely Garcia said she would forward Steve Main's information to Wanda Rodriguez in the County Attorney's Office who will take care of the paperwork to make the change. Debrah Forester requested a motion be passed in regard to this change in title just in case. Maurice Gutierrez inquired if changing it to a Bayshore Business Owner or Artist was a possibility. Debrah Forester said it could be brought up during the Redevelopment Plan Workshop during discussion about the CRA Boards Structure,but as of now it would need to remain a Business Owner. Maurice Gutierrez made a motion that Steve Main move laterally from the position of Bayshore Business Owner to the position of Davis Business Owner. Second by Peter Dvorak. Passed Unanimously. ii. Maurice Gutierrez: Peter Dvorak made a motion to reappoint Maurice Gutierrez to the CRA Board. Second by Karen Beatty. Passed Unanimously. iii. Michael Sherman: Peter Dvorak made a motion to reappoint Mike Sherman to the CRA Board. Second by Steve Main. Passed Unanimously. IX. Staff Report A. Project Manager Report: Tami mentioned that the Project Manager Report was not included in the packet but that she wanted to highlight just a few points: i. Project Map: A map of the Bayshore district was distributed that depicted all the projects in the area with a blue dot. She noted that it is exciting and encouraging to see how many projects are currently underway in the area. ii. Mattamay Homes & Thomasson Drive: Staff has met several times with Mattamay homes. They do not have a project to show to the CRA yet,but discussion about landscaping, sidewalks, benches, art, etc. on Thomasson Dr and Bayshore Dr have commenced. There are concerns with both parties about the timing and overlapping construction between their project and the Thomasson Drive project. The county is working on an agreement with Mattamay to have construction access on Thomasson Drive with the stipulation that they cover any damage cost done to the Thomasson Drive project. The 5 /f iiipo Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA.Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU proposed wall will be 6 feet in height and will be 7.5 ft from the property line in their 15ft buffer. iii. Windstar: Windstar will be covering the expense for external landscaping installation and maintenance along their wall after the completion of the Thomasson Drive/Hamilton Drive project. Until that time the wall will remain blank to keep from going two steps forward and one step back. iv. Racetrac: Has gone to the Hearing Examiner(HEX),which is a two step process. There are some negotiations still underway in regard to distance waivers. Both HEX Decision were signed on March 20th, 2018. Racetrac is willing to present to the CRA, but no date has been set yet. A possible stipulation was suggested that language be inserted to assure that the previous property under consideration would not be allowed to develop as a gas station. Staff can follow-up with Mike Bossi for a recommendation on bringing forward that option during the zoning process. v. Thomasson Drive: A Bayshore Beautification project that starts at the end of Hamilton Drive and goes through Orchid. The 100%drawings have been submitted by RWA and are awaiting final approval. Expanding the boundaries of the MSTU to include the right of way (ROW)from Dominican to Orchid is being reviewed to present to the BCC. Staff aims to have the least disruption to school and peak hour traffic. B. Draft Letter: The CRA Advisory Board voted on March 6th, 2018 to write a letter to the BCC regarding affordable housing in the area and the proposed Housing Plan. Staff has complied a letter and asked the CRA Advisory Board to review the letter and vote on whether it is or is not what they would like to submit to the BCC. Steve inquired why a vote was necessary again. Debrah Forester explained the letter was drafted utilizing the motion passed during the March 6th,2018 meeting in conjunction with staff's interpretation of the conversation had by the CRA Advisory Board. In addition, several CRA Board members were not present during the vote and should be allowed to weigh in on the verbiage of said letter. She did not feel comfortable presenting words on behalf of the CRA to the BCC without a firm backing that what is stated in the letter fully addresses their concerns regarding diversifying affordable housing throughout the county. It was agreed either a consensus of the board to approve the letter would be sufficient as it was previously voted on. However, for prudence sake,Peter Dvorak moved to approve the letter articulating a vote regarding affordable housing, have the Chairman sign said letter, and have the letter sent to the Board of County Commissioners. Second by Mike Sherman. Passed Unanimously. 6 Cite, vc/v'1+7, 141.. .B1007$1, Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU C. Financials: Debrah and Tami distributed a copy of the CRA current, official financial standing. Peter asked a number of questions in regard to inventory, market values,restrictions, and real values of property. Shirley informed him the CRA pays a$50K/month on a loan which is held in collateral. Peter stated a$5 million loan should be a liability which would cut the net worth in half. He would like a handle on the actual budget at the next meeting. He stated that since the CRA is technically a County Department,there should be someone in the financial department that is monitoring the finances for the department and can provide a profit& loss as well as balance sheet with anticipated TIFs. Staff will continue to work with the Budget Office to get additional information. X. Correspondence and Communications: A.Keep Collier Beautiful: Shirley Garcia reminded everyone that there is still time to sign up to come out on April 14,2018 to help clean up the Bayshore Area and Haldeman Creek. Shirley Garcia is working with Code Enforcement to have enough shirts, dumpsters, maps, etc. XI. Public Comments: A. Help for Elderly/Veterans: A community member inquired about what services the area was providing for individuals who are elderly/veterans. His neighbor is over 80 and not physically capable of resolving his code cases on his own. Corporal Mike Nelson, Collier County Sheriff's office, mentioned there are many services available. He himself has assisted many individuals in the area to stay healthy in a safe living environment. However, the county cannot physically move or remove anyone. Corp. Nelson offered to discuss in more detail after the meeting. B. Vacant Lots/Parking: Several open lots in the area were discussed as potential parking for area establishments. The proposed empty lots being utilized as parking lots or parking structures would accommodate the rise in project business without having to worry about street parking. This conversation also included possible location for the CRA Office. It was decided to keep the monthly regular meeting on Bayshore, no matter the location of the office. It is easier for the community to attend. Arno's original plans included a space for the CRA office and meeting spaces. That will be revisited. Naples Botanical Gardens has also offered meeting space. XII. Staff Communication: A. Sherriff Dept: Corp.Mike Nelson mentioned some restricting in the department and introduced his new Immediate Director/Supervisory for Community 7 IP? cze,W1:14/n/1-7. B100 Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU Policing, Sgt. David Plamondan. It is his first time in the area, but they are excited to have him on their team. A general discussion about proactive patrolling ensued including clarification on a point of contact in case of an issue. Corp. Nelson stated he is still the main contact, but he would leave the cards of the other officers covering the area in the CRA office as well. It was also mentioned that Corp.Nelson received recognition for efforts with Kid's Bicycle Safety. Ms. Garcia mentioned that many officers never receive recognition, but Corp.Nelson has accomplished 2 safety awards during his time as an Officer of the Law. The CRA is proud to have such an accomplished and dedicated leader in the community. B. Code Cases: Karen Beatty inquired on how Code Enforcement can become more proactive so that citizen do not need to call in issues that are obviously Code Violations. A list of all current code cases was distributed to the CRA. Eric Short reviewed the list, noting 15 were highlighted in yellow still pending their initial 45 days of investigation. Two of those would be closed out after the meeting with the CRA approval of the two murals. Several code violations were stated as well, including an unregistered vehicle being moved from spot to spot. Eric Short mentioned that proactive code citations are for Health and Safety concerns. It was suggested that during the redevelopment plan update, the Committee could make recommendations on the codes in Bayshore to reflect the community's vision. Otherwise Code must act within the parameters currently set.Shirley Garcia,Mike Nelson and Eric Short all gave examples of Code acting proactive for the betterment of the community. Karen Beatty made a motion that Code Enforcement be more proactive in their dealings so that citizens do not have to make reports. Second by Mike Sherman. Passed Unanimously. C. Dan Burden: Debrah mentioned that Dan Burden, from the Blue Zone Project, has drafted a report that he would like to present it to the CRA at the next meeting. The information may be useful as we review and update the Redevelopment Plan. XIII. Advisory Board General Communication: A. Thanks: Maurice Gutierrez and Karen Beatty both wanted to thank the staff of the CRA and BCC for a productive day of meetings. Peter thanked the community for their productive,positive,progressive participation. It is greatly appreciated how much this community comes together. XII. Next Meeting Date: April 3, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. XIII. Adjournment—The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. 8 61.0e01-1:4,,a" 141,. 7310001,t. Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA•Bayshore Beautification MSTU Haldeman Creek MSTU Chairman Maurice Gutierrez 9 16.K.6 04/10/2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation that the Board (1) direct the Bayshore CRA Advisory Board not to process any applications regarding murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; and (2) direct Code Enforcement to stay all current Code Enforcement proceedings related to murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, to allow staff, working with the Bayshore CRA Advisory Board, to review the issue of murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, and following such review, to bring back recommendations to the Board, including but not limited to a written application and review process for the approval of murals, and whether LDC Section 4.02.16H,which relates to murals within this district,should be amended. OBJECTIVE: To review the entire process of murals within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 3,2018,the Board of County Commissioners,acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency, conducted a joint workshop with the local CRA Advisory Boards. During the discussion concerning the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area, the issue of murals in Bayshore was discussed. Underlying part of the discussions was an article in that day's Naples Daily News,which is included as back-up. There are currently two existing Code Enforcement cases pending regarding existing murals within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. Murals within this district is governed by LDC Sec. 4.02.16H,which provides as follows: H. Murals. Murals are allowed as public art within the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area subject to the following conditions: 1.Murals are only allowed on commercial, civic or institutional buildings. 2.Building must be located within the proposed Cultural District boundary, Community Redevelopment Agency Resolution 08-60,and cannot be located along U.S.41. 3.One mural is allowed per building. 4.Murals are permitted on sections of buildings where there are no windows or doors or where the mural will not interfere with the building's architectural details. 5.The mural cannot exceed 200 square feet unless specifically approved by the CRA Advisory Board. 6.The mural shall not contain text for the purpose of advertising any business or commercial activity. 7.The mural cannot be temporary in nature and the building owner must commit to maintaining the mural. 8.Review and approval from the CRA Advisory Board is required to ensure the mural complies with the conditions above and that the artwork complements the design of the building in color,shape, and location. During the discussion it was evident that the Board,staff,and the Advisory Board felt that the entire issue ought to be looked at,including the application and review process,that the matter be brought back to the Board of County Commissioners for a public discussion, and that until such time,the ongoing code cases ought to be stayed. FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown at this time,but not material. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None at this time. Packet Pg. 1016 16.K.6 04/10/2018 RECOMMENDATION: That the Board (1) direct the Bayshore CRA Advisory Board not to process any applications regarding murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; and(2) direct Code Enforcement to stay all current Code Enforcement proceedings related to murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area,to allow staff, working with the Bayshore CRA Advisory Board, to review the issue of murals in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area,and following such review, to bring back recommendations to the Board, including but not limited to a written application and review process for the approval of murals, and whether LDC Section 4.02.16H, which relates to murals within this district, should be amended.. Prepared by: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney ATTACHMENT(S) 1.Naples Daily News Article-4-3-18 (PDF) Packet Pg. 1017 Co ler County Public Services Department Community & Human Services Division April 2, 2018 Ms. Debrah Forester Bayshore CRA 3570 Bayshore Drive,Unit 102 Naples,FL 34112 Dear Ms. Forester: Thank you for submitting an application to our office for the FY2018-2019 Annual Application Cycle seeking federal funds from the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Partnership Initiative (HOME) and Emergency Solutions Grant(ESG)programs. The Review and Ranking Committee has carefully reviewed, scored and ranked all applications received and will make a recommendation to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners for use of annual HUD entitlement funds. A total of thirteen (13) applications were reviewed totaling over $4.4M in funding requests for CDBG, HOME and ESG. As always, this application cycle was very competitive. There was approximately $1.5M in available CDBG funding for activities in this category for the FY2018- 2019 cycle. Like your organization's application,all the proposed projects represented much needed activities; however, based on a competitive review process, your application for Bayshore CRA - Fire Suppression did not receive a sufficient score to secure funding. The application will be retained in ranked order for any subsequent or supplemental funding should it become available. Technical assistance is available should you wish to meet with staff for suggestions on preparing your application in the future. If you have any questions or need additional information,please do not hesitate to contact me at 239-252-6287, or email at Kimberley.Grantna,colliercountyfl.gov. Sincerely, Kimberley Grant,Director Cc: Cormac Giblin,Housing and Grant Development Manager Kristi Sonntag,Federal and State Grants Manager Cynthia Kemner, Compliance Supervisor Maggie Lopez,Accounting Supervise:00.4,, ',V N"C Community&Hunan Services Division•3339 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 211•Naples,Florida 34112-5361 239-252-CARE(2273)•239-252-CAFE(2233)•239-252-4230(RSVP)•www.colliergov.net/humanservices CIBLUE ZONES PROJECT' East Naples Discovery Report — The Built Environment — 11 vo •w w e per' 7 - `ft,gh":wv,itt Y+'��5,i`'f-"'es" January 2018 Table of Contents BLUE ZONES PROJECT' Section Slide# Acknowledgements 3 The Blue Zones Project®Approach 4 Built Environment Principles 9 Discovery Phase: East Naples 34 Strengths 39 Opportunities 43 Marquee Project Opportunities 44 Capacity-Building Opportunities 50 Policy Opportunities 54 East Naples Toolbox 58 For More Information 67 2 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. AcknowledgementsCI BLUE ZONES PROJECT Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Laura DeJohn- Director of Planning and Landscape Architecture, Johnson Engineering, INC. Mike Bosi-Collier County Zoning Division Director Collier County Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 Collier County Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Blue Zones Built Environment Committee 3 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. The Blue Zones Project° Approach fk I s ' f'" is Where it All Began Blue Zones Longevity Hot Spots LOMA LINDA, CA SARDINIA IKARIA * OKINAWA • NICOYA PENINSULA, COSTA RICA Shared Traits of the Longest-Lived People C.-?,)( BLUE ZONES PROJECT' MOVE NATU ;LL 1. Make daily physical activity an unavoidable part of , your environment r RIGHT OUTLOOK 2. Know your purpose 3. Downshift:work less,slow down,take vacations s....e. . . EAT WISELY 4. Eat until 80%full L /] 5. More veggies,less meat&processed food 6. Drink a glass of red wine each day BELONG 20KY 7. Create a healthy social network t YYill" 8. Connect/reconnect with religion 9. Prioritize family Power 9'"is a registered trademark of Blue Zones,LLC.MI rights reserved. 7 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. 'I it 1 .\.":: - r;1's,";—";-;"'''''''''''''',:7,:4,,I,'"! LIt,:::::',;1,:t:'„or'''''':49::74.4;'1; . , What Determines Our Health? 20% 20% 50% 10% GENETICS ENVIRONMENT HEALTHY BEHAVIORS ACCESS TO CARE BLUE ZONES PROJECT i Built Environment Principles w z W igilt ra`. of 1, t--ur` , ..v .., rte ,r ,,..,..,r,. 11•t ,� ,yr . " ' � ` :-« �- ! I. \.3 ik‘‘blA ' * 3. , it, , . d -- *,--- ,iiiL. t 41tI ,ts. te . IF so AIX'. N. . „..,„ . \'� - Fa"Healthy places are those designed and built to improve the quality of life for all people who live, work, worship, learn and play within their borders—where every person is free to make choices amid a variety of healthy, available, accessible and affordable options." — Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Health and Healthy Places Why Transform the Built Environment? Place matters to our health. • A person's zip code can be a more reliable determinant of health than their genetic code. • The type of community a person lives in and the design of places where people work, worship, shop, learn and play have have a tremendous impact on health. • Decades of sprawl have resulted in auto-focused design and poorly planned growth. „.' � • • The consequences are congestion, inactivity, obesity, exposure to pollutants, traffic crashes and loss of economic vitality and community life. We can do better. Source:"Zip code a better predictor of health than genetic code. 2014. it http://news.h a rva rd.ed u/gazette/sto rynews p lu s/zip-cod e-bette r-pred icto r-of-hea Ith-tha n-genetic-cod e Streets Impact Health & Wellbeing e , g W 4 Conventional street engineering widens roads for Rebuilding the intersection on the left to support walking vehicular efficiency. People walking and bicycling and bicycling lowers speed and noise, shortens crossing become discouraged, so more people end up driving. times, moves more cars, reduces personal injury crashes Crashes increase, due to increased load and added by 90%, and eliminates delays for both people walking conflict points. Roadway sections can double or triple and driving. When the street honors development, in price. Walking is engineered out of the environment. development will honor the street. Photo vision:Todd Clements ' Streets Impact Our Children y 4 t 11P' Airr�.�I/l E . r S i r _l a , } Crossing multiple"anes of traffic is a safety issue for many Collier County and East Naples have much at stake to parents who then deny their child walking trips to school. build the social, physical and emotional health of Sections of roads that are wider than they need to be children. Building and maintaining low speed force people into cars, building more traffic and delay. environments, compact intersections and properly scaled streets are essential to raise the region's school walking rates. Streets Impact Our Elders _ 1:;,...., , :.__N.- ' * , Ua'"_ i 1 A ..,. . , 0'',4 -----..._. .. .- "-_ . / 001 .,4'''.....0""°."'''''' , ' I( t :///V. , r/41 Small features often make the most difference for In contrast, shade trees, benches, and sit-walls are highly livability. High curbs, poor drainage, dog fouling and valued micro features that enable elders to enjoy broken sidewalks are cited as physical hazards that neighborhood walks and easily run errands on foot. keep elders from venturing out. Well-designed crossings, on this former 5 lane road, remove barriers, rather than create them. Your Commute Improves Health or Reduces Health .,; • fe 4 ''''":111:111ir',7::: `-- -.. ''' - . . ,.,,.' ------'''"'''.-- igifigeliMilla"i'4 ----.^-::''.J.' ' .'."0,11f , . ' IF a ........ - , , tikt, -;•• '. ..... r — 1 UCLA&Cal State-Long Beach: Vehicle-miles traveled has a stronger correlation with obesity than any other lifestyle factor. Source:http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your_commute_is_killingyouu.htmI Source:https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/urban-survival/201501/commuting-the-stress-doesnt-pay 15 The Benefits of Designing Streets for People �.d , s • ,y •'° Benefits IncludeA tatt,iii," I • Increases physical activity rates - • Encourages social connectedness - std • Catalyzes small business development • Increases property values . k - • Improves access and safety for all r . i / i V. • Advances social equity 1111. - -f4 . • Reduces pollution and run-off t • Provides safe routes to school f -, TM ........ • Makes the healthy choice the easy choice Source:Victoria Transport Policy Institute - • ,'� http://www.vtpi.org The Life Radius Approach to Community-Building (42/- L C� • Most Americans spend 80%of their lives within 20 miles of their homes; we call this area the life radius. • Built environment policies and design features either encourage or discourage healthy behaviors. • The Built Environment team assesses policies, plans, and existing conditions in a community and works with community partners to determine which interventions will make the healthy choice the easy choice. 17 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. The Life Radius Approach to Community-Building Poor connectivity results in car Well-connected streets encourage active Well-connected and destination-rich dependence transport but destinations are needed streets create healthy communities 1/,-- .,\ clk, C� C� t0{-1-1'—ln ____ /___II3V, i J,JJ�� , nJ� nS }�� , ,� �W ' 1 L�tn�i 1[7=J ir�,w+1. r s tenni_. _{ ,C - nL.n[9,4- 3 [ }n.... 14-Li nnr . n 7a[�n nn� � - v.__Li ___,___„_- __ ---7r r��CgeCredit:Gletting Jackson Weak pedestrian connections force High levels of connectivity offer With many nearby destinations, a life people into cars and traffic onto a few people choices for transportation. radius shrinks to one or two miles streets which must carry heavier Speeds are typically lower as traffic is since all needs are met locally. Most traffic volumes. This model of disbursed across a network, making trips are accomplished on foot or planning makes walking walking and cycling safer and more bicycle, reducing traffic and keeping uncomfortable and impractical since comfortable. money in the local community. This is destinations are at a distance. the goal. How Easy is Active Transportation in Our Community? 6, In many places—such as the walled communities in East Naples—which induce higher traffic %; 1.0111.1Y— _ • volumes and higher speed roadways, people are 911A:i 1, deterred from walking or cycling. tit A Under such conditions, active transportation is not an easy or comfortable choice. Destinations are indirect and too hard to reach by foot—very much like climbing the staircase in the lower image. 8,,, It is the town code—or the \i�i�i'i�l ik community DNA—that determines whether active - ---, transportation is even an option. ,..- N ME\0:11101 oli , Cartoon Credit:Ian Lockwood 19 Designing for Cars Vs. Designing for People Orive-thru oriented —Retail corner entrance building fails to with residential above Over-head electrical poles address the street Multi-family units on add to visual clutter secondary street Strip center retail ,----Surface parking interior to development -- "" --- Attractive buildings front Shoebox lighting too ,_� `_ 444,41N1111 �� the main street adding to tall for human scale _ ' ' - , R" ,• _.elf the living experience _ f — f y ; F Billboard signage a __ a - 7 f Trees line street:to x . - �,1 - create a sense of scaled for passing— �, / ! I i -A 1 l i�, ti / enclosure automobiles 4i. - ,. _ if - _- �.- Z � -1-! 1 !-}-h r � I \' UTOMOBILE OCUSED PEOPLE FOCUSED EDGES SIDEWALKS PARKING BUILDINGS CHARACTER ED:",E SIDEWALK RASkNC' SHIED t/ S CHARACTER Suburban land use forms(above left) are designed On the other hand, the urban land use form (above right) primarily for the car, while people are an afterthought. This illustrates a design for people first, while the car is form has many conflicts for all modes. No one watches accommodated.This design keeps speeds low, reduces the over the street because buildings are set-back and hidden number of conflict points, establishes place, highlights the behind vast parking lots. A single commercial land use community's unique character and charm, encourages local dampens the desire to walk since destinations and housing commerce and inspires active transportation. Goods and remain a'art. Goods and services are not easil accessed. services are easil accessed. Image Creat:WALC Institute Designing for Cars Vs. Designing for People ti �'t I( -* 'ii\ ' e- ,I, .I ' IIn T Ill ,. .- a eta— ;00 • 79%of Americans want to live in a walkable neighborhood. honor its community. Driveways establish too many conflict • 51%of Millennials prefer living in houses where they can points to encourage walking and the bleak street discourages walk to shops and have a short commute. people. The development on the right properly orients buildings to place `eyes on the street' and limits the conflict • Yet, only 14%of today's neighborhoods are walkable and points a pedestrian will encounter, encouraging activity for all demand is far outpacing supply. ages. Source:National Association of Realtors,2015) How Do We sr' :y. • `..,�� .prt Complete a Place? r 4 i4.7 '4' rC1� Would you allow a 10-year-old to walk to I school through this space alone? Not r p likely. What would you add to create a more walkable environment? The lower image adds sidewalks and =.,=r, crossings—a good start. is .* =`_. Encouraging active transportation - :- ' r requires land use and transportation �, 1 ti planning decisions to be aligned so that � community members feel safe, —_ =- - ,,,, ,°-: ----.-- comfortable and watched over. Photo vision:Steve Price,Urban Advantage 22 Wit: ' Community-Building Opportunities � . -- • . "2 ;_-� Once trees and benches are added, we . . A, _ begin to build a space that expects and welcomes guests. Are we finished . ,„„--_—_—_-7,.. --- 4.41„..;.---------- designing for people? Not by a long shot. � f The lower image orients buildings and t front porches to place "eyes on the street." With the presence of people, the ` street becomes a safer shared space that encourages active transportation. Land :. ,. use and transportation planning must ,- ,1 - as a support one another. _ i II ir -I 0 1 D illitii•In *fir-= '_`___ a. Homes either facing a park or open space will market for approximately 15%more " ----- than more distant properties. .....-tee , Photo vision:Steve Price,Urban Advantage Source:https://msu.edui-sta/Anderson_openspace_MJE.pdf 23 Safe Routes to School # ref The number of children who walk or bike to school fell 75% between 1960 and • ;.rte 2009. During this same period, childhood obesity rose 76%. Active transportation is a great way to achieve 150 minutes of physical activity per week. . To encourage active transportation,the • street's design elements must bring down . ` speeds and protect all users. Then, • families feel safe walking and biking to school. 44.4 . Photo vision:Steve Price,Urban Advantage Sources: http://www.saferoutesinfo.org/ ry** -t https://stateofobesity.org/obesity-rates-trends-overview/ https://health.gov/paguidelines/ 24 t - i ---,- Understanding Boulevards ;,, ,' '- Boulevards must move traffic efficiently, s. walla M3 "�' however,they are not required to be ugly, 4 intimidating and dangerous. In this conversion, all through lanes are kept, improving traffic flow. Often suburban to urban street changes provide greater efficiency in traffic movement. � = ,, Medians,for instance, can add 17-20% tee greater capacity. s '.,. "• _. '` The lower image demonstrates an { ••• �, environmentally-and business-friendly �-- � � ,, .�_ ,, . �- - \ �.. *I - t, design option that carries the same amount _ � of traffic, as it builds love for home. +/ 717- - Photo vision: Steve Price,Urban Advantage r ,w Understanding Avenues Streets that gather traffic from local roads are known as collectors and they should be places where people want to live, shop, work and play. Well-designed streets allow people to take walks, use transit, bike and enjoy their unique neighborhood. When a street feels right, we behave well; when the street does not behave well, we do not. ` vlaiitro Place is established through the urban r _ design and land use decisions we make. F U 1 l. Our street designs make a community feel �, - — �' welcoming or make it feel like a drive- _. .- th ru. Photo vision: Steve Price,Urban Advantage 26 i Understanding Intersections x -Nodes- _ Y The crossroads of two collectors or • arterials is an ideal location for a village node. • Throughout history, important places to live, work, shop and play were often built at these junctions. Designed well, they -� - become places of the heart, the ..0.•'''. community focal point, and a source of v 04 -' pride. E �' am Engineers, designers, architects, planners, 4 .H [7,411;','.11" . - I , .-I • I. I I developers and members of the public , c. t ' .. 4 l; `'X -- � �". ,- must work together to advance designs that produce the social and retail exchange people seek for village nodes to emerge. Photo vision: Steve Price,Urban Advantage 27 Understanding Intersections "`"2p rkt . ' - @.,' --- -Efficiency & Safety- iwee;I .' 4 I-1 -":_ _ The intersection in the top image is inefficient and unsafe. It is dangerous to those wanting to cross and,therefore, it is —. hostile to businesses. Modified as a • . ,. - ' ' roundabout, the engineer has reduced the ~ � otential for personalinjury crashes and at p �,*p ttl— ..---...^+ '• :s ——"" the same time, has eliminated delays to n $ ,...4.4W'-' ' .,> motorists and pedestrians. Once the community considers placemaking .x,10. ."`!�..., 4 as central to urban design and transportation . _ . """ planning, an area will transform into a ' � - , bustling environment for convenient .*: services. Such a change brings back life to the downtown and this arterial strip street. _itivia When intersections become true nodes (gathering places) land values can increase from $3-5/square foot to $15-35/square foot. Photo vision:Steve Price,Urban Advantage Source:Joe Minicozzi,AICD,Urban 3,http://www.urban-three.com Understanding Intersections 7 -Placemaking- a t S'4 , =_ The intersection in the top image is �} „ t 'it ,i:� "'x . , inefficient and the crossing distance is �- unfriendly to pedestrians, exposing them '— - to risk for an extended period of time. • IME 10 � Modified as a roundabout, the .0 community gains a safer intersection for all users, while also further establishing place. Intersection design offers tremendous !: I: ..44,r , - ti ., ;' opportunities to add beauty and charm `= _ to a community, and protect our most I I- ,; .�s valuable resource: our people. z •as -'4i�" Photo vision:Steve Price,Urban Design '4 . Placemaking -• ¢ People seek places of the heart. While this may _ be a beach or other cherished natural or ,_ -:•_ rs. cultural place, the built environment can be N. ----- enlivened by design decisions. II m 0, Place-based planning assesses all land use and [ transportation investments to ensure they align f1' _I with the community's vision. T Streets occupy so much of our shared public aspace that they must be considered as a t4 community-building opportunity. r 1 " ;Ar.: 4, The siting of parks and schools offers ,...--k„._ s .�erd 1 4*.a. ,--Al „ i �r tremendous opportunities with significant 1 t -. impacts to health and well-being. WV iron . '� ❖�..x.....t.A, _-: 6„t Invest in What You Want PO.•e„ .sir. e4 s:•efl. e,i.,t'`v,„.+z. P�,44, „•iae+•••�i.® ,�p • * *. .�*";*,•,.i 4%**. , .�.; Over the last 60 years,American cities and counties, both �_� 3» :"'° ^. -'4104..!.” large and small, have focused policy on auto-centric ...14:1;401'• - ,.. .''•, street and land-use practices which have had many unintended negative effects on individual and community - health, economic vitality, social connectedness, " affordable lifestyles and overall well-being. - x�:..: "sir;. •- 5:99.,. -:..,,.. Blue Zones Projects work with community leaders to advocate for policies, principles and best practices that bring back natural movement and choice in how people } ' 1,4LR ;k. 14. ' access daily places within their community. Community ,:.- t.• infrastructures like trails, roads, sidewalks, bike lanes, getiltz *I -,--.4'-'6;" ..', - parks and other public spaces affect our ability to move .,;, , �- naturally, connect socially and support local economies. . = The formula is simple, pump less money into things we J � � don't want and more into things we do. E k r, e .4 .... _ _ ,„ ,,,.. itCreating Healthier Communities •` ` % ' ., -, Creating healthier built environments is not s . r �"� - solely the business of planners and '" -1 engineers. Elected officials, city planners, x t trans ortation decision makers, architects #}[ *"`� ` ! ' ( `.� � landscape architects, builders, real estate p developers, citizens, community ws ► 4 � ✓ organizations, healthcare professionals,the �—" ' business community, school boards and w .t. t �. members of the public all have a role to ' ''1play in addressing community design ; : s �' _ .� challenges. r k „..,tt fc�;ii �� s e* w 32 , k.,, .,,,„ •-k-.. ii, ., w , , * s , X , ' al Timillir .- . , . 3 ....',Z \ 1 4a Ita a t "*' .. ) 1 "Protect through action that which you most treasure - people and place.// — Dan Burden Discovery Phase East Naples, Florida Discovery Phase - Objectives • Share the on-the-ground realities of a community's built environment. • Celebrate the unique history, culture, demographics and lifestyle of East Naples. • Identify possible policies, plans, marquee projects and capacity-building opportunities for the community to discuss and prioritize at the Built Environment Summit. • Serve as a catalyst for change by educating, empowering and equipping community leaders to take the steps to create healthier built environments. 35 Copyright 0 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. 1 1 a c m 43 c :r 3 ` v 9.rli The Study A ,Naples Land ; Colmer Museum Center 9 Yacht Harbor w o Government Center "'"lam"0 a` -1171 7 :4 T.,„,.-, ii :.y � f - Bay Club £ ... .. E . ... Waimart • .` NAPLES 4 • 5 :f a Jll�► 1 P si _ alt.,' P r a __ _ - k ! lay . ap..�r. . _. 3�i { .„.. Moo SUga .._+ ' Reglona{Pa rx rt rw F e ..,k^..:.o .kmccp• ,: ;baa.. +a� z 0a�e a.e m e r .:,... .. CindY Aar w ;- MOha{r i .. Mod Fao Naples Thomasson Dr _ Lm�F'�' Bayshore Drive, East Naples, Florida Botanical Element.SelAvala Garden c , y ci ,, .r Q. Walking Audit shown in Orange Potentialcanal bridge link 36 Copyright©2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. The Study Area �� 1,...;,;.,:t/ ,tom J £` y - # 1 Y ti r '.. . ,..—w • 4 IIII 10 a East Naples (connector street) Tamiami Trail,U.S.41 East Naples (residential street) ? ;; se r ,q , f Bayshore Drive Thomasson Drive Affordable housing, East Naples 37 Copyright®2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. The Walking Audit -...v ,; ;. --:‘ ,, '''.'"IN:,_,Lc ...v„ f. �_ <, 411 • .y 1 'mow" v �' " yl '- ''''y ' 'i is Ilif t w. ,..ii - ,44:„.0‘.10 4 r YOVRtEER T pre 'Al�.:.... t- '` ! j, .. . w. VOLUNTEER I bat( , 110 _ ` m "s4b,„.„ ,, , 1 More than 30 people took part in a walking audit along On Bayshore Drive, East Naples, Florida, lanes have Bayshore Drive, adding ideas and gaining knowledge on how to been narrowed and painted bike lanes have helped make this street more supportive of walking, bicycling and retail slow traffic. Meanwhile, there is much more that can life. Although Bayshore Drive is already one of the more green be advanced to make this a destination street. and welcoming streets in the region, much more can be done to make it a signature street. Copyright©201,Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. Discovery Phase Findings — East Naples 1. Proven leaders in Complete Streets are making progress across Florida 2. There are local best practices to learn from 3. Recent streetscape improvements in East Naples advance active transportation Strengths Strengths FLS Fla ' STREETS Putting the WHAT IS FDOT'S APPROACH right street in TO COMPLETE STREETS? the right place. In September Luta.the Florida Oepartmeot of Transportation 1,FOOT)adopted me Statewide Complete Streets Policy(Topic No.000-525-017a) Complete Streets serve the transportation needs of traosportaton system users of all ages and abilitiesindudtng pedestrians, tucydiststransit raters mdionstsand freight handlers_A transportation system based on Complete Streets principles can help to promote safety.quality of We and economic development Safety:Safety for at users is Quality of Ufa:A Complete Economic Dawaiofmaents FOOT'S top pronty.Roadways Streets approach hops to align A Complete Streets approach with content-approprlate speeds transportation demons with Land connects cofnmr titres and supports can result in reduced fatalities and use,resulting in quality places where Florida's eulstutg economic centers, serous iluries.The Complete transportation investments support a engdoyment dmters.and vttitor Streets approach considers the c mnwnity's quality of life destinations by striving to provide Former District Director, mobility,convenience.accessibibty, the highest level of mrdrinwdat and safety of ailroad usersartd infrastructure in these core areas. Billy Hattaway not only set places an emphasis on the most vulnerable users of agiven roadwayan important stage for the district, but for walking, Implernenimg Complete Streets is an FOOT department-yodel priority. The Complete Streets approach builds on ihnritzirty and innovation in roadway planning and design to put the right street in the right place, bicycling and liveability for Florida, as well. Proven leaders in Complete Streets are making progress across Florida 40 Strengths t kta - a-�` h l')... �. s .'`� �.., 4 , fit € s - •. Roundabouts Safe Crossings Gateways Raised Intersections Bradenton Beach, Florida Venice, Florida Sarasota, Florida Sarasota, Florida r. xY il Trail Crossings Road Diets Curb Extensions Lower Speed Designs Orlando, Florida Clearwater, Florida Venice, Florida Clearwater, Florida There are many local best practices to learn from 41 Strengths ii �.. Bayshore Drive uses innovative , '` colorized bike lanes.This conversion of asst 4 , - Bayshore, adding the median, tightening the lanes to 10 feet, creating the bike ' " '� ' lanes, in 2012, has improved walking { .grop and bicycling conditions. r ,+ ., However, more consideration for I .1 .» = $� 1 °°r:Ewalking and •bicycling is •important. How " t * i can we reduce the speed of traffic and � � �� „ _ the exiting speed onto side street - , rte. =`� entries,while providing higher level ' -: - options for those bicycling? r-- The current design (as shown) supports about 6%of the public who desire to ride bikes. Other designs-such as protected bike lanes—will meet the needs of 60% of the US population. Recent streetscape improvements in East Naples advance active transportation 42 Discovery Phase Findings — East Naples 1. Marquee Project Opportunities: • Advance the Bayshore Drive Road Diet and Use Curb Extensions • Create a Link Trail into Sugden Regional Park • Trial a Home Street on Jeepers Drive, N Road or Short Road • Plan an Urban Village for East Naples 2. Capacity-Building Opportunities: • School Lead Work with Safe Routes to School Coordinator • Develop a Complete Streets Outreach & Education Plan 3. Policy Opportunities: • Reduce Speeds in School Zones to 20mph • Choose a 'Roundabouts First' Intersection Policy • Adopt a Vision Zero Policy Opportunities Bayshore Drive : Road Diet t -y 1`. 3 ° "' ":"_It Bayshore Drive was rebuilt in recent . .".,,',.', , ,te4, 0. .,." ,i,'*IA.,..:-A--..: E .1.. years.The painted bike lanes ;: t h- ,:..,.i. separate the threat of cars from ' '' ` pedestrians. Meanwhile, this i-. , . ' : .1P. L' i boulevard style street remains I\ ,m4r1-1 +e .a overbuilt for both present and future traffic. ` With a low in season volume of i a- � -� — 9,000 vehicl1111 Ili es per day, this roadway can benefit from a lane reduction (road owing caw �, . more smoothlydiet) , better supportrsto �. �--- � _- walking andallbicycling, reduce flo crashes, and set the stage for development to shift from strip style _ __J.,J „, . ., to village style. See the following w _. pages for additional information. Bayshore Drive, East Naples, Florida 44 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. Local Best Practice: Tropicana Boulevard Tropicana Boulevard, ►!r _ •. Collier County: Iry This street was rebuilt in 644 recent years to take out non- , essential lanes. Two other streets in the same area (Golden Gate) are being @Mk k considered for similar treatments.This view of the "—� road illustrates how simple a dr- lane conversion can be in its early stages. Buffered bike lanes are a low-cost paint Yir ,�,, solution that could be considered for the next phase . _ . of improvements for Bayshore Drive. 45 Copyright®2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. Bayshore Drive : Use Curb Extensions . Fifixe- ,...., . , -..... -, _ , .. „. , ,. _. - _1 - ' - ,, ...., , ....., ,77-'1' i l n • 1 .. '% r:1:".71 -'---- ..... _ oftiL On Bayshore Drive, many side street crossings are overly-wide This set of curb extensions drops the crossing distance and (50 feet). This creates exposure, risk and discomfort to people crossing times in half.The curb extension not only narrows on foot, and discourages walking. Curb extensions can be the exposure to one-half, while opening sight lines and used to support walking and bicycling, while reducing conflict lowering turning speeds, it also makes the intersection safer points for pedestrians. and more comfortable for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. 46 Copyright O 2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. Create a Link Trail into Sugden Regional Park , ,. N. _ WELCOME TO YOUR _� SUDDEN PARK s ., ; P OPEN 8AMTOS 3E- s . r' :tea y �: _` `' o ' +- d� PARK RULESORD.76-48 ,. ti ->1r r-- .. 8 ,, STM ,..,sn`"" Ytt^ ,, . t } A short bridge across a canal can be designed ,` as a simple flatbed railroad car sitting on two pylons, on up to an aesthetic treatment • similar to the one shown here. The new x structure can open up the park for significant ' new walking and activity. In some cases, a link _ can be sponsored by a local civic group or " . other benefactor. 47 Copyright©2017 Blue Zones,LLC.All rights reserved. Trial a 'Home Street' on Jeepers Drive, N Road or Short Road • One lower priced concept, ;, • • known as a Home Street, reallocates space by painting low-volume streets with a , . • ,� --_ , single 10-foot travel lane for bi- - directional travel, ,: ...• ''1 1 , remakes the remaining space I !t t � �_ �' , �`�(, -- _ into walking and bicycling _ ` =• space. Here are two streets in America that have redesigned . ---.....7.- 4.r....4., - _ - -- -41°6°— their speed for things they " value the most: human activity. People on these streets "own"the street In this image above, in northwest Seattle, which advances social interaction, walking a regular width (28-foot wide) local street and bicycling, as well as play. This street, in was narrowed to 10 feet, and allows two Manhattan Beach, California, was designed directional travel. Parking and rain gardens for alley loading only. Although a full width were added. Pedestrian, bicyclists and street, which can permit moving vans or a motorists share this street as speeds are emergency responder, it is only on a rare kept to under 10 mph. occassion that a car is permitted. Copyright 02017Blue Zones LLC All rights reserved Plan an Urban Village for East Naples .......� P. a - . + 't -' . r �'""� ,. ► Pub ix Suo�r „ . '`�"°, Alp, ` Market 11 Shcau{es:3I moi' ' itiP ;� . = .w. - i. 'Ikk,�' ;3r > • .. .. /, t , A*1(il fr. , 4 a , it / ;.• ^! Nw �' a u:111;:' , .yam - .w�"' . �+: 3 ikestGovernment Center, or another . � + � location, such as Thomasson Lane and Rattlesnake . . ,,, ,,,,.7.7, _ - r II t__Ac _,40....,„1-„Ti.i.....;,...,..r,':t::::::ii--,,,,,,,_7::i.4''''a ....':4414l'1a.:,7‘..,1.1,::...4.44.„; Hammock Road could provide ` i - 7, an ideal location for %. ,: '° , . '. establishing the Village of East -.; 1 Google 7 .; , > Naples. 49 Discovery Phase Findings — East Naples Capacity-Building Opportunities Schools Lead Work with Safe Routes to School Coordinator The photograph in the upper image was taken at the East Naples Middle School shortly after a child lost his life here. Florida consistently leads the nation in fatalities to people attempting to walk or bicycle. The design of many streets encourages speeding and fails to protect children crossing the street. The lower street, which once looked like the street above, now accommodates those who drive, walk or bike to school. "g -- Top Photo:East Naples Middle School,Florida ., Bottom Photo: Safe Routes to School,Sacramento,California si Schools Lead Work with Safe Routes to School Coordinator Children have much to offer in the t ,' community planning and design ' �- I ii process,yet they remain mostly ( � ,,� untapped throughout community '�ti " ! ' ' , t� transformation processes. I - t --. y w_,. ___..-. ._ They can dream up the perfect ' -- " community in which to live, play and --044016166.4p— g. , � 1 1 ... _ go to school. Beyond the power of 111111111111 I ,'.iii i 1 - _ — their imaginations,they also can Y bring very practical solutions to the °� � table. - .:- :,,....,,,i., r , i J....,A- ,.4 .. r_-_,_ ..._ ___ ,, + , ,/ �' For example, children often are aware A "8 , GEAI of shortcuts to the places they go that could be formalized into trails and ► E / added to the community's ..h 1 pedestrian network. Develop a Complete Streets Outreach & Education Plan To build support for Complete Streets ‘: projects,the list of stakeholders should be MI0 : 4 broadened to include members of the = 1 --.,,,,--- ,-.40p,-- M • ,,� baa , P t ; s, public, business and property owners, = � ' ;5',, elected officials, community boards and -- ' . I, ... ....._,, ,,_... _ neighborhood association leaders, school SFE ' - and health agency staff, main street and Amb` :g illie431)i non-profit representatives and major . employers. Churches,journalists, philanthropists and children should also be r engaged to confirm their vision, build ; it support for Complete Streets, and to ` w • tot E^ __ capture concerns in a timely manner. w - • :.: ,,,k r fi-2„/!-/ Residents in Farmington, New Mexico, - 1 utilized Pads to share individual's goals for L � •`t-their community. Schools often bring --,,>,..30.\>-\ �=''' ' ` ^ - " children on walking audits. What can East ., „wow ` � x Naples do to encourage a community-wide t • �; c discussion on how transportation systems ,h should function? ,`I; 53 Discovery Phase Findings — East Naples Policy Opportunities Reduce Speeds in School Zones to 20mph ' r _ , < �- HIT BY A VEHICLE HIT BY A VEHICLE HIT BY VEHICLE LL ....-4.e`7:;‘.44: �` TRAVELING AT: TRAVELING AT: TRAVELING AT: e0 yo--.„...„-...... ,.. .„„„ ,' 1 ,„,.„..,...,„ , ..., —_,. ..,,,,.. .„,,,, ,,.. ..,,, MPH MPH MPH i3 ,-;,,,i,--.5,,i.t.,..,,,...,, - -,,,,,,F.- _ , , AAAAAA ,X.,kit -X-X-X-X-Xf Siff', Amtt tittle . ,*' survive 9 out of 10 pedestrians svive 5 out of 10 pedestrians survive Only 1 out et le palmettos swim ' Higher speeds increase the likelihood and severity of crashes while lower N N‘kilr speeds improve safety for everyone, especially people walking and cycling. Survival for a pedestrian is directly tied to vehicular speed. Engage the s C Collier County Council and the Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization to craft and pass a resolution that reduces the default speed limit around schools to 20 mph from 25 mph. 55 Choose a `Roundabouts First' Intersection Policy Conflicts at a conventional intersection with single a,- ilii Conflicts at a single-lane, Ai A lanes in each direction "'his" modern roundabout .��il,• • 8 vehicle-to-vehicle :_ - '.•- 32 vehicle-to-vehicle conflicts ��•>�� conflicts " -`• 0 8 vehicle-to-person •n�-�,_• 0 24 vehicle-to-person - 'N • conflicts `'•a��,�•r conflicts sm. Til nit Wel • A roundabout has%of the number of potential conflicts compared to signalized intersections. • These conflicts are at low speed since vehicles enter the intersection at lower speeds and softer angles. • Roundabouts reduce personal injury crashes by 90%and have been recognized as a proven safety countermeasure by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and the National Insurance Institute, with each encouraging communities to choose a 'roundabouts first' approach to intersection design. Adopt a Vision Zero Policy r • 0Z IV - " 1111,� wat 1111, Traffic crashes are the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S. and globally. In 2015, 1.25 million people died around the world in traffic violence. In the U.S. last year, 35,092 people died in traffic crashes, an increase of 7.2%over the prior year.This was the greatest percentage increase in traffic violence in this nation since the 1960s. A Vision Zero Policy sets the goal of eliminating all traffic deaths and serious injuries that occur on our streets by a certain date. Join local and regional efforts underway in advocating for a Vision Zero Policy. Source:https://visionzeronetwork.org/resources/speed-fatality-map 57 East Naples Toolbox Ideas for Inspiration Buffered Bike Lanes Best Practice: 6' minimum bike lane $ LANE 10" edge striping ^ + mp 'fie lai, _a1� 711w.e1�►-' 1116-"111:_ _.2.,,,,. . l,- 7,... 1111111111"-v- y Y Buffered Bike Lanes provide further benefits for all road users, including: • Offering a better defined space for people on bikes which reduces sidewalk riding • Increasing the buffer between bicyclists and motorists, and motorists and pedestrians • Promoting an orderly flow of traffic and reducing conflict points • Increasing the sight distance for motorists entering the roadway from driveways and side streets • Improving the turning radius for larger vehicles • Allocating space for motorists to pull out of the travel lane when emergency responders must pass Protected Bike Lanes s Best Practice: a 6' minimum bike lane brings the bicyclist into 10 At full view at intersections .- 11 I Protected Bike Lanes provide benefits for 60%of the U.S. population, rather than 6%who will use bike lanes. Benefits include: • Fully separating bicyclists from moving traffic • Offering a defined space for people on bikes which reduces sidewalk riding • Promoting an orderly flow of traffic and reducing conflict points • Increasing the sight distance for motorists entering the roadway from driveways and side streets • Improving the turning radius for larger vehicles Curb Extensions BEFORE AFTER s a t .w . _ w _ 5 a e 32 ft * Ilk, Lir 41 00 0 ON o all 18 ft >k 14ft.412ftEft#8fl 14-18ft -.---14ft->L12ft,-6ft 8f Curb extensions reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians by 44 feet at this intersection in Venice, FL Curb extensions, or bulb-outs, place pedestrians out from behind parked cars, improving sightlines and reducing crossing distances. Curb extensions create compact intersections that promote walking and make the intersection operate more efficiently. Curb extensions reduce vehicle turning speeds by physically and visually narrowing the roadway. Curb extensions provide increased pedestrian waiting space. 61 i 1 Pop-Up Traffic Calming Demonstration Project -- - -- - Aiimai 1011 -- ' , • ,, l 1 x fin 4� - �� e* _' _ , s n x p 7 �� ! ` �y,, �!" �dam` '7 41W. " m Neighbors in the Pogo Park area oft the Iron Triangle in Richmond, W -, r __ California,came together to trial _ `" Mi traffic calming tools, including mini --� • ,, .'" 1 + �- �,� circles and curb extensions,and to f . test safer, age-friendly and inclusive street treatments in their i ..—_ community.This project is also an example of transportation equity. - ____._ Low-Cost Wayfinding Implementation Project I W4-_ 11141§4*, &Iris A, 2 MINUTE WALK TO COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE 9/9 - 5-7 PM As Collier County advances its pedestrian and bicycle —�,....,7 • features, it's a good time to pilot wayfinding by using t,�,.,i ► rr-temporary signs that encourage active transportation to key destinations. Q;'/j . 1 Low-Cost Intersection Redesign Demonstration Project ------------ .....7: -- - ..,... ' 1 ....:00., 11100 ":440100.P .m.h.._ '411114/4110410., * 4iiir ,,,,,,,, 'ft, '} . 41111114111111110. ' i 4 7, '‘'''' ,,,, ASO 'a- 1) \v„ , 40, 10111* I 6 4 a, 4 4 1°111$1,5 *. , : Pop Up Demonstration Project Low-Cost Placemaking Demonstration Project --- .4; _.,..;„--,_ ,4 1 - . --- :,- . 1 , -.4,770,,,, ,- . 4, 4. . +.� , fit .; 11' a , ,. .. . , _ J .45 Pavement-to-Parks Project 65 Next Steps • Between the Discovery Phase activities and the Summit, the following activities should take place: • Review the Built Environment Discovery Report. • Discuss findings with the Blue Zones Project team, friends and neighbors, as well as , elected officials. I `� • Identify your marquee project.This involves a charrette with all key players involved. ' • Flag additional opportunities for consideration. • Consider your priorities. • Identify any foreseeable barriers or obstacles to implementation. • Identify opportunities to cross-promote or leverage complementary efforts. 1 66 CIBLUE ZONES PROJECT* ,...-... ., 6.,. - tilt _.....,..,____ . _------------ - ----_-_- ---.... For More Information Jessica Ayers-Crane Community Policy Lead— Blue Zones Project, SWFL T: 239.404.4924 E: jessica.ayerscrane@sharecare.com Advisory Board Application Form Collier County Government 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 Naples, FL 34112 (239) 252-8400 Application was received on:4/20/2018 11:01:45 AM. Name: Dwight Oakley Home Phone: Home Address: 8080 Bayshore Dr. City: Naples Zip Code: 34112 Phone Numbers Business: 239-262-0073 E-Mail Address: dwight@dwightoakley.com Board or Committee: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board Category: Not indicated Place of Employment:Self-employed/Dwight Oakley Architect How long have you lived in Collier County: more than 15 How many months out of the year do you reside in Collier County: I am a year-round resident Have you been convicted or found guilty of a criminal offense(any level felony or first degree misdemeanor only)? No Not Indicated Do you or your employer do business with the County? No Not Indicated NOTE:All advisory board members must update their profile and notify the Board of County Commissioners in the event that their relationship changes relating to memberships of organizations that may benefit them in the outcome of advisory board recommendations or they enter into contracts with the County. Would you and/or any organizations with which you are affiliated benefit from decisions or recommendations made by this advisory board? No Not Indicated Are you a registered voter in Collier County? Yes Do you currently hold an elected office? No Do you now serve,or have you ever served on a Collier County board or committee? No Not Indicated Please list your community activities and positions held: Education: Architecture (B.Arch.) :Auburn University Experience/ Background Practicing licensed Architect-State of Florida 1985 to current day. Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 Requested Budget Office of the County Manager Bayshore Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Department Budgetary Cost Summary Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Personal Services 251,734 491,600 426,700 490,800 - 490,800 (0.2%) Operating Expense 437,506 1,007,400 719,800 1,356,900 - 1,356,900 34.7% Indirect Cost Reimburs 60,100 57,500 57,500 62,100 - 62,100 8.0% Capital Outlay 175,809 4,403,200 659,300 4,926,500 - 4,926,500 11.9% Grants and Aid - 75,000 - 175,000 - 175,000 133.3% Net Operating Budget 925,149 6,034,700 1,863,300 7,011,300 - 7,011,300 16.2% Trans to Property Appraiser 8,116 11,400 11,400 12,100 - 12,100 6.1% Trans to Tax Collector 21,115 29,300 29,300 31,000 - 31,000 5.8% Trans to 187 Bayshore Redev Fd 136,800 136,800 136,800 136,800 - 136,800 0.0% Trans to 287 CRA Loan 85,500 631,000 631,000 625,100 - 625,100 (0.9%) Trans to 506 IT Capital - 3,700 3,700 - - - (100.0%) Reserves for Contingencies - 131,000 - 122,900 - 122,900 (6.2%) Reserves for Capital - 2,137,000 - 3,221,800 - 3,221,800 50.8% Total Budget 1,176,680 9,114,900 2,675,500 11,161,000 - 11,161,000 22.4% FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Appropriations by Program Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Bayshore Beautification MSTU(163) 297,250 5,037,200 341,000 5,747,100 - 5,747,100 14.1% Bayshore CRA Grant and Grant Match 195,137 - 675,200 - - - na (717/718) Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelop 414,227 951,900 786,600 1,258,400 - 1,258,400 32.2% (187) Haldeman Creek MSTU(164) 18,535 45,600 60,500 5,800 - 5,800 (87.3%) Total Net Budget 925,149 6,034,700 1,863,300 7,011,300 - 7,011,300 16.2% Total Transfers and Reserves 251,531 3,080,200 812,200 4,149,700 - 4,149,700 34.7% Total Budget 1,176,680 9,114,900 2,675,500 11,161,000 - 11,161,000 22.4% FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Department Funding Sources Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Ad Valorem Taxes 977,728 1,130,000 1,084,800 1,197,800 - 1,197,800 6.0% Delinquent Ad Valorem Taxes 850 - - - - - na Charges For Services - - 7,000 - - na Miscellaneous Revenues 84,641 15,000 67,000 - - - (100.0%) Interest/Misc 64,780 58,300 73,000 92,800 - 92,800 59.2% Reimb From Other Depts 70,952 - 675,200 - - - na Trans frm Property Appraiser 1,094 - - - - - na Trans frm Tax Collector 6,933 - - - - na Trans fm 001 Gen Fund 1,054,000 1,274,200 1,274,200 1,350,700 - 1,350,700 6.0% Trans fm 111 MSTD Gen Fd 238,600 288,400 288,400 305,700 - 305,700 6.0% Trans fm 163 Baysh/Av Beaut Fd 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 - 125,500 0.0% Trans fm 164 Haldeman Creek 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 - 11,300 0.0% Trans fm 186 Immok Redev Fd - 78,000 78,000 74,100 - 74,100 (5.0%) Carry Forward 5,474,700 6,194,500 7,058,600 8,067,500 - 8,067,500 30.2% Less 5%Required By Law - (60,300) - (64,400) - (64,400) 6.8% Total Funding 8,111,078 9,114,900 10,743,000 11,161,000 - 11,161,000 22.4% Fiscal Year 2019 1 Office of the County Manager Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 Requested Budget Office of the County Manager Bayshore Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Department Position Summary Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelop 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 - 4.00 0.0% (187) Total FTE 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 - 4.00 0.0% Fiscal Year 2019 2 Office of the County Manager Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 Requested Budget Office of the County Manager Bayshore Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelop (187) Mission Statement To support the efforts of the Board of County Commissioners which established itself as the Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA)and made a finding of necessity and of blight conditions in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Component Redevelopment Area by adopting Resolution 2000-82 on March 14,2000,and to implement the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Component Section of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Plan adopted by the CRA. FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Program Summary Total FTE Budget Revenues Net Cost CRA Implementation 2.85 1,137,277 1,137,277 - Monitor, update and implement the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle component of the Collier County Community Redevelopment Plan. Project&MSTU Management 1.15 121,123 136,800 -15,677 Manage CRA&MSTU projects within the district including; streets, sidewalks, lighting, landscaping and other improvements. Land acquisition and rehabilitation projects include purchase of blighted properties and construction/re-development of commercial and residential buildings. Transfers for Debt Service - 625,100 625,100 - Reserves - 2,297,600 2,281,923 15,677 Current Level of Service Budget 4.00 4,181,100 4,181,100 - FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Program Budgetary Cost Summary Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Personal Services 251,734 491,600 426,700 490,800 - 490,800 (0.2%) Operating Expense 111,693 333,600 308,600 512,500 - 512,500 53.6% Indirect Cost Reimburs 50,800 48,500 48,500 53,600 - 53,600 10.5% Capital Outlay - 3,200 2,800 26,500 - 26,500 728.1% Grants and Aid - 75,000 - 175,000 - 175,000 133.3% Net Operating Budget 414,227 951,900 786,600 1,258,400 - 1,258,400 32.2% Trans to 287 CRA Loan 85,500 631,000 631,000 625,100 - 625,100 (0.9%) Trans to 506 IT Capital - 3,700 3,700 - - - (100.0%) Reserves for Contingencies - 131,000 - 122,900 - 122,900 (6.2%) Reserves for Capital - 1,601,200 - 2,174,700 - 2,174,700 35.8% Total Budget 499,727 3,318,800 1,421,300 4,181,100 - 4,181,100 26.0% Total FTE 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 - 4.00 0.0% Fiscal Year 2019 3 Office of the County Manager Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 Requested Budget Office of the County Manager Bayshore Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelop (187) FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Program Funding Sources Actual Adopted Forecast Current Expanded Requested Change Charges For Services - - 7,000 - - - na Miscellaneous Revenues 78,613 15,000 67,000 - - - (100.0%) Interest/Misc 14,202 15,300 20,000 28,600 - 28,600 86.9% Trans fm 001 Gen Fund 1,054,000 1,274,200 1,274,200 1,350,700 - 1,350,700 6.0% Trans fm 111 MSTD Gen Fd 238,600 288,400 288,400 305,700 - 305,700 6.0% Trans fm 163 Baysh/Av Beaut Fd 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 - 125,500 0.0% Trans fm 164 Haldeman Creek 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 - 11,300 0.0% Trans fm 186 Immok Redev Fd - 78,000 78,000 74,100 - 74,100 (5.0%) Carry Forward 814,200 1,512,700 1,836,700 2,286,800 - 2,286,800 51.2% Less 5%Required By Law - (1,600) - (1,600) - (1,600) 0.0% Total Funding 2,336,415 3,318,800 3,708,100 4,181,100 - 4,181,100 26.0% Notes: A challenge facing the CRA is the decline in taxable value and the resulting impact on its Tax Increment Financing(TIF) revenue. The CRA's tax increment value peaked in 2008 at$626,776,903.Today the taxable increment is$376,271,932.While the tax increment has increased substantially,year over year, the tax increment revenue is$699,200 off the peak of$2,285,351 (2008). On July 26, 2006,the CRA entered into a loan agreement with Wachovia Bank under which a line of credit was secured for $7,000,000. Of this amount, $5,901,000 was drawn to purchase and assemble commercial property within the Gateway Triangle catalyst project area as an incentive to attract private development interest. On July 28, 2009, a$13,500,000 term loan was secured through Fifth/Third Bank which paid off the earlier Wachovia line of credit and provided additional dollars for strategic property acquisition.The term of this note was five(5)years with a final maturity date of September 1, 2014. The note was restructured in May 2013 into the Fifth Third Bank Note Series 2013. On March 2, 2017,the debt was again restructured. The restructured note, TD Bank, N.A. Series 2017, provided proceeds of$5,293,293 which were used to pay off the Fifth Third Bank Note. The term of the TD Bank Note is ten(10)years with a final maturity of March 1, 2027.As of September 30, 2017 the TD Bank, N.A. Series 2017 Note has an outstanding principal balance of$5,072,089. Forecast FY 2018: The personal services forecast reflects savings from position vacancies. Operating expenses are in line with the adopted budget and include the CRA Redevelopment Plan update. The primary revenue source for the Bayshore CRA is Tax Increment Financing revenue(TIF). TIF revenue is budgeted as transfers from the General Fund(001)and the Unincorporated Area General Fund(111). The Bayshore CRA taxable increment value generated a combined TIF revenue of$1,562,600. Current FY 2019: The budget is based on three(4)FTEs and a full time job bank Planning Technician position. The operating expense budget provides flexibility for as needed professional and contract services. In the grants and aid category the proposed pool of grant dollars for the Community Improvement Grant Program provides for an incremental$100,000 and the carryforward of program funding provided FY 18. The capital outlay budget provides for a vehicle for the CRA Director.This mechanism will allow the FY 19 budget to accommodate the pay out of FY 18 contracts. A transfer to debt service fund (287)provides for annual debt service requirements.A substantial capital reserve is provided. Revenues: The primary sources of funding are Tax Increment Financing (TIF)derived from the CRA's property tax increment and fund carryforward. The Initial estimated FY 19 tax increment value is$398,848,247 a 6%increase over last year. Applying the respective General Fund and Unincorporated Area General Fund tax rate, CRA TIF revenue is estimated to be$1,656,400. This revenue is recorded as transfers from the General Fund(001)and the Unincorporated Area MSTD General Fund (111). Carry forward into FY 19 is anticipated to be$2,286,800. A transfer in of$74,100 from the Immokalee CRA Fund is programmed to support a portion of the CRA Director's cost. The reduction in charges for services and miscellaneous revenues reflects the anticipated closing on the sale of the Triangle properties and the resultant termination of revenues generated from those properties. Fiscal Year 2019 4 Office of the County Manager Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change 163 Bayshore/Avalon Beautification MSTUII 60 Operating Expense Expenditures 162525-163 631400 Engineering Fees 63,281 150,000 177,212 30,000 470,000 0 470,000 213.33 162525-163 631650 Abstract Fees 800 0 0 100 0 0 0 0.00 162525-163 634211 IT Billing Hours 100 100 100 100 0 0 0 100.00 162525-163 634970 Indirect Cost 8,700 8,500 8,500 8,500 7,800 0 7,800 -8.24 162525-163 634980 Interdept Payment 8,389 5,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 100.00 162525-163 634990 Landscape 88,770 100,000 103,610 100,000 90,000 0 90,000 -10.00 162525-163 634999 Other Contractual 71,072 250,000 356,317 150,000 200,000 0 200,000 -20.00 162525-163 641950 Postage Freight 1,037 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 162525-163 643100 Electricity 18,115 21,000 21,000 21,000 25,000 0 25,000 19.05 162525-163 645100 Insurance General 0 2,100 2,100 2,100 1,700 0 1,700 -19.05 162525-163 645260 Auto Insurance 0 900 900 900 600 0 600 -33.33 162525-163 646311 Sprinkler System 5,868 40,000 40,000 12,000 6,500 0 6,500 -83.75 162525-163 646318 Mulch 3,000 15,000 15,000 7,500 15,000 0 15,000 0.00 162525-163 646430 Fleet Maint Isf 600 1,800 1,800 1,800 800 0 800 -55.56 162525-163 646440 Fleet Maint ISF 100 1,600 1,600 1,600 100 0 100 -93.75 162525-163 646445 Fleet Non Maint 191 0 0 0 200 0 200 0.00 162525-163 646451 Lighting 17,264 21,000 21,000 0 21,000 0 21,000 0.00 162525-163 648170 Marketing And 9,084 10,000 10,000 0 0 0 0 100.00 162525-163 649030 Clerks Recording 0 0 0 100 300 0 300 0.00 162525-163 649100 Legal Advertising 0 0 0 0 700 0 700 0.00 162525-163 652310 Fertilizer Herbicides 677 10,000 10,000 5,000 7,000 0 7,000 -30.00 162525-163 652490 Fuel and Lubricants 202 200 200 300 400 0 400 100.00 Expenditures 297,250 637,200 774,339 341,000 847,100 0 847,100 32.94 70 Capital Outlay Expenditures 162525-163 763100 Improvements 0 4,400,000 4,400,000 0 4,900,000 0 4,900,000 11.36 Expenditures 0 4,400,000 4,400,000 0 4,900,000 0 4,900,000 11.36 91 Transfers Out Expenditures 929010-163 911870 Transfer To 187 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 0 125,500 0.00 Expenditures 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 0 125,500 0.00 93 Transfers to Constitutional Officers Expenditures 959010-163 930600 Budget Transfers 7,618 10,600 10,600 10,600 11,200 0 11,200 5.66 959010-163 930700 Budget Transfers 19,525 27,300 27,300 27,300 28,900 0 28,900 5.86 Expenditures 27,144 37,900 37,900 37,900 40,100 0 40,100 5.80 99 Reserves Expenditures 919010-163 993000 Reserve For Capital 0 186,300 186,300 0 640,900 0 640,900 244.02 Expenditures 0 186,300 186,300 0 640,900 0 640,900 244.02 29 Ad Valorem Taxes Revenues I 162525-163 311100 Current Ad Valorem 916,679 1,051,100 1,051,100 1,009,100 1,114,200 0 1,114,200 6.00 Revenues 916,679 1,051,100 1,051,100 1,009,100 1,114,200 0 1,114,200 6.00 36 Miscellaneous Revenues Revenues 162525-163 311200 Delinquent Ad 787 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 162525-163 361320 Interest Tax 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 162525-163 369130 Ins Co Refunds 6,028 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-163 361170 Interest Sba 8,712 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-163 361180 Investment Interest 38,480 40,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 0 60,000 50.00 Revenues 54,072 40,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 0 60,000 50.00 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 919010-163 489201 Carry Forward Of 0 0 137,139 0 0 0 0 0.00 919010-163 489900 Less 5%Required 0 -54,600 -54,600 0 -58,600 0 -58,600 7.33 959010-163 486600 Transfer From 1,027 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 959010-163 486700 Transfer From Tax 6,411 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 7,438 -54,600 82,539 0 -58,600 0 -58,600 7.33 49 Carryforward Revenues 919010-163 489200 Carryforward 4,355,000 4,350,400 4,350,400 4,883,300 5,438,000 0 5,438,000 25.00 Revenues 4,355,000 4,350,400 4,350,400 4,883,300 5,438,000 0 5,438,000 25.00 Fund Total Expenditure: 449,894 5,386,900 5,524,039 504,400 6,553,600 0 6,553,600 21.66 GovMax V5 1 4/23/2018 Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change Fund Total Revenue: 5,333,189 5,386,900 5,524,039 5,942,400 6,553,600 0 6,553,600 21.66 Fund Balance: 4,883,296 0 0 5,438,000 0 0 0 0.00 164 Haldeman Creek MSTU 60 Operating Expense Expenditures 144258-164 649990 Other 0 0 100,000 60,000 0 0 0 0.00 162547-164 631400 Engineering Fees 0 20,000 20,000 0 0 0 0 100.00 162547-164 634970 Indirect Cost 600 500 500 500 700 0 700 40.00 162547-164 634999 Other Contractual 17,935 20,000 20,000 0 5,000 0 5,000 -75.00 162547-164 641950 Postage Freight 0 1,000 1,000 0 0 0 0 100.00 162547-164 645100 Insurance General 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0.00 162547-164 647110 Printing Binding 0 1,500 1,500 0 0 0 0 100.00 162547-164 649990 Other 0 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 100.00 162547-164 651210 Copying Charges 0 100 100 0 0 0 0 100.00 Expenditures 18,535 45,600 145,600 60,500 5,800 0 5,800 -87.28 91 Transfers Out Expenditures 929010-164 911870 Transfer To 187 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 0 11,300 0.00 Expenditures 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 0 11,300 0.00 93 Transfers to Constitutional Officers Expenditures 959010-164 930600 Budget Transfers 498 800 800 800 900 0 900 12.50 959010-164 930700 Budget Transfers 1,590 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,100 0 2,100 5.00 Expenditures 2,087 2,800 2,800 2,800 3,000 0 3,000 7.14 99 Reserves Expenditures 919010-164 993000 Reserve For Capital 0 349,500 349,500 0 406,200 0 406,200 16.22 Expenditures 0 349,500 349,500 0 406,200 0 406,200 16.22 29 Ad Valorem Taxes Revenues 162547-164 311100 Current Ad Valorem 61,049 78,900 78,900 75,700 83,600 0 83,600 5.96 Revenues 61,049 78,900 78,900 75,700 83,600 0 83,600 5.96 33 Intergovernmental Revenues Revenues 144258-164 331220 Fed Em Mgt 0 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 0 0 100,000 0 0 0 0 0.00 36 Miscellaneous Revenues Revenues 162547-164 311200 Delinquent Ad 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 162547-164 361320 Interest Tax 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-164 361170 Interest Sba 614 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-164 361180 Investment Interest 2,703 3,000 3,000 3,000 4,200 0 4,200 40.00 Revenues 3,384 3,000 3,000 3,000 4,200 0 4,200 40.00 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 919010-164 489900 Less 5%Required 0 -4,100 -4,100 0 -4,200 0 -4,200 2.44 959010-164 486600 Transfer From 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 959010-164 486700 Transfer From Tax 522 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 589 -4,100 -4,100 0 -4,200 0 -4,200 2.44 49 Carryforward Revenues 919010-164 489200 Carryforward 305,500 331,400 331,400 338,600 342,700 0 342,700 3.41 Revenues 305,500 331,400 331,400 338,600 342,700 0 342,700 3.41 Fund Total Expenditure: 31,922 409,200 509,200 74,600 426,300 0 426,300 4.18 Fund Total Revenue: 370,522 409,200 509,200 417,300 426,300 0 426,300 4.18 Fund Balance: 338,600 0 0 342,700 0 0 0 0.00 GovMax V5 2 4/23/2018 Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change 187 Bayshore/Gateway TriII 50 Personal Services Expenditures 138325-187 512100 Regular Salaries 146,142 328,387 328,387 296,078 307,245 0 307,245 -6.44 138325-187 512600 Er 457 Deferred 200 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,000 0 2,000 -20.00 138325-187 513100 Other Salaries And 10,776 10,000 10,000 10,000 45,000 0 45,000 350.00 138325-187 514100 Overtime 1,044 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 138325-187 515000 Vacation Sell Back 0 1,280 1,280 600 1,231 0 1,231 -3.83 138325-187 518100 Termination Pay 18,093 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 138325-187 519100 Reserve For Salary 0 9,521 9,521 0 6,144 0 6,144 -35.47 138325-187 521100 Social Security 13,112 31,239 31,239 23,000 27,715 0 27,715 -11.28 138325-187 522100 Retirement Regular 16,166 38,851 38,851 24,700 31,554 0 31,554 -18.78 138325-187 523149 Health Ins-Job 3,821 13,100 13,100 13,100 13,000 0 13,000 -0.76 138325-187 523150 Health Insurance 39,300 52,400 52,400 52,400 52,400 0 52,400 0.00 1 138325-187 523152 Dental Insurance 1,471 1,961 1,961 1,961 1,961 0 1,961 0.00 138325-187 523153 Short Term 271 361 361 361 400 0 400 10.80 138325-187 523154 Long Term 571 761 761 761 800 0 800 5.12 138325-187 523160 Life Insurance 567 950 950 950 881 0 881 -7.26 138325-187 524100 Workers 200 289 289 289 469 0 469 62.28 Expenditures 251,734 491,600 491,600 426,700 490,800 0 490,800 -0.16 60 Operating Expense Expenditures 138325-187 631400 Engineering Fees 0 0 5,500 5,500 150,000 0 150,000 0.00 138325-187 631600 Appraisal Fees 0 2,000 2,000 2,000 5,000 0 5,000 150.00 138325-187 634207 IT Capital 2,100 1,800 1,800 1,800 3,000 0 3,000 66.67 138325-187 634210 Info Tech 10,900 11,800 11,800 11,800 18,200 0 18,200 54.24 138325-187 634212 IT Microsoft Office 0 0 0 0 300 0 300 0.00 138325-187 634970 Indirect Cost 50,800 48,500 48,500 48,500 53,600 0 53,600 10.52 138325-187 634980 Interdept Payment 2,501 5,000 5,000 3,000 6,000 0 6,000 20.00 138325-187 634999 Other Contractual 49,991 234,000 234,000 190,000 234,000 0 234,000 0.00 138325-187 640300 Out Of County 648 2,500 2,500 700 6,000 0 6,000 140.00 138325-187 641230 Telephone Access 0 400 400 400 800 0 800 100.00 138325-187 641700 Cellular Telephone 0 2,500 2,500 0 1,300 0 1,300 -48.00 138325-187 641900 Telephone Sys 2,904 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 138325-187 641950 Postage Freight 10 600 600 0 600 0 600 0.00 138325-187 643100 Electricity 954 2,000 2,000 1,500 3,000 0 3,000 50.00 138325-187 643400 Water And Sewer 0 0 0 2,500 1,500 0 1,500 0.00 138325-187 644100 Rent Buildings 19,817 20,700 20,700 21,600 30,000 0 30,000 44.93 138325-187 645100 Insurance General 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 2,800 0 2,800 55.56 138325-187 646180 Building R And M 140 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 138325-187 646360 Maintenance Of 5,241 8,000 8,000 0 10,000 0 10,000 25.00 138325-187 647110 Printing Binding 0 2,000 2,000 0 5,500 0 5,500 175.00 138325-187 648170 Marketing And 4,582 3,000 3,000 0 6,000 0 6,000 100.00 138325-187 649050 Property 0 20,000 20,000 0 0 0 0 100.00 138325-187 649100 Legal Advertising 3,969 2,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 0 4,000 100.00 138325-187 649990 Other 181 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 138325-187 651110 Office Supplies 946 1,500 1,500 1,000 3,000 0 3,000 100.00 138325-187 651210 Copying Charges 3,938 6,000 6,000 0 7,000 0 7,000 16.67 138325-187 652920 Computer Software 0 1,000 1,000 0 3,000 0 3,000 200.00 138325-187 652990 Other Operating 97 1,500 1,500 0 3,500 0 3,500 133.33 138325-187 654210 Dues And 1,046 1,500 1,500 0 4,000 0 4,000 166.67 I 138325-187 654360 Other Training Ed -71 2,000 2,000 0 4,000 0 4,000 100.00 144259-187 646360 Maintenance Of 0 0 0 62,000 0 0 0 0.00 144259-187 649990 Other 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 0.00 Expenditures 162,493 382,100 887,600 357,100 566,100 0 566,100 48.15 70 Capital Outlay Expenditures 138325-187 764110 Autos And Trucks 0 0 0 0 26,500 0 26,500 0.00 138325-187 764900 Data Processing 0 3,200 3,200 2,800 0 0 0 100.00 Expenditures 0 3,200 3,200 2,800 26,500 0 26,500 728.13 80 Grants and Aids Expenditures 138325-187 884200 Residential Rehab 0 75,000 75,000 0 175,000 0 175,000 133.33 Expenditures 0 75,000 75,000 0 175,000 0 175,000 133.33 91 Transfers Out Expenditures 929010-187 912870 Transfer To 287 85,500 631,000 631,000 631,000 625,100 0 625,100 -0.94 929010-187 915060 Transfer To 506 It 0 3,700 3,700 3,700 0 0 0 100.00 GovMax VS 3 4/23/2018 I Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change 187 Bayshore/Gateway Tri Expenditures 85,500 634,700 634,700 634,700 625,100 0 625,100 -1.51 99 Reserves Expenditures 919010-187 991000 Reserve For 0 131,000 131,000 0 122,900 0 122,900 -6.18 919010-187 993000 Reserve For Capital 0 1,601,200 1,601,200 0 2,174,700 0 2,174,700 35.82 Expenditures 0 1,732,200 1,732,200 0 2,297,600 0 2,297,600 32.64 33 Intergovernmental Revenues Revenues 144259-187 331220 Fed Em Mgt 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 0 0 500,000 0 0 0 0 0.00 34 Charges for Services Revenues 138325-187 347907 Parking Fees 0 0 0 7,000 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 0 0 0 7,000 0 0 0 0.00 36 Miscellaneous Revenues Revenues 138325-187 362190 Lease Facilities 78,613 15,000 15,000 67,000 0 0 0 100.00 989010-187 361170 Interest Sba 2,948 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-187 361180 Investment Interest 11,255 15,300 15,300 20,000 28,600 0 28,600 86.93 Revenues 92,815 30,300 30,300 87,000 28,600 0 28,600 -5.61 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 919010-187 489201 Carry Forward Of 0 0 5,500 0 0 0 0 0.00 919010-187 489900 Less 5%Required 0 -1,600 -1,600 0 -1,600 0 -1,600 0.00 929010-187 481001 Transfer From 001 1,054,000 1,274,200 1,274,200 1,274,200 1,350,700 0 1,350,700 6.00 929010-187 481111 Transfer From 111 238,600 288,400 288,400 288,400 305,700 0 305,700 6.00 929010-187 481163 Transfer From 163 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 125,500 0 125,500 0.00 929010-187 481164 Transfer From 164 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 0 11,300 0.00 929010-187 481186 Transfer From 186 0 78,000 78,000 78,000 74,100 0 74,100 -5.00 Revenues 1,429,400 1,775,800 1,781,300 1,777,400 1,865,700 0 1,865,700 5.06 49 Carryforward Revenues 919010-187 489200 Carryforward 814,200 1,512,700 1,512,700 1,836,700 2,286,800 0 2,286,800 51.17 Revenues 814,200 1,512,700 1,512,700 1,836,700 2,286,800 0 2,286,800 51.17 Fund Total Expenditure: 499,727 3,318,800 3,824,300 1,421,300 4,181,100 0 4,181,100 25.98 Fund Total Revenue: 2,336,415 3,318,800 3,824,300 3,708,100 4,181,100 0 4,181,100 25.98 Fund Balance: 1,836,688 0 0 2,286,800 0 0 0 0.00 GovMax V5 4 4/23/2018 Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change 287 CRA Taxable Note (TD Bank), Series 2017 80 Grants and Aids Expenditures 939010-287 871200 Principal Other 473,132 456,900 456,900 456,900 473,500 0 473,500 3.63 939010-287 872200 Interest Other Debt 210,955 173,100 173,100 173,100 156,700 0 156,700 -9.47 939010-287 873100 Fiscal Agent'S 152 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 0 1,000 0.00 939010-287 873850 Cost Of Issuance 35,708 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 939010-287 874200 Payment To 5,253,793 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Expenditures 5,973,740 631,000 631,000 631,000 631,200 0 631,200 0.03 99 Reserves Expenditures 919010-287 991000 Reserve For 0 20,000 20,000 0 20,000 0 20,000 0.00 919010-287 992000 Reserve For Debt 0 330,000 330,000 0 330,000 0 330,000 0.00 Expenditures 0 350,000 350,000 0 350,000 0 350,000 0.00 36 Miscellaneous Revenues Revenues 989010-287 361170 Interest Sba 242 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 989010-287 361180 Investment Interest 737 0 0 500 0 0 0 0.00 989010-287 361190 Interest Other 1,624 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 2,603 0 0 500 0 0 0 0.00 37 Debt Proceeds Revenues 939010-287 484100 Loan Proceeds 5,293,293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 5,293,293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 929010-287 481187 Transfer From 187 85,500 631,000 631,000 631,000 625,100 0 625,100 -0.94 Revenues 85,500 631,000 631,000 631,000 625,100 0 625,100 -0.94 49 Carryforward Revenues 919010-287 489200 Carryforward 947,900 350,000 350,000 355,600 356,100 0 356,100 1.74 Revenues 947,900 350,000 350,000 355,600 356,100 0 356,100 1.74 Fund Total Expenditure: 5,973,740 981,000 981,000 631,000 981,200 0 981,200 0.02 Fund Total Revenue: 6,329,296 981,000 981,000 987,100 981,200 0 981,200 0.02 Fund Balance: 355,555 0 0 356,100 0 0 0 0.00 717 Bayshore CRA GrantII 60 Operating Expense Expenditures 138341-717 634999 Other Contractual 19,328 0 18,672 18,700 0 0 0 0.00 Expenditures 19,328 0 18,672 18,700 0 0 0 0.00 70 Capital Outlay Expenditures 138341-717 763100 Improvements 175,809 0 466,191 466,200 0 0 0 0.00 Expenditures 175,809 0 466,191 466,200 0 0 0 0.00 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 138341-717 487999 Reimbursement 70,952 0 484,863 484,900 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 70,952 0 484,863 484,900 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Total Expenditure: 195,137 0 484,863 484,900 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Total Revenue: 70,952 0 484,863 484,900 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Balance: -124,185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 GovMax V5 5 4/23/2018 Account Major Fund Line Item Detail Proforma Collier County Government Fiscal Year 2019 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 FY 2019 Adopted Actual Adopted Amended Forecast Current Expanded Budget %Change 718 Bayshore CRA Grant MatchII 70 Capital Outlay Expenditures 138342-718 763100 Improvements 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 Expenditures 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 40 Transfer In and Other Sources Revenues 138342-718 487999 Reimbursement 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 Revenues 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Total Expenditure: 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Total Revenue: 0 0 190,282 190,300 0 0 0 0.00 Fund Balance: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 GovMax V5 6 4/23/2018 GrecoSherry From: East Naples Civic Association <info=eastnaplescivic.com@mail193.at121.rsgsv.net> on behalf of East Naples Civic Association <info@eastnaplescivic.com> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 3:27 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: April Luncheon Update & Upcoming Events Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up Flag Status: Completed Today's Luncheon Highlights The ENCA April Luncheon Did Not Disappoint. Close to 50 attendees listened intently to a presentation by developer Jerry Starkey for the hotel/condominium tower plans located at the Gateway to East Naples. The Mini Triangle Project at#41 and Davis Blvd. will include a mix of restaurants, storefronts and a high end movie theater. 1 Timeline for this exciting new development is projected to be 2 - 3 years. MAY 4TH CHARITY GOLF TOURNAMENT Registration continues for the Friday, May 4th Charity Golf Tournament hosted by Royal Palm Country Club. Continental Breakfast, Golf and Awards Dinner $120. NON-Golfers welcome to join us for Cocktails, Dinner, Entertainment by Caluha & Cream and silent auction $40. ALL PROCEEDS benefit scholarships and youth programs for children in East Naples. We'll see you there! ENCA MAY LUNCHEON Look forward to seeing you at our May 17th Luncheon at the Players Club & Spa in Lely Resort. Guest Speaker is Sheriff Kevin Rambosk. Details and Registration will be on the web site soon. 2 ENCA SPECIAL JUNE LUNCHEON We celebrate our June luncheon with a special sunset cruise at 6:30 pm aboard the Naples Princess on June 21st. Cost is $30 per person. Please sign up at the May luncheon or inquire at info@EastNaplesCivic.com. Our Valued Members and Guests A great lunch, education and fun had by all! Thank you for coming out and for your continued support of East Naples. ENCA Board Members John Hooley, Esq. and Gina Lostracco Keep Smiling and thank you for your service! 3 Copyright©2018 East Naples Civic Association, All rights reserved. You are receiving this because of your interest in ENCA. Our mailing address is: East Naples Civic Association 11502 Tamiami Tr East Naples, Fl 34113 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 4 GrecoSherry From: GarciaShirley Sent: Monday, April 2, 2018 7:40 AM To: GarciaShirley Subject: CRA public meeting April 3rd 6pm Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency AGENDA April 3, 2018 6:00 PM Chairman Maurice Gutierrez Karen Beatty, Peter Dvorak, Larry Ingram, Ron Kezeske, Steve Main, Shane Shadis, Michael Sherman 1. Call to order and Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. March 6, 2018 (attachment) 5. Community/Business—Presentations a. Mini Triangle- Presentation Bob Mulhere, FAICP Hole Montes (attachment) 6. Old Business a. Vacant Lots—Staff update b. 17 Acres -Staff update c. Redevelopment Plan— Staff update (schedule attachment) 7. New Business a. Mural Review—Jaron fine Jewelry, 3784 Bayshore Drive (attachment) b. Mural Review—Diana Sullivan, 3248 Bayshore Drive (attachment) c. Board Member Reappointment Maurice Gutierrez Ronald Kezeske Michael Sherman 8. Staff Report a. Project update b. Financials 1 9. Other Agency's a. Collier County Sheriff Department b. Collier County Code Enforcement 10. Commination and Correspondence a. Keep Collier Beautiful -April 14, 2018 (attachment) 11. Public Comment 12. Staff Comments 13. Advisory Board General Communications 14. Next meeting date: May 1, 2108 15. Adjournment 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 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 10:45 AM To: david.wheeler@dot.state.fl.us Cc: StrainMark; TaylorPenny Subject: Trio Project Attachments: Trio TIS.PDF;Trio SDP (partial).pdf Good morning Mr. Wheeler, As a follow up to your conference call with Commissioner Taylor and Mark Strain on Monday, March 12th I will be sending you three separate emails for the projects discussed on the conference call. These attachments are for the Trio project that will be combining their entrances with the mini-triangle project. Please email our office if you have any questions. Thank you. shy Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter 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 Trebilcock planning•engineering Traffic Impact Statement Gateway Mini Triangle Planned Unit Development and Growth Management Plan Amendments Collier County, FL 03/29/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Hole Montes, Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 950 Encore Way 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 Collier County Transportation Review Fee—Major Study—$1,500.00 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 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. Digitally signed by Norman J. Norman J. Trebilcock P.E.47116 ,��, . DN:cn=Norman J.Trebilcock ,��•••` TRFl., � P.E.47116,o=Trebilcock `,� P - ..... . eb �� ConsultingSolutions,PA, • Q..•�\C E N Sk •CD•i� Trebilcock ou=Norman J.trebilcock, 20; No 47116 •.:O •% email=ntrebilcock@trebilcoc *' '* P.E. 4 7116 Date:2017.03.29 07:01:47 1:11: ;CC: -04'00' 1 • STATE OF • • S• O R Pt.Ns 4% Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. 'ei`,S/0NA��0- FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 2 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table of Contents Project Description 4 Trip Generation 6 Trip Distribution and Assignment 8 Background Traffic 10 Existing and Future Roadway Network 11 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network Link Analysis 12 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis 13 Improvement Analysis 15 Mitigation of Impact 15 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 16 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 18 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition 25 Appendix D: US 41—from Goodlette Rd.to Davis Blvd.Traffic Data 33 Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits 39 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Project Description The Gateway Mini Triangle development is an approved Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Davis Boulevard (SR 84) and Tamiami Trail East (US 41 [SR 90]). The project is approximately 5.35 acres in size and is located in Section 11,Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. The project is located within the US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). The US 41 TCEA is designed to reduce the adverse impact transportation concurrency may have on urban sprawl control policies and redevelopment. Proposed development located within the boundaries of the South U.S. 41 area are exempt from transportation concurrency requirements so long as impacts to the transportation system are mitigated using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies enumerated in the Land Development Code (LDC), as applicable. Refer to Fig. 1 — Project Location Map, which follows, and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Fig. 1— Project Location Map j �A , e is N j t l K I ' Naples AI /116 1 Si Airport Ao ^ II* fi f PROJECT ai i Naples { c.-,.- ."`. , 4444 g ft $.. a i � ...,,yy r....u. lsi © wn k.tl 4 6 A...!, t x. t 1 Mt- . a * :S S. Y t -T i I 0 " > dd§$ Googk v m � Consistent with the approved Collier County zoning districts and uses, the existing subject site is currently zoned General Commercial District (C-4) which provides the opportunity for the most diverse types of commercial activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational attractions. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Upon approval of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and Plan Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) applications, the project will be developed as a mixed-use project as shown in Table 1, Proposed Development Program. The proposed principal uses are illustrated as follows: - Residential— Multi-family—up to 210 dwelling units. - Commercial — up to 152 hotel suites; up to 74,000 square feet of Retail, Restaurant, Movie Theater, Personal services; up to 60,000 square feet of professional or medical office use. - Permitted uses based on a conversion matrix—Assisted Living Facility (ALF); Indoor air- conditioned passenger vehicle and self-storage; New Car Dealership; any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the forgoing list of permitted principal uses. The units and square footage provided above may be adjusted from the stated units and square footages as provided in a Land Use Conversion Table —this document is submitted as a separate item. The project provides the highest and best use scenario with respect to the project's proposed trip generation. For the purposes of this analysis, Medical Office is conservatively used, as it generates higher traffic volumes than the General Office use. Table 1 Proposed Development Program Development Land Use ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Total Size Code Residential Multi-Family Residential Condominium/Townhouse 230 210du* Hotel Hotel 310 152 rooms Retail Shopping Center 820 74,000sf** Office Medical-Dental Office 720 60,000sf** Note(s): *du=dwelling units. **sf=square feet. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2021 planning horizon. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on November 14, 2016, as illustrated in Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist. Connections to the site are proposed as follows: on US 41— northern entrance — right-in/right- out/directional median left-in access; southern entrance — right-in/right-out access; on Davis Boulevard — western entrance — right-in/right-out access; eastern entrance — right-in/right- out/left-in access (proposed dual left directional median). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 15 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 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: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. The estimated project trip generation associated with the proposed development is illustrated in Table 2. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. Per Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture trips should be reasonable and should not exceed 20%of the total project trips. For the purposes of this report, the software program OTISS is used to generate associated internal capture traffic. The OTISS calculation procedure follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, Volume 1, User's Guide and Handbook, Chapter 7—procedure for estimating multi-use trip generation internal capture, aka "triangle method". As illustrated in Table 2, calculated internal capture values are below the county limits. 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. 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 to be assumed 10% lower than the peak hour capture rate. This analysis calculates shopping center daily pass-by trips at 15% of the gross external traffic with AM and PM peak hour at 25%of the gross external trips. Pass-by trips are not deducted for traffic operational analysis. As such, the total external generated traffic illustrated in Table 2 is computed for the site access turn lane analysis. Table 2 Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions)—Average Weekday(' Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA-PUDA 10,221 258 189 447 407 468 875 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 6 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Total Traffic Internal Traffic (1,300) (15) (15) (30) (56) (56) (112) External Traffic 8,921 243 174 417 351 412 763 1 Pass-By Traffic (743) (18) (11) (29) (53) (56) (109) Non-Pass-By Traffic 8,178 225 163 388 298 356 654 (Net New External Traffic) Note(s): (1)For more details on Trip Generation calculations,refer to Appendix C. In agreement with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study (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 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this TIS, the surrounding roadway network link concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic generated by the project (Table 2,Total Non- Pass-By Traffic). The site access turn lane analysis is calculated based on the estimated traffic during the weekday AM and PM peak hour. Based on the trip generation results, projected PM peak hour traffic is more intense than the AM peak hour traffic (both egress and ingress traffic). As such, the PM peak hour traffic is used in the project access turn lane sizing (PM Peak Hour Enter — 351 vph; Exit—412 vph). Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Trip Distribution and Assignment Projected traffic generated by the proposed development is assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. Based on the estimated PM peak hour total net new external traffic, the assignment of proposed site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour, and is graphically depicted on Fig. 2 — Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour Distribution PM Peak Hr Project Traffic CC Roadway Link AUIR Roadway Link Location of Project Vol.lzl Linin k ID# Traffic Enter Exit Tamiami TrailNSA Goodlette Rd.to Davis 40% SB—119 NB—142 East(1)(US 41) Blvd. Tamiami Trail East (US 41) 91.0 Davis Blvd.to Airport Rd. 20% NB—60 SB-72 Davis Blvd. (SR 84) 12.0 US 41 to Airport Rd. 40% WB-119 EB—142 Note(s): (1)Not a Collier County monitored roadway. (2)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 1 8 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Fig. 2— Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE N Naples Muni Anpoo 40% 40% > • 20% r ' Goggle ifTP PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PM PK HR n INBOUND (40) OUTBOUND Naples Muni Atrputt (EB-Peak SB-Peak (142) ® Direction) Direction .%•.%.*".• re„. EBB °...•' (142) 60 (;2 (SB-Peak Direction) Go gle Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 1 9 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Background Traffic Future projected background traffic volumes are calculated based on approved growth rates and trip bank volumes for the segments of the roadway network in the study area, as shown in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The higher of the two determinations, is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. It is noted that the US 41 (SR 90) segment from Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) to Davis Boulevard (SR 84) is located within the City of Naples corporate limits. The Level of Service (LOS) Standard for City streets is evaluated by comparing the two-way traffic volume at peak hour, peak season with the designated roadway capacity as set forth in the City of Naples Comprehensive Plan. For US 41 (SR 90), the City is consistent with the State's policies for LOS and adopt LOS D, except for the segment of US 41 between Four Corners and Davis Boulevard which is set at LOS E (as illustrated in FDOT Collier County Level of Service Spreadsheet). As illustrated in FDOT 2015 Historical AADT Report, historic traffic for the US 41 segment from Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) to Davis Boulevard (SR 84) shows a negative annual growth rate for this segment (year 2006 —AADT 64,000; year 2015—AADT 52,000). Based on Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance, a minimum of 2%growth rate is considered. Calculations of projected peak hour, peak direction background traffic volume (without project) for the future build-out year 2021, are illustrated in Table 4A and Table 4B. Table 4A City of Naples Traffic Count Analysis (US 41/East of Goodlette Rd. to Davis Blvd.) Traffic 1 2021 Peak Hour Date of Traffic Seasonal 2015 Annual Growth 2021 AADT K and D Peak Direction Count Count(1) Adjustment(2) AADT Growth Factor(3) Background Factors(5) Background Rate Traffic(4) Traffic(6) (%/yr) (trips/hr) March 67,397 0.92 62,005 2015 June 2015 45,270 1.14 51,608 September 45,449 1.12 50,903 2015 December 54,976 0.96 52,777 2015 Average 54,323 2.0% 1.1262 61,000 K=9;D=55.9 3,069 Note(s): (1)As illustrated in the 2015 City of Naples Traffic Counts. (2)FDOT 2015 Peak Season Factor Category Report. (3)Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)6. (4)2021 Projected Volume=2015 AADT x Growth Factor.FDOT-AASHTO rounding standards. (5)Refer to Appendix D. (6)2021 Peak Hour Peak Direction=2021 Projected AADT x 0.09 x 0.559. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 110 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 City of Naples 2015 Traffic Counts and FDOT traffic factors are illustrated in Appendix D, for US 41 roadway, segment located from Goodlette-Frank Road to Davis Boulevard. Table 4B Background Traffic without Project(2016—2021) 2021 Projected 2021 Projected 2016 AUIR Projected Pk Hr,Peak Dir Pk Hr,Peak Dir CC Pk Hr,Pk Dir Traffic Background Background Roadway AUIR Roadway Link Background Annual Growth Trip Traffic Volume Traffic Volume Link Link Location Traffic Growth Factor Bank ID# Volume Rate w/out Project w/out Project (trips/hr) (%/yr)* (trips/hr) (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank*** Tamiami Goodlette Rd Trail Eastll) N/A to Davis Blvd N/A N/A N/A 3.069 N/A N/A (US 41) Tamiami Davis Blvd Trail East 91.0 to Airport Rd 1,580 2.0% 1.1041 1,745 47 1,627 (US 41) Davis Blvd 12 0 US 41 to 1,520 2.0% 1.1041 1,678 14 1,534 (SR 84) Airport Rd Note(s): (')Not a Collier County monitored roadway.For more details refer to Table 4A. *Annual Growth Rate—estimated for 2008-2015 peak hour,peak direction traffic volumes,or 2%minimum. **Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)5.2021 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2021 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume+Trip Bank.The projected 2021 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). Future projected 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. As no such improvements are identified in the Collier County 2016 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and projected future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 111 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions 2016 Peak Dir, Future CC AUIR RoadwayLink Exist Min. Roadway LinkStandard Peak Hr Project Link ID# Location Roadway Ill LOS Capacity Build out Volume Roadway Tamiami Trail Goodlette Rd.to Davis East(2)(US 41) N/A Blvd. 8D E 3,600(SB)(2) 8D Tamiami Trail East91 0 Davis Blvd.to Airport 6D E 2,900(SB) 6D (US 41) Rd. Davis Blvd. 12.0 US 41 to Airport Rd. 6D E 2,700(EB) 6D (SR 84) Note(s): (1)2U=2-lane undivided roadway;4D,6D,8D=4-lane,6-lane,8-lane divided roadway,respectively;LOS=Level of Service. (2)Not a Collier County monitored roadway. Capacity is consistent with similar type roadway. 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, project's impacts are significant on all roadway segments within the analyzed area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at year 2021 future conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate proposed development traffic. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service, illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the studied roadway network. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 112 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS)—With Project in the Year 2021 Roadway 2021 Peak %Vol. Min LOS Min LOS CC AUIR 2016 Peak Link,Peak Dir,Peak Capacity exceeded exceeded Roadway Roadway Link Dir,Peak Hr Dir,Peak Hr Link ID Hr Volume Impact without with Link Location Capacity (Project w/Project By Project? Project? Volume Volume ** Project Yes/No Yes/No Added)* Tamiami Goodlette Rd.to Trail East`" N/A 3,600(SB) 119 3,188 3.31% No No Davis Blvd. (US 41) Tamiami Davis Blvd.to Trail East 91.0 2,900(SB) 72 1,817 2.48% No No (US 41) Airport Rd. Davis Blvd. US 41 to Airport No No (SR 84) 12.0 Rd. 2,700(EB) 142 1,820 5.26% Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report. **2021 Projected Volume=2021 background(refer to Table 4B)+Project Volume Added. ***Not a Collier County monitored roadway. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the site are proposed as follows: on US 41 — northern entrance — right-in/right- out/directional median left-in access; southern entrance — right-in/right-out access; on Davis Boulevard — western entrance — right-in/right-out access; eastern entrance — right-in/right- out/left-in access (proposed dual left directional median). For more details refer to Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. The site access turn lane analysis is calculated based on the potential future total external traffic during the weekday AM and PM peak hour, as illustrated in Table 2. Based on the trip generation results, the generated PM peak hour traffic is more intense than the AM peak hour traffic (both egress and ingress traffic). As such, the PM peak hour traffic is used in the project access turn lane sizing (PM Pk Hr Enter—351 vph; Exit—412 vph). For the purposes of this analysis, the adjacent property to the west is included in this report. This development named Trio Hotel is currently under permitting process and consists of a 12-room resort hotel, 24 Multi-Family dwelling units, 3,145 square feet of office space and 11,798 square feet of quality restaurant space. Site access turning movements associated with this project have been incorporated in this report as illustrated in the Traffic Impact Statement for Trio Hotel, dated April 15, 2016. The estimated overall trips at the Mini Triangle site access locations are illustrated in Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Project Accesses—Northbound Tamiami Trail East(US 41) This segment of US 41 has an Access Management Classification of 3. The established spacing standard for posted speed of 45 mph is 440 ft between driveway connections. The directional opening spacing is 1,320 ft. Based on these criteria, these are non-conforming driveways. The Northern access is proposed to be redeveloped into a left-in/right-in/right-out access by extending the existing directional median for a total of approximately 360 feet. Based on the posted speed limit of 45 mph on US 41 in the vicinity of project, the right-turning threshold volume for warranting a right-turn lane is 80-125 vph, according to the FDOT Driveway Information Guide. The project is expected to accommodate 68 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80— 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated northbound-right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Based on FDOT Design Standard, Index#301 — design speed of 45 mph, the minimum turn lane length is 185 ft (which includes a 50 ft taper) plus required queue. Required turn lane storage length is determined consistent with the number of turning vehicles likely to arrive in an average two-minute period within the peak hour, as illustrated in the guidelines from FDOT Florida Intersection Design Guide Chapter 3.12.12. The existing directional median is proposed to be extended 50 feet for a total length of approximately 360 feet. The left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 85 vph left turning movements during PM peak hour. Consistent with FDOT criteria, the southbound left-turn lane should be 260 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 75 ft storage) to accommodate the overall projected traffic at build out conditions. As such, the proposed left-turn lane is adequate to accommodate proposed traffic. The Southern access is proposed as a right-in/right-out connection. The project is expected to accommodate 17 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Project Accesses—Eastbound Davis Blvd. (SR 84) This segment of SR 84 has an Access Management Classification of 5 with a posted speed of 45 mph. The established spacing standard is 245 ft between driveway connections, 660 ft for directional median openings, and 1,320 ft for full median openings and signals. Based on these criteria, the proposed driveways are non-conforming connections. The Western access is proposed as a right-in/right-out connection. The project is expected to accommodate 35 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 114 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 The Eastern access is proposed to be redeveloped into a dual left directional median and allows for left-in/right-in/right-out turning movements. The project is expected to accommodate 35 vph right turning movements during PM peak hour, which is below the 80 - 125 vph threshold values. As such, a dedicated right turn lane is not warranted at this location. The westbound directional median left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 141 vph inbound left turning movements during PM peak hour. At the minimum, consistent with FDOT criteria, the left-turn lane should be 310 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 125 ft storage) to accommodate projected traffic at build out conditions. The eastbound directional median left-turn lane is expected to accommodate 41 vph outbound left turning movements during PM peak hour. At the minimum and consistent with FDOT criteria, the left-turn lane should be 235 ft long (185 ft deceleration lane with taper and 50 ft storage) to accommodate projected traffic at build out conditions. Improvement Analysis Based upon the findings of the capacity and level of service analysis of this report, the estimated traffic impact is significant for the surrounding roadway network at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway surplus capacity to accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed development, without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service at future year 2021 build-out conditions. Regardless, concurrency will be measured at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP)/Construction Plans and Plat (PPL) submittals when more specific development parameters are available. At such time, should sufficient capacity not be available, the Developer may be required to assist the County with roadway link and intersection improvements in such a manner as to provide sufficient capacity. Based on the results of the site access turn lane analysis, turn lanes improvements maybe recommended at the analyzed project site access locations. A more detailed evaluation of applicable access points and nearby intersections will be performed at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP)/Construction Plans and Plat(PPL) submittals, as applicable. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. Though the project is located within the US 41 TCEA, and because the project does not have LOS deficiency issues, we do not anticipate needing to exercise TDM strategies outlined in the LDC to mitigate for project transportation impacts. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 115 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 16 Gateway Mini Triangle o and G9m-pl-March7IZ a ,�.�'■ ,- §p T ' rizg § {j r . ] : . . \ . . . . )0 ec,v�gwwoo _ : a e cc \ice ' . \ \ 1LLI .— •Ill! ! 2 . % :7, ![/ § 2 ! ' � \ I 80. ® | --1--- _,?.. . . . , . : ——-- - | f ; k §| . ��' �` . . ^©s / w© § i rrE j -- y �. °x g . § \¥ e, |// © « _ , ■! ...°4-.-i2 2 §/ |! i1JN . . t. | \ : s \ \ t ''N;', § q { � � � » 7 1.2i °~ -116 / \ ;` ° & rz . LI � .L) ` , , y | | | | \ \ y z . 51' ` / I' $ a | _____i � � § ■ | m tR A sk (S § \k; c 7 �� a. §§2 i k � ` \� . ƒ 2 _ ; I- ; , | --© > ^ :e - \ : | ...,. 14t ! Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I17 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 118 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 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. Date:November 14.2016 Time: 2:00 pm Location: Collier Counts, Growth Management --2685 S. Horseshoe Drive. Naples. FI 34104 People Attending: Name.Organization.and Telephone Numbers 1) Michael Sawyer,Collier County Growth Management Department 2) Norman Trebilcock,TCS 3) Daniel Doyle.TCS 4) Stephen Baluch-Collier County Growth Management Department 5) Trinity Scott Collier County Growth Management Department 6) Laurie Beard Collier Counts'Growth Management Department 7) Lorraine Lantz Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization 8) Mark Clark-FOOT(via email) 9) Deborah Snyder--DKS Associates(via email) Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title:Nonnan Trebilcock.AICP.PE Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Address &Telephone Number 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202. Nantes_ Fl 34110;nh. 239-566-9551 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager Organization:Collier County Transportation Planning Department Address&Telephone Number:2885 S.Horseshoe Drive.Naples,FL,34104;ph.239-252- 2926 itpvlicant: Applicant's Name:Hole Montes.Inc. { Address: 950 Encore Way.Naples.FL 34110 Telephone Number:1239)254-2000 Proposed Development: Name: Gateway Triangle 'Mini-triangle Location: South of Davis Blvd..north of LIS 41 and approximately 500 feet east of the jntersection of Davis Blvd.and US 41.Naples.FL (refer to Fie. 11 Page 1 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 119 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 Land Use Type: Residential.Hotel,General Office,and Shopping Center ITE Code #: 151 (Mini-storage): 230 (Residential Condominium): 310 (Hotel): 445 (Multiplex Movie Theater): 710(General Office): 820(Retail -Shopping Center); 841 (Automobile Sales) Description: Residential 210 MF du:Hotel 152 rooms:General office 60.0ksf(Includes 20.0ksf automobile storage, 10.0ksf display): Retail - Shopping Center — 73.0ksf (Includes 32.5ksf movie theater). Zoning Existing:C-4 GTMUD-MXD Comprehensive plan recommendation:N/A Requested:GMPA PUDZ approval Fig.1-Location Map 11 PROJECT Go ci Findings of the Preliminary Study: Since estimated new project traffic is greater than 100 two-way peak hour trips,this study qualities for a Major Scale TIS.The TIS will include AM-PM peak hour trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments and significance test(based on 2°0 2°0'3°0 criterion). Internal capture-consistent with ITE residential,office and retail rates. Pass-by rates are assumed as follows:25°0-AM-PM peak hour, 15°0 Dalh'. Roadway link analysis is determined based on estimated project new PM peak hour traffic -net external(non-pass-by). Operational site access-turn lane analysis is based on proposed net external traffic build- out conditions AM-PM peak hour generated traffic. Turn lane design speeds:Davis Blvd. and US 41-45mph posted speed limit: Page 2 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 120 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 lite project is located within the Collier Counts Transportation Concurrency Exception Area(TCEA). Study Type: Small Scale TIS Q Minor TIS ❑ Major 11S Study Am: I3oundaries:Davis Blvd.and US 41 Additional intersections to be analyzed:N'A Build Out:Planning Horizon Y'ear(s):2021 Analysis Time Periods):AM-PM Peak Hour Future Off-Site Developments:N_A Source of Trip Generation Rates:ITE LUC Data-ITE 9th Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: N,'A Pass-by trips:Per ITE.CC Guidance.up to 25%for shopping center. Internal trips(PUD):Per ITE.CC Guidance,up to 20%maximum. Transit use:N/A Other:N/A Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: 2021 Methodoloey&Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates:CC 2016 AI'IR:CC Traffic Counts Site-trip generation:OTISS Software-ITE LUC 151.LUC 230.LUC 310.LUC 445.LUC 710.LUC 820 and LUC 841 Thp distribution method:Consistent with April 15.2016 TIS for the'Trio Hotel at Davis Blvd.and Tamiami Trail East(US 41)-refer to Cie.2 Traffic assignment method: Project trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate:historical growth rate or 2%minimum Turning movements:see Findings of the Preliminary Study Page 3 ot 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 121 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Fig.2—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE N PROJECT 40% 1 .. 20% 1 Special Features:(from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A Queuing:N/A Access location&configuration:One right-in/right-out access onto westbound US 41.one directional left,right-in/right-out access(shared with Trio Hotel)onto westbound US 41, one possible shared(site to east)directional left,right-in/right-out access onto eastbound Davis Blvd,one right-in/right-out access onto eastbound Davis Blvd(west side of site)and proposed interconnects with properties east and west of the proiect—coordinate with FDOT on US 4l and Davis Blvd access locations. Traffic control:MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs:Eta On-site parking needs:per CC LDC Data Sources:ITE Trip Gen.;2016 CC AUIR;CC Traffic Counts Base maps:N/A Prior study reports:N/A Access policy and jurisdiction:CC/FDOT Review process:N/A Requirements:N/A Miscellaneous:N/A j I Page 4 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 122 Gateway Mini Triangle–PUDA and GMPA–TIS–March 2017 Small Scale Study–No Fee Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1500.00 X Methodology Fee$500 X Includes 0 intersections Additional Intersections-$500.00 each All fees will be agreed to daring the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the app@catiat. SIGNATURES Norwt,ttw TYeblocl2 Study Preparer—Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 5 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 123 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will he paid incrementally as the development proceeds. Methodology Review,Analysis Review,and Sufficiency Reviews. Fern for additional meetings or other optional services arc also provided below. Niel hodoloey Review-$500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement,including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s).distribution assignment,and review of a"Small Scale Study" determination, written approval comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement. and one meting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency reviewl Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency detrnnination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Manor 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 offsite improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency"comments:questions. "Maior Study Review"-$1 500 Fee(Includes two intersection anahsis and two sufficiency reviewsi Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation. special trip generation andror trip length study, distribution and assignment. concurrency determination. confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collcctcrfassembled.review of traffic growth analysis.review of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis,review of site access and circulation,neighborhood traffic intrusion issues,any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates,and preparation and review of up to two rounds of"sufficiency'comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-$500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 6of6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 24 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (7 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 125 Gateway Mini geg� —gig and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 it, m , = : = Va . o ■i . ; S2 § ocoo § § 0ERq cr § I Igoao@ ° = . , , , a2 § , . © . ■ ; . EGF / \ l � , , . a2 , 00R , , 0 ; k20 „ m ■ 0 „ 2 0 IL M i ; , ., , ; # �000 „ ,,,, g ,•= 0 .- 0 :-' ; o ; 0, \ I 2 } y( I | 1oRIn ! cv 2Zo § , % Qo . , . � kr § # , § , � / . § [ § \ Z � § , 55 , , , . " ," _ f ° ! ° § � ° ( k § es e } § \ ) ! .9 ! e . > } 0 E : ` § ..2. || . j | c \ . E ! _ { ± C h ± ! f$ I ! ! ) ffl, \ ; i ! ! 72 ƒ (tf ! { ( 2 : 42 V . / 2 ƒ ) ! 7 ! ) \k } £ ® ! ! 2 ! ! 2 _ kf ! ! §§ 1 : 11 8„ \ \ � ` , § ` § ƒ J ) ) 7 r be kCos*bm Solutions,PA Page I26 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:Weekday Page I of 2 I PERIOD SETTING ,,, DATA PROVIDED By ITE Specify the Independent Variable,Time Period and Calcuiabon Method to be used in the calculation of the cumber of Tripe generated in the analyse To record any notes.dick Add Notes above *rre AL'I R1*6011 NRA a 00ANSI E N1FI31920I ANM13110t4661e (wig/cagyi LAND USE t vFID ENT SIZE TIRE PERIOD +dETh04 ENTRY EXIT TOTAL ilksat.IIoilies 01 EI G�apn Los OF YaO v�t 614 613 1227 onim Il merino reuse urns OWN' Y8000r07 LmTi=08742.86 A310-140181 (y� .,. etir twyilip AverageEn621 1242 Q,820-Shopping Center 10066q.Feet Oros lv� i•2... OWOEaay NItGraph Welt OF Vl 2112 2712 5584 _� '4.120-MNdOA-Damp°I" f 0000 sq.thater.. Or eklisf __....,�1 Average �` 1004 1004 2168 Building 36 13 31 indicates a¢e oil at ran9e TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of trips that occur between the Land Use on the left and the Land Use on the right The table i below displays the total number of nips that have been reduced from a particular Land Use The total number of Internal Trips for each Land Use will be deducted from the adjusted Entry Trips and Exit Trips from the previous section To record any note!,click the• Icon above.For recommended values see the ITE Handbook or NCHRP 684 130•ReslOembai CondommmumRwe1110YN 310-Hotel Eat 613 Cen.0na Ent '0 'a (01 Balanced. 0 Domani Entry- 111_,_111. (0, Entry 621 Entry 614 Demand Entry 0_..% 101 BMdIe80m : 0 OOand Eat I0 N. (01 Exit621 230-ROaidamal Condominlullyll/�S�MB 020•Shopping Cater Exit 613 Demand Ent len 7~ (2031. Balanced. 233 Demand VW 2.0 he (251) Entry 2792 Entry 614 Ormond Entry. (1 s 400) 8aanced 203 Osmond Eat 11 116 (307) Exit 27922 230•Reeldentlal CondonnNoinYTI{ —IRaO1N 720.MedicN-Cental olexe Budding E xit 612- Demand Exit: (a f16 RR Balmleed- 0 Wmarmd Entry 0 9, i0r Entry 1084 E ntry 614 Demand Enhy, (3 l (161 Benaed. is Dymond Ex 2 '6 f 2:1 Eait '084 310-Hotel 830.Shopping Center E xit 621 Dimond E,6 =II BB Solenoid. 0 Demand Entry 0 •i6 r0-, Entry 2792 Entry 621 Demand lily: 1 01 Ba(ancect 0 Demand Eel. ,0 1, i0, Ext 2702 310-Motel 720-Medical-Cental ORIc a Building Est 621 Demand Erg. 10 PS tot Balanced 0 DomareE Ery,`0 l'k all Entry 1084 E ntry 621 Demand Erd/E r---1. S BaNnc$d 0 Dwell eitl: L9 .. 6 (0) Exit 1084 820-Shopping Cada ISE-Medical-Cental 01110 a Building Exit 2792 Demand Ea. l3 181 (4) Balanced: 84 Demand BElyr 116 % 11631 Entry 1084 Entry 2792 00mand Ennui / (1121 Balanced.. 112 Damaridielt 22 'I6 i 27a1 Ext 1004 230•Residential Condomemlunnlownhouse .. E INTERNAL TRW'S XTERNAL TRIOS haps: tltisstrallic corn.protjcctstudy'"projeetid-153R98(study=46134 12 191016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 127 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:Weekday Page 2 of 2 9111.111401 11H.n.pg I220-MOdeaTotalTo 1 - °litindlng � Entry 614 1100%1 0(0%) 203(33%) 18(3%) 221 136%) 393)64%) Exit 613 1100%) 010%) 233(30%) 010%) 233)38%) 380162%) Total 122271100%1 0 (0%) 436 136%) 10 11%) 454 t37%) 773163%1 310-Hotel INTERNAL T5•PS 70TAL TRIPS EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 820-Chopping O720•Mentl edical- W TO CondCondominium/Townhousean ownhouse Coder Building Entry 621(100%) 010%1 0)0%) 010%) 0(0%) 621(100%) Exit 621(100%) 010%:• 0(0%) 010%) 0)0%) 621(100%) Total 1242(100%) 0 10%1 0 10%) 0 (0%) 0(0%) 1242(100%) 020-Shopping Center -1.,L rRtFS 720-Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 310-Hotel Dental Mce Total Condominium/Townhouse Building Entry 2792(100%1 233(0%) 0(0%) 112(4%) 345(12%) 2447(88%) Exit 2792(100%1 203(7%) 0(0%) 84(3%) 287110%) 2505(90%) Total 5584)100%) 436 (0%) 0 (0%) 196 (4%) 632)11%) 4952(89%) 720-Medical-Dental Mice Building INTERNAL TRIPS TOTAL TRIPS 290-Residential S20- � EXTERNAL IMPS 810.NOM > ld j To Cw/onMmum�Townhouse Cantor Entry 1084(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 8418%) i 04(0%) 100802%) Exit 1084(100%) 10(2%) 0(0%) 112(10%) 130(12%) 804(10%) - ToW 2168(100%) 18 (1%) 0 (0%) 180 (8%) 214(10%) 1864(00%) 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 0)con 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 230-Residential Condom810n/TOwIlhouae 773 0 773 310-Hotel 1242 40 t% 0 1242 820-Shopping Center 4952 t0 743 4209 720-Medical-Denial Office Building 1954 ,t0�% 0 1954 i Pant Preview gave Analyr Ki I https: otisstratiic.com'projectstudv?projectid=15389&study=46134 12 19 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page l 28 Gateway Mini Triangle–PUDA and GMPA–TIS–March 2017 Analysis:AM Peak Hour Page 1 of 2 1 1 PERIOD SETTING ,y DATA PROVIDED BV ITE Specify the Independent Variable.Time Period,and Calculation Method to be used in the calculation of the number of Tripe generated in the analysis To record any notes.dick•'Add Notes above c17iui.'imMae. kiltafra aseekkiinittatelal ..."4".11"`L$t+4Mir- {AM Peek Nall ) LAND 115E yarrowsB10 tf Si2E 1t PEF000 METw3t7 ENTRY EXIT TOTAL cs,230-RaNMlal g ' ....- fi7e01t La--{�Va1� ar Condomm.lxnndwnfaui! �� lines •v� 21B Weekday Peek FlOt -_--_-s--� 16 7'r Lornaoetorsi+[0--3(r1��s Ci 310-Nom! Rooms rVil i!''.. WNI[�f.Mak FbtlV(rA LJ:! 00 33 01 t.) 020-ShOppny case 1000 Sq Feet Gant rV11 70 f WM ,B•ak PeakamPL adt Viiiy 01 49 130 LdRI.O.iT UWA)+12.20 ' la Lk.ne r-Do0 1009 5y Fen Gros•nil Weekday Peak Nor VT'AV""iea 113 ac 142 aidaq 2 39 10,(Muhl sax out of range TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of trips that occur between the Lana Use on the left and the Land Use on the right The table below displays the total number of tips that have been reduced from a particular Land Use The total number of Internal Trips for each Land Use will be deducted from the adjusted Entry Trips and Exit Trips from the previous section To record any notes,click the: icon above For recommended values see the ITE Handbook cr NCHRP 684 210-11051411111101S COnaoalOi101074 aMap 310-Nater Edt 77 Demand Ext: `.0% (01 Balanced. 0 Demand Entry. II_ % (0) Entry 48 Entry 16 Demand Entry _% (0) Balanced' 0 Demand Eel {.1,Litt) (01 Em 33 230-Ralaerdlal Cenden*aIMTONa*Owa 121-She/po9 Canter End Ti Demand Eke. "51 '% 1411 Balanced: 7 Demand Entry- i0 )11 (7) lorry 01 Entry 16 Demand Entry 3i % (5) Balanced: 5 Demand Eta 12 (1) Bud 49 215-Residential COndemnNundrewnMusa 720-Oardltet-0eraat omnia dimming Exit 77 Demand Exe: 0 10 (Si Salanad: 0 Demand Entry 0 '7. 10i Entry 113 Entry IS Demand Edit (l—is (0) Balanced 0 Demand Ext j2 .... 1. (1) Exit 30 310-Neral 125•Shopping Canter End 33 Demand EA'' 10�1L (0) Balanced. 0 Demand Entry 1 B _IR (0) Entry 81 Entry 40 Demand Entry' 0 X14 (0) Balanced. 0 Demand Eat 0 % tti Exit 45 310.Metal 770-Medical-Dental Omen Building g Salt 33 Demand Sad 0 % (0) Balanced. 0 Demand Entry 0 % i0. Entry 117 D Entry 48 Demand Entry. 0 % tti Balanced 0 Demand Eat 0 % 10. Exit 30 820.Snapping Canter 720.Oladica/Aan0N OtOn a Building Exit 49 Demand E.4 3 ' tit Balanced. 1 Ow10$El*y= 21 (36) Entry 113 • Entry e1 Demand Entry 2 % 1>1 Balanced: 2 Os1dEa$ IM )11 (7) Ent 70 230-Rasidand l CoRdsedntannlowMausa TOTAL NUPE INTERNAL TRIPS Es FtRrfCL TRIPS 1 I I h • :liotisstratlic.com1.r.ectstnd •ro= -d=15389, •i . =46135 12/19/2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 129 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:AM Peak Hour Page 2 of 2 710-1100 1 828•Shopping 720-Metlica4 l TOW I Conor Oantal OfM0 Building Entry 161100%) 0(0%) 5731%) 0)0%) 5(31%) 11169%) Dolt 77(100%) 010%) 7(9%) 0(0%) 7(9%) 70191%) Total 93(100%) 0 10%1 12 (13%) 0 (0%1 12(13%) 81(87%) 310•HMW ItlTERNA,L TRIP, T3TA.TRIPS 720-Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230•Residential 820-1"PPing Dental Office Total CondemniunYTownhouse Center Building Entry 481100%) G;0%: 010%) 0 10%, 0(0%) 48(100%) Eon 331100%) 3�,0%, 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 33(100%) Total 81)100%) C .0% 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0(0%) 81(100%) 820-Shopping Cerner INTERNAL TRP: ^~_ 230•Residential720-Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS COMotn).WneTovanfouso 310•Hotel Dental Office TOW Building Entry 81(100%) 7(9%) 0(0%) 2(2%) 9(11%1 72189%) Ex0 49)100%) 5(10%) 0(0%) 112%) 6(12%1 43(88%) Total 130(100%) 12 (9%1 0 (0%) 3 (2%) 15(12%1 115188%1 720•Medical-Dental Office Building INTERNAL TRPS TOTAL T)1IP3 EXTERNAL TRIPS 230•Residential 710.11•0 100•• , Teal Cesdeedel VTewnhouse CY80te _-' Entry 1 113(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 1(1%) 1(1%) 112(99%) Eon ' 30(100%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 2(7%) 2(7%) 20(93%) __.Total , N3(60%) 0 (0%) . .. , 0 (0%) 3 (2%) 3(2%) 140(90%) 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 fir'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 � --r_ TRIPS m 230-Resenha)Condominium/Townhouse 81 I O j% 0 81 310-Mote) 81 (0 )% 0 81 820-Shopping Center 115 (20 )% 29 86 720-Medical-Dental Office Building 140 \- 191 0 140 Print Preview Save Analysis l 1 ll htt is:iotisstraffic.cotnraro•ectstud nro'ectid=15389&study=46135 12/19/2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 130 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 I PeakPage1 oft Analysis:PM Hourj 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 Trill generated in the analysts.To record arty notes.drek r Add Notes above, Kowa:c 14401. Mao ta+av33., nAM .k uL lipetwadhgetr 1 LUC USEESSEPEESIIINT SIZE 1111e5 PE700O Elm( moor( Cut TOTAL ea, 230-Resident". oda..eeianRwwlaus. 13wealasMale a ate" rwteekeay P.ak Fla ro 01. 14 36 110 .0• _�r 1*ex 4.310•Morel Roams ilii yes- Feed./ed.y peek —: A4 VIP e t6 45 91 tt1dd11 ttLl��.... _.__.. t7,620-Shopping Center I t000 S9 reet cro;p3 7a" (Weekday Peak I1oiTioi),Graph Lot 235 255 490 te,772 Medical-MAN ESN Its Feel _,-.y tt 55, .intim Lott Up Vall3 52 132 ISA �..._,-.sett WNYrq i�IT l.ii L liaid•5a .vi ..6i a...Oat ortango TRAFFIC REDUCTIONS INTERNAL TRIPS Specify the percentage of trips that occur between the Land Use on the left and the Land Use on the right The table below displays the total number of trips that have been reduced from a particular Lana Use The total number of internal Trips for each Land Use will be deducted from the adjusted Entry Trips and Exit Trips from the previous section To record any notes,click the^ icon above For reconintended values see the ITE Handbook cr NCHRP 684 230-Rearer05al cnn4ORhI**tlfote 1MYp � Tie.Hetet Exit 36 Demand Ext i 0 j% 101 Balanced 0 Demand Entry. 10 t" (0) Entry le Entry 74 Demand Entry. (i--3% (0) Entwined 0 Demand 5.4 0 (0) led 45 230-Resreenitm Csndomnd04dTenanto00. 020-Shopping Cantor Edit 36 D0100110 5n11. 53 16 1191 Balanced. 19 Demand Entry i I-1.1 121) Entry 335 Entry 74 Demend Entry 31 % 1231 Balance! 23 Demand Ertl 1t- {3i) a.tt 255 230.R001001621 cen0enlMWrftawhouse 220-akeilleaBoantal Mice 004)4409 j Exit 36 Demand Ext. 0 % SirBetencad: 0 Demand Entry ,T )% (0) Entry 5: Entry 74 Demand Er4r L: i1) Balanced 1 Demand Ext: 12 (3) Exit 132 310-Matte 120.Shopping Cerra Exit 45 Demand Fir*' nig) (0) Balanced. 0 Demand E0My1 ori tp, (0) Entry 235 Entry 16 Demmd Enny: t• 1' 10) Balanced. 0 Demand Ent l0 )*. 101 Ent 255 310.Natal 7211-lasalleaBOoneal Canna Bunning Exit 45 Demand Eat. Figh 10) Balanc.4.. 0 Demand Entry. j0 )13 (0) Entry 52 Entry 16 Demand&dry: Epli 10I Balanced. 0 Demand Eno. '0 x% (0i Eel) 132 020-Shopping Centre720-WMa1-0YMM 0110.Budding F : Exit 255 Demand Eat: 1% () Beancrd: 0 Demand Entry lit )119,(111) i.ry 02 Entry 235 Demand Entry: I2^,-111, 151 Beleeet 0 Demand Ext iZt 110 4301 Boll 132 230-IlMdmllee CemMlYrtRwiMsa t0TAL TRIPSINTERNALTRiP$ EXTERNAL TRIPS 1 httr::lfotisstraffic.com/rro-ectctudv. ro.cctid-15389: •i r ==46136 12/19/2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 131 1 I 1 3 I Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Analysis:PM Peak Hour Page 2 of 2 310-Hotel _....__.__1020-`u$_ I 724•11 I TOY I _I Ilulleng Entry 74(100%, 0i0%1 23(31%) 10%) 24(32%) 00(11%) Eel) 361100%) 0(0%) 19(53%) 0(0%) 10%5% (7H7%) Total 110 11 00%1 0 (0%, 42 (38%) 1 (1%) 43(10%) 8T 411%) 310-Hotel INTERNAL T4:F_ TOTAL TRIPS 720•Medical- EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-Resleentul 820.Shopping Dema,OTce Total Cane ontnlumTownhouse Center Building Entry 461100%, 010%, 010%, 010%, 0(0%, 46(100%) Ext 451100%, 010%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 45(100%) Total 91,100%I 0 t0%1 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0(0%) 91 1100%) 820-Shopping Center INTERNAL TRIPS 230-Residential 720-Msdka4 EXTERNAL TRIPS CondominlumTownhouse N0.Hot l Dental OOka Total SulldIng Entry 235(100%) 19(8% 0)0%) 5)2%1 24(10%) 211(90%1 Eel) 255(100%) 2319%) 010%) 813%) 31(12%) 224(88%( Total 4901100%, 42 (9%) 0 (0%) 13 (3%) 55(11%) 435)89%( 720-Medical-Dental Office Building INTERNAL TRIPS TOTAL TRIPS EXTERNAL TRIPS 230-ResldemW „0-IIa1M $20.Sh(1p1n0 Ts% Condorneniummownhoup CaaOe iiy I 521100%) 0 10%; 0(0%) 8(10%) 0(10%)—..1 44(95%) Balt 132(100%) 1(1%) 1 010%) 0(4%) 90%) 126(95%) Total 104(100%, 1 (1%) 1 0 (0%) 13 IT%) 14(8%) 170(92%) 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 ii'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-61Y TRIPS 230-Residential Condominium/Townhouse 67 (Q )% 0 67 310-Hotel 91 C° )% 0 91 820-Shopping Center 435 QC-1% 109 328 720-MedkoLDenla)Office Binding 170 (0 ) 0 170 Print Preview Save Analyses htrts:l/otisstraffic.comftr,'ectstud tro'ectid=15389&study=46136 1219'2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA 9 32 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix D: US 41 - from Goodlette Rd. to Davis Blvd. Traffic Data (5 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 133 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 ,.. QY ? c0 O V r I( I.11 R O N W O W W W O N V h h W W V W M O h V 0 W ln M W V O O LU 0 r r t� wA N r. 4) 0 CO N r h 111 10 0 p N M CD <O V W N C f0 r CO N wA M W O N N d x NMM M M M Lii N OO r h O) V wA N CO V 1.0000103 W h h CO 60 0) N !O tO h V O E x G cVV0 7 n2N VOM p O11 N N V O)NMWtlA fli N O M NWO) /O N W M o W V W (0 /OQ I*** Vt0O MJ72 ,7Oirt.. r01 , MM -pOO4NO"- WWCORMOoC0 N M V V V V o)1,- in W r CO co V V ,_ co V UI M M CO V W 4_ h 10 O !O OO C. C. M CU INI CC Z C7 QY � 004 1 F. N (0, CIM r e.co co M1 to h h l0 CO W O N f71 h N M co h 1A N 111 01 CO_ (O P. x I11 O co W N CO O r f� 0 V V CO CO CO V CO p N N a U) W Tr W CO r O CO O O O V O 1- tl x r N CO M M CO VIe--CO V r M N M N N V N V M M f0 V to (0 e-to V co V (0 (0 h M T V pp.... tqA (pO t O 00 N N V U)C. N CO COQN C. C. h p Vp N O 1D t0)Op O t NA COQQ�� h V V CO qMqpp tO CO sO� MMP CO W O 0) OM) co O C 1V OV r co CO LO O 111 O N- M M r N M CO OV) t0 0 O CO .0O N N N R M O�+I M NtI S co of r V 10 co er a N C CO CO her OC OO Co O of w0 a(0 h M C CC t O Q r re V N co co co OI Vco O O o mote- V N N O CO OO CO V W O) N OO 01 CO W IA WW V N N O V 14 a- K coO h fO V t0 Off.A N C "' M N N M Q CO CO M N M wn co co R 0 C CO CO CO eN- 10A R 01 N «% w a x r N N N N N m d M a+ « i t F- to OOpp 1a1aAA /pp 14 p@�1O OD h O 40 OO N 010 C. M (O CO 01 CO V r r W M CO CO h h W N 0. M O V' rh- V N O.tr W W 0 V co co O gOQp f- co 0 cg V N h CO 1� ffOO 0pp0 V WOp, 1" Wo V r O N O r b r 0 O) h to r M r M N rW W OO V IA Net W W Q1 NN rNMMNML0Tr'N V W M NNMMNr MNMwOMet ODNCMto4rw0efr _ 1 f l p Co of Tr 11'1 W 00 O coR h O) N Nrpp V N O hN h CO V (0 W co co N O M M O OD 0 go 0 U O N+ O hOf0h N WOW V ON ONANhNNMhNWWOMMV M V OrhNt O M cu Z1x rNNNNN N 1 0 CD ee}t (V 1A no p W i :i ;2 0n OWO NM hIOVO DNI co C4 O W b O C C. w Tt r N COMv- 0 CO N a go 00ONO) OI O • pp 7.01co-W r /p01 q V r co co O V V V h r co co r b h N co 0 h h OO co W M W O I.I. 7 N co N M M M R R 1 r` N 7 0 M M N M .0 N N e)N M 4p N V OD 00 O MOO V N Uf .c a > • 1 R 2' 1 O 1- 1:e V O W O h o O) C) s_ a Q O W O V h N C. ;q4) W CO O 0 V) N IA N V C. C. W (0 V CO N O P. V O CD Of to V d 0- r r h to N h u.,,._- W 0 r . to 0 V f0 N M O fO V Of N V 0 V W N lA M W O d fn a x N M M M M O+)tOjr 0 fO r h 01 V V OO W V wA M M W N h h W m W W W OO CO h V h r 1 d r 0) N.to r. 000p pC) '1t�t WNm N OhfiN N VV QQ11 N tO r N h N 0p MNr 10 Of ID M W M r 11f Of c{co W tO L Qo h /O44NO %4V MOON W NwM WMM W t0N W wANoMMM Of ttoA Df V O CO LO r h 0) M r M M CO CO co,N W CO W CO W CO O Of W 2N NM V V K .440,,- t0(0r100)vet wA W et u)C)MW C) N. f00W ODh NM N I E 0 0 IL x gcc W _ T J I U 0 W x ~ O co• 4 0 O - m Z ^—Iw Z > I- 0 I 0 I- M I x O ox 3 - OU W eexmnooz V �Om - OWQW W ZmOZ 2 W N /0/) j > F- Omz› F- Q W W 1.1.1111 1- W WWZ .. t- tLLL > ptLxKOwJxZilZa'mOWOQ » W > W O1XxOQ J 1- 000 00W OZWOZ0 Z � ZJWZZW W W OZI- W .WJZtnt--- Mux) OUZ � < = 00< > 0 > xl-- » 1- 01- 0K0WJ � OOrrrr YLLCO Wtt tt } Oxu) u_ } QxQF- NQQNQu) Oa � > O O tL Q a I- JO V V V V VarJx WOQZU W JZ2F2ZxOSxOOxZJxQu) 00 COu) wm Q :3QQOCtNO-' J :) QF- OF- W F- 2hF- xd' OQOF- W W 0 0 » D > ppd O x O E U N O tL O m h corIA O W M of T m M 0 0 0 V Z 5 4.. • Z Q W O v. W W N M M MMM er ? a R CO WV N wA 0 OND CMO CO C. n ti ti C. O M CO OWO Qf oc0I~DZ rr _I 1 • Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 134 I Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 2015 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 0301 US 41, N OF SR 951 MOCF: 0.89 WEER DATES SF PSCF aaaas:aaasaaaaaaaaaaas:::masersaaaaa.a=aa -asaa-----------a-masa -aa= 1 01/01/2015 - 01/03/2015 0.95 1.07 * 2 01/04/2015 - 01/10/2015 0.94 1.06 * 3 01/11/2015 - 01/17/2015 0.93 1.04 * 4 01/18/2015 - 01/24/2015 0.81 1.02 * 5 01/25/2015 - 01/31/2015 0:90 1.01 * 6 02/01/2015 - 02/07/2015 0.88 0.99 * 7 02/08/2015 - 02/14/2015 0.87 0.98 * 8 02/15/2015 - 02/21/2015 0.86 0.97 * 9 02/22/2015 - 02/28/2015 0.86 0.97 *10 03/01/2015 - 03/07/2015 0.86 0.97 *11 03/08/2015 - 03/14/2015 0.86 0.97 *12 03/15/2015 - 03/21/2015 0.88 0.99 *13 03/22/2015 - 03/28/2015 0.90 1.01 *14 03/29/2015 - 04/04/2015 0.92 1,03 -- --Va 76512(115-,1)111 2 B.9% f.T1l-- 16 04/12/2015 - 04/1B/2015 0.97 1.09 17 04/19/2015 - 04/25/2015 0.99 1.11 18 04/26/2015 - 05/02/2015 1.02 1.15 19 05/03/2015 - 05/09/2015 1.04 1.17 20 05/10/2015 - 05/16/2015 1.07 1.20 21 05/17/2015 - 05/23/2015 1.08 1.21 22 05/24/2015 - 05/30/2015 1.10 1.24 23 05/31/2015 - 06/06/2015 1.11 1,25 24 06/07/2015 - 06/13/2015 1.13 1.27 25 06/14/2015 - 06/20/2015 1.13 1.27 26 06/21/2015 06/27/2015 1.14 1.28 "ft---aria%MI5----afAITAIC -'TAT I..fir-- 28 07/05/2015 - 07/11/2015 1.14 1.28 29 07/12/2015 - 07/18/2015 1.14 1.28 30 07/19/2015 - 07/25/2015 1.14 1.28 31 07/26/2015 - 08/01/2015 1.13 1.27 32 08/02/2015 - 08/08/2015 1.13 1.27 33 08/09/2015 - 08/15/2015 1.13 1.27 34 08/16/2015 - 08/22/2015 1.13 1.27 35 08/23/2015 - 08/29/2015 1.14 1.28 36 08/30/2015 - 09/05/2015 1.14 1.28 37 09/06/2015 - 09/12/2015 1.14 1.24 --19--O 248.1- i(122R. ---1ii Hi 40 09/27/2015 - 10/03/2015 1.08 1.21 41 10/04/2015 - 10/10/2015 1.06 1.19 1 42 10/11/2015 - 10/17/2015 1.04 1.17 43 10/18/2015 - 10/24/2015 1.02 1.15 44 10/25/2015 - 10/31/2015 1.01 1.13 45 11/01/2015 - 11/01/2015 0.99 1.11 46 11/08/2015 - 11/14/2015 0.97 1.09 47 11/15/2015 - 11/21/2015 0.97 1.09 48 11/22/2015 - 11/28/2015 0.96 1.08 4---iiia 4 600--tilAi it--- i -- 51 12/13/2015 - 12/19/2015 0.94 1.06 52 12/20/2015 - 12/26/2015 0.93 1.04 53 12/27/2015 - 12/31/2015 0.93 1.04 * PEAK SEASON 03-MAR-2016 11:17:49 83013PD 1_0301 PKSEASON.TXT Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 135 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 H H H 0r� W W 0 u Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q d Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a 0) s a n o N CO SO 0 u) w 0 03 0 m m m to In 0) n 0 H w II m -11 el 09 m v0 m 0) m , N a N c m N 0 NI U IIQ W Cu Cu W Q W W W W Cu W W W W W II N1 O .r N Ol rn m O N N N '0 N N N N O. z X O U 1I u) u) h N N 0) N h h h u) h 0- h h u) 3 • s W II In N N U) N to N 0 In 15 u) N In If! N to 0 0 u ZO a a a 11 0 In to o o u. o 0 O a N o 0 0 0 O 0 a QZ 0 II m 01 m m 09 0) a m 0) 0) 0 0 0) 011 0) m n R 0 5 W u .r 0)Z 0 W 4 I (.1 a ..W N HZ 90 H N II U0 U U C) V V U V V U U U V V V W O H Q U 11 a 3 II h o 0 0 0 rr 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 3 O 112 2 O O O O hh O O O O N O O O O O W Qn i QW m V• N N to m t0 In m 0 '0 CO ri CO 01 CO 10H1'0 m In r+ m m u) H N +s Cl m N m E. 0 CO II a W H H 0 0 0 0 r+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zw a Z 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o H O Z 0 0 0 0) CO 0 0 0) N 0 0 CO N N 0 0 t!) 0 O a H ti N 0) w h 90 CO 00 10 0 el '0 to C. 0 II W F CO U N .-+ N .r .1 N H CO N H H N H0 W r-. .•; FW PO a a w A 3 3 3 3 3 n n n 3 3 W CO 3 n 3 z N w c n� H N aan QH w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 r` 0) n t� Z 0) 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N 0 H'r' 0 dI m N N o 0) In 0 to qI 0 0 0 0 0 u) i-7 1-1 0 r+ N CO 90 N t0 (0 N 90 0 m C 90 @ 0) H z Q Q U Cl - N r+ .-' CO H N .r r~ N Ha 0 w u 0 O Q zw au° vwN r0 0110) 0) 0) 0) 0) Z z z W W 3 z W z W n cn H O • a 7 a a. u) Z > In u) N to 3 .a • a Q a z z N U O H 0O In U O I DI w to v 10 z C) U 0 C.) Z n u m QQ .a-7 H a 0 U N U 0 U U Zwa 0 A ° x Hwa a u a a Pi Rd an . aQ • H H w W W 0 0 N Cu W Fi C> H a I�-1 CO>,0 Qa wN Ix ti ' H a a 0 a 0 ca aHW a aH e U Cu 00 00 a 0 0 n n HCH N CO U U 0 0 U a. U I-+ N V I-+0 a U 3 r\+ W 0 a > 4 a nQ Q W W Q u) a 0) 0 a \ o \ o n a u w n i w m o a a m '0 a ... a e w a m 1. 0E .,E . " c 94 a a a a a X4CO0 Z Co 0+ a X W \ Q n 0 n 0 0 WOZH U N N 0 W H CO O H to 0., a a \ aZ Q 0 0 • 0 m a N Cu a Cu a h W Q C.) W a s 0 N \ Cl) < 00) 01-40) H H 0 n 10 0 H m 0 a W a Q Q m 0)0 a \ CO I 0) - U CO Z \ n \ n z0 W W W H Q a 0 QQyr + a n 0 0 al CO a H • m m U H H a H W W O Z O 0 Q 0Q a W E CO WV O 0 WHHW n 0 U 0 U 0 a H 4 F ^H Q W a n W .3 0 W GO 0 II m n n � • 00) 0zQ n 0 za0 0 H Cu H Ha a Z i .r r+ .r 3 H Z 00 0 a H O H O H H 0a Z H a a 0 I C CI C ' 0 0 W to a n a co '0 Cu b 0 I-I I I 0 v 0 0 C, h a Q a W I Z a 0 U H I CU n n o CO • 0 (9 H W3 n IHSH 0) Z l 0 0 0 n 0 0 • -- 1 Ir Q c 0 X300 N N'1\ \ \ 0 \ • el .-I a • \ \ • \ • \ Z 0 l 0 0 O \ 0 0) N u) c r1 V• ri VIn Q 0) H < •• H 101 On 01 0 0) N 01 CO W W 00,, C.) n m 0) V #3 Ca S4 II el o w 1 tz a CO a a a a a . a CO a a CO a a m 0 1 CO n Cr) 01 n CO n U a Cl) 0) U n U CO n •• •. ••.. O N GI r4 n Wa0(0J SO Na It a0Qa o a ii H a+Haa N (y n H n U H 0 W W raid C W W H- £ W II V• c r+ 0) v m N 0) 0 0 m u) 10 h 03 N H O H H urn 0 C N CO CI u) u) 90 h h h h r N h I-10 rit\ Ir II 0 Ir 01 ri r+ r) H H H .r H HH R. n SG Q O 1u n 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,r Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 136 • Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 • 1 I . W dH H H m W u 0000000000000000 O OW W e-iWWWOINW' N1Or.s! a U y'NNMNNNNNNW UIMWMN W W x M D H H04z HOZ> piDo W 000004rMWh0000.000 M Q. QANh,ONTWN4r0. +h Nl,h M 11IIX Om,nututinu�u�,.a+n�nNr.nrN' MWXW 4 U1 Ul o m m m UI o m N m U1 m U1 N m W C Cu Ca H Hm N2Efw HHH>+ Z N 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v M O N O O O o 0 0 M M M N 0 0 00000N0\Wy0NMOQ,NOy' 1WW0 HU Z 0 ChM01410100000O0410OH WWW. H...... H.. a E. a 4. W>.ur a °a°rCu W I' m(n CC H wCEl0 2444QH W EE.Z < HQ 0�Ma 0 N '£Z,-. 110 04.7 O Z MH'ON HFC .. 0 0000000000000000 W I E 'J U r+ l-1 0000000000000000 . H 2. 44 H 0004OOlnlc)(nlnlnustn4044 0W -E. WZfY W 0 )oh to u)ti)ul to W r.N 0o 410,CO Ur <HW H 0 N a W NNNNNNNNMMMMNNNN 0 4,E . 4HxE. u. 0 ZZZXXZXSZXZZXZXZ E. ZEHN W oa W0 11 W CoCC r. H Wda> <040 N OZN c'C r+ ._Wr' Op<t W >>EO . H H 0 Cr 00000000000000 o Ha 14 0 DE. 0 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 Cr 0 0 N M 44 0 H 0111Ut U1004004U100U10U1 (4 0 ,0 0111@ l4'O W Nr.0001 W h4 £ HO WW NNNNNNNNMMMMNNNN aW UMW. ~a 0 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW ulllla W UW>F (C D N 1i 0 r (0 004.00000000000 4 a 0 a F 0000000000000000 Cu 0 U C a 0000000000000000 1 </y Otft.0000MOOOMM0000 NMH000M,0 r1V .O W CO 111N Q d UINNUIUlNNUINto�Ol0U1mmm E-r 4. M O N 0. >C N . M 91 W W 1 MTEMN..001 W h,0U1RMNe-10 0 H e.g I .4 r4 r.r...r.o0 00000000 0 r G7 10000000000000000 U M >. I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA P a g e 137 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 FDOT Florida Traffic Online Identify Information Page 1 of 1 Site Information Feature 1 Road Name TAMIAMI TRL Site 030124 Description SR 90/US 41,SOUTHEAST OF CR 851/GOOD Lt1 IE RD NP24 Section 03010000 Milepoint 12.34 AADT 52000 Site Type Portable Class Data Yes K Factor 9 D Factor 55.9 T Factor 4 TRAFFIC REPORTS (provided in r format) Collier County Annual Average Daily Traffic Apnual Vehicle Classification Historical AADT Data Synopsis 030124 Vehicle Class Histo Print this window. Close this window J { httfito.dot.state.fl_usiwebsite/FloridaTrafTLOilinedisplavAttributeDataAll3.as 11 212016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 38 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 Appendix E: Turning Movements Exhibits (3 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 139 Gateway Mini Triangle-PUDA and GMPA-TIS-March 2017 U V Z W ..... re , 1 C y i. 3 c, N v T N \„ Z [- 1 -, I I I I o 0- ' , T! 1 eII / � / // y, it. / x II A s / C.,�I --- ... .E // O i7 ! H I O z• L—I / r I y: p / I t WI i ®a l r ' ``\ s it n a s I �ili . / �J� //�/ // t i 1 I ll0 - ,i1%1 l' - \ .�/% j/ r Piallift i tip MM I a , a / � / i I if Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 140 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 NORTH ATs 30 Davis Boulevord ♦♦♦ r.. 7 ^ m Toff PM PEAK ENTER/EXIT ffi 74 VPH/43 VPH n bpi o4 ze CCp 1/1 )s I 's LEGEND yi��pp 34 ----# PM Peak Hour Project Traffic JIM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Trio Hotel PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 28 April 15, 2016 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 6,3 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 141 Gateway Mini Triangle—PUDA and GMPA—TIS—March 2017 ,: W Z } a. 4Z <,--2,-,,-, p , '. i g. m = o Z — j � � p .� = U = J O „3 ui Z QV F W � = p Z , 4 y wa o1" tZt - D o - - - - -�; -1� -, o , —a { F � 44 hm k w, ,',...i V / c l� \ z g i iji ' • Ni F z eJ 2 Z ,— /Ne i' < I I I I ' 1 Q f%/ .? / w III _ \ ." / J if O /3" 7 / t c 1 1 I i f i, tom. 4.+Q t i Lc) v ~ �,. // a- HI. ,aez // H= II ti $ / CO "s2 ii e � 1I .'I I 1�1[w — /� r ...2 p -.--2 _ ...,, . „ ........*rj,,,..,, ,/,,,,,, / ,: II i 11 J I 'IIIIII‘114.1.111111111r21"1.0* g i/ 9 1 " NMS* - Ii { iH -,/ ' .;,?7 I I ritot 7 x <// il i i I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 142 GREEN/OPEN SPACE S ZONED:C-4-GTMUD-NIXD iA GREEN/OPEN SPACE REQUIRED/ y DAVIS BLVD(100'ROW) PROVIDED 10%00.54 AC LEFT IN NOTE: T T i RIGHT INPUT RIGHT KOUT GREEN/OPEN SPACE AREAS ARE NOT -{ FIXED ON THE MASTER PLAN.THEY WILL 10'LANDSCAPE BUFFER VARY IN LOCATION THROUGHOUT THE NO BUFFER— SITE,AND WILL BE LOCATED AT TIME OF REQUIRED 11 14 SDP APPROVAL. 14 —NO BUFFER 14 TRACTMXU RED UIRED 14,r GTMMUD CMXD 1.72 AC 1 SEE SHEET 2 OF 2 FOR TRACT MX)] ZONED:C-4 SCHEDULE OF DEVIATIONS 6101.04 AC 1 I TRACTAID 0.77 ACA) / GTMUD-MXD.- AND NOTES ki,A �TyL / �` =' POTENTIAL "iii . INTER-CONNECT Cl S'J a & TRACT MXU Q N. RIGHT NLEF�UT 'N 7� 1.83 AC . K ill CITY OF NAPLES , :r- w ZONED: PD OSc N,49& j 11 4<`=t` 1` ZONED:C-4 ``, /? p,.;`_ GTMUD-MXD I- 0 �� ZONED:C-4 ;..£. %; I- I r-- GTMUD-MXD RIGHT INRDUT , SCALE:I.0500 = MINI TRIANGLE MPUD EXHIBIT"C"MASTER PLAN ' SCALE:1"0500 LAND USE SUMMARY TOTAL SITE ACREAGE 0535 AREA PERCENT TRACT MXU(MIXED USE) 04.58 AC 86 TRACT ID(INTERNAL DRIVE) 00.77 AC 14% TOTAL 5.35 AC 100% SHEET 1 OF 2 p. 303 ti Way SUBJECT SITE ® MINI TRIANGLE HOLE vns.e oo"'irs EXHIBIT C ® .®qe.�. ., MPUD �� No MASTER PLAN .,o .m. ® SCHEDULE OF DEVIATIONS SCHEDULE OF DEVIATIONS(CON'T) I.DEVIATION FROMLDC 5.05.06 D.3.C.FACADE/WALL HEIGHTTRANSTTION ELEMENTS,WHICH STATES THAT TRANSITIONAL 13.DEVIATION FROM 4.06.05.D2.A.-TREESAND PALMS,WOECH ALLOWS 3 PALMS TO BE COUNTED TOWARD ONE REQUIREDCANOPY TREE ELEMENTS CAN BE NO MORE THAN TOO PERCENT TALLER THAT THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF THE ADJACENT BUILDING,BUT NO MORE UP TOA MAXIMUM OF 30 PERCENT OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF CANOPY TREES,TO ALLOW POR 3 PALMS TO HE COUNTED TOWARD THAN 30 FEET,AND NO LESS THAN IO FEET ABOVE THE EXISTING GRADE,TO ALLOW FOR BUILDINGS UP TO 166 FEET ABOVE MEAN ONE CANOPY TREE OR UP TO TO PERCENT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF REQUIRED CANOPY TREES. SEA LEVEL,REGARDLESS OF THE HEIGHT OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS. 14.DEVIATION FROM SECTION 4.06.02 TABLE SA.-TIES TABLE IDENTIFIES THE TYPE OF BUFFER REQUIRED BETWEEN LAND USES AND 2.DEVIATION FROM LDC 50508 114A.1.VARIATION DI MASSING,WITCH REQUIRES,IN THE CASE OF BUILDINGS 40,000 SQUARE FEET ZONING DISTRICTS.THE DEVIATION REQUEST IS TO EXEMPT THIS DEVELOPMENT FROM THE OTHERWISE REQUIRED 10 FOOT PERIMETER OR LARGER M FLOOR AREA,THAT A MAXIMUM LENGTH,OR UNINTERRUPTED CURVE OF ANY FACADE,AT ANY POINT MUST BE 150 LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM ADJACENT COMMERCIAL ZONED PROPERTIES AND TO ALLOW FOR A PER0.IIRERLANDSCAPE BUFFER EQUAL FEET,TO ALLOW FOR A MAXIMUM LENGTH,OR UNINTERRUPTED CURVE OF ANY FACADE OF OP ID 300 LINEARFEET AND TO TO THE REQUIRED SETBACK WHICH IS EITHER 0(NO BUFFER)OR 5 FEET THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN DEPICTED I4 THE MPUD EXHIBIT GS,LANDSCAPE AND ARCIETECIURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. DEPICTED IN THE MPUD P30001T C-3.LANDSCAPE AND ARCIHTECIURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. 3.DEVIATION FROM LDC SODS DM.ROOF TREATMENT'S,WHICH ESTABLISHEDMIIMUM REQUROMUITS FOR ROOF TREATMENTS, IS.DEVIATION FROM SECTION 405.04,PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW PARKING FOR THE MPUD TO BE PROVIDE AS FOLLOWS: TO ALLOW FOR SUCH ROOF TREATMENTS TO BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE DES/GIING ARCHITECT AND TO ALLOW FOR THE +� DESIGN DEPICTED IN THE MPUD EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPE AN � D ARCFBTECTURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT rnrE£T, 34 Y - v'44.4;,e _ -' PE RM, • He. LOO per... • 4.DEVIATION FROM LDC 60508D413J AND LOS08 D4.B.I-WALL PLANE CHANGES WHICH REQUIRES THAT BUILDINGS SUBJECT TO 5.04rH141 LSp.runV • THE PROJECTIONS AND RECESS DEPTHS REQUIRED IN SECTION 5N5NBD.4A MUST NOT HAVE A SINGLE WALL PLANE EXCEEDING 60 SMpppin6(AMRr 1 per 250lif. PERCENT OF EACH FACADE,TO ALLOW FORTUE DESIGN DEPICTED IN THE MPUD EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. Y fpr MO9,f, 5.DEVIATION FROM LDC 5.05.IND.10.CI-ROOF TREATMENTS,WHICH REQUIRES THAT WHEN PARAPETS ARE USED,THEAVERAGE THIS REPRESENTS A DEVIATION FROM THE LDC REQUIRED PARIONG FOR HOTELS OF 1.1 SPACES PER ROOM TO ALLOW FOR I O SPACE PER HEIGHT OF SUCH PARAPETS MUST NOT EXCEED 20 PERCENT OF THE HEIGHT OF THE SUPPORTING WALL TO ALLOW FOR SUCH ROOF ROOM,ANDA DEVIATION FROM THE LOC REQUIRED PARKING FOR MULTIFAMILY RESE)EMTAL KNITS WHICH REQUIRES THAT I SPACE ; TREATMENTS TO BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE DESIGNING ARCFITELT AND CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN DEPICTED IN THE PER UNIT PLUS VISITOR EARRING COMPUTED ATOS PER EFFICIENCY UNIT,035 PER 1-BEDROOM UNIT,ANDA PER 2-BEDROOM OR LARGER j UNIT,TO ALLOW FORA PARKING RATIO OF IS PER DWELLING UNIT. MPUD EXHORTC-2,LANDSCAPE AND ARCLHTECI'CARAT.DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. i 6.DEVIATION FROM LDC S 0508.401 B.-GROUND FLOOR,WHICH REQUIRES THAT PRIMARY FACADES ON THE GROUND FLOOR HAVE 2 16.DEVIATION FROM SECTION 401.02 G.2 THAT REQUIRES AT LEAST 30 PERCENT OF THE GROSS AREA OF THE MPUD TO BE DEVOTED TO f OF LISTED FEATURES ALONG AMINAIUM OF 50%OF THE HORIZONTAL LENGTH,TO ALLOW FOR SUCH FEATURES TO BE AT THE USABLE OPEN SPACE,TO ALLOW AT LEAST IO PERCENT. 1 DISCRETION OF THE DESIGNING ARCHITECT AND CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN DEPICTED DI THE MPUD EXHIBIT Cl,- LANDSCAPE 1 AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. NOTES: 1 I.DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 406039.1.THIS SECTION REQUIRES AN AREA AT LEASE EQUAL TO IO PERCENT OFTHE VEHICULAR I TO TO BETIEMPUDIFPROVIDES LVEESI THEFOLLOWINGSES UP TO III YAND DWELLING ENS. 0.ALLOWaIiLEUSE6: USE REDUCED PERCENT, DHATIC INCLUDES BOTH LANDSCAPING UENDAREAS.PUBIC DEVIATION ISFOR TITORALCULATDDN •OPMTO 152 Fer SUITES(OROTERUP TO RAN0WEUASIENT LODGING GISRU UNROOFEDVEICULAR USE THAT THE WILL BE ETWrill Il DESIGN COM,. EIS ER)EXHILY INh@I1D RNI'ERVALO5 SQUARE OR VACATIDNREMALSUITES): 1I II •UP TO MOM SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL,RESTAURANT.ENTERTAINMENT.AND PERSONAL SERVICE EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. •UP TO 60000SQUARE FEET OF PROFESSIONAL OR MEDICAL OFFICE USES. 8.DEVIATION FROM LDC SECTION 4.06.03B.I.THIS SECTION REQUIRES THAT AN AREA OF AT LEAST I PERCENT OF THE SIZE OF ; THE VEHICULAR USE AREAS MUST RE DEVELOPED AS GREEN SPACE WITIHN THE FRONT YARD(S)OR COURTYARDS OF SHOPPING NOTE THE ABOVEMA%1MUMS MAY BE EXCEEDEDTHHROUGH UTILIZING OF THE CONVERSION MATRIX CENTERS AND RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND MUST BE INADDTIION TO THE BUE.DDIG PERIMETER FLAMING AREA PROVIDED IN THIS RAND.S.M.TO THE FOLLOWING LIMITATIONS: REQUIREMENTS.THE DEVIATION IS TO REDUCE TINS TO3 PERCENT WHICH MAY INCLUDE LANDSCAPE AND PUBLIC USE AREAS, •IN HO CASE SHALL THE MAXIMUM TOTAL DAILY TRIP GENERATION EXCEED 815 TWO-WAY Pm PEAR I SUCH A PATIOS,PLAZAS,AND SIAILAR PUBLIC PLACES.THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN CONCEPTS HOUR UN.IUSTED TRIPS. DEPICTED INMPUD EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPE ANDARCHITECTURAL DESIE4 SUPPI.F.MENT. • MITY O ARESIDENTIAL USES AN 000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL, RESTAURANT, o OTHER ALLOWABLE COMMERCIAL USES SHALL BE DEVELOPED, 9.DEVIATION FROM 4.06.05.13.1.INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS.TIES SECTION REQUIRES ONE CANOPY TREE PER REOARDIJSSOF AM'CONVERSION ALLOWANCES SET PORTHHEREP'. 3.000 SQUARE FEET OF PERVIOUS SITE AREA,OR ONE CANOPY TREE PER LOT,WHICHEVER IS GREATER THE DEVIATION REQUEST II TO EXEMPT THAT DEVELOPMENT FROM TMS REQUIREMENT ENIIBELY.THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN CONLEPT6 DEPICTED INM PED EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPEAND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. 10.DEVIATION FROM SECTION 4.06.05.0 BUILDING FOUNDATION PLANTINOREQUIREMENTS,WHICH REQUIRES THAT,FOR I BUILDINGS 50 FEET OR GREATER IN ZONED HEIGHT,BUILDING FOUNDATION PLANTINGS BE PROVIDED IN AN AMOUNT AT LEAST EQUAL TO 55 PERCENT OF THE COMBINED TOTAL OF ALL BUILDING FACADE LENGTHS MULTIPLIED BY20 FEET TO ALLOW THAT 1 AREA TO BE REDUCED TO 20 PERCENT OF THE COMBINED WIDTH OF ALL OF THE FACADES.THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONSISTENT WTTHTIE DESIGN CONCEPTS DEPICTED IN MHPUD EXHIBIT C-1,LANDSCAPE AND ARCHRECTUHALAI.DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. II.DEVIATION FROM SECTION 406.02.C.4 TYPED BUFFER THIS SECTION REQUIRES LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHIMS AND PLANTINGS TO BE PROVIDED BASED UPON ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH THE DEVIATION IS TO REQUIRE A BUFFER WIDTH OF 10 FEET, j REGARDLESS OF THE WIDTH OF THE ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY.THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DESIGN CONCEPTS DEPICTED D4 MPUD EXHIBIT C-2,LANDSCAPE AND ARCHfTECNRAL DESIGN SUPPLEMENT. IL DEVIATION FROM SECTION 4.06.02 TABLE 2.4 THIS TABLE IDENTIFIES THETYPE OF BUPFERREQUIRED BETWEEN LAND USES AND f ZONING DISTRICTS.THE DEVIATION REQUEST IS TO EXEMPT THIS DEVELOPMENT FROM THE OTHERWISE REQUIRED 10 FOOT I PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFER FROM ADJACENT COMMERCIAL ZONED PROPERTIES AND TO ALLOW FOR A PERAMECER LANDSCAPE BUFFER EQUAL TO THE REQUIRED SETBACK WHICH IS EITHER 0 MO BUFFER)OR 5 FEET.THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE 1 CONSISTENT WITHTHE DESIGN CONLEPI5 DEPICTED BI MPUD EXHIBIT C-L LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN i SUPPLEMENT. ® A SHEET 2 OF 2 f ,, H SUBJECT SITE m MINI TRIANGLE .,p,0. M� ++0 m1°"'"� m .�..r.,r.r, MPUD HOLE PI„d,Q„�„ EXHIBIT C f ,,,,,, ..m. ., .... �""¢ ABS A�.„m.RrN„Ta MASTER PLAN rMp>: 1 I A A 1 168'MAXIMUM BUILDING 160'MAXIMUM BUILDING BUILDING HEIGHT HEIGHT (TYPICAL) (ABOVE MSL) (ABOVE NAPLES AIRPORT BASE ELEVATION) I i I i I E I I NAPLES AIRPORT BASE ' vi ELEVATION 8' (FEMA ELEV=7'+1'=8') ' i MSL=0' j I BUILDING HEIGHT EXHIBIT C-1 NOT TO SCALE i I aaE Beare Way SUBJECT SITE °' ,u,.a, MINI TRIANGLE me Naples,FL. . „ ( )ssa200 BUILDING HEIGHT I p MPUD HOLE MONIES Cada al + TEXHIBIT C-1 i.� — ab NOTED { GrecoSherry From: BosiMichael Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 7:59 AM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: OchsLeo Subject: additional e-mail for the mini-triangle petition Attachments: triangle-e-mail.pdf Good morning Commissioners. Please find attached an e-mail received relating to the mini-triangle petition that is before you today that was in avertedly omitted from your package. I will bring hard copies to distribute at the hearing. Please consider this a one way communication. Respectfully, Mike Mike Bosi, AICP,Zoning Director, Collier County Growth Management Department 239-252-6819—Office 239-784-7461-Cell Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXivgT. 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 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 11:21 AM To: david.wheeler@dot.state.fl.us Cc: StrainMark; TaylorPenny Subject: mini triangle project (#2 email of 3) Attachments: Mini triangle site plan 4-3-2017).pdf; Mini triangle Revised TIS - 03-29-17.pdf Good morning Mr. Wheeler, As a follow up to your conference call with Commissioner Taylor and Mark Strain on Monday, March 12th I will be sending you three separate emails for the projects discussed on the conference call. These attachments are for the mini triangle project where the turn lane(s) would be considered. Please email our office if you have any questions. • Thank you. Sherry isco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter 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 From: Rosemarie Young [mailto:rosemarie.young@rosswmcintosh.com] On Behalf Of Ross McIntosh Sent:Wednesday, February 07, 2018 11:18 AM To:StrainMark<Mark.Strain@colliercountvfl.gov> Cc: Ross McIntosh<ross.mcintosh@rosswmcintosh.com> Subject: Gateway Triangle Bait and Switch As you are aware,the Collier County Planning Commission will consider proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment language pertaining to the County-owned 5.35 acre Gateway Triangle on Thursday, February 15. I have attached excerpts of their Proposed GMPA Amendment Language for reference. Allowable Uses and Restrictions II.A, B, C, and D have been with us since Real Estate Partners International (REPTRS)first responded to the County's RFP in December, 2015;the uses under E are new, and raise the question whether A, B, C, and D are nothing more than bait for a car lot and self- storage switch. How ALF, Self-Storage, and New Car Dealership will produce the"legacy mixed use community that becomes the catalyst-project to set in motion a decade or more of redevelopment and infill for the Gateway Triangle and surrounding area",which REPTRS promised in 2015, eludes me. An excerpt of REPTRS's December 15, 2015 cover letter is attached. It is my belief that the highlighted promises accurately articulate the ambitions of the Bayshore Gateway CRA and the Board of County Commissioners and the principles outlined in the Gateway Triangle Overlay District for the redevelopment of the Gateway Triangle. Approval of ALF, Self-Storage, and New Car Dealership will sabotage those ambitions and goals, and will ensure that the current vehicle sales and industrial character of the East Naples Gateway is preserved for posterity. Is this discussion the preview of the Collier County Planning Commission? If so, I will prepare a more comprehensive presentation for Planning Commissioner's further information. Please call me at 239-213-1425, or email me with your advice.Thank you. Ross W. McIntosh Licensed Real Estate Broker 720 Goodlette Rd.N Suite 303 Naples,FL 34102-5656 239-213-1425 - Office 239-791-1221 - Fax ross@rosswmcintosh.com