Loading...
Backup Documents 03/22/2011 Item # 8AC0LJ,lF,RCOFNT1 FLORIDA RI QTEST FOR LEGAL GAL ADV ERTISING OF PUBLIC HEARINGS To: Clerk to the Board: Please place the following as a: ❑ Normal legal Advertisement (Display Ad%_ location, ctc.) ❑ Othci: .K. x.F ..Y. X,<%" %:c.K ## runt#.##. .S #a;k # %.Fd'.:e,"Y,e1,.R43${'.. .. t:is # #kl. #:.k.' {: r::; #ir'. n.. �:!. F'kiY : ✓:Y d: r, ;.#% Fi '%'.'k #ry;YR *x #:kt +Yr'Mt %.''$# Originating Dept/ Die: Comprchenstve Planning Section Petsou: Marcia R. KeudalllSenior Planner Dale: 2/1 5120 1 1 Peuunn No. (It ❑one, g(vc httct descupl.ivn i 2010 Cycle G(vfP Amemdmentl. incluelhtga 2008 Petition (CR- 200R -1). Yeudoner: (Name & Addlev ): D. Wayne A:uold, (,r Gr{dy Minor, 1800 Via Del Ray. Boiwa 5ptmgs. Pl, 34134: Rich Yovanovich. Coleman. Yovanovich Ar Kor,wr, P, A., 4001 't:unlaml nail North, tiuitc I3 Naples.. Fl _ ,4105. \mne & Address of any person(s) to be notified b) CiCA, s Otfiec. tit more space i, neede(. attach cep imie shret) N/A Iiearnl,; 1) loic xB('C BGA t)ther Ru)ucaed Ht mmg date: March 22, .'.01 [ Based on adccnlsi-rnenl. appearing 20 day, h[ lore heating; Novw,papci(,) to be used (Complete onlg if inq)onam): x Napics Daily News ❑ Odic[ ❑Legally Rcquoed Proposed TCxt; rinelude ICgill dctcription & common 1,sl.uion & S¢c: See Atullted ' r 1pamor ,ttitionfsl, if any & propomed healm d vc: Sct>nralc Cover 1) r.: PC11110n fee al& I , ivertisin� osf? z Yes ❑ No It Yes, whal aCCoun( should ba charged too advemshtg costs: In At �-� WS]1$ TO 45DO i Zz�Zo t2ecieviced bv: Divisiou Administralor or Wsiunee Date I ist Attachments: Adverll,naL,nt Ragrest and Copy of *PT,iW' RrsoLmon DI4l'RLBl,TfON INSI'RC CTIONS A. ],or hearings before BCC or BLA: Initiating person to complete one coy and obtain Division head approval before submitting to County Manager. Note: If legal donunent is involved. fie cure that any necessary legal review, or request for carne, is submitted to County Attorney before submitting to County Nl:mager. 'The Manager's office will distribute Copies: ❑ County Manager agenda file: to ❑ Requesting Division Clerk's Ofrwe ❑ Original B. Othrn cCaim�,: Initlahne Dmsion head to appm,v and subtmt original to ( fork', (A 1 Ice, retaining, a cop} for file. :.nt Max.'s # #rk #knv.+:w F. N -a - #Yk 'kK x, .: %t #Y .I K t...: �..• ,n :.... -:..:. .arts# - {:t t a: k. Frey, #'; .+tr, -rtt Krb..,r.., i - # #.t x.r >: FOR CLERK'S Of FIC.E USE ly - DalcRcdcnal�"- l'$�,�__ hate of Pehiu Kcal mv� (i _ �.. Date Ad%eurscd _. r Ann P. Jennejohn #84 From: KendallMarcia [MarciaKendall @colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 7:26 AM To: Minutes and Records Cc: Bosi, Michael; Brock, Mary; NeetVirginia; Patricia L. Morgan; RodriguezWanda; Weeks, David; Lorenz, William Subject: 2010 Cycle GMP Amendments Transmittal, including Wellhead Protection Advertisement Request(s) Attachments: BCC Ad_Request_2010_Cycle_ Trans_ALL.pdf; 2010 Cycle BCC GMP Transmittal Legal Ad 20 Day.docx; 2010 Cycle w_10_5 and 08- 1_Ad_Map.pdf; BCC Ad_Request_2010 cycle Wei I head. pdf; BCCTransmittal Ad Wellhead_Protection_CPSP- 2010- 2.docx; Wellhead Protection Map_Rev_1_12_2011 -A.pdf Please process the attached advertisements and acknowledge receipt at your earliest convenience. Also, please forward confirmation(s) for final approval priorto processing. Thankyou! 2010 Cycle BCC Transmittal Amendments Advertisement: 2010 Cycle, CPSP - 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection BCC Transmittal Amendment Advertisement: Cordially, Marcia Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Phone: 239.252.2387 EFax: 239.252.6675 Email: marciakendall@colliergov.net 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. J.. [ a ­Si I c c March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and furnish proof of publication to the attention of Marcia Kendall in the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. The advertisement must be a 11112" page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111- 138317 - 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 ACCOUNT NUMBER: 068778 • a • 1 !P8 A March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and provide the Affidavit of Publication, in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to the Board Minutes and Records Department. The advertisement must be a 111/2° page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111 - 138317- 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 ACCOUNT NUMBER: 068778 1 • • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolutions, for amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT 'I'O THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. v Petition CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITYAFFAIRS. ME, 1 • Petition CPSP- 2010 -2, staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE /FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] RESOLUTION NO. 1 I - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ME RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ➢ Petition CPSP- 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing ± 22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] t 1 • RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -4 and C -5 zoning districts with a requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3rd Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN • DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) a f >.. �o o c '�Q o�tixaY� o c ARP RD. Fl 9 S.R.- 951 Ai p £ ❑ C N g I( w C.R.- 951 "l 0 9 5 � � y N v N LEE COVNtt V ' S 1.� � h a i ' t S.R.- 29 mm 9 N f0 if T 29 SR. -29 9 ,s W o m HENDRY CWNi 4 a R u F z A9 O � N TT � � E C n9 g u lu C F rF a A m MDE CWNi BRORfMD CWNV s es l I s z a i s I s i s 09 1 s OP i s a► i s Lt i 1 s 91, 1 Acct. #068778 February 22, 2011 Attn: Legals Naples News Media Group 1100 Immokalee Road Naples, Florida 34110 Re: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (Display Ad w /Map) Dear Legals: Please advertise the above referenced notice on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Please send the Affidavit of Publication in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk P.O. #4500122420 WE March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and provide the Affidavit of Publication, in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to the Board Minutes and Records Department. The advertisement must be a "1/2" page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111 - 138317 - 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 /_T41016111 ilk 9 . 111 di IA 4 3911- 41 -Y&I.1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolutions, for amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITYAFFA IRS. 2 ME Petition CPSP - 2010 -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE /FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Lem RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP- 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing ± 22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] ME RESOLUTION NO. I I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. r Petition CP- 2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -4 and C -5 zoning districts with a requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3rd Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN 4 • j • DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) k 8A T 46 S T 47 S T 48 S T 49 S T 50 S T 51 S T 52 S I T 53 S AlNMO OtlVMOtlB A NWO 30V0 W m C � w m Om 'Q ¢ u o W w = LL 2 N Om ¢ u z W uNWD AACWH W O m 6 Z oz - ml eL =tl5 W O N ¢ fiL -us Z N g d I m N of N U w llNIIOJ 33l N O N I N N N V) J tq m a U jl U w 'atl tltln - -_1 ak • g¢ uo g Mexic O as of Gulf �= �g< 0 1 • Ann P. Jennejohn To: Naples Daily News Legals Subject: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CPC - 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) Attachments: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP - 2010 -5, CP- 2008- 1(3- 22- 11).doc; CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP - 2010 -5 & CP- 2008- 1(3- 22- 11).doc; CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008- 1(3- 22- 11).pdf Hello again, Please advertise the attached DISPLAY AD w /MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Thanks again. Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252 -8408 (Fax) 1 T • 1 • Ann P. Jennejohn From: postmaster @collierclerk.com Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 1:05 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Relay) Attachments: ATT249684.txt; CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP - 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Your message has been successfully relayed to the following recipients, but the requested delivery status notifications may not be generated by the destination. leyals @naplesnews.com Ann P. Jennejohn From: Sent: To: Subject: ok Emery Pagan • j Pagan, Emely [EPagan @Naplesnews.com] Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:55 PM Ann P. Jennejohn RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) Gegar Inept. Naples Daily Trews 1100 Immokaree Wpad Naples, AEG. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 Email: legals(a_naples news. com From: Ann P. Jennejohn [mai Ito: Ann JennejohnPcollierclerk.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:49 PM To: Pagan, Emely Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP - 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) The Planner from the Growth Management has asked if the below /highlighted text can please be added to this Display Ad. (Bottom of page 3 attached) I've attached a notice with the added text, I hope it fits in the space allotted and nothing has to be rearranged. Please let me know if you anything else from me. I've included her e-mail request J Ann, This one needs one minor modification. After each Petition Title, it reads in caps "TRANSMITTAL HEARING ". However, behind petition title CPSP- 2010-5 it is missing. Please have them change to the following: Petition CPSP - 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the f A southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 Sou , Range 26 east, containing + 22.83 acres. TRANSMITTAL. HEARING [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Once done, this is good to go to print. However, please re -send revision to my attention for my files. Thank you: Cordially, Marcia Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Phone: 239.2.52.2387 EEax:239.252.6675 Email: marciakendall@colliergov.net Under Florida Law, e- rrtail addresses are public records. ltyou do not wantyour e -mail address reh.ased in response to a public records request do not send electronic mail to this entny. Instead, contact tliis office 6y telephone or in writing. From: Legals NDN [mailto:1ega1s9naplesnews.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:04 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) TICKET# 231 - 182531 ATTACHED please REVIEW notice & send your APPROVAL via EMAIL. Should you have any questions, changes or corrections, please contact me via EMAIL. No verbal changes or approvals accepted by phone, via email ONLY. Emery <1'agcin LegafElept. Naples Daily News 1100Immokalee Wpad Naples, DEL. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Noamae —my give, Thal lee eoibiC.Unry BaaN at DESIRE eolninl¢¢Imen 11111 hole a punt a halt on pbeii. Marts 22, .11 m The Bva,e of Caamy Cmaeeg. men Chemne, 1 1 1 1 tem, collar Ease, Gwernmem Genres YP E h'nlaml ia111. Naples nn ea. la e, ma Lamm11va110l me mlow11ng County Ballston, br emene'nent, tc the C111 11 County GoMh MUNMenonl Plan. The Myst, NN cnmmm.. ei A FIR AM. p,,,a, al the he...... to YDi emc emmannaron an ameremeall to lee FIE- L IXT Lau Ell del dine FNUe LAID HAS Mapantl Map Genet; the 11 Ole. Area MaGw Plan aid Ooleen IS All Meti Plan FILL re 1111-Mao dine Mep Gerl lei DISIFFlal to the Flonea Peparmenl o' Gomn 'I'll Fllalvs, The PLSOWTICN title, are as Io1111— ea fit SOUTH RON NO 11 SOLUTONOF THE BOARD OF COUNTY gMMISGIONEASEobeff NO AMEND MMU 1O THE COLLET COUNTY GRCNTH MANAGEMENT PVW, OIIURFANCE NO Ri AS AMENDED. SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SULFATE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANOERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SU9UMTNK T FOR CERTAIN USES AMC FURTHER- MORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF TIE AMENDMENT TO THE FL ORIGA LIE - PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. orld- LP-mm.1.E nR,thatrganami Set m the OULS, LOL we E�>mN I' SEA Cmwm Management File to moem me lAngi ^ee If the RAHISSul Basch FLAT NNyheomool oal L'A'ANG to alloy a aronrvLSUparmalket Pnyslwl Nmeas HOLY cmlMObby lli, 1.11 1 11111 mug stma ane egraereenl Ni ... .be IF ,Y-Ell he 11 RUN phase eI lieffer XXJEA 1s -ial lu m of NUFFO sq eat, lo, PArcel1 one¢ BraelolJ SNU�,x USEFUL oely�a erall naumum eevelo anon IS ul, y IL0Uy00 I �f,'ieuivt .1 re Teo: of cornnmlcialII uses an Earce11 l to,man; th 1,oApar Cmishh HaRgual Trrlo1len ..eF A,Rg co 1101 IT TRANSVE SE LRoaesn[Lrvmgslcn m SecM1m T,TowesniplASOUlhflaope'[6 wl. TRANS!AITTALIIEAHIN,= jLOOrdnalor: MIC11Ne MOSCa, MGP,P rclpal Planned RI SOLUTION NO 11 A RESOLD ZION OF ruf BOARU OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- SEAT TO III COLLET COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ORDINANCE 89 Q5. AS EMENDED, SPECS COO I'/ AMENDING IFit Pat ORE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LANLI USE MAP ANTI IAA1 SERIES... FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITAL OF THE AMEapiTO TELL I, MEDIA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS PNMon CPSP-g016g Sall pelhlon RemeslinA wienements to the CUP U YdYj UbeNeel m la FN are de UI MIN SO Map SydRo EFLUE . )ITUA I, meets th..a,lg,vGSleway in aeyle B.""MMMILIS OreRay IBARTRO1; NAG FLUE Pdlc/ 5,1, moely app -oghty a th, FILIAnn In101Llxnmemial Stater ctu MpEthe.bIIhlMPYpWII.IMap; HIRAXIIIII.UM 2M Map Senwlorellecl onna,aliarvc etc; maFe FLUMbountlarywrrcGionsln ru,L a.. and, E HOLD, c rest Bale IT maFe..,If, ISIDILLlve to. Mvmons. TRANSMITTAL HEARING C—minatal: DevM Weekq AICP, GMP Mari FI CRIVTION NO If - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING ARAI MODELS TO R C FOR ICE COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 P5, AS AMENDED, SPEGIFI -N OF AMLNUING IIIE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAE AND MAP SERIES TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM UAVIS BOULEVARE COUNTY BARN BOAC MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS SET LEVARCCOU NIYBARN ROAOFESIOENTIALSLIBUISTRICT AND FUITHERMORERED OMMENDING TRANEMITHOOF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. 0� IR SOLU11OO 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY GOMMIdSIONEPS PROPUGNG AMEND RENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWM MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE He 05, AS AMENDED. SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LANO USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LFNU USE MAP AMC MAP SERIES, TO REMIWE IN IT ENTIRETY, THE GAME BOULEGARNCCUNN BOARD ROAD MgEO-UCE SUBDISTRICT AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA CEPALT SENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. PNII11en CPSPGSISOU Sal paonon HARIEiing an amenena1t 1. IRA FNUre Lanc Uae Elemanl n F DISH, OFF Use Map ale Map Gees to moeH the Off- BoWmarNGOUnry Bem TOM M xeOUI S, belsler:Irydralff", eom mimeuseREIRantial,anellm11Gng III mad- oloewelllnqunlspA, FOR - vpo¢slgyrepeahngihe yeardAncimes anlirely theS i v of Oavla BIW. SR Rdl ane Gooney Barn lead 1n Setlmn 8, GASHIRp IF I—R Ranige 11-11 1111.01 acme. TRANCM11TEAL HEARING lLaxdlrgai Corby BCnmlel. Abi Prnmpa11 Plaeeed RESOLUTION NO I1- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GELLER COLD HE FLORIDA PB CP0.SING AN AMENDMENT TO III COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MALL AGFMLNT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89115, AS AMENDED SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE SOL.LET GALL AREA MASTER PLAN, INGLUUIi USE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND M AP SERIES AND FURTHERMORE REARRESTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPAITMI:NO OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, Pel on CP-3IXN�1,P 1,nga IF "'0" he GOesn s Area ldyg191Pfbi eN.on re aputoRCai lguea Rase Pan F4W¢ LS011t xMgg3n11 M➢2SVI45.loomaie the Exlaiea 6M1ON pmg Gen er SUOei¢ oallow m of 1111,...areieeLOlaan xoiW US aoIIM1e FI eeongno-o aoeln9 elahcia,w end some aaas of me C S he C s.....iaN Ge agrm ryei e.I., pen, 11aaeL.a an the sell die. of Gmeen Yet, Beffunul Extending from value, Blvd tie sm.t Nmh,SC In Sauhhe 4. ThAtrup 44 South Raege PT Eat co ,G t,Tg of 110.80,1 ,, TRANSMITTAL HEARING C aorel ig ior: Mkhele Weve, Al., Pneclpal Planned jl Cost COUSIN Florida All 11 a PARG hi to appear end 0 heard OSHA of the Deopasae G h Manageme Plan Omenememe ell be made avellaM, far mpetllm RIM USE DevNOpmml Se�lcge Dept, Coro' he. Sol, Ressing Section, 2800 IN HoraeYroe De, Npbe, FL beNem the hours W BSS A.M. and I5; 00 P.M., MonOay IMOOOh led, FuMermpe To mafema6 By be mode available sa mspeclim el Ile Dover Gouts CbMa Cruse. Fouts Flwr, Suite 401, Odbx Cwmy Gwanmme CenmT �I Tanolml RXI, Nast, one week prior to the schali lea'Ing. Any 0ueaflan¢ Plelny fo the MAILenls ahwM be THARe to Ina Dome erealrae Panne, Seollon. III 11mi Ned even the FBI Is Tha III Ell Odd to March YL,.11, Will be read dins oon¢Ide,ed al this pui hey, If a person Om:rOas to appAN any oennm made by The Chaer Comty III of Cwnry COMMS ...... A .IP A of,:'Io any mortar cmmanM at such meeting or I...... be wiy Agee a record al Thal 1,Ialinv. ALL fa a Wmav may nets 10 a tell a verbatim of al the IHea dings is H.U. , AhAh ,¢card,rowdy, The ixAL, alb anea,c. upon Ahmh m. SHMAl Is m I. basadee TV, aJmahJllyw naWSV nody4 oldar lopedlagyfe ynGlnq, yoaa nitleea to 0, 1, they e. %ea P Ere Ddlle, POLL, Ioat M35 aenam aslifast Sc)lias - MESheIMCDetohouseDIc, total MSIglnaml'rell Supp Stile 101. s sthis, Fel,i mp]W E.....i90 the Begged wo house Co es,Off, sled lliromng erwsfor the heanrlq lmpoired arc avalMde In the B.rard of Dounvy Garnrnisvmery nlra POSTED OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA Na Panre. Mmo-,e amuff, Cnasrnu � d • Ann P. Jennejohn 6 8A From: KendallMarcia [MarciaKendall @colliergov.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:44 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) Yes! This advertisement may now be sent to print. I hank you very much! Cordially, Marcia Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Phone: 239.252.2387 EFax: 239.252.6675 Email iiiarcial<endaII@colliergov.net 1Jnder Florida Law, e -mail addresses are public recordk It you do not want you re- mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, coutact this office by telephone or in writing. From: Ann P. Jennejohn [ mailto: Ann.Jennejohn @collierclerk.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:37 PM To: KendallMarcia Subject: FW: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) Hi again Marcia, Here is the notice w /the modified text. May I give them the "go ahead" to process /publish this one? Ann From: Pagan, Emely [mailto:EPagan @Naplesnews.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:10 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP-2010 -5 & CP- 2008-1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) TICKET# 231 - 182531 ATTACHED please REVIEW notice & send your APPROVAL via EMAIL. Should you have any questions, changes or corrections, please contact me via EMAIL. No verbal changes or approvals accepted by phone, via email ONLY. Emely 'Pagan Lega(Dept. Naples Daily News 1100 Immokafee Wpad Naples, TL. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 Email: legals(cD_naplesnews.com From: Ann P. Jennejohn fmailto: Ann .JenneiohnC&collierclerk.coml Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:49 PM To: Pagan, Emely Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) Em, Please add the below highlighted text to this Display Ad. (Bottom of page 3 attached) I've attached a copy of the notice with the added text. Please let me know if you need anything else. • Petition CPSP - 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing ± 22.83 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] From: Legals NDN [ mailto:legalsCalnaplesnews.coml Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:04 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CP- 2010 -1, CPSP- 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010 -5 & CP- 2008 -1 (DISPLAY AD w /MAP) TICKET# 231 - 182531 ATTACHED please REVIEW notice & send your APPROVAL via EMAIL. NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Kim Pokarnev, who on oath says that she serves as the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County. Florida: distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida: that the attached copy of the advertising. being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on March 1. 2011 Affiant further says that the said Naples Dailv News is a newspaper published at Naples. in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County. Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier Counq'. Flonda. for a period of I year next preceding the first publication of the attached copv of advertisement and affiam further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, been or corporation anv discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. ( Signature of affiant Sworn to and subscribed before me This 3rd day of March.. 2011 (Signature of notary public) ;ro +N"' � �; KAROI E KANGAS Notary Public - State of Florida ;y. < My Comm. Expires Jul 29, 2013 x` Commission # OD 912237 real ayt iip m aq 3m pangs Aagt BtWutl ;uapivi n I •dlaielpawiut sett[ ispue salpocl op3q ''h1 �snti ta a4e[ toi s s mom t� xNdm;4ilenattana xalto alp tp!m t :`1eat8 alai. #xu p;rig a ua ptp 30POP matt sJU, ml t) NabUd0 Ou ,PU4 am Pap! op E ta4p1 /llau}� 'm3aop aahl of am aorm of a' 1 PRT pttalti s tagwtu AW i.. "-woui swailt'anfl.' B a�ltoi +lel klgw:13 Pq I '10cytt13i; . yu19 to Ainfi i • PW iu 2Am the Co +R I p /tllonpetll uo amer! dds Reateratloa P 9 W��+4 19wdxplelsno]'a �taHalrltadto I -'f� PN* bi1l141f WNeAU y011itflaq•Jae6ib; tCL IHCiaFti,�C�, Oaa CO P Aratuos of eaea)L Ac le Of $'9 .. .up a ni Alu ild I two Am%Mamamsl�'1laM,s•sCogaptq lfMabih4uivs at,I'tno6 mou>l taam I. uaym News aogoa.mlpMwmwa.00m RriTT!`T DTTRT T!' Ail1TT!G DTTT T!` � NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolutions, for amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on amendments to the Future Land Use Ele- ment and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHER- MORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DE- PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the BLt m Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft /hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject por- tion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP - 2010 -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the FuWro LOC,._U.Se_El4utent- and Fututo Lai;[ tlSQMap aO.dM�p_SsCleS.1FLS1F1FlUM1. to: modify the Bayshore/Gateway Tri- angle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non- substantive text revisions. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] RESOLUTION NO 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENI PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE IHE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOU- LEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE REC- OMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Lei; RESOLUTION NO 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN I rs ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPART- MENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP - 2070 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Seder to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maxi- mum of 5 dwelling units per acre - or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdis- trict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing + 22.83 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MAN- AGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT 7 0 1 "HE FLORIDA DEPARI'MFNT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2008.1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Gplslen_Ga�.9raalYtasterPlan and QQIdan Qgtefisa Manta Pan Eutura l®andJae -Map and Map $erjois, to create the Estates Shop- ping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -4 and C -5 zoning districts with a requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Soulevapi extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3rd Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Com- prehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M.. Mondav through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Florida a ye_.e p CP 30101 pow. mxn 8 4n __ r _ _� CPpP -Alu6 � All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Com- prehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M.. Mondav through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the ('01,1JER COUNTY FLORIDA 8A RE, L HEARINGS QUESTFOR LEGAL ADVERTISING i)FI1IJBIAHEARINGS 'ro: Clerk to the Board: Please place the following as it; ❑ Normal f,,val Advertisement i Diplay Ad',- ],,cation. etc.) 011platin" Dcpt/Dj,, ComplellenskC Nallpin", Section Person: Marcia R. Koijolill!Setwt Planner Date: 2118/4011 Petition No. (If nonc, gno brief dc,ni-itoatI 2010 C)LiC GMP Amendment, Pentom CI'SP-2010-2 \kcillicad PRACC114011 Mail Change alliendincill, I 11cuponci iName & Address): VA Name & Aildiet% of any per orris) To he notilli'd li� Clerk "s ( )[!ice { [I j,erc space I, needed, ittiAch w1paratc sheet; N/A I ie,irim-, bfoic x BCC [JIZA 0111VI Requested licarim, date: N18rch 12. 01 L Based on advertie.emem apjpeiirimt 10 (Ja\s belore hearing. New,papen ) io he ti,e,l: (Complete, only it 111t)(41taliti: x Naples I )afly Nem , ❑ oltiel piopo'c(I 1'ext. (include legal description N commor, loc,,Iwn S' Size Scc Altai hill ❑ Legally Required Companion pe1111011('). if unly & proposal hearing daw Separate coven Does Petition Fee include ackertitti-' cost' x as ❑ No If YCS, what aLCOUT I should be Charged I ol atk o is ov CuMs :W $ ?0 LIEZ)O(ZZ-47-0 Re�imed 1,\. Division Adnimismaiii or Designee Ditte I im Attachments Adveilisellient kckluvS1 and copy of "I"TiIII" Resolution DISTRIBUTION INSTRUCTIONS A. For hearings before BCC or BZA: initiating persm, to A-coriplete olle, coy and obtain Division Head approval before submitting to County Manager. Note: If legal document is involved, he sure that any necessary legal review, or request for same, is submitted to C0Uo(v Attorney before submitting to Count% Manager. The Manager's office will distribute copies: ❑ County Manager agenda file: to ❑ Requesting Division Clerk's Office ❑ Original g Other ficarmy's, 111111,10111" Div iL011 baud a)Jj)I)J()Veand submit oi ipual to Oft ice, retaintrig. a copy ior tile. ***At* *14 it A, I * *it FOR CLERK'S OFFICELTSE ) Date Dilte ,,II' hfichcujm�, $-22-11 Witt Ad%crtiCd: Ann P. Jennejohn From: KendallMarcia [MarciaKendall @colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 7:25 AM To: Minutes and Records Cc: Bosi, Michael; Brock, Mary; NeetVirginia; Patricia L. Morgan; RodriguezWanda; Weeks, David; Lorenz, William Subject: 2010 Cycle GMP Amendments Transmittal, including Wellhead Protection Advertisement Request(s) Attachments: BCC Ad Request_ 2010_Cycle_Trans ALL.pdf; 2010 Cycle BCC GMP Transmittal Legal Ad 20_Day.docx; 2010 Cycle w_10_5 and 08- 1_Ad_Map.pdf; BCC Ad_Request_2010 _Cycle_ Trans_Wellhead.pdf; BCCTransmittal Ad_ Wellhead_Protection_CPSP- 2010- 2.docx; Wellhead Protection Map_ Rev_1_12_2011 -A.pdf Please process the attached advertisements and acknowledge receipt at your earliest convenience. Also, please forward confirmation (s) for final approval prior to processing. Thank you! 2010 Cycle BCC Transmittal Amendments Advertisement: 2010 Cycle, CPS P-2010-2 Wellhead Protection BCC Transmittal Amendment Advertisement: Cordially, Marcia Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Phone: 239.2522387 EFax:239.252.6675 Email: marciakendall@colliergov.net 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. March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and furnish proof of publication to the attention of Marcia Kendall in the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. The advertisement must be a "114" page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not;,, be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111 - 138317 - 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 Account Number: 068778 owl March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and provide the Affidavit of Publication, in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to the Board Minutes and Records Department. The advertisement must be a "1/4" page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111 - 138317- 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 Account Number: 068778 • NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 201 1- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. r CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map series, including the map titled Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas, Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. i 8A If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK. CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs a ut CITY OF NAPLES COASTAL RIDGE WELLFELD O� 8A EXHIBIT "A" PETITION CPSP -2010 COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs a ut CITY OF NAPLES COASTAL RIDGE WELLFELD O� CITY OF LIVINGSTON m 'FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL ROAD ASR NAPLES (IRRIGATION UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN QUALITY) U GATE CITY WELLFIELD (4 WELL PERMITS) \ CR 846 N G. BLV U WELLFIELD EXTENSION ro COLLIER COUNTY UTILI IES GOLDEN p GATE G. P MARCO LAKES UTILITIES ASR U CITY OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 No. 2003 -44 m 'FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL AMENDED Ord. NAPLES o! UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN ASR U GATE CITY WELLFIELD (4 WELL PERMITS) \ p SOUTH HAWTHORN WELLFIELD EXTENSION ro LO p MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES MARCO ISLAND MARCO LAKES UTILITIES ASR U (9 WELL PERMITS) O * L S 1 O MANATEE rn ROAD ASR SCALE � � N 0 SMI. AMENDED - Ord. SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 No. 2003 -44 AMENDED Ord. - JANUARY 25, 2007 No. 2001 -18 AMENDED Ord. - DECEMBER 4, 2007 No. 2007-82 1V O) 8/ PREPARED BY QS/CAI) MAPPING SECLOl1 GROW MPNAGENENT DIMNON / PLANNING MO REW"TION SOURCE: COWER COUNTY POLLUTON CONTROL AND PREVENDON DEPT. DATE: 1/2011 RU: WPZR12- 2010 -A.DNG LEGEND IMMOKALEE WELLFIELD CR 846 AVE MARIA WELLFIELD POTENTIAL FUTURE COLLIER COUNTY WELLFIELD AREA rn N CITY OF NAPLES EAST GOLDEN GATE rn m2magav, 1 -75 PORT OF /THE ISLANDS WELLFIELD 41 PLANNED WATER'i SUPPLY WELLS �. ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE ®POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD m Acct. #068778 February 21, 2011 Attn: Legals Naples News Media Group 1100 Immokalee Road Naples, Florida 34110 Re: CPSP- 2010 -2, Wellhead Protection Map (Display Ad w /Map) Dear Legals: Please advertise the above referenced notice on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Please send the Affidavit of Publication in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk P.O. #4500122420 • e • March 22, 2011 Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, and provide the Affidavit of Publication, in TRIPLICATE, together with charges involved to the Board Minutes and Records Department. The advertisement must be a "114" page ad, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES [Comprehensive Planning Section] FUND & COST CENTER: 111 - 138317- 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500122420 Account Number: 068778 108A NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map series, including the map titled Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas, Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs DR% to LIVINGSTON ROAD ASR (IRRIGATION QUALITY) CR 846 N u CITY OF M r NAPLES 0' COASTAL RIDGE WELURELD CITY OF V NAPLES ASR (4 WELL PERMITS) MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES MARCO LAKES 0 SCALE 0 5M1. AMENDED - Ord. SEPTEMBER 10, No. 2003 -44 2003 AMENDED - Ord JANUARY 25, No. 2007 -18 2007 AMENDED - Ord DECEMBER 4, No. 2007 -82 2007 COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES GOlOEN GATE WELLFIELD \ \1 PETITION CPSP-20T0° IMMOKALEE WELLFIELD CR 846 AVE MARIA WELLFIELD CR 858 \POTENTIAL FUTURE COLLIER COUNTY WELLFIELD AREA rn 'FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN U ` GATE CITY WELLFIELD SOUTH HAWTHORN WELLFIELD EXTENSION m ut o MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES ASR (9 WELL PERMITS) 9C S PORT OF { THE ISLANDS N 1 4J / WELLFIELD m MANATEE +/ ROAD ASR N / I PREPARED BY: CIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DINSION / PLANNING AND REGULATION SOURCE: COWER COUNTY POLLUTCN CONTROL AND PREKNTION DEPT. DAIS: 1/2011 RLE WFPZR12- 2010 -A.DWG JS LEGEND PLANNED WATER SUPPLY WELLS ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE ®POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFIELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD 846 D! N CITY OF NAPLES EAST GOLDEN GATE WELLFIELD 1 -75 rn 'FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN U ` GATE CITY WELLFIELD SOUTH HAWTHORN WELLFIELD EXTENSION m ut o MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES ASR (9 WELL PERMITS) 9C S PORT OF { THE ISLANDS N 1 4J / WELLFIELD m MANATEE +/ ROAD ASR N / I PREPARED BY: CIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DINSION / PLANNING AND REGULATION SOURCE: COWER COUNTY POLLUTCN CONTROL AND PREKNTION DEPT. DAIS: 1/2011 RLE WFPZR12- 2010 -A.DWG JS LEGEND PLANNED WATER SUPPLY WELLS ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE ®POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFIELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD 846 D! N 8A Ann P. Jennejohn To: Naples Daily News Legals Subject: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Attachments: CPSP 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (3- 22- 11).doc; CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection (3- 22- 11).doc; CPSP - 2010 -2 (3- 22- 11).pdf Please advertise the attached DISPLAY AD W /MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Thank you Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252 -8408 (Fax) Ann P. Jennejohn 8A From: postmaster @collierclerk.com Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:09 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: Delivery Status Notification (Relay) Attachments: ATT248852.txt; CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Your message has been successfully relayed to the following recipients, but the requested delivery status notifications may not be generated by the destination. Iegals@noplesnews.com -J g q Ann P. Jennejohn From: Legals NDN [legals @naplesnews.com] Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:33 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) OK Emery pagan Lega[Dept. Naples Daily News 1100 Immokafee Wpad Naples, AFL. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 Email: legals(cb_naplesnews.com From: Ann P. Jennejohn fmailto: Ann.Jennejohngcollierclerk.com] Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:09 PM To: Legals NDN Subject: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Please advertise the attached DISPLAY AD W /MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Thank you. Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252- 8408(Fax) Please visit us on the web at www.collierelerk.coni This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. -1 � Ann P. Jennejohn 8A From: Legals NDN [legals @napiesnews.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 11:23 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Attachments: 231182530. pdf TICKET # 231 - 182530 ATTACHED please REVIEW notice & send your APPROVAL via EMAIL. Should you have any questions, changes or corrections, please contact me via EMAIL. No verbal changes or approvals accepted by phone, via email ONLY. Emety Fagan Lega(Dept. Naples 1Daify News 1100Immokafee Wpad Naples, TL. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 Email: leg als(cD nap les news. com From: Ann P. Jennejohn [mailto: Ann .JennejohnCalcollierclerk.com] Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:09 PM To: Legals NDN Subject: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Please advertise the attached DISPLAY AD W /MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Thank you. Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court 1 u11201 It" 91 u IiiLgijmii NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELE- MENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Main and Map series including the mar) titled Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASKS C1 846 I �- r All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Develop- ment Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the ma- terials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the docu- ments should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Com- missioners with respect to any matter consid- ered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the ap- peal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) Ann P. Jennejohn I BA From: KendallMarcia [MarciaKendall @colliergov.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 12:04 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: FW: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Attachments: 231182530. pdf Good Morning Ann, This advertisement for CPSP - 2010 -2 (1/4 page) Wellhead Advertisement is good to go to print. Thank you! O 1 hat leaves the main ad for Y2 page of 2010 Cycle covering four petitions (CP- 2010 -1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP - 2010 -5 and CP- 2oo8 -1) remaining. Thank you! Cordially, Marcia Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner Growth Management Division Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Phone: 239.252.2387 El ax: 239.252.6675 Email: marciakendall@colliergov.net Under Florida Law, e -mail addi asses 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. From: Ann P. Jennejohn f mailto: Ann.Jennejohn @collierclerk.coum Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 11:31 AM To: KendallMarcia Subject: FW: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Here's the next one Marcia O Display Notice for CP5P- 2010 -2 regarding Wellhead Protection. Please review. Thank you! Ann From: Legals NDN [ mailto:leoalsCalnaplesnews.com1 Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 11:23 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: CPSP- 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) • 1 • TICKET # 231 - 182530 ATTACHED please REVIEW notice & send your APPROVAL via EMAIL. Should you have any questions, changes or corrections, please contact me via EMAIL. No verbal changes or approvals accepted by phone, via email ONLY. Emefy Pagan Legal Dept. Naples Daily News 1100 Immokafee Wpad 9Vaples, APL. 34110 Legal Line: 239 - 213 -6061 Email: legals(aD_naplesnews.com From: Ann P. Jennejohn [ mailto :AnnJenneiohn@collierclerk.comJ Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:09 PM To: Legals NDN Subject: CPSP - 2010 -2 Wellhead Protection Map (DISPLAY AD W /MAP) Please advertise the attached DISPLAY AD W /MAP on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. Thank you. Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239- 252 -8406 239 - 252- 8408(Fax) Please visit us on the web at www.collierc lei k.com 2 �8A 4, A RES�DLVTION OF Tim � E%7. �G41Cu113510ENkf� � ' AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER GROWTH MAh�CiE PLAN FOR 144 UNINCORPORATED AREA OF 60L `1 AMENDED. By PRDVMa FOR AN AWOVENT TUTTIE 9=USUI# LA* USE ELE- MENT'S FUTURE LANDUSE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELL KEAD � � _. PROPOSED WELLFIELDB AND AOUIFE'R STORAGE AND REOtYawfASA'S) AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDIN(3TW�NSMITJALOF THE A MENTTOTHE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFA{RS.. to the F & JA • '�9Il1,M20L0lI t ., CP8P -01f11Q.Y,- Petdbn raquepting vedow,amer — (aaadgabt 19seWe WsekM , mew All interested Parties are and be heard. Copies of raw sax Management Plan Amendment w kEt available for Ins at It* mot Services P Seaton, 2810 N,' between the hoax ,Monday through �!' .• . , -1.. tertals will be m M. e..w AIH r-fil. , Yw. ad Naples, One `Meek PraXW me wleu,. g hearing. AMY questions Pertaining to the do ML ; mettle should be *90*01td the COMPrahM .. ,.� " ... Planning Section'. Witten cOmmer"W" the Clerk to the Board's OMCe Prior t0111110ew 2011, will be read and boniildes r _ *1c; hearing. e f claim decides to app" any 'cs mz. V TnaRm NO a , ha.snay new to ensure ih the proceedings is made, which Includes k6ekimony and evidence upon which the ap- ®3'iw+ Isto be based. sile.� pe'94 If you am aperoo ! with a dobft who needs anyg000mmodstion Inorderto pwtdipete in thia proceeding, you are ohthlsd, at no cost to Y66, to V* Owkal4n?i °8°is e.. Phaea cw�ct tie Gbllkel Cnunb Faculties MansprVd Dapwttnera', kNxted St 6 TMrYasni Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL ',}{112.6356, (230) 252 -M, at ie9attwo days pdorto the m kirig. Assisted listening devices for the hearing Id,peired are avallable in the Board of.Cqu* Core Off' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS .. COLDER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Clerk (SEAL) By: /e/Pah cia Morgan DWN# Me ch 1.2011 _ ..�.... "^ #,..d.:,,.++�».- ...,g,.�.�,,... ....tom. ,.,...6.•.- ,- -°---' NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publicath State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the autht appeared Kim Pokamev, who on oath says tir the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily] newspaper published at Naples, in Collier C distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Flor . attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in on March 1, 2011 Arrrant further says that the said Naples Daily News is published at Naples. in said Collier County, Florida. and newspaper has heretofore been continuously published it Coumy, Florida. distributed in Collier and Lee counties t each day and has been entered as second class mail math office in Naples, in said Collier Count}'. Florida, for a vein next preceding the first publication of the attacl advertisement. and affiant further says that he has neitli promised any person. firm or corporation anv discol commission or refund for the purpose of securing this ad publication m the saitjyey+spaper. Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This 3rd day of March, 2011 k9 L (Signature of notary public) .1; Pr'°ul', KAROL E KANGAS 'u' m•5 Notary Public • Slate of Florio My Comm. Commission l# DO 9122370 o: • • ••. 8A RESOLUTION NO. 11- sn A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE, AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. se q., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January t0, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3 187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following element of its Growth Management Plan: Golden Gate Area Master Plan, including the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission on October 19, 2009 considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, ending in a tie vote 4 -4, forwarding no recommendation on the amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners on January 19, 2010 voted 4 -0 (Commissioner Coyle absent) to indefinitely continue Petition CP- 2008 -1 and to place the proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, on a straw - ballot referendum to be voted upon by the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates on the November 2, 2010 general election; and Words underlined are added; Words struck threegb are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. WE WHEREAS, the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates voted on November 2, 2010 in favor of the referendum and to return the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners for final vote on March 22, 2011; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have sixty (60) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said sixty (60) days pursuant to Section 163.3 184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed text and map Growth Management Plan amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this oioah day of 1AAAC 1. , 2011. ATTEST: DWIGHT E.BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Y C BY: t'1 w, 4 ty_Cl'k FRED W. COYLE, Chairman 2 Words underlined are added; Words 4Fack4lifough are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. • Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Use Section Chief CP- 2008 -1 Transmittal Resolution F /Comprehensive/GMP Amendments /Transmit al Words underlined are added; Words stfueli throug are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 8A Exhibit A GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN [Page 4] Policy 1.12 The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: B. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict 2. Pine Ridge Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 3. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 4. Commercial Western Estates Infill Subdistrict 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict 6. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict B. Estates — Commercial District 6 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient driving distances for many residents assist in minimizing the road network required and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: Words underlined are added; words are deleted. Row of asterisks ( "" "` "`) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 8 n a Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and recreation Groups 7911- Dance studios schools and halls, excluding discotheques 7991 -Physical fitness facilities 7993 - Coin - operated amusement devises 7999-Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified including only day camps, gymnastics instruction iudo /karate instruction sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges Waterslides etc.) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no_ adult oriented sales Groups 5611 - Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 - Women's clothina stores 5632 - Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 - Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 - Family clothing stores 5661 - Shoe stores 5699 - Miscellaneous apparel an- stores 3. Automotive dealers and aasoline service stations Groups 5531 - Auto and home super stores 5541 - Gasoline service stations without repair 0 Groups 7514 - Passenger car rental 7534 - Tire retreading and repair shops including only tire repair 7539 - Automotive Repair Shops Not Elsewhere Classified, including only minor service lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 - Carwashes as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Building materials hardware garden supply and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 - Paint glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 - Hardware stores 5261 - Retail nurseries lawn and garden supply stores 6. Business services Groups 7334 - Photocopying and duplicating services 7335 - Commercial photography 7336 - Commercial art and graphic design 7338 - Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 - Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 - Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 - Equipment rental and leasing not elsewhere classified Words underlined are added; words 64616k through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 7371 — Computer programmina services 7372 — Prepackaged software 7373 — Computer integrated systems design 7374—Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7Q7a — r'.mmni dor rplatari cArviCPS not Plsawhere classified ouL — UVl U[ILY JyOW... o 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified Z. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 — Cable and other pay television services 9. Construction special trade contractors (office use only, no on -site equipment stora e Groups 1711 — Plumbing heating and air - conditioning 1721 — Painting and paper hanaina industry 1731 — Electrical work industry 1741 — Masonry, stone setting and other stone work 1742 — Plastering drywall acoustical and insulation work 1743 — Terrazzo tile, marble and mosaic work industry 1751 — Carpentry work 1752 — Floor laving and other floor work not elsewhere classified industry 1761 — Roofing siding and sheet metal work industry 1771 — Concrete work industry 1781 — Water well drilling industry 1791 — Structural steel erection 1793 — Glass and glazing work 1794 — Excavation work 1795 — Wrecking and demolition work 1796 — Installation or erection of building equipment, not elsewhere 1799 — Special trade contractors not elsewhere classified 10. Deoository institutions Groups 6021 — National commercial banks 6022 — State commercial banks 6029 — Commercial banks not elsewhere classified 6035 — Savings institutions federally chartered 6036 — Savings Institutions, not federally chartered 6061 — Credit unions federally chartered 6062 — Credit unions not federally chartered Words underlined are added; words stFwGl( thmu9h are deleted. Row of asterisks (....,_ "') denotes break in text. 8A CP- 2008 -1 6091 — Non - deposit trust facilities 6099 — Functions related to depository banking not elsewhere classified 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812 includinq only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use no outdoor amplified music or televisions) 12. Enpineerinq, accounting, research management and related services Groups 8711 — Engineering services 8712 — Architectural services 8713 — Surveying services 8721 — Accounting auditing and bookkeeping services 8741 — Management services 8742 — Management consulting services 8743 — Public relations services 8748— Business consulting services not elsewhere classified 13. Executive, legislative, and general government except finance Groups 9111 —Executive offices 9121 — Legislative bodies 9131 — Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 — General government, not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores Groups 5411 — Grocery stores (minimum 27,000 square feet) 5421 — Meat and fish (seafood) markets, including freezer provisioners 5431 — Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 — Candy nut and confectionery stores 5451 — Dairy products stores 5461 — Retail bakeries 5499 — Miscellaneous food stores including convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 — Department stores 5331 — Variety stores 5399 — Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 16. Home furniture, furnishings and equipment stores Groups 5712 — Furniture stores 5713 — Floor covering stores 5714 — Drapery, curtain and upholstery stores 5719 — Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 — Household appliance stores 5731 — Radio television and consumer electronics stores 5734 — Computer and computer software stores 5735 — Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) Words underlined are added; words stFLIGI( thFeugh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( "' * ** "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 8A 5736 — Musical instrument store 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 — Life insurance 6321 — Accident and health insurance 6324 — Hospital and medical service plans 6331 — Fire marine, and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 — Title insurance 6371 — Pension, health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified 6411 — Insurance agents 18. Justice, public order and safety Groups 9221 — Police protection 9222 — Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5912 — Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 5945 — Hobby toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 — Tobacco stores and stands 5994 — News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores 5999— Miscellaneous retail stores not elsewhere classified (excluding gravestone tombstones auction rooms monuments swimming pools and sales barns) 21. Non - depository credit institutions Groups 6111 — Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies 6141 — Personal credit institutions 6153 — Short-term business credit institutions except agricultural 6159 — Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 — Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 — Loan brokers Words underlined are added; words 64616k thF96igh are deleted. Row of asterisks (,.. "' "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 8A 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021) 23. Personal services Groups 7212 — Garment pressing and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 — Photographic studios, portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barber shops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services not elsewhere classified excluding massage parlors Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance taxation and monetary policy (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 — Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 — Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 — Title abstract offices 6552 — Land subdividers and developers, except cemeteries 26. Schools and educational services not elsewhere classified (Group 8299) 27. Security and commodity brokers dealers exchanges, and services Groups 6211 — Security brokers dealers and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified 28. Social services Groups 8322 —Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 29. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31. Video tape rental (Group 7841 excluding adult oriented sales and rentals) Words underlined are added; words MwGk thFeugh are deleted. Row of asterisks (... "" "`) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 32. United states postal service (Group 4311 excluding maior distribution centers 33. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC. b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures including, but not limited to: a. Utility buildings b. Essential service facilities c Gazebos statuary and other architectural features c. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services not elsewhere classified (Group 7999, NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste management (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313— Radio television and publishers' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertisina services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 1. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 5813) 6. Educational services Groups 8211 —Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges universities and professional schools 8222 — Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 — Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 — General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 — Psychiatric hospitals 8069 — Specialty hospitals except psychiatric 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 — Liauor stores 5961 — Cataloa and mail -order houses 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators Words underlined are added; words GtFuGk threugh are deleted. Row of asterisks (... "` "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 + (� A 9. Personal services Groups 7211 — Power Laundries family and commercial 7261 — Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services excludina adult day care centers 8361— Residential care including soup kitchens and homeless shelters d Development intensity shall be limited to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. e One grocery use will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet. With the exception of one grocery use no individual user may exceed 30,000 square feet of building area. f Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 120 days of a written request from the County. 2 The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3 Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The q Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual plan which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. Words underlined are added; words stwskNreagh are deleted. Row of asterisks (... "' "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 8A rezone shall include at a minimum: • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106 which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.H of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm replantina requirements) Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: a There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. b If the project requires oermittina by the South Florida Water Management District the project shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. c If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. Words underlined are added; words stwsk- thFaugh are deleted. Row of asterisks (.'. "' "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 ' 8A [Page 27] A. Estates Mixed Use District 2) Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all four three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The ISIW 144 Unit 1 ■ of Golden Gate Estates. The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to Words underlined are added; words SIFUG'i thFeugh are deleted. Row of asterisks (` ++ + ++ + * +) denotes break in text. i EXHIBIT A PETITION CP- 2008 -01 LEGEND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP F °" ■°mu moa"am��� IYMORALEE ROAD ■mom m��..e vYmrw ■rxmcv.m svQ�a� ■ w m�ewr am+vmm+ ryry ���mn mnm ❑ mru so.Rr h y "y OIL W ©.L ROAD F a IMMORALEE ROAD S $t] RANMLL 8OULEVARD SUBJECT > SITE CP- 2008 -01 VANMRRILT _ BEACH ROAD p S B GOLDRN GATE BOULEVARD V PINE RD. g mL IL r_ U J _ I � F X gO.G. PRWI'. c S 4 2 < INTRNNTATR_ge N.R. IN 6 z s DAMN BOULEVARD m RR. 61 m ' m P UJ c Si n GOLDEN GATE FUTURE LAND USE MAP d TI I— W i' m n F � O O SCALE MI. 9 NI. 5 . MI. 1ZYE'1 W"RNG R M NG f PENUIIM o.rt�x /x�i iYE. tv- xoxt -n OF R 26E R27E R28E i EXHIBIT A GOLDEN GATE ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS Collier County, Florida ftvL 0 IMMOKALEE ROAD 8A PETITION CP- 2008 -01 0 1 MI 2 MI PREPARED BY: CIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENIAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE: GGMP -47- 2008 -2.DW DATE 9/2009 AMENDED OCTOBER 26. 2004 (Ord No 2004-71) AMENDED JANUARY 25, 2007 (Ord No 2001 -19) AMENDED - OCTOBER 14, 2008 (Ord. No 2DOB -59) CGOLDEN GAN ESTATES NEI GIN ORIOOD CENTERS LEGEND NEIGHBORHOW CENTERS EXHIBIT A PETITION CP- 2008 -0 WILSON BOULEVARD /GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD CENTER Collier County, Florida 0 ADOPTED -- (Ord- SEPTEMBER 10, No 2003 -44) 2003 AMENDED (Ord. JANUARY 25, No 2007 -19) 2007 AMENDED (Ord. - DECEMBER 4 No 2007 -76) 2007 AMENDED (Ord. - OCTOBER 14 No 2008 -59) 2008 NEIGHBORHOOD 1MMOKALEE D CENTER i i �VV ✓� � � mac. i/ // / � / 4 G A V zi ADOPTED -- (Ord- SEPTEMBER 10, No 2003 -44) 2003 AMENDED (Ord. JANUARY 25, No 2007 -19) 2007 AMENDED (Ord. - DECEMBER 4 No 2007 -76) 2007 AMENDED (Ord. - OCTOBER 14 No 2008 -59) 2008 NEIGHBORHOOD 0 1/2 MI, 1 MI, PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECIION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE GGMP -43- 2008 -5DWG DATE: 9/2009 LEGEND - ' GOLIJEN GATE SETTLEMENT L ESTATES L— AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER EXHIBIT A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Collier County, Florida PETITION CP- 2008 -01A 0 1/2 MI_ 1 MI. PREPARED 9Y. GIS /CAD MAPPING SEOIION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE: GGMP -43- 2008 -6DWG DATE: 9/2009 LEGEND v 7 GOLDEN GATE STATES U EA_ SETTLEMENT AREA ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT y IMMOKALEE IT ' Kxi i 0 1/2 MI_ 1 MI. PREPARED 9Y. GIS /CAD MAPPING SEOIION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE: GGMP -43- 2008 -6DWG DATE: 9/2009 LEGEND v 7 GOLDEN GATE STATES U EA_ SETTLEMENT AREA ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT C C a a W F z w U (J N .r U i m y d UU W W O Y rn � 0 b � Q itl W 0 o m U L Q 'n 0 n 1U� fJ p N 9 $ P. O U � O RESOLUTION NO. 11- 59 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared a plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element of its Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, on January 20, 2011, considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA, must adopt with changes, or not adopt, the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution 1 of 2 • WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed text amendment to the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. ITHIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this 2.? N day of At,� 2011. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Irk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: (..11 R/O� Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Land Use Section Chief CP \10 -CMP- 00785 \11 CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE Chairman 2of2 i Exhibit A CP- 2010 -1 I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Page 44] A. Urban Mixed Use District 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. This Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acre. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet, except for a grocery /supermarket physical fitness facility craft/hobby store home furniture /furnishing store or department store use which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. (Words underlined are added, words struck threes are deleted) b. Parcel This parcel is located approximately 1/4 mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. In addition to the prohibited uses applicable to both parcels the following list of uses shall also be prohibited on Parcel 1. 0742 — Veterinary services for Animal Specialties — Horses are prohibited, other animals are allowed 0752 — Animal specialty services except Veterinary (dog grooming is allowed) 5261 — Retail nurseries lawn and garden supply stores 5499 — Poultry dealers — retail and egg dealers — retail 5531 — Auto and home supply store except automobile accessory and parts dealers — retail (no on -site installation) 5813 — Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) 5921 - Liquor stores exceeding 5,000 square feet 5932 — Uses merchandise stores 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators 7211 — Power laundries family and commercial 7215 — Coin - operated laundries and drvcleaning 7216 — Drycleaning plants except rug cleaning 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services not elsewhere classified Coin operated service machine operations Comfort station operation Escort service Locker rental Massage parlors (except those employing licensed therapists) Rest room operation Tattoo parlors Turkish baths Wedding chapels privately operated (Words underlined are added, words sNask thFeugh are deleted) 2 • e • 7389 — Business services not elsewhere classified, except Appraisers 7R9.'A — Rafrinaratinn and air - conditioning Service and repair shops /�Ltl'GICldI W61 UII\I Glcaiuvuv .vvun �....r.. ••�• 7641 — Re- upholstery and furniture repair 7692 — Welding repair 7694 — Armature rewinding shops 7699 — Repair shops and related services not elsewhere classified 7841 — Adult oriented video tape rental 7993 — Coin operated amusement devices 8641 —Civic, social and fraternal associations CCPC Recommendation: Not part of the Subdistrict Text As a condition of approval, and prior to the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment, the owner shall record in the official land records restrictive covenants for the benefit of surrounding property owners, including the Orchards, Village Walk, Tiburon at Pelican Marsh and Wilshire Lakes, that will prohibit the prohibited uses contained within the Subdistrict. (Words underlined are added, words sNuskthrough are deleted) LOOK, RESOLUTION NO. 11 -6_ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seg., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County staff has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: and Future Land Use Element, including the Future Land Use Map and Map Series, WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 1 Words underlined are added; Words week tiffEmgh are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. i 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the text and map amendments to the proposed Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of 2 Words underlined are added; Words siFaek through are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day ofhu,I 2011. ATTEST: ,, DW(64 E.BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN iy f grtaturt as's Approved as to form and gal sufficle 1 11 w.�s APL' t� Heidi Ashton- Cicko, � Assistant County Attorney, Land Planning Chief CPSP - 2010 -2 GMP Transmittal Resolution Batch amendments 3 Words underlined are added; Words so"ek t4eugh are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 }( EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 5.1: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.1 1, is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The foregoing notwithstanding, such commercial properties may be approved for the addition of residential uses, in accordance with the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, though an increase in overall intensity may result. A zoning change of such commercial -zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Future Land Use Element. b. For such industrially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. c. For such residentially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district. said pfapei4y may be eombined and deN,eleped with d. Far property deemed t8 he eansistent with this Element Purstiaflt 4) 8140 Or MEWO ef palioies 5.9 through -5.4 .the 'i eR hethe el Othff rty is de ed eensistent via the . lieies Of is deefRed ee....:,. efit 101,414 the Fut ,.e Land Use Pesigfiailk.. Description Section Fe.residential alld m ed use developments only, the .la -wed defis:t, het,. e ., these prepeF+ies fflay he distr:h .ted th fatigheat the projeet, as pfi3vided f..r in the Density Raii g System E)f the Ge fftmereial M;..ed Use c .bdistriet as applicable. d. Any property deemed consistent may be combined and developed with other abutting property provided the density and intensity of development derived from the property deemed consistent is not increased. e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Words underlined are added; words ^_____. -- eiighLaeiig are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 8A I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 5. Office and In -rill Commercial Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow low intensity office commercial or infill commercial development on small parcels within the Urban Mixed Use District located along arterial and collector roadways where residential development, as allowed by the Density Rating System, may not be compatible or appropriate. Lower intensity office commercial development attracts low traffic volumes on the abutting roadway(s) and is generally compatible with nearby residential and commercial development. The criteria listed below must be met for any project utilizing this Subdistrict. For purposes of this Subdistrict, "abuts" and "abutting" excludes intervening public street, easement (other than utilities) or right -of -way, except for an intervening local street; and "commercial" refers to C -1 through C -5 zoning districts and commercial components of PUDs. a. The subject site is in the Urban -Mixed Use District. b. The subject site abuts a road classified as an arterial or collector on the Collier County Functional Class Map, as adopted in the 'Fran sportation Element. c. A rezone to commercial zoning is requested for the subject property in its entirety, up to a maximum of 12 acres. For a property greater than 12 acres in size, the balance of the property in excess of 12 acres is limited to an environmental conservation easement or open space. Under this provision, .,open space" shall not include water management facilities unless said facilities are incorporated into a conservation or preservation area for the purpose of enhancement of the conservation or preservation area. d. The site abuts commercial zoning: (i) On one side and that abutting commercial site is not within an infill Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District or the Urban Commercial District HEM commercial zoning on the athef ; or, (ii) On both sides. e. The abutting commercial zoning may be in the unincorporated portion of Collier County or in a neighboring jurisdiction. f. The depth of the subject property in its entirety, or up to 12 acres for parcels greater than 12 acres in size, for which commercial zoning is being requested, does not exceed the depth of the commercially zoned area on the abutting parcel(s). Where the subject site abuts commercial zoning on both sides, and the depth of the commercially zoned area is not the same on both abutting parcels, the Board of County Commissioners shall have discretion in determining how to interpret the depth of the commercially zoned area which cannot be exceeded, but in no case shall the depth exceed that on the abutting property with the greatest depth of commercial area. This discretion shall be applied on a case -by -case basis. g. Project uses are limited to office or low intensity commercial uses if the subject property abuts commercial zoning on one side only. For property abutting commercial zoning on both sides, the project uses may include those of the highest intensity abutting commercial zoning district. Words underlined are added; words St_tiek are deleted. 2 Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 (� h. The subject property in its entirety was not created to take advantage of this provision, evidenced by its creation prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on October 28, 1997. i. For those sites that have existing commercial zoning abutting one side only: (i) commercial zoning used pursuant to this Subdistrict shall only be applied one time and shall not be expanded, except for aggregation of additional properties so long as all other criteria under this Subdistrict are met; and, (ii) uses shall be limited so as to serve as a transitional use between the commercial zoning on one side and non - commercial zoning on the other side. j. For those sites that have existing commercial zoning abutting both sides, commercial zoning used pursuant to this Subdistrict shall only be applied one time and shall not be expanded, except for aggregation of additional properties so long as all other criteria under this Subdistrict are met. k. Lands zoned for support medical uses pursuant to the "1/4 mile support medical uses" provision in the Urban designation shall not be deemed "commercial zoning" for purposes of this Subdistrict. the Urban Mixed Use n;..«. -iet of ifi rtio Urban an G +)m_m_Pr ial n:,.r.iet aig eommereial zening ashall .r ,. al:r, cause the . bu ffin property(s) to f»: 1. Land adjacent to areas zoned C- 1 /T on the zoning atlas maps, or other commercial zoning obtained via the former Commercial Under Criteria provision in the FLUE, shall not be eligible for a rezone under the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, except through aggregation as provided in Paragraphs i. and j. above. m m. For purposes of this Subdistrict, property abutting land zoned Industrial or Industrial PUD, or abutting lands zoned for Business Park uses pursuant to the Business Park Subdistrict, or abutting lands zoned for Research and Technology Park uses pursuant to the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict, shall also qualify for commercial zoning so long as all other criteria under the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict are met. a n. At time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer. o. The project will be compatible with existing land uses and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties. The maximum acreage eligible to be utilized for the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict within the Urban Mixed Use District is 250 acres. Words underlined are added; words tek "li-^•g are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP - 2010 -2 lk II. AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION B. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District 1. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), and Sending, Neutral, and Receiving Designations C) Sending Lands 7. Permitted Uses: t) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section -5 a. Ta) through 3 e) Te) such as the fellew+ng private wells and septic tanks; kitility 4ine o ept se of lines; se of lines and 144 stations only if 1eeated within n n NRPA Sending hands, and only if laeated within already eleafed portions af.��:.. rights of way or easemefits, and ifneeessafy to serve the Rafal Tr,. itio . Water and Sewer- District; and, ,.to... ..t.,N..., .. g) Essential Services as follows, necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District: utility lines. except sewer lines: sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within non -NRPA Sendin¢ Lands, and only if located within already cleared portions of existing rights- of -wav or easements; and, water pumping stations and raw water wells. g) h) Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. h4 ij Oil and gas exploration. Where practicable, directional- drilling techniques and /or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. IL CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The following uses are authorized in this Designation. h. Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section a through g above such as the file iinns private wells and septic tanks; utility lines exec .t se we lit es; sewer 1:..,,,. and 14 4ations n!y if l0eated within B R KfDDA (•,".,,eryati n words underlined are added; words are deleted. q Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 i. Essential Services as follows, necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District: utility lines, except sewer lines; sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within non -NRPA Conservation Lands, and only if located within already cleared portions of existine rights -of -way or easements, and if necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central sewer system providing service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District; and water pumping stations and raw water wells necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central water system providing service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District. i, j. Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. } k. Oil extraction and related processing. Where practicable, directional - drilling techniques and /or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. The following uses may be permitted as Conditional Uses: a) The following uses are conditionally permitted subject to approval through a public hearing process: (1) Essential services not identified above in Paragraph h., i. and i-. L Within one year, Collier County will review essential services currently allowed in the Land Development Code and will define those uses intended to be conditionally permitted in Conservation designated lands. During this one -year period or if necessary until a comprehensive plan amendment identifying conditionally permitted essential services, no conditional uses for essential services within Conservation designated lands shall be approved. F. Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay The Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, depicted on the Future Land Use Map, is within the boundaries of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on Alafeh 14, 2998 June 13, 2000. The intent of the redevelopment program is to encourage the revitalization of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area by providing incentives that will encourage the private sector to invest in this urban area. This Overlay allows for additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property, or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections between properties and neighborhoods. The intent of this Overlay is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where urban services are available. One or more zoning overlays will be adopted into the Collier County Land Development Code to aid in the implementation of this Overlay. The following provisions and restrictions apply to this Overlay: 1. Mixed -Use Development: Mix of residential and commercial uses are permitted. For such development, commercial uses are limited to C -1 through C -3 zoning district uses-, hotel /motel use; theatrical producers (except motion picture), bands, orchestras, and entertainers; and, uses as may be allowed by applicable FLUE Words underlined are added; words struek thre••gh are deleted. 5 Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. • 1 CPSP- 2010 -2 8 A Policies. Mixed -use projects will be pedestrian oriented and are encouraged to provide access (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas. The intent is to encourage pedestrian use of the commercial area and to provide opportunity for nearby residents to access these commercial uses without traveling onto major roadways. Parking facilities are encouraged to be located in the rear of the buildings with the buildings oriented closer to the major roadway to promote traditional urban development. 2. Residential uses are allowed within this Overlay. Permitted density shall be as determined through application of the Density Rating System, and applicable FLUE Policies, except as provided below and except as may be limited by a zoning overlay. 3. Non - residential/non- commercial uses allowed within this Overlay include essential services; parks, recreation and open space uses; water- dependent and water- related uses; child care centers; community facility uses; safety service facilities; and utility and communication facilities. 4. Properties with access to US -41 East are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the project must be integrated into a mixed -use development with access to existing neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties and comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #8, below, except for mixed use projects developed within the "mini triangle" catalyst project site as identified on the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map. The "mini triangle" project site is eligible for the maximum density of 12 units per acre, with development standards as contained in the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District zoning overlay, adopted February 28, 2006 (Ordinance No. 06 -08), and amended December 14, 2006 (Ordinance No. 06 -63). For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. 5. Properties with access to Bayshore Drive, are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the project must be integrated into a mixed -use development with access to existing neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties and must comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #8, below. For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. 6. For parcels currently within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #16, land uses will continue to be governed by the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. A zoning overlay may be developed for these properties within the Mixed Use Activity Center to provide specific development standards. 7. Existing zoning districts for some properties within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay allow uses, densities and development standards that are inconsistent with the uses, densities and development standards allowed within this Overlay. These properties are allowed to develop and redevelop in accordance with their existing zoning until such time as a zoning overlay is adopted which may limit such uses, densities and development standards. Words underlined are added; words s- tx=ek are deleted. 6 Row of asterisks (* * * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 8. To qualify for 12 dwelling units per acre, as provided for in paragraphs #4 and #5 above, mixed use projects within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay must comply with the following standards: a. Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories. b. Buildings containing only residential uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories except such buildings are allowed a maximum height of four stories if said residential buildings are located in close proximity to US -41. c. Buildings containing mixed use (residential uses over commercial uses) are limited to a maximum height of four stories. d. Hotels /motels will be limited to a maximum height of four stories. e. For- purposes of this Overlay, aeh L, iildifig .tor may be p to 14 foot in height. e. For mixed -use buildings, commercial uses are permitted on the first two stories only. g f. Each building containing commercial uses only is limited to a maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet gross floor area. h g. One or more zoning overlays may be adopted which may include more restrictive standards than listed above in Paragraphs a---g a_f. 9. For all properties outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, any eligible density bonuses, as provided in the Density Rating System, are in addition to the eligible density provided herein. However, for properties within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), only the affordable- workforce housing density bonus, as provided in the Density Rating System, is allowed in addition to the eligible density provided herein. For all properties, the maximum density allowed is that specified under Density Conditions in the Density Rating System. 10. A maximum of 388 dwelling units are permitted to be utilized in this Overlay for density bonuses, as provided in paragraphs #4 and #5 above, for that portion of the Overlay lying within the CHHA only. This 388 dwelling unit density bonus pool corresponds with the number of dwelling units previously entitled to the botanical gardens sites prior to their rezone in 2003 to establish the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD. The "mini triangle" catalyst project is not subject to this density bonus pool. 11. The Botanical Garden, Inc. properties located in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, and shown on the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map, shall be limited to non - residential uses except for caretaker, dormitory, and other housing integrally related to the Botanical Garden or other institutional and /or recreational open space uses. FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent By Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5_12) [no further changes] Words underlined are added; words sn are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. 7 effil CPSP -2010-2 8A FUTURE LAND USE MAP (countywide) • Expand Incorporated Areas to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; a portion of the Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. • Correct South Golden Gate Estates NRPA boundary at US41. Port of the Islands and at I -75: shift boundary north so it follows I -75, follows US41, and follows the south line of Sections 33, 34, 35, Township 51 South, Range 28 East (so is no longer over Port of the Islands Urban area). • Correct Agricultural /Rural boundary near US41 /CR29 /Everglades City: shift boundary to west to run along CR29, to follow ACSC boundary, and to follow west Section line of Sections 28 & 33, Township 52 South, Range 29 East; and, shift boundary to south to follow US41. • Correct Ag /Rural -RLSA- Conservation boundary along CR850: remove jog along common line for Sections 8 & 9, Township 46 South, Range 28 East - from near southeast corner of Section 7, boundary should run along CR850 to the northeast. • In map legend, add Interchange symbol under Overlays and Special Features and label: "Interchange." FUTURE LAND USE MAP — MAP SERIES Activity Center Index Map. Revise Activity Center #18 boundary to match the boundary on Activity Center #18 Map, to reflect prior expansion in southeast quadrant. Revise Activity Center #14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole - in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road. All Activity Center Maps. Revise to update underlying map features — zoning, lot/parcel creation, street names, etc. — and to reflect parcel development and generalized building footprints. Activity Center #12 Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Moorings Park, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, a church zoned RSF -4, on south side of Seagate Drive. Activity Center #14 Map. Revise Activity Center #14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of a portion of Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road. Words underlined are added; words �engk are deleted. 8 Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 8 Map FLUE -10, Consistent by Policy Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway; a church zoned RSF -4, on south side of Seagate Drive; Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road. Rivers and Floodplains Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Estuarine Bays Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Soils Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport - Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Stewardship Overlay Map. Amend to add additional approved Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs 10 -15), as required by Policy 1.6 of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and to correct the boundaries of SSA 7. Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Replace existing map with proposed map that reflects the latest hydrologic modeling, as required by Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub- Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and subsequent policies. CPSP- 2010 -2 Exhibit A as approved by CCPC 1 -20 -11 GAComprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments\2009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions \2010 Cycle Petitions \CPSP - 2010-2 batch\Exhibit A Transmittal CPSP- 2010 -2 dw17 -26 -10 & 9 -24 -10 & 11 -8 -10 & 11 -9 -10 Words underlined are added; words are deleted. 9 Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. N O N CL N a O Z O F F W a a m gg W T 40 S T 47 S T 48 S 4 5 E � v .WU w nn 8 4 ■�� ■Il ■fl■ 15■ U ®� 74 e7% o lU 2Td E of �gn��gM cr g�-pyag a 5 r j a dm e : aa��&rz a 33a�n 7 r e y e a y j a 5�A�g Seta 2 $agL$g SSe�r��G � °s�u��� ®mS�Pi imi-I ¢ I ¢ � i IL w y r N J5H; Z ; 35 -t LU N LU V E z W � n � NJ T 48 S i T 50 5 T SI S T 52 S T 53 S r Sj k K4a PE W3ff B�F�r�8�W8 s8 LL%vg Rg �g j ¢ ¢ ¢ s gggg .— P�JS�� i r I �o � 99 8 L4 1 S BAAYii 1 9 04 1 8 05 1 S is _1._.. 8 Z5 1 S SS 1 u ■ f N N a EXHIBIT "A' R 25 E t R 26 E N N r AMENDED JANUARY 25 2005 (0d, No _ 2005-03) AMENDED /% ,a G_1 c AMENDED a. No 2008 59 _Ord. MIXED USE 6 INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER INDEX MAP f � � rc �— scryE - I 19 Rm /20� 2 4 � 0 n 3 f i 11. F C.P. 846 C R. 846 11 21 C.R. 862 r� J p 1 12 13 10 f C.ft e9. R_ RBE r c R 68B 1a ra 7 , y I I iII1))� 6+ i 1 S R. 84 IB 16 ,o I N N r AMENDED JANUARY 25 2005 (0d, No _ 2005-03) AMENDED /% ,a No 2005-25) AMENDED a. No 2008 59 _Ord. MIXED USE 6 INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER INDEX MAP f � � rc �— scryE - I 19 N N r TpZ X, PREPARED BY GIS /LAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIAWN / PLANNING AND REGULATION DATE'. 12/2010 FlIE ACCESS —INDEX -2010 DWG I R 25 E R 26 6 N N Y f N 6 a N O N r N N t- V AMENDED JANUARY 25 2005 (0d, No _ 2005-03) AMENDED JUNE J 2005 (Ord. No 2005-25) AMENDED — OCTOBER 14, 2008 No 2008 59 _Ord. - -- TpZ X, PREPARED BY GIS /LAD MAPPING SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIAWN / PLANNING AND REGULATION DATE'. 12/2010 FlIE ACCESS —INDEX -2010 DWG I R 25 E R 26 6 N N Y f N 6 a N O N r N N t- V a � 9 W g W 6 u F 7 ' I I I -1 i L1 I I II �l I 11 °IIJI �I ` Z W owl J� ,V it tit�gpi d�i�c r 4 � e uuuuQ� �3�' � 1 I II Hy4� i L1 I I II �l I 11 °IIJI �I ` Z W owl J� i I 1 4 a i I i i i G g� s I 11�� (K Y�) man MMT tOmn mom,, ` iii i l ,V it tit�gpi d�i�c r 4 � e uuuuQ� �3�' II Hy4� i I 1 4 a i I i i i G g� s I 11�� (K Y�) man MMT tOmn mom,, ` iii i l i py AI wo - L 5 it r s W r O ei i py AI wo - L 5 it : f §� $ Z. u§ / ()� k; I � «2 .p t} , r :\ \\ \ |.� d , ° IgI \/; . %. \ _ ?� ��. §�\ � . \� �/ i� ` ■ » \ ^�\ - « \ �� era mR r 1 ! y' VMS ■ w I � ! v v y y y ' I w 1 iM y y �9 Y r _ 199 � 3 Up', gg! III ?ivii r i , W v f O III � $ Ph f f 5r� �� era mR r 1 ! y' VMS ■ w I � ! v v y y y ' I w 1 iM y y �9 Y r _ 199 � 3 Up', 111 1 e , Hsi s f P48 ML -- -- - �n y R i """444y 4y1y1y $ u��lri� v�Qf�>W�•� � � i � � � if / / ". Jl °ll °JI:I i'�. 14,^14H� � 4 � Y � A 0 tF W `+ III + p'd7 111 1 e , Hsi s f P48 ML -- -- - �n y R i """444y 4y1y1y $ u��lri� v�Qf�>W�•� � � i � � � if / / ". Jl °ll °JI:I i'�. 14,^14H� � 4 � Y � A 0 r W $ W W i� U f 7 O W l7 W J ...E k% ,s liltr 9 y I I � I • I y I I � I • y i3 M A I d Y a [4 g i P I LLB. i Ft� , -� � V-2 II mil .r r ki W y i3 M A I d Y a [4 g i P I LLB. i Ft� , -� � V-2 II mil I a� o K \ a TF- 1. 1 II I I �'I f ,• �� ' ILL g 3! M, "i�9id • 6 �i� I� N. J qq a u 2�� e log h � W I• 1 ; .r a;H I a� o K \ a TF- 1. 1 II I I �'I f ,• �� ' ILL g 3! M, m W W F r<i Z 1 F w i F V a 0 Z W W W k is a g .4 l m 111 \ (I �\ I i I 7 �IIVI�IA � - lyy/ I �� ff a ya � .m s' F� 44 y3 Ss /I_ell yl �'� 1 Y fll I Atli lfllilpI Ulli_4 \I � !� �Illfllpl� l/ uuiurl aMA • or ~�E 2� V q �sd � w f S 0 2 W W W J ur � 9 P/ ll r 9 I f i Y �Yk I a �IA 1LL � � tlM1 ■ 8 � v F 4 I �� ip i��g �, �! � 111lilllll�il It 4 I r �1f11111Ifflll UMI!_ i L ^nw ;L k.1 I �� ip i��g �, �! � 111lilllll�il It 4 I r �1f11111Ifflll UMI!_ i L I �� ip i��g �, �! � 111lilllll�il It 4 I r �1f11111Ifflll UMI!_ s N, -1 NOW- v m � -„ i fi, m , 11� h K� gg ICI I �I ¢ f �Ipw N, -1 NOW- v m � -„ i fi, m , s N u s g r8 i� W f U a f �z u <s i G$ 9rP {{ 1 1�1 t 7 � 0, r,. f yyy 77, did O 2 W b W J CI illl�Xl- rle d CALL fN(r r awe sl 1 i aF 1 Uz a¢r CI illl�Xl- rle d CALL e u WP+ F iy ao+ i 3 14v lk two Li t it i III(/IIII i�¢`'�1 a l I Ib IN Ili 5 A I g I � 4 b u I 1 1 h ` 1�= I V� • • e r +r E e� s 3 2 7 d w% W ~R >$ I s l I Ib IN Ili 5 A I g I � 4 b u I 1 1 h ` 1�= I V� • • e r +r E 1 � J is Ili �l. J c s a �I yam=' �� • • E W 8 g 1 � J is Ili �l. J c s a �I yam=' �� • • E s I p yq Al s � 4 n�Eb �w ff p I I pl Ip, Y Y ll i� III r. l Ito d y R T I I [-Tlr llfSP?ir L2 l� � I I I � a iii I 'U-:8 A I �t • o ' j �i�t d � r r E s I p yq Al s � 4 n�Eb �w ff p I I pl Ip, Y Y ll i� III r. l Ito d y R T I I [-Tlr llfSP?ir L2 l� � I I I � a iii I 'U-:8 A • d i n • zg u� 3 r 3 7 e r a i� I O W W J � W I$ I: ypC G �,o TS' kKw o, s � f III �0i e n o, s � f r� � III r� ME- Hill Man �� m I ow� 'Ili 1 f. --- ------ j � ��III'!IllilV \l f� dlllilll I 1 = ii � Y N 5 Y �� 8E 2 `f yn col J Nit � F �a <= a I 11 s Y r� � III r� ME- Hill Man �� m I ow� 'Ili 1 f. --- ------ j � ��III'!IllilV \l f� dlllilll I 1 = ii � Y a a N a U r m x 56b1 I 1 i 4 e N 4 4 a e r�l ✓,�y 'n W b N 1 4 N C YI 0 vow' r u to _{ N t_ O .� O N LL W a tL IL S W F- Oz 3 O 1 J 1 2 Ill, v m,e W N ' 4 N Lq Is l7 •• •` j � � fC �' T u� �� a. ➢� 1P�' t W 9 4"y � JJn;t l+ 1 ial'S1 � w r 6 ❑❑■■ CCk T 49 S fig' M N O O d U Q F S ED �H �I BROWARO COUNTY OBOE COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY cn z ch Q � U a W O L O W z O (if Q s 7 4 U LLI i zz N o k7 0 o � r b ILn� a0 vi o ^` OJ m P m r V -3 `N � 1 SL p w Ll/ N � o z� F0, 3 1 Sao 00 °_ v- 0 a Qn is Uao g a3w wOr ?�rc�W�ozam �i3 LLwn4mx�� (9 u w z w °p¢mixmmo 2wpU��p�ap�.. `¢uz irc��`azr oxoowzzaa� OpO iwpmvm3 0 N d N U a m w .IK i m fr U m U dl BROWARD COUNLY 1. nUER COUNTY H as OAOE COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY • � C N i5 N a�Fo4 m !1 In/ v � OV m y y G m! Cj C,OO LP a J' G G\, > Q m mwm> am o� 'a> v am3�Yia'6N ism L.J m o (n � C] �o�aFaaa'opz� �zxrc�rco .moo aamm'n `. �LLm�v Z z cs Q U w a onao °oaoow - � ci °a w `-'AS aB°4`� m m fr U m U dl BROWARD COUNLY 1. nUER COUNTY H as OAOE COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY • � C N i5 N a�Fo4 m !1 In/ v � OV m y y G m! Cj C,OO LP a J' G G\, o i m v Z 6�m x i go a uw � m= wor- o a�a oo 8A EXHIBIT "A" CPSP- 2010 -2 [UIURL LAND USt MAN STS Western Collier County, Florida HENDRY cuuNlr R8 8 5 0 8 10 \_�_ 10 /1 6 J B 10 0 p 8 0 0 \ ) mpg C5_/ r' IMMOIOLEF 5 L m f i x 10 r4K w \ CA 846 U�10 10 10 10 _ _LEE COUNTY 2 8 0 8 7 U [ GR &58 5 CR 8467 2 rn J t 9 7 9 / 85 I 51 1 9 7 -- v 5 alc -� 5 CYPRESS 7 a SWAMP 9 I 1 rI _ 1. n OF SR 84 9 II NFLUES 1 \J �7 4 9 O !1S P I r 1n 2�� 5 s a l c G 1 NWUiGMEE '< a 5 5 1 9 '✓ 5a 4 4.� V E acltt 1 _ /- or \ ISLWO 4/ a I SCALE C��2 � _..__..._I PfirC S2I, 0 5M1. oMF ADOPTED - JANUARY 25, 2007 2 -J 1 Ord N. 2007 -18 AMENDED - OCTOBER 14, 2008 Ord Na. 200859 I SOURCE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, JUNE 1988 EACH AREA OUTLINED ON THIS MAP CONSISTS OF PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECEDE! MORE THAN ONE KIND OF SOIL. THE MAP IS THUS GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING AND REGULATION MEANT FOR GENERAL PLANNING RATHER THAN A BASIS DATE: 1112010 FILE'. LU- 94- 2010.DWG FOR DECISIONS ON THE USE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS. LEGEND _ ___—] SAILS K ME MM'MME EM PS O—0", ufplfMMS - 9r5iH1%F ASS]CU11M .LS CE ME VAL APEAS wWGT - fllMww __AA` 3. HESSpI - .WCLOR - "E NE. ASS9CU11CN SOILS CF LEE SwONPS. PRAIRIES MVO EXE...R IIMSEP5 E — a HmpN - CCPEWIp A55 .uipH WWOER F.E ..I. SOILS OF ME ELABIFOO 5, STELAE, AND HAMMCCHS YOIWfE B WER - OLAMW A550CNiIM NWNIYSO �ttCMW -- q,ON� A150cNN�noH� u E NOTE UN-0 MO AUAEnFL sLrvER AAEUIS NFARY QWES. MIwRE UN LINTS ME IfREP OEE 8A EXHIBIT "A" CPSP- 2010 -2 [UIURL LAND USt MAN STS Western Collier County, Florida HENDRY cuuNlr R8 8 5 0 8 10 \_�_ 10 /1 6 J B 10 0 p 8 0 0 \ ) mpg C5_/ r' IMMOIOLEF 5 L m f i x 10 r4K w \ CA 846 U�10 10 10 10 _ _LEE COUNTY 2 8 0 8 7 U [ GR &58 5 CR 8467 2 rn J t 9 7 9 / 85 I 51 1 9 7 -- v 5 alc -� 5 CYPRESS 7 a SWAMP 9 I 1 rI _ 1. n OF SR 84 9 II NFLUES 1 \J �7 4 9 O !1S P I r 1n 2�� 5 s a l c G 1 NWUiGMEE '< a 5 5 1 9 '✓ 5a 4 4.� V E acltt 1 _ /- or \ ISLWO 4/ a I SCALE C��2 � _..__..._I PfirC S2I, 0 5M1. oMF ADOPTED - JANUARY 25, 2007 2 -J 1 Ord N. 2007 -18 AMENDED - OCTOBER 14, 2008 Ord Na. 200859 I SOURCE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, JUNE 1988 EACH AREA OUTLINED ON THIS MAP CONSISTS OF PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECEDE! MORE THAN ONE KIND OF SOIL. THE MAP IS THUS GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING AND REGULATION MEANT FOR GENERAL PLANNING RATHER THAN A BASIS DATE: 1112010 FILE'. LU- 94- 2010.DWG FOR DECISIONS ON THE USE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS. a a U Q m X LU 6ROWARO COUNTY COWER COUNTY oADL COUNm COLLIER COUNTY N J Q (Y LLB o z a Q _ cn LJ p > J _ �U N O V�i�3 Vl • " z T 7 Q �1J O C U U W -D U Q L) N D Li X O U Z j F- U W U) � X m Ld 6ROWARO COUNTY COWER COUNTY oADL COUNm COLLIER COUNTY N w lI • o c�dw3 v Z p O I Qz Jw �U w O V�i�3 Vl • n m to V a - u z vl F N D a Z xWa U W Tl�lQ z a - � r m avJi¢ mi s = o ¢ z > m d 6ROWARO COUNTY COWER COUNTY oADL COUNm COLLIER COUNTY N lI • o n • o n �U � o N O �OV D • � m d _ b d m � O J • �s � • �p Coro m • o • � J D r� J �Jl o • a m � ^ U z OWN U.S. 4 H >Q Q E %X,811 1- O�IL11''�� E*1 COLLIER COUNTY RURAL& AGRICULTURAL AREA ASSESSMENT STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY MHP PEm N CPSP3010- o�ii io/�o.0 �u vx•�o� e�io.. ox'. �.ti "u legend �w re.umm��ni.. M1MU, -&%h,.o-uwmw vows -eem�sww„ro u.=msnl ifs wnry n.wi�sw A —wav li d o�ii io/�o.0 �u vx•�o� e�io.. ox'. �.ti "u legend �w re.umm��ni.. M1MU, -&%h,.o-uwmw vows -eem�sww„ro u.=msnl ifs wnry n.wi�sw A —wav li 8A EXHIBIT "A" PETITION CPSP- 2010 -2 COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs O� LIVINGSTON ROAD ASR (IRRIGATION QUALITY) [J CR 846 IMMOKALEE WELLFIELD AVE MARIA / WELLFIELD POTENTIAL FUTURE COLLIER COUNTY WELLFIELD AREA CITY OF NAPLES CR 846 EAST GOLDEN GATE v WELLFIELD 1 -75 NAPLES 2007 UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN ASR U CITY OF r1 .G. BLV NAPLES V - • COASTAL RIDGE PINE • COLLIER • COUNTY WELLFIELD SOUTH HAWTHORN RIDGE WELLFIELD EXTENSION GOLDEN GATE rn G. P WY WELLFIELD w CR 846 IMMOKALEE WELLFIELD AVE MARIA / WELLFIELD POTENTIAL FUTURE COLLIER COUNTY WELLFIELD AREA CITY OF CITY OF NAPLES 2003 EAST GOLDEN GATE FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL WELLFIELD 1 -75 NAPLES CITY OF SEPTEMBER 10, No. 2003 -44 2003 C, FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL 2007 AMENDED Ord. NAPLES 2007 UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN ASR U GATE CITY WELLFIELD (4 WELL PERMITS) o SOUTH HAWTHORN J m WELLFIELD EXTENSION rn w 0 MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES MARCO ISLAND a MARCO LAKES UTILITIES ASR o' (9 WELL PER GS w PORT OF O THE ISLANDS 1 R7 / WELLFIELD `O MANATEE ROAD ASR r/ SCALE N 0 5ML f AMENDED — Ord. SEPTEMBER 10, No. 2003 -44 2003 AMENDED Ord. — JANUARY 25, No. 2007 -18 2007 AMENDED Ord. — DECEMBER 4, No. 2007 -82 2007 DRO SOUR, DAIS: : U� AND RECUUnCN ROL AND PKWNIION DEPT. MG JS LEGEND • PLANNED WATER SUPPLY WELLS ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFIELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD rn N • RESOLUTION NO. 11- 61 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sec., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: and Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 17, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and 1 Words underlined are added; Words stfeek tweagb are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. LOOK, WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. ti6 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day ofwb" ",011. 2 Words underlined are added; Words stpaek thfough are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. %r, A1T fir: RV1j E-• BROCK, Clerk R- i U oe 4.4-9 Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Section Chief BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA G'j 1 u lUt BY FRED W. COYLE, CHAT AN CPSP - 2010 -5 Transmittal Resolution Davis Blvd/County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 3 Words underlined are added; Words stfuelr threattk are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -5 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION - MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub - districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources; promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 44 ab 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 4C� 15. Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 47-. 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict I. URBAN DESIGNATION • E CPSP- 2010 -5 Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non - residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non- residential uses including: 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdi strict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. A. Urban Mixed Use District LOOK CPSP- 2010 -5 V A 1=2 IT ••• ••• - - m no •. -. •• RM 1=2 IT CPSP - 2010 -5 45- 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 46, 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 47-: 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays the ■. (10%) Rqust •_ be aifeFdable WE)F'4()FGe h9USiRg units provided for these eaFRiRg less thaR eF equal to •. 42. The 800%, bUt than 100%, of the mediaR rt ;hall spt fA14h a to Re greater this Subdistr implementing rezone E)FdiRaRGe provision 45- 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 46, 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 47-: 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays CPSP - 2010 -5, a n Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map Copeland Urban Area Map Railhead Scrub Preserve — Conservation Designation Map Lely Mitigation Park — Conservation Designation Map Margood Park Conservation Designation Map Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map DaViS BaFn Read Mixed Use gubdistFiGt Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road /Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Exhibit A text alt. 2 DRAFT G: \CDES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments 009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions\2010 Cycle Petitions \CPSP - 2010 -5, Revamp Davis Blvd.-Co. Bam Rd. MU Sub dw/1 -10 -11 4 0 s N d y a U O r a w< \ C7 W uIJ171➢N ally / � � \��I �t� � unomut� �nl�l n < I��zv � czun uumil I� U ➢I➢ID III 11141 W ➢IIQ ➢f0 if muuntu�i>i�➢mu iP9� I t�nilo I / 17�ImRilllrr,, . 1 � I III I I 111 I t �yo (CI O P7 JJ 1VI{ J f I OVO tl NNV6d1N003 � i 14 O l7ulllmSl�up� awn IvS nU[ Ul n ItID{ 11�Cini`imnm Wmu� / (I, 31�,,III lur Q IJ(WIIII�Ip1IpIR� r ft1�R% UjIl[III[IT111MM 'I P( `Il�.�� tii; � Q LLI01 ➢W➢1W ❑WI1mT1 ➢➢WIWllI- Y94�1'hT� mim�mC3- m ➢[mmnrnq ft p ��¢¢a�s ➢ #9 �i��nooyy,� ��oi�lt� _. CL{ '. ,'IIII 1 I Wl6U111 �_ �'I' m w , TMMI�hSIf(fA�liH�d�W�Sflllltd�; nlmwjwj m(}}�lJIli W ®MWQIIIILIIllH ➢ f��Vl Lu nw ilmimmitfl � � ��\,(�yy �' IUIIIIW �illlN�llrl � mua AHIllfllllWWll gnn�'Q��nlrmllMn�llfI �'I IIIIiIII Il:�. /Jr ,vim. ��!'C�f I I�JIlflil, I fell ���y'; 71� It,uu � � IIC ( { lj � •� v � ii I AI � �IL IIIII � r III; I nunu Ilmll S�if {����tllClllltilil� i I ljf }; y�d d0 I _ I It��i{{ j.. �� ���III �I ❑IIIIII� I \1(�� I �i�il'I ���� ����5��_, rlllll Il, i_I, Ila7,� � �lll�l� �f�� Y'R [IIAIItHI 111 ill IIII ,� nTT'T1T�7 f 111 20 S� B k g T 46 S T 47 S T 46 S 4 y U p S o a F 3 F •� � o s r s §4 Rill w a r {ra $y o ■mss �m ■I7� ■Ll■ i I: � I G7�� °�K �n91; w pp 4 4B �a���AB aav RG gs s�5ygpsp� P B 40�" G gg I T 49 S T 50 S T 61 S T 62 S T 53 S yiss22' ..s �Gv�: xsA yo'�. a as K� e° -'g C '! fa 7Y a ry sr, b LU m a VJ LL W' WU ae o 4 9 9Y 1 ! S L7 1 I S B/ L S 84 L S o5 1 8 l9 1 S ZS 1 P w tl ry a s �5y S S9 1 Clerks Office Minutes & Records Dept. 4th Floor Administration Building (F) Attn: Patricia Morgan COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS 2010 CYCLE including petition CP- 2008 -1, BCC hearing only (TRANSMITTAL HEARINGS) Apf Collldr County Florida - -L_ ih,1. Petitions: CP- 2010.1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010.5 CP- 2008.1 (BCC only) CCPC: December 16, 2010; January 20, and February 17, 2011 BCC: March 22, 2011 8A I - 7- p i... +. y Apf Collldr County Florida - -L_ ih,1. Petitions: CP- 2010.1, CPSP - 2010 -2, CPSP- 2010.5 CP- 2008.1 (BCC only) CCPC: December 16, 2010; January 20, and February 17, 2011 BCC: March 22, 2011 8A I COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority .l 3 Li AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples FL 34112 March 22, 2011 9:00 AM Fred W. Coyle - BCC Chairman; Commissioner, District 4 Jim Coletta - BCC Vice - Chairman; Commissioner, District 5; CRAB Chairman Donna Fiala - BCC Commissioner, District 1; CRAB Vice - Chairman Georgia Hiller - BCC Commissioner, District 2 Tom Henning - BCC Commissioner, District 3 NOTICE: All persons wishing to speak on Agenda items must register prior to speaking. Speakers must register with the Executive Manager to the BCC prior to presentation of the Agenda item to be addressed. All registered speakers will receive up to three (3) minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. Collier County Ordinance No. 2003 -53 as amended by ordinance 2004 -05 and 2007 -24, requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying activities (including but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners), register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department. Requests to address the Board on subjects which are not on this agenda must be submitted in writing with explanation to the County Manager at least 13 days prior to the date of the meeting and will be heard under "Public Petitions." Public petitions are limited to the presenter, with a maximum time of ten minutes. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceeding pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department located at 3335 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 1, Naples, Florida, 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380; assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the County Commissioners' Office. Lunch Recess scheduled for 12:00 Noon to 1:00 RM 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Pastor Tom Stamatinos - Naples Alliance Church 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for consent and summary agenda.) B. February 22, 2011 - BCC /Regular Meeting C. March 3, 2011 - BCC /EMS Blue Ribbon Committee Workshop 3. SERVICE AWARDS 4. PROCLAMATIONS 5. PRESENTATIONS 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS • A. Public petition request from Rocco A. Migliazzo requesting a return of the original Pg. 1- 8 zoning and agriculture value for his property located at 1815 Dove Tree Street 7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Item 7 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise noted. 8. ADVERTISED, PUBLIC HEARINGS Item l8 to be heard no sooner than 1:00 pm unless otherwise (noted. A. Recommendation to approve the 2010 Cycle of Growth Management Plan Pg. 9 - 82 Amendments, including true 2008 Cycle Petition, for transmittal to the-Florida Departmei l: of t-.ommuntty Affairs (DCA) for review and objections, recommendations and comments (ORC) response. (Transmittal Hearing) 9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. Recommendation to approve the purchase of property insurance effective April 1, Pg. 83 - 85 2011 in the amount of $3,105,825, a reduction of $313,123 and authorize the County Manager or designee to execute any applications or other documents necessary to bind coverage and services. (Jeff Walker, Risk Management Director) 11. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 12. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS TABLE OF CONTENTS BCC - 2010 Cycle GMP Transmittal Amendments including a 2008 Petition MARCH 22, 2011 BCC AGENDA: 1) TAB: Table of Contents. 2) TAB: Legal Advertisements. 3) TAB: Executive Summary. 4) TAB: CP- 2008 -1 Staff Report, etc. 5) TAB: CP- 2010 -1 CCPC Staff Report. 6) TAB: CPSP- 2010 -2 CCPC Staff Reports. 7) TAB: CPSP - 2010 -5 CCPC Staff Report. 8) TAB: Resolution CP- 2008 -1 9) TAB: Petition CP- 2008- 1(Supplemental). 10) TAB: Petition CP-2008-1 (original). 11) TAB: Resolution CP- 2010 -1. DOCUMENT: 2010 Cycle Table of Contents Including, Petition CP- 2008 -1 DOCUMENT: Transmittal Legal Advertisements for BCC, CCPC, EAC DOCUMENT: Transmittal BCC Executive Summary; CP- 2008 -1 Supplemental Report for the BCC; Straw Ballot Resolution and Precinct Map; Staff Summary of The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010-107: The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, October 2009, "Population Need as a Criterion for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map"; Golden Gate Estates Area CIGM Map; Straw Ballot Executive Summary 2/9/10 DOCUMENT: Transmittal Executive Summary 1/19/10 for 2007 -2008 GMP Amendment Combined Cycles; CP- 2008 -1 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report; CCPC Transmittal Recommendation for CP- 2008 -1 DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: CPSP- 2010 -2 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report including Staff Report revisions 1/12/11; CPSP - 2010 -2 EAC Transmittal Staff Report; Existing Wellhead Protection Areas Map; Wellfield Model Report DOCUMENT: CPSP - 2010 -5 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: CP- 2008 -1 Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit 'A' Text & Maps DOCUMENT: Transmittal Application /Petition submitted post referendum DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Transmittal/Petition -- original from 2008 DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit 'A' Text TABLE OF CONTENTS k. 8 n 12) TAB: Petition CP- 2010 -I. DOCUMENT: CP- 2010 -1 Transmittal ApplicationTPetition 13) TAB: Resolution CPSP - 2010 -2. DOCUMENT: CPSP- 2010 -2 'Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit 'A' Teat& Maps. 14) TAB: Resolution CPSP - 2010 -5. DOCUMENL CPSP - 3010 -5 Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit 'A' Text and Maps ' 8q BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (B.C.C.) 2010 CYCLE GMP TRANSMITTAL AMENDMENTS CP- 2008 -1; CP- 2010 -1; CPSP- 2010 -2 & CPSP- 2010 -5 MARCH 22, 2011 Aers ITE TRING 8 A N 4PLEd I INERS • MUTI ©NS Published Daily fi m ommissioners will hold a public hearing lvaples. FL 14116 -mers Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Oyu +�O� consider the Transmittal of the following ration win Managemern Plan. The Meeting will Staffs o r FIc6 da �wnd.p�+ J ps:.,eti- t[o"fl"a- p.fd3u B.Com „sued a, �dv ay o Auc ao auaued aYY C011riilo e5 Of COI11.e' andT ��e you feel about Gov. Rick ,uaaa;Ilp adny if saalew n anq'buly1 n cut Everglades restoration vonuanald„ IIc, I aeym sl aeyy Before the undersm_ned they serve as the. authority, personally Vc sey »err aya woa{ uaappy> 'kayo � appeared Kim Pokamev. who on oath says that she serves as h the Everglades Founds oa fiunaaO - a,uptp �.. sauaaed llO aeya sfiulya the Accountine Manager of the Naples Daily News. a daily r dedicated to restoring an awes Motel I aeya port newspaper published at Naples- in Collier County. Florida: Everglades ecosystem, onl Juet1,L arnw uldaq oa distributed in Collier and Lee counties of F londa: tha; the responses from the surve pull aeya ivatatflp os attached copy of the advertisin . being a an to use the rest to test me: abll Inn aaeas P1no, pile use against their opponent - Naleay log Ienuaaod PUBLIC NOTICE asaq aya tli m onl idn't ask respondents if the s!Nr ano paaaeas Aaya in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE Day more in taxes to continu ;toration projects, Fordha - - 8ulmouy malnumi, Iaaj I 'Alaaelpawtul - ask respondents to prioritiz saulds pone salpoq DID!I was pubiishcd in said newspaper 1 dune in the issue project against other prc ' �'" I al°J P� aale(aol se moN on March 1, 2011 also facing potential cuts. >s xaaeidontla oa auam Apem Tana It programs against one ac , synsaa awosame„ aayao Dip gatm Afitant furfhc says that the, said Napier Daily News is a newspapc n said. aol IIDrc os paalaom 31 i.wnmdduly> puhiished at Napier, in said Colder Count}', Florid::. and drat tire mid >o found 74 ercem of r P r�Po I P!P 'YO iAialE1paumn paseaaaa F newspaper has heretofore been conni uouar, puhiishoJ in said Collin a state needs to manage neu!N 'a'?a?IWv5Ip dupueal in -a3 ?I Count}'. Floods: drsrributed in Collin and Lee coantis o' ' Florida. ! protect the Everglades, an s Aep rany 'am oil -aea38 ila) ;ach car and tar heat ent=d as second class mail mane: at we ms ed the state needs to manag QUoIm pe acly Dmils Am paasnfpe nfficc in Napin. in said Collier Count }', Flonda, for a period of I ent to protect rivers, lake!] '11110 ca ue pup aoi op mau suLL vm- ncxt Tr=wrnf thr firsi puhiicauon of the atuchcd con, of aches from pollution. suopdo aatpo ou poll am papr,ap adverrgcn t and afriant rumtcr saY, tha! he nas neither paid nm- -cent of respondents rankie'AllEmA - uoa>op lay of out a4m of promised am: person, Len or corporation any discount. rebate. restoring the Everglades a 104 Pala peq pilau} s aayaow AIN commission or refund for fife purpose of sceurhts this advenisemem to, ly important or very import --aaow gaaaya 'ang publication in utr s -. /- /y„ - -rcent ranked it as somewhamftn sraods snouas e pey I 'fooyas /� / 11 percent ranked it as nor mass i,uplp ieyt saoa>op yo s7ol L vplin do maid pue tpatq at Aantul ( 5t <_nature of afrrant Congress in 2000, the Con Am moydnoma Allenp lit uo awe, erglades Restoration Plarquwoy pue smDlgoad galeatl sriouas originally estimated to tak aafieuaaa 'e rem I 'uatp �>eg ` Swom to and subscribed before m: A about $7.8 billion. Howeve �was ku, nok llm aw aa-I -u3na503 This 3rd chf ' of Marcir. 2011 1 a since increased. y pauaddeq dulgaamos ode s aDX •� j y principle of Everglade, 'tnaq alrm Am instead of flushing two bill tlatm am n aeya 'JpA� g" aplr) r (SiLriature of notary public) „ water out to sea,' Fordhanq, t,,m pn anon, usas so, t 'nok m uv it in the Everglades durin6Lp undo or Dldoad iaaw uaym I I so you have it during thcgd Dill dun cldx; Aq ,,,,,,,,,._ aaeas aw aa-I provide to our population �� aayao maI a Acs am aa1'ydnoya ` = KAROL E KANGAS ncultural, and business an aaojag 'aydrens paoDaa Dill ass oa Notary Public -Stale o1 Florida =.`• •'> _ , MY Comm. Expires Jul - ?9, _013 s Inoa Alleai'y8noa ale scimssajuoD lion Everglades restoration c Commission r. OD 91223; Ae ground in mid - February 'puau3 aea(T Strand State Forest is not in ll tam said, because it is funde 'an Mills at mootalstaff/ryan -mills IS.aPLESLULI NER'S Published Dai11 N an Its, EL .i 1(j _kffidavir of Pubiicat NOTICE OF PUBLIC HE $ A NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commisslorters will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Canter, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples Florida, to consider the Transmittal of the following County' Resolutions, for amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on amendments to the Future Land Use Ele- SIaL° oI Florida ment and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area �011Il%1O5 of C 011.107 2I7d LOB Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, Tor transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: Before the undersigned they serve s., the at appeared Kim. Pokamev. who on oath sa*N- the Accourinne Manager of the Naples Dal newspaper published ai Naples- in Collie distributed in Collier and Lee counties of P anzched cope of the adv_rtismo, heinc u PUBLIC NOTICF in the matter of PliBLIC NOTICE w aaS published in said newspaper 1 time on March 1. 2011 Affiant further saes mar him said Naples Dally New published at Navin, in said Collier Counn. Florid:, newspaper has heretofore been con rruoush, pubitsh Qmnnl Florida: distriomed in (-.11in and I -ec count rncl, . an, and has hen, entered as smono class mail r office in Napier -in said ColliLT Counn. Flcndc. to veer uc, nrecedmr the firs, pu'ohcanon of P's ot ucvemsnnrnu arc afi aro iurtbm sips that he has u pmhy"rd am person firm or comnrauon any dr. comm,scion at refund for the pumuse of securing tm: pubisation in the s ewspupe ! Shy mature of affian t) S worm w and subscribed before me This- ird dn- of March. _10 *1 i St,_nature of n0itin public) RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHER- MORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DE- PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2010 -1, Penton requesting ar, amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home fumiture/turnshing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subiect por- tion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Plannerl RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP- 201D -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and uh Land Use Mao and Mao Se leis IFLUE�FLUMI, to: modify the Bayshore/Gateway Tri- angle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. David Weeks, AICP, GMP Managerl RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOU- LEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE REC- OMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. OR RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPART- MENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP - 2010 -8, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it tram mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maxi- mum of 5 dwelling units per ace - or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety, the subdis- trict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Bern Road, in Section B. KAROL E ItA9GA5 Notary Public - Sfair of Flo, - My Comm, Expires Ju 9 20 v Commission 4 CC 012237 RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHER- MORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DE- PARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CP- 2010 -1, Penton requesting ar, amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home fumiture/turnshing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subiect por- tion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Plannerl RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP- 201D -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and uh Land Use Mao and Mao Se leis IFLUE�FLUMI, to: modify the Bayshore/Gateway Tri- angle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. David Weeks, AICP, GMP Managerl RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOU- LEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE REC- OMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. OR RESOLUTION NO. 1I- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPART- MENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Petition CPSP - 2010 -8, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it tram mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maxi- mum of 5 dwelling units per ace - or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety, the subdis- trict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Bern Road, in Section B. �d KAROL E KANGAS Notary Public - Stale of F', My Comm. Expires Jul 29, Commission # DD 912E LEVARD/COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE REC- OMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ' ^ A OR j v� RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMEND- MENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89- 05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS _15 LiVAROWUNTY BMW ROAD *l))fEb -bSE SUBE)VRIGrAND- Ti3RTHERMDRE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPART- i MENIT OF COMMUNITY,AFFAIRS. . - a -,- Petition CPSP- 2010.5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to tins Future Land Use Elamarn and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis. Boulevard/County Earn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and itrrdtlngdensity to a maxi- mum of5 dwelling unitsper acre — or Possibly repealing the subdistrict in hsarturea ;thesubdis- trict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd: (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing+ 22.83 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [ Coordinator•. Corby Schmidt, AICP,- Principal Planner] RESOLUTION NO. 11- - A RESOLUTION OF THE$OARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSINIG AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLUEA COUNTY"GROWTH.MArN- AGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPMFiCALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING'TH6GOWEN -'&ATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. , Petition CP•2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden GaIg Area Master plan and ,olden Gate Area Maher Film Fare Land Uw Ml a d Mao Series. to createthe Estates Shop- ping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the G1 through C -3 zoning districts, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -4 and C -5 zoning districts . with a requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3rd Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 SSobth;; -Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. TRANSMITTAL HEARING [Coordinator. Michele 1Mosca, AICP Principal Planner) 5 Y r Collier Countu Florida �J e J r O.f,a1 w a� CRlrvn r e e' 5 5 n All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Com- prehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL, between the hours of 8:00 AM. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a- verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Nyou are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in orderto participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days poor to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E BROCK, CLERK By: /s/Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS NolrreanereEy gnen llV IYie LUllierLwnly BCeN Of COUMy LOmmiauorreen.. IFIR.' A'wneanrry on TunEry, Memn a urn Ir) la Wind of Conrrly comrn¢brcre Cleminr Third Flavor. Wier county Crnemmenl Cemur S28g F. IF mm�J Led .0. R.A. , m IGEAFA Hw irerienrtllL o1 ue followng Lamy BeedWUna, Sir anxnarwna ME Iln Tourer Goumy Growtlr Mary Jemenl PM. 1M HEII wG I--- W AMA. TRY Wrreve DI IM Many a m emrwdr a nmmmndllon on emeMrreMS W IM Chun Land Ile Ha meal and Fenn Land Uce Ml aM Mr` 4rlr_q Pa AnNen Gab Wq..R. PMT and Goeen Gale Weo EMERY Plan IT La ON a Mnp and Man Bens¢ Wr lrerremTtl to Ne FWk6 Wasmml oI FOR Affair, The HESCLUION NIee a re as lolbws: PESOL THIRD NO. 11 A NESOLU110N Of THE BOARD 01 COON IY COMMISSIONERS PREARFOSING AMEND MEN CU T TO THE LOCUM R OCUNTY GROW IH MANAGEMENT al OPgNANCE NO 8905, AS AMENDED. SR GIIFICALLY AMENOINO THE FUTURE LONG USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE STORE DUST UMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROO➢ NEIGHBORHOOD YACr MEBLIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND HIBINEO- MORE RECOMAENDINL LANSMIT RIL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DE- PARNMEMOFCOMMIIInIIAGE'el per". LRA10.T"Fre , puaeplp an arnendnanl tO an, WWR El Ol,'11ad re, SMITH hkmgamarl Pkn. Io ned's, the 6yrm9e o1 FIE ... Burch Boed Negllnor. commmdel SavndMina w a1— a grrcory/vrrWrmerkel. IFYI -Il flmes fe ., —1/hat IceOne, Mors 1urWUYmwnehire, The and domNmam alavm am 10 eueed ire 4 FOR epure l limanMnbl a m9M c.,rrvnam ®I we. F`S `maAmum avI 50.OW egigru real. m,PVren 192, sree lnnetl BmJbrl6gI MPUDI FLY aM wills ""-YOU murmur CevebOmenl ean[t notatan BI 100000 ARL fm1 of wnmeand IwG Teas on Pagl 110 shosel the ani U, Area I,ne SUoa" IF—, FIE l " .-,a mini Ol HANSn....IT ,ON Li�lrgalon rn Seclfoaidr.. OBBST Iflange R5 Fen igANSM ?T/LL RENTING fL OOMine10Y: MicMeM¢, u, NCV Pnn[ipel NenneR PF9JLUTICN NO 11 A HESOUG RON OF ME BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRCVBSING OMEN& MENT TO THE COTTER G]UNTY AMEND FI MANAGEMENT PEW, ORpNANGE 8405. AS EMENDED. STRALLEH:N I V AMENDING IHE TUTU% LAND USF ELEMENT. AND F ORTHE LAND USE MOP AID MAP SERIES AND FURTHERMORE RE 4MMEMENNG THANS4RTAT OF IFIE!HA EFFECT TOl111 R LINDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS PM me LPSP MITI Sni IF TIon Insess n, FOHAIJ ar6 b the FIRE I Use Harts aIW Folurz Bad the Pan FIE Map ILIA, IFLH/F UFES In YI TaBayALOYELHO —ey TOY t angle Rverve- nenl Ova my iTOGNSH: FI FELL Alley i.1, mMlly aOelearesty or 1N 011wanI InNll CoU -YLY 1, Uinret: HASLA as 11111 d Prole05oT Ma, uMa1e DO FLOM and MCPSeoe relNar mats FLUMMii,a, co rurdw G. add Manly n wear, o.,m rreke other ,ahem GOT A-me TRAEEMina HFMING [CooNlnlo[ OLVid rial Al GNP MenaPeYfwe REBOI11101 NO 11 A RC W WTION OF IRE A,IOD OF COUNTY LOMMLSSIONFRB PROPOSING AMLND, MEMS TO THE COLLIE H WUNTY G EMNI MANAGEMENT PIAN. CRLEN IN IE 09 O5. AS AMFNDED_ SPEC P(OLLY AMENDNG THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND LETTER LAND USE I AND MAP SEBIE$ TO CHANGE THE SUBDSTRICT FROM DAMS BOULE MDTASWT'( BARN RDOD MI%EI)LISE GUBDISTRCT TO OAKS BOLL EELAMDrCOUNTYN tl HUpDT &DENITMSUBDISTRICTi ANDFURIHEIrMOREHEC OMEFNDINGTPAN:MFIAL OFIIIESEMAENDMENTSTOTHFFLCRIOACE MMENT OF COM.1JMI AFFAIR: OR T ESCC UION NC. 11 A R LAYTH ION OF THE BCAHD CF CCIINLV COMMSSgNEPS PROPOSING AMEND MEATS TO THE COLTDT COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLNJ, ORDINANCE 84 05. AS AMENDED SPY FlOALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE "' AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT 'R EN TIMELY THE DAMS BOULEVARDAGUN TY IFNN ROAD MIXED USE SUBq$TNU, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENgNO RA BILIALCFTHESEAMINOMPIIS10 THE FLOIDADEPMi- MEW CE (OMMUNIIY A,FSFFA PeNMLP5RX1AsS SPel1 Pylili., 11 ArlganennMmLm to his FUwm L sal U »Flemenl and FIM. Laid Use Ma, and I,,a, Saps 10 m0dryy IN D. BoukvaEICIE, Earn HOW MuN VueSuMTrlm I OF ag, IIIrommMtldum toresiEenYeEeM4mH[p de115i1ybarYtyr n Of 5 tlwellinguni1, rwa mOnsaNly leviree Las- MFCUlInb entirely: NO suMs led harts, nM nl nnrer AT WJrs BIV� (SR 84l and County flsm Ever! SMbn 8, Al., OOLOG, IT SOWh.)ieUF lO Va,, containey. 12 AE ashes. TRANSMTTPL HEARING Chandinater: SONY SO RISC A LP, Pnnc4el Plil RFCIS URON NO 11 A BESOLUION OF I1151dOM ID OF COUNTY NAMMI$SIGNER$ OF COLL IER COUNTY. FLORIDA FROPOSINI AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MAIN AGEMI'ON, OPDIIYEU,O 6905. AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GME AREA MAST 11 FLAN. MCLITANG THE GOTTEN GAZE AREA MASTER PLµ FUTURELAND :9T 1,141FIDNAP5ERIELF MDFUBTHEPMORFTRANSMITIING HIS NM ENDMNJTTOI!EIIORIDLDEPARIMENI CCCOMMUNINAEFNRO asithon OP -hYYL PDT' reall.asYng eB amenJmanllavtle GlNffiaGVLNw MSIeIPIena1M r M ° "ReMNW M0e10IaAn FUlwn LaffiVeM MaOm shaMSatiu. tounetetN B181¢SnR l HOUgh CLY SJNI "I"'lbwemmlmamor AL va,game leemlmmmd 1, Sean Dl I.A. allay' "ant."Ii'I II USrenRae.+u"'wmLOmaay.. El and state.aOR, wanaYepuoard OHE mnml SEE, Blvd Toni Io1 IStreb Foresea IN mthaih mGONan Gem her USE 11Cg0oa V,, f,F weano9m ANTEMITATCH.ln E.I. a. TownLMF 'OR.E.h., Faar Ira: Mhy ofh a.mr fflNJSMITTALHFARING jCwkinebr'. MicMle Mmm. AICP, OMP4el Memerl 5'— Callly CWaRy IJ 1 d Fl4eltl� k�d L hh i` NI Ih islar ed aeries ae II, he-, In a�Taa and N nave Get o11M PmyreJ Growl, MATO.A. n Far .....111 ne neMr II ser far rrnlrenwn el 11. Land Oevebonenl Se— On, Co vvhvl rve Par—anent Er 5E N. HINAS Dr.. Neran" R OeMZn pee Murs of B W A M. vq FROM Monday mwugn FMSy. - vlNrmcre The melerlek III M nwy AreBanle As InSPeeBUI A the Colin, Coumy Gak4 Year Fnun, Fbor Swle W, . Wier Coumy Gwemmtnl Carl Earn TemWmi Tna. N.11 or, weakpner 11,IT. Ran. hearing the elleslbm seadvaOg W IM 6,cumanls FLOM MY 0RAOSd m the OURSOLUmalx FlanneS Amer. when BanmeMl filed wiW OR Cars m the flwras reasherloramn'.11 ,,10 aadared— vileratANepunrc Aran, It A prism decors AN oFPw ar made W th, WER, LOU.M Marl ICOUnry LOm wnh rmpetl IF en,— �uos.'s, eY hnall Iw eirl1 -1e eenN Cl that llr ene, and 1erucn pu,NvAMIrt a1.a mWBme OOr Of The MADEadMya R ass. which o Onsid�IN., Ia,.I ,.DA say MYtNae irleeal le to M nsead ayon ap— LF Adle2h8Tw ned, — .m mmMallon,..I to paNeilr,l leMxee a, ryes emm..A o1M' . I a.,. a Rear ISHtheCOBk orally 11 ,,, iFMan AB et 0', nI I I.'he� 09. 1, aremLai NTAI,Rvml. Elde, Yas,.,, W, 1..- .112$e, al bnnlwu dale ,nerlhn mealy MLaled lMlenilg davn`relollM Manng lmllabed mmApadn iT IN Bcertl oI uxmry CemMssonole Olfirc BOARD OF COUNTY COM11k ISF1(JNFPS COLLIER COUNTY, FLOHIOA. AEA' ES TIFF :1111 _. Mach', $gll &A BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (B.C.C.) WELLHEAD PROTECTION MAP ADVERTISEMENT CPSP- 2010 -2 GMP TRANSMITTAL AMENDMENTS NAPLES DAILS NEWS Published Dail) ]Naples. FL 34110 .k davit of Pubtieation Jlate Of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authorm. personally appeared Kim Pokarnev. who on oath save that she serves as the Accounting Manaeer of the Naples Dail- News. a daih newspaper published at Napies. in Collier County. Flonda: distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida: that the attached cony of the adveruslms. be1nv a °IBL1C NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on March 1.2011 Aunt further saes that the said Naples Daily New, is a n"rspap published at Naples. in said Colher County. Florian. and mar the said newspaper has heretofom been cameroomiv rnblished in said Collin C.oaml)'. Florida: distributed in Collier and Ise counties of Flonda. each day and has ban entered as second class mail mailer a the past office in Naples, in said Collier County. intends. for a perim of vent, nett preceding the firs: Publication o: the attached cop, e' ooverismmnt and affiant further says that he has neimc hard our promisee am' person, turn n- corporation any discount. rebatt . commission or refund for the pumose of securing this advertisement lot puhitcauon in 1he sajaH ^wspape: ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before m- Tnis Std day of March. 2011 Ln (Si_natureofnoarypubiic). // t if you want RESULTS conventional drugs and in satisfacrion. Consumer :tion with these treatments ion- biased to protect you, ,r it and a leg to correct your �o a chance to see if we are ith pain or just want to sit t issues, you can schedule a it NO CHARGE. .w patient exam, including rpedic examinations and ... so please take advantage i4dt and 1 don't want you -iderstanding about quality exam fee. You'll get great ins... I'm a Summa Cum nd Cum Laude graduate of low exam fee to determine niter, and they are really Ily and warm, and we try Our office is called 00C or e KAROL E KANCAF 'G' = Notary Pu6hc -State of Florida IN WELLt+FES$ My Comm Expires .In 29, 2013 5 Commission it OC 912237 tples, FL 34109 and Staples fiber is: )004 ractic.corn hank You ,t, D.C. ,ere, been perfonved u a teem, ETING NOTICE, R RESOLUTION Commissioners will hold a public hearing ners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County !r the Transmittal of the following County rowth Management Plan. The Meeting will ation on an amendment to the Future the Growth Management Plan. The IMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN d MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE FLORIDA. ORDINANCE 99 -05, AS �O THE FUTURE LAND USE ELE- �ELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE the { {{bavid Weeks, AICP, GMP Manalgerr] F rested parties are invited to appear and brand. Copies of the proposed Growth pgement Plan Amendment will be made able for inspection at the Land Develop- : Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning ion, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. ,een the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., day through Friday. Furthermore the me- is will be made available for inspection at .',oilier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, a 401, Collier County Government Center, Naples, one week, prior to the scheduled ing. Any questions pertaining to the docu- is should be directed to the Comprehensive ning Section. Written comments filed with clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, ch 22, 2011, will be read and considered at 3ublic hearing. ,erson decides to appeal any decision made teXlfier County Board of County Com- Iioners with respect to any matter consid- at such meeting or hearing, he will need a rd of that proceeding, and for such purpose ray need to ensure that a verbatim record of aroceedings is made, which record includes estimony and evidence upon which the ap- is to be based. tion in order to participate in this proceeding, ssistance. Please contact the Collier County rail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL. 34112 -5356, ad listening devices for the hearing impaired I NAPLESDAIL), NEVIS Published Daily' Naples. i'1 341 1 U - kffldavit of Publiea mate of rloTica Counties of Collie; and Lee Before the undersiLned they serve to the at appeared Kim Foicamec, who on oath say III Accounting Manage- of the Naples Dai newspaperpublished at Naples. in C'ol ie distributed in Collier and Leo- counties o; F attached copy of the advcrnsma being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time or. March 1. 2011 '.. Affiant neither says that the said 1:arn es Daih ,,Jew published at Naples, in said Collier C,ounl), Florida. newspaper has heretofore been mortnuously publisbe Coum) Florida: rbsuibuted in Collier and Lie counu each day and has been emered as sezond class mail in office in Naples_ in said Collier Count)-, Florida . for year next prmedmg the first puhheautin of inc au: advmisemrn_ and afnan motser says that he has ne promised an) person_ firm or corporation any d:se commission or refund for the purpose of securmg this pubiiatim: t t�pdf e —_ _— Si_matuneof affiardl t Sworn to and suoscrihed before me This 3rd da- of March: 2011 a (Sisnature of norarw pubitel KAROL E KANGAS PL I.g Notary Public -State of Flmidi My Comm. Expires Jul29 201. Commission k OD 912237 • NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Favor, Collier County Government Center, 3299E Tamaami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting wil commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -_ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELE- MENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND .RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP - 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element an Flitprgland Use Mao and Map cedes inclu -_g the mao fRled Colter Courttv Wellhead Protection Areas Proposed Wellfieas and ASRs Map. [Coordinator. David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] co.yeu couxrr r— weuerno aaarccnoa nnews. a vnoroseo waur�ens rro wsn, 4,� - - °,^ A ID r N Q t Y, All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Develop- ment Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the me- tentes will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center; East Naples, one week pria to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the docu- ments should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Cledt to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, March 22, 2011, will he read and considered at the public hearing. It a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Com- missioners who respect to any matter consid- ered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the ap- peal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Taman Trail East, Sole 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5355, (339) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted harming devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNT', FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE. CHAIRMAN DWIGHT =. BROCK. CLERK By /s/Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL,, Net 231102530. _. _ —_ _... _ —._.. _. _— _.__— __. _. _-__--fAarcht 2011 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, March 22, 2011 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELE- MENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP - 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map series including the map titled Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRS _J l y .... A PF* i --__ .1— All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Develop- ment Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL. between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the ma- terials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the docu- ments should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, March 22, 2011, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Com- missioners with respect to any matter consid- ered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the ap- peal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: /s /Patricia Morgan Deputy Clerk (SEAL) a, A84 I COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION [C.C.P.C.] 2010 CYCLE TRANSMITTAL ADMENTMENTS CPSP- 2010 -5 FEBRUARY 17, 2011 NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Kim PoLrr ev, who on oath says that she serves as the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida:, distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida: that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper I time in the issue on January 28, 2011 Affiant further says that flit said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier Count}. Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida: distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each dal and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier Count}. Florida, for a period of I vmi next preceding the first publication ofthe attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, fine or corporation any discount. rebate. commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for pubticati the sal / spaper. ( Signature of affiant Sworn to and subscribed before me This I st day of February.. 2011 pcuylIK (Signature of notary public) iiar � ,u `F2 KAROL E KANGAS Notary Public • State of Florida r o My COMM. Expires Jul 29, 2018 _.` 1° Commission # DO 912237 Iff C HEARING ISIDER RESOLUTION � Commission will hold a publio meeting on of County Commissioners chamber, third mril; Naples. on to the Board'of County Commissioners to eh ,Yns vssz „y;;. , the Transmittal of 2010 Cycle Growth Man- ' Dent and the Future Land Use Map and Map iSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS PLAN, ORDINANCE89 -05, AS AMEND - SE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE ,T FROM DAVIS ElOULEVARD /COUNTY ULEVARD/CO]]NTY. BARN ROAD RESI- MMENDINC""j; 'NSMl7TAL. QF THESE. OMMUNITYAFPAIRS. °'r SE + ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE ,.THE DAVIS..BOULEVARD /COUNTY 'MORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMIT- '. - HTMENT OF COMM _ ITY AFFAIRS. ,tp the Future Land Use.Element and Future . evard/County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdis tl gdensity to,a maximum of8 dweling units.. thesubdlstrict is lbeateidettbeloutheast" ctich B;Towriship 50;South lunge 26 east;., A7CP,Prinoipal planber] &a- M 1 -75 Q 7.. OQ rd.l Copies of the proposed Growth Manage - f CP7I4S, Lux III --tion at the Land Development Services Dept., WAi Dr., Naplee, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. iertaining to the documents should be directed 2,$r eive Planning Section. Written comments will be read and con -er County Planning Commission with ring. he will need a record of that proceeding, mi"Otuou record of the proceedings is made, which' e appeal is to be based.. - mmodatlon to order to participate In this sion of certal2 assistance Please contact iedat333�m1at iTratlEast,Sude'101, s prier -tot eetifg Assisted;fistenmg 'ntyoise loners Office, 'ti NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 .kff davit of Public State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the a appeared Kim Pokamev, who on oath sa, the Accounting Manager of the Naples Da newspaper published at Naples, in Colli( distributed in Collier and Lee counties of I attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper I time on January 28, 2011 i l NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the'Collier County Planning Commission will-hold a public meeting on Thursday February 17 2011 at '8.3o A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, tlaples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of 2010 Cycle Growth Man a9p.metit Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map has. The resolution title is as follows' k RESOLUTION NO. .11- ��` A RESOLUTION OF THE TO THE COLLIER COUI Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News ^ BARN R published at Naples, in said Collier Count}, Florida '..TAL,OF' newspaper has heretofore been continuously publish , Counry, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counti CPSP -20' each day and has been entered as second class mail m Land Use office in Naples, m said Collie County. Florida, for trietby oh year next preceding the fast publication of the atta per sonar - advertisemrnt; and affiant further says that he has no corner of I containing promised any person, firm of corporation any disc ' commission or refund for the purpose of securing this publication i the said n rs riper. O,+ K ( r ignatureofaffiant)� " and LAND USE )/COUNTY CAD RESI- 1MMUrvurr+r�p!+u+o:� -q. -� fTURE,'LANU VSE tLk kri l 7lNu Yu i Uric t Nu uoo IN IT'S ENTIRETY•T� VI AOULEVARD /COUNTY T, AND FURTHERMQRB'R�C &MENDING TRANSMIT - FLORIDA 6EPARINEE T,'OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. A amendment toithe FLYurs land Use Element and Future the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdis- the Sworn to and subscribed before me This Ist day of February, 2011 sis kwy� • All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth ME (Signature of notary public) ment Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:01 and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be di to the Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section. Written com KAROL E KANGAS filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office poor to Thursday February 17.2011 will be read an Notary Public •State o6 Florida sidered at the public hearing: ?� ,• to ' My Comm. Expires Jul 29, 2013 - '• ' %;F Commission # OD 912237 If a person decides td appeal any d9tiFafon made by the Collier County Planning Commissic respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he'will need a record of that proce andforsuch p,�urposat ee[kto ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, record inclu s t,I a e •. ,a 't$yidence ufjon which the appeal is to be based a+ m r,... PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday. February 17, 2011 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of 2010 Cycle Growth Man- agement Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMEND- ED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESI- DENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. Or- RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMEND- ED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN IT'S ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMIT- TAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. CPSP - 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed Use Subdis- trict by changing it from mixed use to residential, and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre- or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety, the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 east, containing + 22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] a ',h I ff G.G. BLVD. N K } Z PINE RIDGE RD. n m OLDEN I GG GATE PKWY. S.R.- 84 1 -75 DAMS BLVD. CPSP- 2010 -5 CITY / OF NAPLES I All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Manage- ment Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Land Development Services Department, Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday. February 17. 2011 will be read and con- sidered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman - Collier County Planning Commission No.231188482 January 28, 2011 07, k 8 A + COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (C.C.P.C.) 2010 CYCLE GMP TRANSMITTAL AMENDMENTS CP- 2010 -1 & CPSP- 2010 -2 DECEMBER 16, 2010 Continued to January 20, 2011 NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Kim Pokai who on oath says that she serves as the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida: that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper I time in the issue on November 30- 2010 Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of I Year next preceding the frst publication of the attached copy of advertisement, and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor Promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said nyvrlpaper. ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This I st day of December, 2010 (Signature notary public) `=Q:Ff1V PUBn —��0 KAROL E KANGAS =;E aNotary Public - State of Florida My Comm. Expires Jul 29, 2013 "•. °; ;; °�• Commission # DD 912237 ME 08 Escal�EARING AND C11023A, dfdy22,000 ISIDER RESOLUTION miles! n will hold a public meeting on Thursday, December third floor, County Government Center, 3299 Fast of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida iwth Management Plan amendments to the Future resolution title is as follows: S PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COL - -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMEND- ) USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FUR - MENT TO THE FLORIDA. DEPARTMENT OF lure Land Use Element of the Growth Management �O CTS U mood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/su, furnishing store and department store use to exceed CP7089, performance a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ package, 26,000 miles mum development limitation of 100,000 square feet f the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of 48 South, Range 26 East. (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) I R.0� e Eut= Lwd Use Element d'P t re Land Use V Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B/GTRO7; modify al Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add ions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] 26,000 MILES!! Hard to find . ' I kage, navigation, 26,000 mil Collier County I rear seat DVD, new tires! I *Florida 5,000 MILES!! Limited package, 9 - not a rental car!! I MILES!! Navigation, rear dvc VILER New Cadillac trade, (4, LT, white with tan leather, 1 MILER Power ever fhing, gre --�— age, low miles, great car!! ' vet top, leather to proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment atic, leather, Anhiversa Edits Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. ry ., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials e, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government iearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents eat zFef f /� „ the public filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office /V"A°`y',t the public hearing. ty Planning Commission with respect to any matter - "proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to T ok and Twitter! rd includes the testimony and evidence upon which i in order to participate in this proceeding, you are se contact the Collier County Facilities Management 34112 -5358, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior ��,re available In the Board of County Commissioners ° 41� N her 30 2010 NAPLES DAILY- NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publicati State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the autl - appeared Kim Pokarnev, who on oath says the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily' newspaper published at Naples, in Collier ( distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Flo attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper I time on November 30, 2010 Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily N ews i published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, an newspaper has heretofore been commuously published County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties each day and has been entered as second class mail mat office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a year next preceding the first publication of the shop advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neit promised any Pusan, firth or corporation any disco commission or refund for the purpose of securing this at publication in the said rilpnpaper. ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This 1st day of December, 2010 (Signature of notary public) o'N" ate•,•. Rio a- KAROL EKANGAS k Notary Public -State Of Florida My Comm. Expires Jul 29. 201; `� •,9F �, Commission # OD 912237 P� PlifiBA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday, December 16, 2010 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government Canter, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of the 2010 Cycle,Gmwth Management Plan amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT. TO THE COL- " ,UER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMEND- ING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE -LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FUR- THERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ❑ PeDlipnCP- 2010 -1,. Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/su- peonarkeL physical threes facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /fumishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast comer of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator. Michele Moses, AICP, Principal Planner] ❑ Petition CPSP - 2010.2, staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Mao and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B/GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errars, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator. David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] s Collier County 'Florida CP.A161 P r 1p r All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week poor to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documerhs should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments fled with the Cleric to the Board's Office poor to Thursday, December 16, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. It you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the prevision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday, December 16, 2010 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners chamber, third floor, County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs the Transmittal of the 2010 Cycle Growth Management Plan amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series. The resolution title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COL- LIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMEND- ING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FUR- THERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ❑ Petition CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Futur nd Use ElemQnt of the Growth Management Plan, to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/su- permarket, physical fitness facility, craft /hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (9.2+ acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 squarefeet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrict is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South. Range 26 East. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] U Petition CPSP - 2010 -2, staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land_ Use Element and Future_ L n Use Mao and Mao Series FLUE/FLUM], to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B/GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] Collier County i4 ? Florida t / I —✓ o. i ac ern � r r L 7 L All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, fourth floor, suite 401, Collier County Government Center, East Tamiami Trail, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday, December 16, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark R Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No.6 7 8178413_ ____ _- ___ ___. November 30 2410 ME COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (C.C.P.C.) WELLHEAD PROTECTION MAP ADVERTISEMENT CPSP- 2010 -2 GMP TRANSMITTAL AMENDMENTS R ME!ITING 8 A. NAPLES DAILY NEM'S ommission 1 hold a public meeting: blished Daily and of County Commissioners cham- Pu Pu FL 34110 Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Naples, ittal amendment to the Collier County 9:00 A.M. Affidavit of Publication ion on an amendment to the Future, wth Management Plan, The Resolu =.- State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee MISSIONERS PROPOSING AN - ,MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR. THE Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally ORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -105, AS appeared Kim Pokarnev, who on oath says that she serves as O THE FUTURE. LAND USA EL 'p' the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily E WELLHEAD PROTECTION AR- newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; E AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the L OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE noN AREAS. Inn ietoa Mm Aens in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE IOW was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on November 30, 2010 .. r•,9C0 -' a Affiant furtter says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier "t - County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post v r VVV office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year next preceding the fust publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication 'n dte sai wspapec. , �,9Qli k ( Signature of affiant) %AOE� ® -® Y900 Swom to and subscribed before me9Q0 .;n This Ist day of December, 2010 Collier County Planning Commission r hearing, he will need a record of that (Signature of notary public) PINE RIDGE ROAD - that a verbatim record of the proceed- _ idence upon which the appeal is to be MKA modation in order to participate in this Notary Florida - '"�' rovision of certain assistance. Please ;r My Com. 2013 SONNA ROAD 1 rtment, located at 3335 Tami ami Trail Com237 at least two days prior to the meeting. vailable in the Board of County Com- ned _. - Nnvamher 3n. 2010 NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publical State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the au appeared Kim Pokarnev, who on oath say; the Accounting Manager of the Naples Dail . newspaper published at Naples, in Collier distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Fl attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF: PUBLICM;MEETI!lI 1,.1­, Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday, December 16, 2010, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners cham- ber, third floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal amendment to the Collier County Growth. Management Plan. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recrimmendatrori on an ameri[iment to the Future Land Use Element Future; Land Use Map Series of the Gmwih Management Plan- The gegoki tion title is as follows; RESOLUTION NOi 2 ©if -,_,T' , A OF PLAN UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER - OOI f N;,FLDRIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05 „AS ' AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN'AMENOMEKIT,TO -THE FUTURE LAND USE EL- EMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIESifOR THE WELLHEAD: PROTECTION AR EAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. - in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE O CPSP - 2010 -2, Petition requesting COLT ER COUMY various amendments to the Future ”` ncl ELLHMFR0MCTfQNAREAS, PROPOSED WEUF1EWS AND A&R* Use Maa Use was published in said newspaper 1 time i d' I ri and including n m titleppFt on November 30, 2010 Colliar CoLnty Wellhead Protection 0 u ' Pro o d Wellfi a]& and ASRs Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News R' ry` x - published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, a f �NS,(yil7TAL HEAPoNQj, newspaper has heretofore been continuously publishe [Coordliretor '.. __ David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] • ^ County, Florida:. distributed in Collier and Lee counti _ each day and has been entered as second class mail m ' e office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida for - - - g U ®NIi year next preceding the first publication of the atta All interested parties Are invited to appear tw - '-- kLlttuall//1l advertisement, and affrant further says that he has nei and be heard. Copies of the propgeed promised any person, firm or corporation any disa Growth Management Plan Amendment commission or refund for the purpose of securing this a will be made available for inspection at pub]ication " the said newspaper. the Land Development. Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning. Section, 2800 - - N, Horseshoe Dr., Naples, betweeri the ( Signature of affrant) hours of 8A0 A.M. and 5.6o Pa, Man- day through Friday. Any qu'esfions per- taining to the documents should be di- reeled to the Comprehensive Planning 1 -® Sworn to and subscribed before me Section. Written comments filed with the This lst day ofDecember,2010 Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thurs- day, December 16, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing (����,�(���h (Signature of notary public V If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that f _ proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed - KAROL E KANSAS soA ings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be Notary Public - Stale of Florid; based. =` My Comm. Expires Jul 29. 201 %•:FOF � Commission # DO 912237 �qa' If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No 678186778 November 30 2010 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on Thursday, December 16, 2010, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board of County Commissioners cham- ber, third floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolution, for Transmittal amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolu- tion title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE EL- EMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AR- EAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. O CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Collier County Wellhead Protection MaD. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Development Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 PM., Mon- day through Friday. Any questions per- taining to the documents should be di- rected to the Comprehensive Planning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thurs- day, December 16, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing. COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs pR))� -1-7' .1� I If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed- ings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No 678186778 November 30 2010 � I ..our/ w �....... -1-7' .1� I If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed- ings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Mark P. Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No 678186778 November 30 2010 � I NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Kim Pokamev, who on oath says that she serves as the Accounting Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on November 15, 2010 giant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier " County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid not promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication W the sai_(LZewspaper. ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This 18th day of November, 2010 (Signature of notary public) / RiElKANGAS - State of Floridas# DO 91223073 11 a� MEETING Council will hold a public meeting on )n her record. It just recovth Management Division Conference mat( ongful arrest wasn't ce. The Naples man ecub9tion on an amendment to the Future NSwth Management Plan. The Resold dlier Sheriffs Office - Fa ;hts by jailing him The use someone used wort- ;. They didn't erase licen,MMISSIONERS PROPOSING ne, jailed him again scr'FOWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN he lost his job. Day R COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDI- I his federal lawsuit vtde,R: AN AMENDMENT TO`THE without admitting - the 'USE MAP SERIESFOR - THE d further litigation menWELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER DsRTHERMORE RECOMMEND - - Qaples, it took ayear stole FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ce and, by then, he'd agate ing jobs. state with pulling a fire Bill. ments to the Future Land Use tclub during a Hal- wor)ncluding the man titled Collier it, dressed as Pamela d0uglds and ASRs Mao. [Coordi -.. itch." Defense attor- got f ined alarm company theyAll interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the Loon, patrons were Mproposed Growth Management Plan, Amendment will be made available her and the fact that Fifth Avenue South Fifth and 50 hlor inspection at the Land Develop- Services Dept., Comprehensive itehens. If planning Section, 2800 N: Horse- ; Irish Pub and Grill, peo hoe Dr., Naples, between the hours eg and Tracy Wenk- 'McCof 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday mer of fish and chips abighrough Friday.. Any questions per- r .s (Shin tzuYorkie H4aining to the documents should be Emma sat patiently frondirected to the Comprehensive Plan - the Ining Section. Written comments filed . aey weren't affected "Ywith the Clerk to the Board's Office -ause they have their tnnephor to Wednesday,. December 1, rte, but they did skip N(2010, will be read . and considered at night traditions this adalthe public hearing. - tom f a person decides to appeal 'any lay nights we eat out A we did. not come soutdecision recommended by the Envi- nmental Advisory Committee with at, because we knew said- espect to any. matter considered at oblem and we knew Flt, ucn meeting or nearing, he 'wig needy- d to eat," said Tracy Va record of that proceeding, and for' ras a way to make up wirmuch purpose he may need to ensure HOuhat a verbatim record of the proceed- - �riday, she said a mings is made, which record. includes t, owner of the Inn no phe testimony and evidence upon abe's Irish Pub and EmcNhich the appeal is to be based. 've came late satur- a wf Pub)odation in order to participate in this got running was the and vision of certain assistance. Please showers at MgCabes' Apent, located at 3335 Tamiaml Trail t crisis;' said McCabe mert least two days prior to the meeting. rd some pretty happy heal'ilable in the Board of County Coro­. takes a difference:' will on after the water N, . running, the hotel's gas dso working. vacs ,er to the restaurant," "I said November 15 2010 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Advisory Council will hold a public meeting on Wednesday, December 1, 2010, at 9:00 A.M. in the Growth Management Division Conference Rooms 609/610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on an amendment to the Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Map Series of the Growth Management Plan. The Resolu- tion title is as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ORDI- NANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR: AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES FOR THE WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY (ASR'S) MAP, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMEND- ING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. ❑ CPSP- 2010 -2, Petition requesting various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Mao series including the map titled Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. [Coordi- nator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs CIT p pI l 0 JJ _J ,ice /� wuncc rc I MI i ' I All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Land Develop- ment Services Dept., Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horse- shoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Any questions per- taining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Plan- ning Section. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Wednesday, December 1, 2010, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision recommended by the Envi- ronmental Advisory Committee with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed- ings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Judith Hushon, Chairman Collier County Environmental Advisory Council No.678188461 November 15 2010 :� • • TRANSMITTAL BCC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ME EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve the 2010 Cycle of Growth Management Plan Amendments, including one 2008 Cycle Petition, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review and objections, recommendations and comments (ORC) response. (Transmittal Hearing) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 2010 cycle of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan and consider approving said amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • The (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2010 cycle petitions on December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011 (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -2), and February 17, 2011 (CPSP- 2010 -5), and October 19 and 20, 2009 (CP- 2008 -1). • This Transmittal hearing for the 2010 cycle considers amendments to the following Elements of the Plan: 0 Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and, 0 Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series. Note: Because the support materials are so voluminous, and some exhibits are oversized, the Agenda Central system does not contain all of the related documents pertaining to these GMP amendment petitions. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is included in the binders provided separately to the BCC specifically for the 2010 cycle of GMP amendment petitions. The complete binder is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section office at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, as well as in the Clerk of Courts /Minutes and Records office at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 401. FISCAL IMPACT: There are fiscal impacts to Collier County as a result of these amendments. Existing staff resources and existing (or budgeted) contracted services were used to prepare and process the two County - initiated petitions, and the existing budget was used to pay for the required special legal advertisements (for the Wellfields Protection Areas map) as well as the separate CCPC legal ad for petition CPSP- 2010 -5 (authorized by BCC on 12/14/10). The cost to process, review and advertise the private sector petitions is borne by the petitioners via the application fees. Final action is not being taken at this time as these amendments are not being considered for adoption at this hearing. If approved for transmittal, these amendments will subsequently be considered for adoption at hearings to be held later in 2011. As to the staff request for BCC authorization to initiate Land Development Code (LDC) amendments necessitated by certain portions of petition CPSP- 2010 -2 — including update of the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone maps in the LDC, existing staff resources will be used to prepare and process those amendments. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Executive Summary has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office. These proposed Growth Management Plan amendments are authorized for consideration by local government, and subject to the procedures established, in Chapter 163, Part If, Florida Statutes, The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, and by local Resolution #97 -431, as amended. A majority vote of the Board is necessary for Transmittal to DCA. [HFAQ GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of these proposed amendments by the Board of County Commissioners for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs will commence the Department's sixty -day (60) review process and ultimately return these amendments to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners for final Adoption hearings to be held later in 2011. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: No listed plant and/or animal species have been observed or are known to be on the site of petition CP- 2008 -1, nor does that site contain jurisdictional wetlands. For the other two site - specific petitions (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -5), environmental conditions of the sites have not changed since the prior GMP amendment approvals in 2005 that established the existing respective subdistricts, and neither of the present petitions propose an increase in overall use intensity or density. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. rezone and/or conditional use, site development plan), the sites will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal environmental protection regulations, including applicable portions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP, and the Land Development Code. HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None of the three proposed site - specific GMP amendment petitions contain lands identified on the County's Historical /Archeological Probability Maps as being in areas of historical or archaeological probability. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders, the sites will again be subject to review for historical /archeological probability. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Most Growth Management Plan amendments are not reviewed by the EAC. However, the EAC did review, on December 1, 2010, that portion of petition CPSP- 2010 -2 regarding update of the • Wellfield Protection Areas Map in the Future Land Use Map Series contained in the FLUE. The EAC forwarded that petition with a recommendation to transmit to DCA (vote: 3/0). COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE RECOMMENDATION: County Manager or designee's recommendation follows each individual petition listed below. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC's recommendation follows each individual petition listed below. Note: Where the CCPC forwarded a recommendation of approval, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the CCPC recommendation. In the case of CP- 2008 -1, where the CCPC recommendation for approval failed by virtue of a tie vote, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text — as revised subsequent to the CCPC hearing, BCC hearing in 2010 and referendum in 2010. 1. PETITION CP- 2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Man and Map Series, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -4 zoning district, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -5 zoning district, with requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3"' Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] County Manager or Designee Recommendation - October 2009: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2008 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petitioner verbally proposed two changes to the amendment: 1) reduce building height from two stories to one story; and, 2) reduce the proposed building area from 225,000 square feet to 210,000 square feet. There was no CCPC recommendation on revised petition CP- 2008 -1 by virtue of a tie vote (4/4). The failed motion to approve was subject to staff alternative text in the Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph "a." to add a "catchall" prohibited use 414; 4) revise paragraph "b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f, as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.l." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation; and, 6) delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. The text that reflects the CCPC's unsuccessful motion is contained in the document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendation for CP- 2008 -1." Speakers: There were nine speakers. Two speakers were in favor of the petition, noting there is a need and desire for more commercial and that the petitioner has worked to resolve neighborhood concerns. One of those two speakers represented the First and Third Group, a group of neighbors near the subject site (I" and 3` Streets NW); he presented a specific list of permitted and prohibited 3 W uses, with SIC Codes, the Group endorsed. Seven speakers were opposed to the petition, citing these concerns: project will increase traffic: there are adequate shopping opportunities in or near Golden Gate Estates (GGE); negative impacts during project construction; commercial should not be located in the interior of GGE; project will attract undesirable animals (rats, then snakes that eat rats); not consistent with GGAMP allowance for commercial and maintenance of rural character; questions whether there's enough population in GGE to support this amount of commercial; will disrupt the tranquility, quiet, nature and [nighttime] darkness the speakers moved to GGE to enjoy. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted revised proposed subdistrict text and conceptual map to reduce building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.£; increase landscape buffers; and, increase building setbacks. Also, the petitioner submitted additional data and analysis. BCC Action — January 2010: With the petitioner's concurrence, the BCC continued this petition indefinitely so as to allow the petitioner to place this proposal as a non - binding referendum (straw vote) on the November 2010 ballot. Post - BCC /Post - Referendum Action: Subsequent to the November 2010 General Election, the petitioner submitted a revised petition with updated data and analysis (infrastructure impacts, needs analysis) to reflect a cap of 190,000 s.f. of commercial development. Staffs detailed review and evaluation of the revised petition. and the election results, are contained in the document titled " CP- 2008-1 Supplemental Report for the BCC.- County Manager or Designee Recommendation - February 2011: That the BCC approve petition CP- 2008 -1 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, subject to the following: (a) eliminate the specific list of uses by SIC Code and replace with reference to the permitted and conditional uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts of the LDC; (b) eliminate prohibited uses that are not listed in the C -I through C -3 zoning districts of the LDC (c) replace the 190,000 square feet commercial cap with a lesser square feet cap, consistent with the upper end of the Neighborhood Center commercial range; (d) replace the individual user cap of 30,000 square feet of building area with a 20,000 square feet cap, while maintaining the exception for a grocery store; (e) eliminate the conceptual plan. 2. PETITION CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet. for Parcel 1 (±9.2 acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistret is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] The Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict was established in 2005 and comprises two non - contiguous parcels that generally allow commercial uses found in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Each parcel has an overall building square feet cap, and each parcel 4 k 8 A includes a maximum size for any individual commercial use of 20,000 square feet. This petition, which applies to Parcel I only, seeks to increase the individual use cap to 50,000 square feet for certain specified uses. County Manager or Designee Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2010 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CP- 2010 -1, as submitted by the petitioner and modified at the hearing to add a list of prohibited uses, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and to require, by adoption hearings, the recordation of deed restrictions listing the same prohibited uses (vote: 9/0). Speakers: There was one speaker, representing surrounding neighborhoods; he did not oppose the petition and generally was in support. 3. PETITION CPSP - 2010 -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE /FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] On September 14, 2010, the BCC authorized County Manager or designee to initiate this petition which proposes various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map series. Most of the amendments seek only to add clarity, correct errors and omissions, provide updates to map features, and provide harmony and internal consistency. However, exceptions include: 1) changes to Policy 5.1 to allow redistribution of use density and intensity; 2) modification of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict pertaining to its applicability; 3) changes to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO) to delete a development standard, add a use, and add clarity regarding applicability of FLUE Policies; and, 4) update the Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map, based upon most recent hydrologic modeling, as required by Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub - Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and subsequent policies. County Manager or Designee Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CPSP - 2010 -2 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. (Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, staff is requesting Board authorization to initiate, immediately, an amendment to the LDC to update the Wellfields risk management zone maps to correlate with the update to the Wellhead Protection Map so that the LDC amendment may be considered concurrent with the Adoption hearing for this cycle of GMP amendment petitions.) CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CPSP- 2010 -2 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 9/0), per County Manager or designee recommendation except subject to modifications to FLUE Policy 5.1 and the Office and Infill 5 Commercial Subdistrict — both for clarity /brevity /simplicity, and revision to the Wellfields Protection Map to add Marco Island Utilities' Marco Lakes (in northeast quadrant of US -41 East /Collier Blvd. intersection). Speakers: None. 4. PETITION CPSP- 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use May and Map Series, to modify the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety: the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, containing of ±22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] On December 14, 2010, the BCC held a public hearing to consider rezone petition PUDZ- 2004 -AR- 6829 for the Davis Reserve Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) at the subject site. During that hearing, the applicant withdraw that rezone petition; the BCC directed County Manager or designee to initiate a GMP amendment to the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict to remove the traditional neighborhood development requirement, the commercial component, and the affordable housing requirement — with the applicant stating "no objection" to this direction; and, the applicant committed to request a PUD rezone that eliminates the retail and limits the maximum density to five dwelling units per acre (DU /A), and to pay costs for that rezone. From the BCC direction, staff developed two alternatives: Alternaive 1: Modify the Subdistrict to eliminate the commercial component, affordable housing requirement, and all design and development standards, and limit density to a maximum of 5 DU /A; and, Alternative 2: Eliminate the entire Subdistrict and re- designate the site as Urban Residential Subdistrict (the site's designation prior to 2005 when the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict was established). County Manager or Designee Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CPSP - 2010 -5 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve Alternative 2 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CPSP- 2010 -5, per County Manager or designee recommendation, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 9/0). Speakers: None. COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE RECOMMENDATION: County Manager or designee recommendations for the 2010 cycle of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2008 cycle petition, are as reflected above following each petition. Additionally, County Manager or designee is requesting Board authorization to initiate, immediately, an amendment to the LDC to update the Wellfields risk management zone maps to 6 8A correlate with the update to the Wellhead Protection Map in the FLUE (part of petition CPSP -2010- 2) so that the LDC amendment may be considered concurrent with the Adoption hearing for this cycle of GMP amendment petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission held their required public hearing on October 19 and 20, 2009 (CP- 2008 -1), and December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011 (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -2), and February 17, 2011 (CPSP- 2010 -5, 2010). The CCPC forwarded the 2010 cycle of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2008 cycle petition, to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations as reflected above following each petition. Prepared by: David Weeks, A1CP, GMP Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Department, Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Attachments: 1) CP- 2008 -1 Supplemental Report for the BCC; 2) CP- 2008 -1 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 3) CP- 2010 -1 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 4) CPSP- 2010 -2 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 5) CPSP - 2010 -5 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text Executive Summary Transmitta12010 Cycle GMPAs & CP -O8 -1 as edited per Judy -Nick GACDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DAWComp Plan AmendmentsU09 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions12010 Cycle Petitions\BCC Transmittal dw13 -3 -11 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY �. Recommendation to approve the 2010 Cycle of Growth Management Plan Amendments including one 2008 Cycle Petition, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review and objections, recommendations and comments (ORC) response. (Transmittal Hearing) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 2010 cycle of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan and consider approving said amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • The (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2010 cycle petitions on December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011 (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -2), and February 17, 2011 (CPSP- 2010 -5), and October 19 and 20, 2009 (CP- 2008 -1). • This Transmittal hearing for the 2010 cycle considers amendments to the following Elements of the Plan: 0 Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and, 0 Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series. Note: Because the support materials are so voluminous, and some exhibits are oversized, the Agenda Central system does not contain all of the related documents pertaining to these GMP amendment petitions. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is included in the binders provided separately to the BCC specifically for the 2010 cycle of GMP amendment petitions. The complete binder is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section office at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, as well as in the Clerk of Courts /Minutes and Records office at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 401. FISCAL IMPACT: There are fiscal impacts to Collier County as a result of these amendments. Existing staff resources and existing (or budgeted) contracted services were used to prepare and process the two County - initiated petitions, and the existing budget was used to pay for the required special legal advertisements (for the Wellfields Protection Areas map) as well as the separate CCPC legal ad for petition CPSP- 2010 -5 (authorized by BCC on 12/14/10). The cost to process, review and advertise the private sector petitions is borne by the petitioners via the application fees. Final action is not being taken at this time as these amendments are not being considered for adoption at this hearing. If approved for transmittal, these amendments will subsequently be considered for adoption at hearings to be held later in 2011. 1 • As to the staff request for BCC authorization to initiate Land Development Code (LDC) amendments necessitated by certain portions of petition CPSP- 2010 -2 — including update of the wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone maps in the LDC, existing staff resources will be used to prepare and process those amendments. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Executive Summary has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office. These proposed Growth Management Plan amendments are authorized for consideration by local government, and subject to the procedures established, in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, and by local Resolution #97 -431, as amended. A majority vote of the Board is necessary for Transmittal to DCA. (HFAC) GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of these proposed amendments by the Board of County Commissioners for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs will commence the Department's sixty -day (60) review process and ultimately return these amendments to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners for final Adoption hearings to be held later in 2011. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: No listed plant and/or animal species have been observed or are known to be on the site of petition CP- 2008 -1, nor does that site contain jurisdictional wetlands. For the other two site - specific petitions (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -5), environmental conditions of the sites have not changed since the prior GMP amendment approvals in 2005 that established the existing respective subdistricts, and neither of the present petitions propose an increase in overall use intensity or density. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. rezone and/or conditional use, site development plan), the sites will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal environmental protection regulations, including applicable portions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP, and the Land Development Code. HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None of the three proposed site - specific GMP amendment petitions contain lands identified on the County's Historical /Archeological Probability Maps as being in areas of historical or archaeological probability. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders, the sites will again be subject to review for historical/archeological probability. ENVERONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Most Growth Management Plan amendments are not reviewed by the EAC. However, the EAC did review, on December 1, 2010, that portion of petition CPSP- 2010 -2 regarding update of the 2 NJ Wellfield Protection Areas Map in the Future Land Use Map Series contained in the FLUE. The EAC forwarded that petition with a recommendation to transmit to DCA (vote: 3/0). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation follows each individual petition listed below. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC's recommendation follows each individual petition listed below. Note: Where the CCPC forwarded a recommendation of approval, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the CCPC recommendation. In the case of CP- 2008 -1, where the CCPC recommendation for approval failed by virtue of a tie vote, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text— as revised subsequent to the CCPC hearing, BCC hearing in 2010 and referendum in 2010. 1. PETITION CP- 2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Ma Series, eries, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -4 zoning district, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -5 zoning district, with requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3rd Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of ±40.62 acres. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation - October 2009: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2008 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petitioner verbally proposed two changes to the amendment: 1) reduce building height from two stories to one story; and, 2) reduce the proposed building area from 225,000 square feet to 210,000 square feet. There was no CCPC recommendation on revised petition CP- 2008 -1 by virtue of a tie vote (4/4). The failed motion to approve was subject to staff alternative text in the Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph ,,a." to add a "catchall" prohibited use #14; 4) revise paragraph "b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f., as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.l." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation; and, 6) delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. The text that reflects the CCPC's unsuccessful motion is contained in the document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendation for CP- 2008 -1." Speakers: There were nine speakers. Two speakers were in favor of the petition, noting there is a need and desire for more commercial and that the petitioner has worked to resolve neighborhood concerns. One of those two s eakers represented the First and Third Group, a group of neighbors near the subject site (I" and 3` Streets NW); he presented a specific list of permitted and prohibited 3 uses, with SIC Codes, the Group endorsed. Seven speakers were opposed to the petition, citing these concerns: project will increase traffic; there are adequate shopping opportunities in or near Golden Gate Estates (GGE); negative impacts during project construction; commercial should not be located in the interior of GGE; project will attract undesirable animals (rats, then snakes that eat rats); not consistent with GGAMP allowance for commercial and maintenance of rural character; questions whether there's enough population in GGE to support this amount of commercial; will disrupt the tranquility, quiet, nature and [nighttime] darkness the speakers moved to GGE to enjoy. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted revised proposed subdistrict text and conceptual map to reduce building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f.; increase landscape buffers; and, increase building setbacks. Also, the petitioner submitted additional data and analysis. BCC Action — January 2010: With the petitioner's concurrence, the BCC continued this petition indefinitely so as to allow the petitioner to place this proposal as a non - binding referendum (straw vote) on the November 2010 ballot. Post- BCC/Post- Referendum Action: Subsequent to the November 2010 General Election, the petitioner submitted a revised petition with updated data and analysis (infrastructure impacts, needs analysis) to reflect a cap of 190,000 s.f. of commercial development. Staff's detailed review and evaluation of the revised petition, and the election results, are contained in the document titled "CP- 2008-1 Supplemental Report for the BCC.' STAFF'S CONCLUSION AND RECOAIMENDATION: Based on the data and analysis submitted, the proposed site would be more appropriate for a neighborhood commercial sized center with the corresponding C -1 through C -3 commercial uses of the Land Development Code, with a limitation of a 20,000 square feet cap for individual users, with the exception that the grocery use may exceed the cap. Additionally, staff recommends eliminating the Conceptual Site Plan within the Master Plan as it is unprecedented to incorporate a site plan into the GMP, and the environmental data provided on the site plan is inadequate to determine compliance with the Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The discrepancy between the petitioner's request and staffs recommendation was heard by the Board on January 19, 2010 at which time the Board directed staff to seek the community's desire through a straw -poll ballot. While staff continues to support a moderately sized commercial center, the public (via referendum) overwhelmingly supported a 190,000 square feet center. As noted previously herein, the Florida Senate Report provides that if the commercial ratio of 1.25 is exceeded, other factors, such as suitability of property for change, locational criteria, job creation, community desires, etc., may be considered. Accordingly, despite staffs finding that the technical Needs Analysis does not support the petition as proposed within the Comprehensive Plan planning horizon of 2020, the Board of County Commissioners may consider the following factors in reaching a decision to approve this petition. The petition does provide for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, local job creation and has community support. 4 • 2. PETITION CP- 2010 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), to modify the language of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict to allow a grocery/supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furnishing store and department store use to exceed the 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, for Parcel 1 (±9.2 acres, zoned Bradford Square MPUD) only, and with the overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel 1 to remain; the subject portion of the Subdistrct is located at the northeast comer of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] The Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict was established in 2005 and comprises two non - contiguous parcels that generally allow commercial uses found in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Each parcel has an overall building square feet cap, and each parcel includes a maximum size for any individual commercial use of 20,000 square feet. This petition, which applies to Parcel 1 only, seeks to increase the individual use cap to 50,000 square feet for certain specified uses. Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2010 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CP- 2010 -1, as submitted by the petitioner and modified at the hearing to add a list of prohibited uses, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and to require, by adoption hearings, the recordation of deed restrictions listing the same prohibited uses (vote: 9/0). Speakers: There was one speaker, representing surrounding neighborhoods; he did not oppose the petition and generally was in support. 3. PETITION CPSP- 2010 -2, Staff petition requesting amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to: modify the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO); modify FLUE Policy 5.1; modify applicability of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict; update the Wellhead Protection Map; update the FLUM and Map Series to reflect annexations, etc.; make FLUM boundary corrections in rural areas; and, add clarity, correct date errors, and make other non - substantive text revisions. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager] On September 14, 2010, the BCC authorized County Manager or designee to initiate this petition which proposes various amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map series. Most of the amendments seek only to add clarity, correct errors and omissions, provide updates to map features, and provide harmony and internal consistency. However, exceptions include: 1) changes to Policy 5.1 to allow redistribution of use density and intensity; 2) modification of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict pertaining to its applicability; 3) changes to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO) to delete a development standard, add a use, and add clarity regarding applicability of FLUE Policies; and, 4) - update the Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map, based upon most recent hydrologic modeling, as required by Objective 1 of the Natural 5 • Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub- Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and subsequent policies. Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CPSP - 2010 -2 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. (Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, staff is requesting Board authorization to initiate, immediately, an amendment to the LDC to update the Wellfields risk management zone maps to correlate with the update to the Wellhead Protection Map so that the LDC amendment may be considered concurrent with the Adoption hearing for this cycle of GMP amendment petitions.) CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CPSP- 2010 -2 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 9/0), per County Manager or designee recommendation except subject to modifications to FLUE Policy 5.1 and the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict — both for clarity/brevity /simplicity, and revision to the Wellfields Protection Map to add Marco Island Utilities' Marco Lakes (in northeast quadrant of US41 East/Collier Blvd. intersection). Speakers: None. 4. PETITION CPSP- 2010 -5, Staff petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and May Series, to modify the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict by changing it from mixed use to residential and limiting density to a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre — or possibly repealing the subdistrict in its entirety; the subdistrict is located at the southeast corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) and County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, containing of ±22.83 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] On December 14, 2010, the BCC held a public hearing to consider rezone petition PUDZ- 2004 -AR- 6829 for the Davis Reserve Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) at the subject site. During that hearing, the applicant withdraw that rezone petition; the BCC directed County Manager or designee to initiate a GMP amendment to the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict to remove the traditional neighborhood development requirement, the commercial component, and the affordable housing requirement — with the applicant stating "no objection" to this direction; and, the applicant committed to request a PUD rezone that eliminates the retail and limits the maximum density to five dwelling units per acre (DU /A), and to pay costs for that rezone. From the BCC direction, staff developed two alternatives: Alternative 1: Modify the Subdistrict to eliminate the commercial component, affordable housing requirement, and all design and development standards, and limit density to a maximum of 5 DU /A; and, Alternative 2: Eliminate the entire Subdistrict and re- designate the site as Urban Residential Subdistrict (the site's designation prior to 2005 when the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict was established). Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CPSP- 2010 -5 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve Alternative 2 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs- 6 CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CPSP- 2010 -5, per County Manager or designee recommendation, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 9/0). Speakers: None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendations for the 2010 cycle of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2008 cycle petition, are as reflected above following each petition. Additionally, County Manager or designee is requesting Board authorization to initiate, immediately, an amendment to the LDC to update the Wellfields risk management zone maps to correlate with the update to the Wellhead Protection Map in the FLUE (part of petition CPSP- 2010 -2) so that the LDC amendment may be considered concurrent with the Adoption hearing for this cycle of GMP amendment petitions. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission held their required public hearing on October 19 and 20, 2009 (CP- 2008 -1), and December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011 (CP- 2010 -1 and CPSP- 2010 -2), and February 17, 2011 (CPSP - 2010 -5, 2010). The CCPC forwarded the 2010 cycle of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2008 cycle petition, to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations as reflected above following each petition. Prepared by: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Department, Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Attachments: 1) CP- 2008 -1 Supplemental Report for the BCC; 2) CP- 2008 -1 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 3) CP- 2010 -1 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 4) CPSP- 2010 -2 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text; 5) CPSP- 2010 -5 Resolution with Exhibit "A" Text Executive Summary Transmittal 2010 Cycle GMPAs & CP -08 -1 as edited per Judy -Nick GAMES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments \2009 -2010 Combined Cycles petrbons\2010 Cycle Petitions \BCC Transmittal dw/3 -3 -11 7 8 p CP- 2008 -1 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT FOR BCC SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT forthe Board of County Commissioners FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION Prepared by: Michele R. Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner HEARING DATE: March 22. 2011 SUBJECT: 2010 CYCLE OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS, PETITION CP- 2008 -1 ONLY (Transmittal Hearing) ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (GGAMP) ONLY - for this supplement CCPC TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATION and COMMENTS (10/19/09): No recommendation. Motion to Transmit failed by 4/4 vote. Motion was subject to staff alternative text in the Transmittal Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph "a." to add a "catchall" prohibited use #14; 4) revise paragraph "b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 sq. ft. to 210,000 sq. ft., as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.1." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation; and, 6) delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. BCC TRANSMITTAL ACTION and COMMENTS (01/19/10): Motion to continue the petition indefinitely so as to allow the petitioner to place the proposal on the November 2, 2010 General Election ballot to determine community support. The following question was posed to voters within Precincts 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591, the geographic area covering almost the entirety of the Estates designation and certain other surrounding areas (refer to attached Straw- ballot Resolution No. 2010 -28 and Precinct Map): Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment — Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a ±40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive - through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes No 3 HOO Fall NOVEMBER 2, 2010 POLLING RESULTS: A total of 7,038 or 76% of the votes cast were in support of the project and 1,924 or 21% of the votes casted were against the proposed commercial center. The results from each Precinct are noted below. Precinct 551: 931 (Yes) and 266 (No) Precinct 552: 735 (Yes) and 265 (No) Precinct 554: 1,044 (Yes) and 224 (NO) Precinct 555: 1,081 (Yes) and 421 (No) Precinct 590: 1,840 (Yes) and 463 (No) Precinct 591: 1,407 (Yes) and 285 (No) POST BCC TRANSMITTAL HEARING and NOVEMBER 2, 2010 GENERAL ELECTION: Subsequent to the BCC Transmittal Hearing and the General Election, the petitioner submitted a revised Greenhouse Gas Reduction Analysis, Public Facilities Analysis, Commercial Needs Analysis, and revised Subdistrict text. The following are staff's analysis and /or comments concerning those documents. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Analysis: The revised analysis to address 2008 Legislation, HB 697 pertaining to energy conservation and efficiency, reflects the decrease in commercial square feet from 210,000 sq. ft. in the original analysis /submittal to 190,000 sq. ft. in the current submittal. Staff's analysis and conclusions are below. The applicant's analysis, including most assumptions used - with the exception that 100 percent of the employees will reside in the Estates - and the conclusions reached, is found to be reasonable by staff given the limited roadway network and current commercial and employment opportunities within the Estates area. The project will provide alternative retail and office uses, and employment opportunities, proximate to area residents, thereby resulting in the reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Public Facilities Analysis: Revised analysis was provided to reflect the decrease in commercial square feet from 210,000 sq. ft. in the original analysis /submittal to 190,000 sq. ft. in the current submittal. Staff's analysis and conclusions are below. Water and Wastewater: The subject property is not located within the Collier County Water and Sewer District boundary and is not part of any other existing utilities district. Development of the property will require installation of a potable well and private sector package sanitary sewer or septic treatment system, permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the Growth Management Plan, Land Development Code (LDC) and other jurisdictional agencies including Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District. Additionally, the proposed project site is located within the zone of the Collier County Tamiami Wellfield for the North and South County Regional Water Treatment Plants; compliance with all rules and regulations to protect the wellfield will be required (LDC Section 3.06.00). All well sites and pipeline easements located on and close to this project need to be shown on all future site development plans, Plat and Construction Plans or any other site plan applications. Potable Water Demand — Gallons Per Dav (GPD Proposed Uses: Office (60,000 sq. ft.) — 9,000 GPD Retail (110,500 sq. ft.) — 11,050 GPD Restaurant (19,500 sq. ft.) — 9,750 GPD Incidental use for irrigation near seating areas: 3,000 GPD Existing Land Use: 17 Residential Units — 4,250 GPD The net difference in demand for potable water is 28,550 GPD increase Sanitary Sewer Demand — Gallons Per Day (GPD): Proposed Uses: Office (60,000 sq. ft.) — 9,000 GPD Retail (110,500 sq. ft.) — 11,050 GPD Restaurant (19,500 sq. ft.) — 9,750 GPD Existing Land Use Designation: 17 Residential Units — 3,400 GPD The net difference in demand for sanitary sewer is 26,400 GPD increase Solid Waste: The service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2010 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) identifies that the County has sufficient landfill capacity to year 2039 for the required lined cell capacity. The proposed change in land use from a potential of 17 residential units (425 cy /yr) to 60,000 sq. ft. of office (876 cy /yr), 110,500 sq. ft. of retail uses (5,602 cy /yr) and, 19,500 sq. ft. of restaurant uses (1,186 cy /yr) would permit [result in] an increase in generation of 7,239 cy /yr. • Drainage: The subject property is located in Flood Zone D. Future development will be required to comply with the SFWMD and /or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of storm water events by both on -site and off -site improvements. Arterial and Collector Roads: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petitioner's December 6, 2010 updated Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the project can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, with a provision of mitigation. Staff's analysis is limited to the significant impacts shown on the initial concurrency links. The latest update of the TIS references 225,000 square feet as originally proposed. Please note that staff has not required revision of this square footage in the study. The square footage reduction of nearly 16% (190,000 square feet) should yield correlating reductions in the directional trips. This reduced trip generation is shown parenthetically throughout staff's analysis below, which has also been updated to reflect the adopted 2010 AUIR. Golden Gate Boulevard Impacts: The first concurrency link that would be impacted by this project is Link 17, Golden Gate Boulevard between CR -951 and Wilson Boulevard. The project would generate up to 130 (110 — reduced) PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 5.53% (4.68% — reduced) impact. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 564 trips in • the 2010 AUIR and is at Level of Service "D." Network improvements and specific dedications have been proposed that will mitigate the significant impacts on this link. The second concurrency link that would be impacted by this project is Link 123, Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard. The project would generate up to 111 (94 — reduced) PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 10.99% (9.3% — reduced) impact. This concurrency link reflects a negative remaining capacity of — 73 trips in the 2010 AUIR and is at Level of Service "F." This roadway is currently in the County's 5 year CIE. Developer contributions toward network improvements including specific dedications to increase capacity have been proposed that will mitigate the significant impacts on this link. Wilson Boulevard Impacts: The first concurrency link on Wilson Boulevard that would be impacted by this project is Link 118, Wilson Boulevard between Golden Gate Boulevard and the northerly terminus of Wilson (north of Immokalee Road). The project would generate up to 74 (63 — reduced) PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents an 8.04% (6.85% — reduced) impact. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 569 trips in the 2010 AUIR and is at Level of Service °B ". Network improvements and specific dedications have been proposed which mitigate the significant impacts on this link. Transportation Element Policy 5.1: Specific mitigation is proposed by the petitioner that will satisfy the requirements of Policy 5.1. The conditions listed below are anticipated to accommodate the impacts that would be made possible by the approval of this amendment. Conditions required at the time of zoning change approval: 1. Up to four primary project access locations are recognized: One direct connection to Wilson Boulevard, located as far to the north as can be reasonably accommodated on the final SDP. This connection is anticipated to be a full - movement driveway until such time that Wilson Boulevard median improvements are made, which may restrict left -in, left -out, or right -out movements at the discretion of Collier County Transportation Division. a. Access to Golden Gate Blvd via 1" Street NW will remain, and is subject to any median revisions created by Collier County. b. Access to Golden Gate Boulevard between 1" Street NW and 3`d Street NW with a possibility for a median opening. Refer to signalization condition No. 2 below. c. Access to Golden Gate Blvd via 3�' Street NW will remain, and is subject to any median revisions created by Collier County. d. No other provisions or restrictions are currently stated for project driveways connecting to 1" Street NW or 3`d Street NW, which shall otherwise be governed by the CCAMP. 2. Signalization: a. A signal is acknowledged as a possible provision at either 3`d Street NW, or the project entrance between 15` and 3`d. The final conceptual location of this signal, if warranted, and approved, by the Transportation Division, shall be determined at the time of rezoning. If allowed at the project's entrance between 1" and 3`d, then the following conditions must already be in place: i. Closure of the full median opening at 1" Street NW to limit it to a RI /RO only. ii. Directionalization of 3rd Street NW median opening (restricted left turn movements as deemed appropriate by Transportation Division.) b. Any traffic signal serving any of this project's primary access(es) to Golden Gate Boulevard shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assign to 4 install. The Developer, his successors, or assign shall also pay annual operation and 84 maintenance fees for said signal, if installed, for the lifetime of the signal. 3. The developer, his successors, or assign agree to donate to the County any necessary rights -of -way along the Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to accommodate capacity improvements associated with County Project Number 6004, within 180 days of approval of the first subsequent zoning change. 4. Phasing a. The first Phase of development, inclusive of the required grocery store, not greater than 100,000 sq. ft., shall have a proportionate share responsibility towards intersection improvements at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (Project No.60040). b. The remaining 90,000 sq. ft. shall not obtain SDP approval from the Transportation Division until such time that Project Number 60040 has commenced, unless the Developer has elected to construct the complete intersection improvements shown in Project No. 60040 prior to the County's commencement (potential eligibility for impact fee credits). This Phase also shall have proportionate share responsibility towards the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards. Commercial Needs Analysis: Chapter 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, "Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments, Evaluation and Appraisal Reports, Land Development Regulations and Determinations of Compliance" sets forth the minimum data and analysis requirement for comprehensive plan amendments. More specifically, Section 9J -5.005 "General Requirements" delineates criteria for plan amendments in sub - section 9J -5.005 (2) "Data and Analysis Requirements." Sub - section 9J- 5.005(2) states in part that "All goals, objectives, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents, and within plan amendments and its support documents, shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis applicable to each element. To be based upon data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue..." In 2009, the Florida Senate issued Interim Report 2010 -07, which provides that commercial projects should be evaluated using a market factor ratio of 1.25 (125% of demand). The Report goes on to provide that when the market ratio is exceeded other factors can be considered, such as suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, community desires, job creation, etc. in order to determine need (see attached staff summary and Senate Report). As part of the post -BCC Transmittal project re- submittal package, the petitioner provided revised data and analysis to address commercial demand within the project's Custom Trade Area (refer to map on page 51 of the petitioner's Commercial Demand Analysis). The petitioner's commercial demand analysis is generally based on determining the total retail expenditures by commercial type for those households located within the Custom Trade Area, and then allocating retail sales by shopping center type (Neighborhood and Community Centers) to derive the sales per square feet figures and finally the supportable commercial square feet in the Trade Area. The supportable square feet (demand) figures are then compared to the existing and projected commercial supply within the same Trade Area to determine the oversupply or undersupply of commercial square feet. The petitioner's assumptions contained within the data and analysis include: • Trade Area estimates and projected Households by year — 4,523 in 2010; 6,719 in 2020; and, 8,181 in 2030 I • Projected commercial Demand (sq. ft.) by year — 148,068 in 2010; 237,253 in 2020; and, 309,462 in 2030 Existing, vacant and potential commercial Supply (sq. ft.), excluding the potential commercial acreage at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards, and without the proposed 190,000 sq. ft. project, by year is — 122,139 in 2010; 322,139 in 2020; and, 463,089 in 2030 Existing, vacant and potential commercial Supply (sq. ft.), excluding the potential commercial acreage at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards, and with the proposed 190,000 sq. ft. project, by year is — 122,139 in 2010; 512,139 in 2020; and, 653,089 in 2030 The petitioner's commercial demand analysis conclusions: • The commercial allocation ratio (or market factor) of 2.0 (200% of demand) is appropriate for the Custom Trade Area to ensure market flexibility • The allocation ratio (supply /demand) with existing and potential commercial, excluding the potential commercial acreage at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards and without the proposed 190,000 sq. ft. project, by year is — .82 in 2010; 1.36 in 2020; and, 1.50 in 2030 • The allocation ratio (supply /demand) with existing and potential commercial, excluding the potential commercial acreage at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards and with the proposed 190,000 sq. ft. project, by year is — .82 in 2010; 2.16 in 2020; and, 2.11 in 2030 Staff comments and conclusions: • The commercial allocation ratio of 2.0 exceeds the recommended allocation ratio of 1.25 (125% of demand) as suggested by the Department of Community Affairs • Based on the petitioner's commercial supply and demand calculations, and applying the 1.25 allocation ratio, there is an oversupply of commercial square feet within the Custom Trade Area in years — 2020 (1.36), the Comprehensive Plan planning horizon, and 2030 (1.50), with or without the proposed 190,000 sq. ft. project and without the inclusion of commercial acreage at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards In addition to the commercial analysis above, the petitioner also submitted a table to display commercial demand and supply within the Estates Designation; generally, all of the Estates lying 2 -miles east of Collier Blvd. (refer to Appendix 4 of the petitioner's Commercial Needs Analysis Report, and attached Golden Gate Estates Area Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) Map prepared by County GIS staff). This table is based on the commercial square feet demand (source: CIGM) generated by the existing and projected population (source: CIGM) within the defined study area compared to the existing and projected commercial supply within that same geography to determine the oversupply or undersupply of commercial square feet. Staff prepared the tables below to demonstrate the demand for commercial square feet based on the CIGM parameters for both Community Center commercial and Neighborhood Center commercial. 6 #0 8A 1 Nft 'Neighborhood Commercial (per ULI standards, used in the CIGM): • Neighborhood Centers provide for the sale of convenience goods (food, drugs and sundries) and personal services. A super market is the principal tenant - geographic convenience is the most important factor in the shopper's choice of supermarket. • Center is typically 50,000 sq. ft of gross leasable area - range from 30,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. • Center is typically 3 to 10 acres- trade area population is 2,500 - 40,000, within a 6 minute drive. "Community Commercial (per UL standards, used in the CIGM): • Community Center - 150,000 typical gross leasable area -range from 100,000 to 300,000 sq. ft. • Center's major tenant s are variety, discount or junior department stores and grocery • Center is typically 10 - 30 acres, trade area population of 40,000 to 150,000 "'Other Commercial: • The CIGM addresses Neighborhood, Community and Regional Commercial only. The "other, category includes commercial development not located within one of these types of commercial centers, such as office parks; freestanding retail uses (convenience store, pharmacy, gas station, etc.): small commercial centers without a grocery anchor; etc. 2010 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 49,808 58,996 81,847 Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 7.48 sq. ft. /Person 249,443 301,422 372,564 441,290 612,216 420,878 498,516 691,607 -Community Center Commercial S . Ft. Supply *Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Supply Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 0 0 340,950 340,950 340,950 Orange Blossom Ranch PUD 0 0 200,000 200,000 200,000 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 0 0 190,000 190,000 190,000 0 0 0 Total Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft./ Supply 0 0 730,950 730,950 730,950 0 0 0 Surplus /(Deficit) Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Supply (249,443) _ (301,422) 358,386 289,660 118,734 'Neighborhood Commercial (per ULI standards, used in the CIGM): • Neighborhood Centers provide for the sale of convenience goods (food, drugs and sundries) and personal services. A super market is the principal tenant - geographic convenience is the most important factor in the shopper's choice of supermarket. • Center is typically 50,000 sq. ft of gross leasable area - range from 30,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. • Center is typically 3 to 10 acres- trade area population is 2,500 - 40,000, within a 6 minute drive. "Community Commercial (per UL standards, used in the CIGM): • Community Center - 150,000 typical gross leasable area -range from 100,000 to 300,000 sq. ft. • Center's major tenant s are variety, discount or junior department stores and grocery • Center is typically 10 - 30 acres, trade area population of 40,000 to 150,000 "'Other Commercial: • The CIGM addresses Neighborhood, Community and Regional Commercial only. The "other, category includes commercial development not located within one of these types of commercial centers, such as office parks; freestanding retail uses (convenience store, pharmacy, gas station, etc.): small commercial centers without a grocery anchor; etc. Nelahht}ftL rtter Commercial Square Feet Estes (dr Rural Settlement Area) as Market Area OUP Planning Horizon is through year n. 0 2010 1 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 8.45 sq. ft. /Person) 281,791 340,510 420,878 498,516 691,607 *Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Supply Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 0 100,000 0 0 0 _ Orange Blossom Ranch PUD 0 100,000 0 0 0 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 0 100,000 0 0 0 Total Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. 0 300,000 0 0 0 Surplus /(Deficit) Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Supply (281,791) (40,510) (420,878) (498,516) (691,607) 'Neighborhood Commercial (per ULI standards, used in the CIGM): • Neighborhood Centers provide for the sale of convenience goods (food, drugs and sundries) and personal services. A super market is the principal tenant - geographic convenience is the most important factor in the shopper's choice of supermarket. • Center is typically 50,000 sq. ft of gross leasable area - range from 30,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. • Center is typically 3 to 10 acres- trade area population is 2,500 - 40,000, within a 6 minute drive. "Community Commercial (per UL standards, used in the CIGM): • Community Center - 150,000 typical gross leasable area -range from 100,000 to 300,000 sq. ft. • Center's major tenant s are variety, discount or junior department stores and grocery • Center is typically 10 - 30 acres, trade area population of 40,000 to 150,000 "'Other Commercial: • The CIGM addresses Neighborhood, Community and Regional Commercial only. The "other, category includes commercial development not located within one of these types of commercial centers, such as office parks; freestanding retail uses (convenience store, pharmacy, gas station, etc.): small commercial centers without a grocery anchor; etc. • Staff comments and conclusions: Based on project development schedules (provided by petitioners), the DCA's recommended market factor of 1.25 (125% of demand), and the DCA's requirement that local governments analyze proposals within the adopted planning time horizon of the comprehensive plan (County's 10 -year planning horizon is through 2020) when planning the amount needed for a particular land use, the following conclusions are made by staff: By year 2015, there will be a projected demand for Neighborhood Center commercial of approximately 340,510 sq. ft. and a projected supply of 300,000 sq. ft. of Neighborhood Center commercial. [The 100,000 sq. ft. proposed by the GMPA (first project phase) should be categorized as Neighborhood Center commercial since there is a requirement to develop a grocery use; the 100,000 sq. ft. identified in the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD may either be categorized as Neighborhood commercial - if a grocer is included, or " "'other" - if no grocery use is included; and, the subject GMPA, Randall Blvd. Commercial Center, and the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD cannot be categorized as Community Center commercial in year 2015 due to the limited square feet proposed. Staff concludes that the Neighborhood supply in year 2015 is potentially 300,000 sq. ft. with a deficit of approximately 40,5 10 sq. ft.] By year 2015, there will be a projected demand for Community Center commercial of approximately 301,422 sq. ft. and a projected supply of 0 sq. ft. [The Community Center commercial supply is 0 sq. ft., as the three projects listed — the proposed GMPA, the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD and the Randall Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict cannot be categorized as Community Center commercial because these projects do not meet the Community Center commercial sq. ft. thresholds. Staff concludes that the projected supply of Community Center commercial in year 2015 is 0 sq. ft. with a projected deficit of approximately 301.422 sq. ft.] By year 2020, there will be a projected demand for Neighborhood Center commercial of 420,878 sq. ft. and a projected supply of 0 sq. ft. (Staff concludes that the Neighborhood commercial supol could be potentially 0 sq. ft. with a projected deficit of approximately 420,878 sq. ft. Based on the uses and square feet allowed within the Randall Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Ranch PUD and the proposed GMPA these centers are expected to transition from Neighborhood Center commercial to Community Center commercial when project build out is reached in year 2020.1 By year 2020, there will be a projected demand for Community Center commercial of 372,564 square feet and a projected supply of Community Center commercial of 730,950 sq. ft. [Staff concludes that by year 2020 there will be a projected oversupply of Community Center commercial sq. ft. of approximately 358,386 sq. ft. (assuming the Randall Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict, the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD and the proposed GMPA are developed as Community Centers).] 4 8A • The allocation ratios (market factor of 1.25) for proposed commercial projects within the defined Estates market area are noted in the table below by year and Center type. COMMUNITY CENTER COMMERCIAL 2010 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 7.48 s . ft. /Person 249,443 301,422 372,564 441,290 612,216 Total Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft./ Supply 0 0 730,950 730,950 730,950 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (with Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict ) 0 0 1.96 1.66 1.19 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (without Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict) 0 _ 0 1.45 1.23 .88 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER COMMERCIAL 2010 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 7.48 s . ft. /Person 281,791 340,510 420,878 498,516 691,607 Total Neighborhood Center Commercial S. Ft./ Supply 0 300,000 1 0 I 0 0 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (with Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict ) .88 0 0 0 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (without Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict) .59 0 0 0 The data in the above tables indicate that there is a present and future demand for Neighborhood Center commercial beyond the planning horizon of 2020 in the Comprehensive Plan. Conversely, there is no present demand or future demand through the planning horizon year of 2020 for Community Center commercial square feet. Other Factors: As previously noted, the Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -07, provides that when the market factor ratio of 1.25 (125% of demand) is exceeded other factors can be considered such as, suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, community desires, job creation, etc. Based on the proposed uses and total square feet, staff views the proposal as a Community Center commercial project. Both staffs analysis of the Community Center commercial supply and demand and the petitioner's analysis of all commercial demand, yield that the 1.25 market factor is exceeded within the Plan's planning horizon (2020). Therefore, potentially the evaluation of those other factors could be used as a basis to approve this request. Staff's analysis of those other factors is provided below. • Suitability for Change and Locational Criteria; (1) The subject project includes 5 -acres presently designated Neighborhood Center Subdistrict, which allows C -1 through C -3 uses, and two other Tracts could be approved for conditional uses of the Estates designation, and the balance of the property could accommodate residential units. The subject property is suitable for development under its existing designation (2) The size of the site, size of the Center and use intensity proposed are out of character with the semi -rural development pattern of the surrounding area 9 (3) The site is located at the intersection of two rural collector roads with relatively high traffic volumes (4) The site is centrally located for a large portion of Golden Gate Estates, east of C.R. 951 (5) The site is only 3.5 road miles from the Randall Blvd. commercial center (approved for 401,950 sq. ft.) and 5.5 road miles from the Orange Blossom Ranch commercial center (approved for 200,000 sq. ft.). Community Desires The results of the referendum indicate the majority of those persons voting ( ±76 %) support this project. Additionally, the results of surveys conducted by the petitioner indicate the majority of respondents support the project. • Job Creation The petitioner indicates that the project will build out in the year 2020 with the creation of approximately 269 jobs. Subdistrict Text: Text is as presented to the BCC at the Transmittal hearing, except that the square feet cap has been reduced from 210,000 sq. ft. to 190,000 sq. ft. subsequent to the November 2010 General Election. [page 351 6 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates, the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopping, personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents assist in minimizing the road network required and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and recreation Groups 7911— Dance studios schools and halls excluding discotheques 7991 — Physical fitness facilities 7993 — Coin - operated amusement devises 7999— Amusement and recreation services not elsewhere classified, including only day camps gymnastics instruction wdo /karate instruction sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges Waterslides, etc.) 10 8 q -V I 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales Groups 5611 — Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 —Women's clothing stores 5632 — Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 — Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 — Family clothing stores 5661 — Shoe stores 5699 — Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 3. Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations Groups 5531 — Auto and home supply stores 5541 — Gasoline service stations, without repair 4. Automotive repair. services and parkinq (No outdoor repair /service. All repairs /services to be performed by authorized automotive technician.) Groups 7514 — Passenger car rental 7534 — Tire retreading and repair shops, including only tire repair 7539 — Automotive Repair Shops, Not Elsewhere Classified, including only minor service, lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 — Carwashes, as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Building materials, hardware, garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 — Paint glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 — Hardware stores 5261 — Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 6. Business services Groups 7334 — Photocopving and duplicating services 7335 — Commercial photography 7336 — Commercial art and graphic design 7338 — Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 — Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 — Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 — Equipment rental and leasing, not elsewhere classified 7371 — Computer programming services 7372 — Prepackaged software 7373 — Computer integrated systems design 7374 — Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7379 — Computer related services, not elsewhere classified 7382 — Security systems services 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 — Cable and other pay television services I/ I I- rIU111U1114 IIIV 211%4 [AU //,�•�•• ^•Y 1721 Painting and paper hanging industry 1731 — Electrical work industry 1741 — Masonry , stone setting and other stone work 1742 — Plastering drywall acoustical and insulation work 1743 — Terrazzo the marble and mosaic work industry 1751 — Carpentry work 1752 — Floor laving and other floor work not elsewhere classified industr 1761 — Roofing siding and sheet metal work industry 1771 — Concrete work industry 1781 — Water well drilling industry 1791 — Structural steel erection 1793 — Glass and glazing work 1794 — Excavation work 1795 — Wrecking and demolition work 1796 Installation or erection of building equipment not elsewhere 1799 — Special trade contractors not elsewhere classified 10. Depository institutions Groups 6021 — National commercial banks 6022 — State commercial banks 6029 — Commercial banks not elsewhere classified 6035 — Savings institutions federally chartered 6036 — Savings Institutions not federally chartered 6061 — Credit unions federally chartered 6062 — Credit unions not federally chartered 6091 — Non - deposit trust facilities 6099 Functions related to depository banking not elsewhere classified 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812 including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use no outdoor amplified music or televisions) 12. Engineering accounting research management and related services Groups 8711 — Engineering services 8712 — Architectural services 8713 — Surveying services 8721 — Accounting auditing and bookkeeping services 8741 — Management services 8742 — Management consulting services 8743 — Public relations services 8748 Business consulting services not elsewhere classified 13. Executive, legislative and general government except finance Groups 9111 — Executive offices 9121 — Legislative bodies 9131 — Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 — General government not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores 12 "8A F 4 Groups 5411 — Grocery stores (minimum 27.000 sauare feet 5421 — Meat and fish (seafood) markets, including freezer provisioners 5431 — Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 — Candy, nut, and confectionery stores 5451 — Dairy products stores 5461 — Retail bakeries 5499 — Miscellaneous food stores, includinq convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 — Department stores 5331 — Variety stores 5399 — Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 16. Home furniture, furnishinas, and eaumment stores Groups 5712 — Furniture stores 5713 — Floor covering stores 5714 — Drapery, curtain, and upholstery stores 5719 — Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 — Household appliance stores 5731 — Radio, television, and consumer electronics stores 5734 — Computer and computer software stores 5735 — Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) 5736 — Musical instrument store 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 — Life insurance 6321 — Accident and health insurance 6324 — Hospital and medical service plans 6331 — Fire, marine, and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 — Title insurance 6371 — Pension, health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified 6411 — Insurance agents 18. Justice, public order and safety Groups 9221 — Police protection 9222 — Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5912 — Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 13 21. • 11• 5945 — Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 — Tobacco stores and stands 5994 — News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores 5999— Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified (excludin gravestone tombstones auction rooms, monuments, swimming pools and sales barns) O I I I — ruuwai aiiu ivyvi O it Y-JPuliJuiuV incur aycnuico 6141 — Personal credit institutions 6153 — Short-term business credit institutions, except agricultural 6159 — Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 — Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 — Loan brokers 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021 23. Personal services Groups 7212 — Garment pressing and agents for laundries and drvcleaners 7221 — Photographic studios portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barber shops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services not elsewhere classified, excluding massage parlors Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance taxation and monetary policy (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 — Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 — Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 —Title abstract offices 6552 — Land subdividers and developers except cemeteries 26. Schools and educational services not elsewhere classified (Group 8299) 27. Security and commodity brokers dealers exchanges, and services Groups 6211 — Security brokers dealers and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 14 h*8A 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified 28. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 29. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31. Video tape rental (Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals) 32. United states postal service (Group 4311, excluding maior distribution centers) 33. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC. b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: a. Utility buildings b. Essential service facilities c. Gazebos, statuary and other architectural features c. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified (Group 7999. NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste management (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313 — Radio, television, and publishers' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertising services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 1. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 5813) 6. Educational services Groups 8211 —Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges, universities, and professional schools 8222 — Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 — Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 — General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 — Psychiatric hospitals 15 8069 — Specialty hospitals except psychiatric 8 A 11 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 — Liquor stores 5961 — Catalog and mail -order houses 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators 9. Personal services Groups 7211 — Power Laundries family and commercial 7261 — Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services excluding adult day care centers 8361— Residential care including soup kitchens and homeless shelters d Development intensity shall be limited to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. e One grocery use will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet With the exception of one grocery use no individual user may exceed 30,000 square feet of building area. f Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1 Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2 The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3 Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. Cl Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses A conceptual plan which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. 16 8 A include at a minimum: • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building, no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106, which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: a. There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. b. If the proiect requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District, the project shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. c. If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: • No present demand for Community Center commercial within the Comprehensive Plan's planning horizon of 2020 • Presently there is a greater deficit of Neighborhood Center commercial in Golden Gate Estates (no Neighborhood Centers approved; and there are two Community Centers approved for 540,950 sq. ft.) • The first project phase will likely develop as a Neighborhood Center • At build out, the project will be a Community Center but will function as both a Neighborhood Center and Community Center • The project market area overlaps (13,196 persons in year 2015 — and 14,984 persons in year 2020) with the approved Randall Blvd. Commercial Center market area, which means 17 • that households within this project's market area will be served by the Randall Blvd. Center, with the exception of households south and southeast of the proposed project • The data and analysis indicate the project will result in a reduction of vehicle miles traveled • This project, inclusive of transportation mitigation commitments, will not result in a reduction in level of service standard for any Category A public facilities • The proposed project size, and use and intensity are out of character with the surrounding semi -rural development pattern • Approval of this project at a Community sized center and use intensity may diminish the value of existing commercial properties and the need for other commercial in Golden Gate Estates • Project site is located within 3.5 and 5.5 road miles of approved Community Centers • The results of the November 2010 referendum indicate the majority of those persons voting (76 %) support the project STAFF'S CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the data and analysis submitted, the proposed site would be more appropriate for a neighborhood commercial sized center with the corresponding C -1 through C -3 commercial uses of the Land Development Code, with a limitation of a 20,000 square feet cap for individual users, with the exception that the grocery use may exceed the cap. Additionally, staff recommends eliminating the Conceptual Site Plan within the Master Plan as it is unprecedented to incorporate a site plan into the GMP, and the environmental data provided on the site plan is inadequate to determine compliance with the Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The discrepancy between the petitioner's request and staff's recommendation was heard by the Board on January 19, 2010 at which time the Board directed staff to seek the community's desire through a straw -poll ballot. While staff continues to support a moderately sized commercial center, the public (via referendum) overwhelmingly supported a 190,000 square feet center. As noted previously herein, the Florida Senate Report provides that if the commercial ratio of 1.25 is exceeded, other factors, such as suitability of property for change, locational criteria, job creation, community desires, etc., may be considered. Accordingly, despite staff's finding that the technical Needs Analysis does not support the petition as proposed within the Comprehensive Plan planning horizon of 2020, the Board of County Commissioners may consider the following factors in reaching a decision to approve this petition. The petition does provide for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, local job creation and has community support. 18 21 STRAW BALLOT RESOLUTION AND PRECINCT MAP Agenda Item No. 1 February 9, 2 8 Page3of7 •• COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Item Number: 16K7 Item Summary: Recommendation to approve a Resolution directing the Supervisor of Elections to place on the November 2. 2010 general election ballot for Precincts 551, 552, 554: 555, 590 and 591 the question of whether the Golden Gate Area Master Plan should be amended to allow for up to a 190,000 square fool commercial development, as requested by comprehensive Plan Amendment 08 -01. Meeting Date: 2/9/2010 9.0000 AM Prepared By Mike Bosi, AICP Manager- Planning Date Community Development & Environmental Services Comprehensive Planning 1129/2010 4:46:38 PM Approved By Scott R. Teach Deputy County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney 211/2 01 0 11:13 AM Approved By Jeff Ketzkow County Attorney Date 21112010 1:04 PM Approved By OMB Coordinator Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 211/2010 3:43 PM Approved By Susan Usher Management /Budget Analyst, Senior Date Office of Management & Budget Office of Management & Budget 2/112010 7:19 PM Approved By Mark Isackson Management /Budget Analyst, Senior Date Office of Management & Budget Office of Management & Budget 2/2/2010 8:46 AM Agenda Item No 16,8 A February 9, 2010 Page 4 of 7 RESOLUTION NO. 2010 - A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA DIRECTING THE COLLIER COUNTY SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS TO PLACE A STRAW BALLOT REFERENDUM CONCERNING A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ON THE NOVEMBER 2, 2010, BALLOT FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION. WHEREAS, on January 19, 2010, at a 2007/2008 Cycle of Growth Management Plan Amendments (including a 2009 Petition) Transmittal Hearing, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners voted to indefinitely continue Petition CP- 2008 -1 and to place that proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, which seeks to create an Estates Shopping Center Sub - district at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, on a straw ballot referendum to be voted upon by the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates at the November 2, 2010, general election; and WHEREAS, Section 125.01(1)(y) of the Florida Statutes authorizes County Commissioners to "place questions or propositions on the ballots at any primary election, general election, or otherwise called special election, when agreed to by a majority vote of the total membership of the legislative and governing body, so as to obtain an expression of elector sentiment with respect to matters of substantial concern within the county;" and WHEREAS, Collier County voter precinct numbers 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591 are located east of Collier Boulevard (CR 95 1) and adjacent to the proposed shopping center location and encompass those residents that would be most directly impacted by the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the ballot language for said straw ballot referendum needs to be adopted and transmitted to the Collier County Supervisor of Elections; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is lawful and in the public interest to call for the straw ballot referendum and direct the Collier County Supervisor of Elections to take appropriate action with respect to this Resolution. 1 Agenda Item No. 16K7 FebruPr g, X010 UA NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Section 1. The Supervisor of Elections is hereby directed to include within the ballot for the November 2, 2010, general election the following straw ballot referendum language: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment — Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gale Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a ±40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive- through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes No Section 2. The Supervisor of Elections is hereby directed to include the above straw ballot referendum language on the ballots of registered voters for the following precincts: Voter Precinct Numbers: 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591 A copy of the Collier County Precinct Map indicating the locations of those Precincts is attached hereto. Section 3. The Supervisor of Elections shall provide any and all notices required by the Florida Election Code in connection with placing this straw ballot on the November 2, 2010, general election ballot. Section 4. All costs related to placing the straw ballot referendum language on the general ballot including but not limited to the cost of translating the ballot into Spanish shall be borne by the Petitioner in CP- 2008 -1. Section 5. The Board of County Commissioners hereby directs the Clerk of Court to deliver, or cause to be delivered, a certified copy of this Resolution to the Supervisor of Elections upon adoption and execution of this Resolution. Agenda Item No. 16K7 February 9, 2010 Page 6 of 7 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second, and majority vote favoring same, this th day of February, 2010. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk UA , Deputy Clerk F&ciency: 3 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA M FRED W. COYLE, Chairman f J i A t 1 � / � l ♦/ ip f Igo I �tu I � .� G"r s - p • .. .a >\1 0 "8A STAFF SUMMARY OF THE FLORIDA SENATE INTERIM REPORT 2010 -107 . Staff Summary of the Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, October 2009 Subsequent to preparation of the CCPC Staff Reports for the 2007/2008 combined cycles of Growth Management Plan amendment petitions, Collier County was provided the October 2009 Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107 entitled "POPULATION NEED AS A CRITERIA FOR CHANGES TO A LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FUTURE LAND USE MAP." In addition to the Interim Report, a draft rule to amend the Florida Administrative Code was provided. The Interim Report identified a primary issue of a "Needs Assessment" in determining whether a comprehensive plan amendment as submitted by a local government provides more land than is needed to accommodate anticipated population growth. Population growth is utilized in the context of projected population during the 5 and 10 year planning time horizons. The genesis for the Interim Report was a land use decision in Marion County where the Governor and Cabinet upheld a decision of an administrative law judge (AU) that a proposed comprehensive plan amendment would, if adopted, allow more than five times the residential units needed in Marion County's 10 year planning horizon. The finding of the AU was that the applicant's methodology was not professionally acceptable because it did not demonstrate the need within the adopted planning time horizon. The Report identified several proposed comprehensive plan amendments that were found not in compliance based upon needs criteria, that is, because need was not demonstrated by the applicant. However, the Report also identifies some instances where comprehensive plan amendments were found in compliance despite failing to meet the needs assessment criteria; more about this later in this summary. One amendment highlighted in the Report not meeting the needs assessment involved the re- designation of land for industrial development in Putnam County; another such amendment was for the creation of the Clear Springs Sector Plan that re- designated 17,000+ acres to allow uses that included over 11,000 dwelling units, 6.8 million square feet of Research /Corporate Park /Commercial, and 21.8 million square feet of Industrial uses. The needs analysis is a useful planning tool to ascertain whether a proposed plan amendment will result in a local government's over - allocation of land in a specific land use category. One of the biggest problems identified with the over - allocation of certain land uses is urban sprawl, which causes increased infrastructure costs, a depleted urban core, and the premature development of agricultural lands and natural areas. The needs analysis explained in the Interim Report includes a market factor, planning time horizon, and population projections. As previously noted, the planning horizon for Collier County is presently out to 10 years (2020). The County utilizes medium range population projections as provided annually by the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research. The market factor is a numerical tool used to determine the amount of land use supply needed to accommodate anticipated growth. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) uses a market factor of 1.25, or 25 percent greater than the anticipated need of land use supply necessary for the population projected in the 110 year) planning time horizon. The additional 25% is designed to allow for market flexibility. Market factor is calculated by dividing the supply of land use by the demand for that land use. • The supply could be dwelling unit capacity (all built units plus all units allowed based on existing zoning and future land use designation), commercial capacity (all built commercial square feet plus all 1 $1r 8 A THE FLORIDA SENATE INTERIM REPORT 2010 -107 • • 0'4A The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107 October 2009 31 Committee on Community Affairs POPULATION NEED AS A CRITERIA FOR CHANGES TO A LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S FUTURE LAND USE MAP Issue Description - Needs Assessment In the growth management regime, a "needs assessment" is a determination of whether a comprehensive plan amendment submitted by a local government provides more land in a specific land use than is needed to accommodate anticipated population growth. When reviewing comprehensive plan amendments the Department of Community Affairs ( "DCA" or "the Department") reviews all residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional amendments for need; the exceptions are rural, agriculture, and conservation uses. The purpose of this interim report is to outline the current controversy surrounding the needs issue and to explain the potential effects of changing the existing policy. Currently, many of Florida's local governments already have enough growth planned in their future land use maps to last for the next several decades' (this is also (mown as over - allocation). Because a local government should only allow land use density increases when there is a need for additional density, it can be unclear when and bow a local government can amend its comprehensive plan if the plan is already over - allocated. Additionally, with the housing market collapse causing thousands of homes to go into foreclosure, many Florida citizens have become concerned that the Department has allowed more development than is needed for future growth. Alternatively, those in favor of development, claim that Department has not been consistently applying the needs criteria in their review of comprehensive plan amendments. Finally, the time horizons for some local governments' comprehensive plans are relatively short. This is frequently caused by local governments failing to consistently update their plans. The problem with short term horizons is that it may be detrimental to reject thoughtful long term developments in favor of short- range, short- term projects simply because the local government has failed to plan far enough in advance. Other local governments have made long term extensions to their planning time horizons. Unfortunately, some attempts at long term planning make projections so far into the future that the data and analysis is no longer accurate enough to be considered professionally acceptable methodology. Background Adopted by the 1985 Legislature, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act- also known as Florida's Growth Management Act - requires all of Florida's 67 counties and 410 municipalities to adopt Local Government Comprehensive Plans that guide future growth and development. Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" that address future land use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, coastal management, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements. As part of each adopted comprehensive plan each local government must also adopt a Future Land Use Map ("PLUM" ).s The FLUM puts each parcel in the jurisdiction into a designated land use category; therefore, when a developer or landowner makes an application to change their designated land use they ' In a survey of nine Florida Counties conducted by the Department, the Department found there was between 27 and 993 years of growth that has been approved beyond the Counties' adopted planning horizons. 2 See Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. ' Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S. M Page 2 Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map • are . e applying for a FLUM amendment. Assuming the local government votes to transmit the plan amendment to- -- the Department, the Department then reviews the amendment for consistency with the comprehensive plan. Each future land use plan amendment is required to be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, including the projected population of the area .° When adopting comprehensive plan amendments, local governments must ensure that each land use category is allocated the proper amount of land. If the local government fails to make a proper allocation, it can run into problems of over - allocation and under - allocation. Over - allocation occurs where comprehensive plan amendments are approved where there is no demonstrated need. The biggest problem caused by over - allocation is urban sprawl. Urban sprawl occurs because there is a lack of constraints on where development occurs. When there are no constraints on development, developers will often develop land which is not contiguous to existing development. This causes increased infrastructure costs, depleted urban cores, and the premature development of agricultural lands and natural areas. Furthermore, once this land has been allocated for higher densities it is extremely difficult to reverse because vested property rights and the Bert Harris Act protect private property rights.s Although transferable development rights ( "TDR's ") are frequently suggested as a solution to over - allocation, TDR programs are often very difficult to implement and monitor consistently. Under- allocation occurs when there is not enough land in a land use category, in a specific area, to accommodate demand. If there is a higher demand for land than what is available to build, land prices will increase and development costs will go up. Location problems can also occur because under- allocation may limit a developer's options on where to build a new development. Finally, because development is a job creator, under - allocation has the potential to stifle economic growth. Because of the clear problems associated with under - allocation, local governments have a tendency to over - allocate. • Without thoughtful planning, Florida runs the risk of revisiting problems such as the platted lands problem. The platted lands problem is a problem where thousands of plats were sold in areas that lacked proper infrastructure. This resulted in underserved and blighted areas that are difficult or even impossible to revitalize or rezone. Once an area is given a certain land use designation or density, it is difficult to change or decrease the intensity of the zoning without interfering with private property rights. How Need is Determined The needs assessment is a part of the land use planning process that provides a mechanism for local governments to determine the appropriate supply of land uses necessary to accommodate anticipated demand. This is particularly true because the "need" issue is one of the factors to be considered in any urban sprawl analysis.6 Therefore, it is important for landowners, developers, and local governments to have a clear understanding of how need is determined so that each entity understands how need factors into the Department's comprehensive plan amendment compliance decisions. Because of the high risks and costs associated with development, landowners and developers want certainty before they invest their time and money in applying for a land use plan amendment. Currently, every large scale future land use map amendment to a comprehensive plan is reviewed, by both the local government and Department, to determine if there is a need for the amendment.' To determine need, the reviewer must analyze: the categories of land use and their densities or intensities of use, the estimated gross acreage needed by category, and a description of the methodology used.' This methodology is then submitted to the Department for review with the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. When reviewing this methodology, the Department reviews both the numerical population and policy factors. Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S ' Section 70.001(1), F.S. 6 Rule 9J- 5.006(5)(,-)1 F.A.C. ' Rule 9J -5 006(2)(e), F.AC. s Rule 9J- 5.006(2)(c), F.A.C. For an example of how the methodolgy is analyzed, see page 5. .,. Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map Page 3 Information for Calculating Needs Methodology In addition to the basic outline provided above for calculating need, there are several components of the methodology that need additional explanation. Market Factor Residential: A market factor (also known as an allocation number or multiplier) is a numerical tool used by professional planners to determine the amount of land use supply needed to accommodate anticipated growth.' For residential land, a market factor is calculated by dividing the amount of dwelling unit capacity by the amount of dwelling unit demand.!` The Department recommends a market factor of 125 which means a plan allows for land uses to support 125% of the projected population." The additional 25% is designed to allow for market flexibility. Therefore, if the proposed residential land use amendment causes the market factor to go above 1.25, the Department can find an amendment "not in compliance" because of a lack of need. However, there is no statute or rule that mandates that every plan amendment must be denied where there is an over - allocation. Rather, if the market factor goes above 1.25 it will cause the plan amendment to be subject to a heightened review to see if it meets the indicators of urban sprawl. 12 Commercial/Industrial: Similar to residential, examining the market factor for commercial and industrial lands is a significant factor in determining need. However, case law has indicated that the need for additional commercial or industrial land may also be demonstrated by other factors such as the suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, and community desires.13 For industrial land use changes, rural communities are also provided a special exception. Section 163.3177(6)(a) F.S., states that "the amount of land designated for future planned industrial use should be based on surveys and studies that reflect the need for job creation, capital investment, and the necessity to strengthen and diversify the local economies and should not be limited solely by the projected population of the rural community." Planning Time Horizon The Florida Growth Management Act of 1985 requires each local government comprehensive plan to include at least two planning periods, one covering at least the first 5 -year period occurring after the plan's adoption and one covering at least a ten -year period." In planning for the amount of land needed for a particular land use, the local government must analyze it within the adopted planning time horizon applicable to that portion of the comprehensive plan. Other local governments have also adopted a third planning time horizon for longer range planning. These longer range planning time horizons have been extended out as far as 40 years, and DCA has approved comprehensive plan amendments that have incorporated these longer term planning time horizons.15 Population Projections A key component of the needs issue are population projections. In 1986, rulemaking required comprehensive plans to be based on resident and seasonal population estimates provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, the Executive Office of the Governor, or generated by the local govemment.'b If the local government chooses to base its plan on the figures provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, medium range projections should be utilized." If the local government chooses to base its plan on either low or high range projections provided by the University of Florida or the Executive ' The Role of Need in Comprehensive Planning Department of Community Affairs Presentation, June 26, 2009. uo Id. " Id. Sierra Club v. St. Johns County & DCA, DOAH 01 -1851 GM (May 20, 2002). '3 O'Connell v. Martin County, DOAN 01- 4826GM (Oct. 16, 2002). u< Section 163.3177(5)(a), F.S. 15 "There is not a prohibition against analyzing more time frames than just one planning horizon." Sierra Club & Panhandle Citizens v. DCA and Franklin County, DOAH 05 -2731 GM (June 12, 2006). 16 Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(e), F.A.C. 3 0 Id. • Page 4 Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map • Office of the Governor, a detailed description of the rationale for such a choice shall be included with such - - -- -- _- projections.lg Alternative Methodologies (for Population Projections) If a local government chooses to prepare its own estimates and projections, it is required to submit estimates and projections and a description of the methodologies utilized to generate the projections and estimates to the Department of Community Affairs with its plan amendments for compliance review, unless it has submitted them for advance review. The Department will evaluate the alternative methodology to determine whether the methodology is professionally accepted. In addition, the Department is required to make available examples of methodologies for resident and seasonal population estimates and projections that it deems to be professionally acceptable. Finally, in its review of any population estimates, projections, or methodologies proposed by local governments, DCA must be guided by the Executive Office of the Governor, in particular the State Data Center.19 Example of Methodology Review When conducting a needs methodology review, a professional planner should divide the amount of dwelling unit capacity by the amount of dwelling unit demand to calculate the market factor. Dwelling unit demand is calculated by examining the projected population for the jurisdiction over the adopted planning time horizon. If there is not enough dwelling unit capacity to meet demand then a market factor will be too low and there is a demonstrated need for the plan amendment. Policy reasons for adopting amendments should also be included in this methodology. How the Needs Criteria Has Been Reviewed in the Past Residential: In the early 1990's, during the initial phase of the adoption of comprehensive plans, the Department . found several comprehensive plans "not in compliance" because the plans allocated more land than was needed for residential land use. For example, in 1992 during the adoption of Escambia County's comprehensive plan the Department found the plan "not in compliance" because the plan allocated 5 times more residential land than was needed 20 Walton and Lee County also had their plans found not in compliance because they allocated more residential land than was needed, i.e. their market factors were too high .21 Since the early 1990's, however, the Department has typically found comprehensive plan amendments to be in compliance in regards to need, as long as the data and analysis was calculated using professional planning methodologies. For example, in 1994, an administrative law judge ( "ALJ") upheld the Department's decision finding a comprehensive plan amendment "in compliance" where the data and analysis was "calculated using acceptable professional planning methodologies "22 The ALJ also based his decision on the fact that this plan was similar to other counties found acceptable by the Department. 23 Commercial/Industrial: Because of the importance of commercial and industrial lands for job creation, the Department and the courts have typically found that need may be demonstrated by factors other than simple numerical need 24 For example, in 2003, a Putnam County commercial land use amendment was challenged by a neighboring landowner because there was no demonstrated numerical need 25 Here, the Department had approved the amendment and the ALJ upheld the decision. The ALJ stated that "an amendment does not have to be found to be not in compliance simply because of a numerical over allocation, "26 rather the presence of an over - allocation a rd 19 Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(e), F.A.0 2° DCA v. Escambia Counry, DOAH 90- 7663GM (Feb. 19, 1992). 2' DCA et al., v_ Walton Couivy. DOAH 91- 00108OGM (Apr. 13, 1992)..Sheridan v. Lee County &DC.4, DOAH 90 -7791 GM (Jan. 27,1993)- 22 DCA v. Lake County, DOAII 91- 5960GM (Aug. 10, 1994). • ` Id. z4 4 These factors include the suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, and community desires. O'Connell v. Martin County, DOAH 01- 4826GM (Oct. 16, 2002). 25 Parsons Y. Putnam County, DOAH 02- 1069GM (May 5, 2003). 26 7d at 14 citing Sierra Club v. St. Johns Counry & DCA, DOAH 01- 1851GM (May 20, 2002). Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map Page 5 iwill trigger a heightened, more thorough review of the indicators of urban sprawl and other factors may outweigh the numerical over - allocation. Current Needs Criteria Review Recently, the Department has been finding certain land use amendments in compliance despite the numerical needs criteria; however, the Department has also found several amendments not in compliance based on the needs criteria Land Use Amendments Allowed Despite the Needs Criteria Although the Department has denied some projects based on need, it has been approving some large scale land use amendments despite the needs criteria. For example, in November 2008, DCA approved the Clear Springs Sector plan.28 Previously this site, which totals 17,466 acres, had a land use designation of Agriculture at one dwelling unit per five acres. This would have allowed the owner to build 3241 dwelling units. The site has now been approved to build 11,016 dwelling units at up to 20 units /acre, 6.8 million square feet of Research/Corporate Park/Commercial, 21.8 million square feet of Industrial, and still contain 4,093 acres Agriculture, and 5,597 acres Conservation/Wetlands/Water Resources. Also, in a recent case in Putnam County, where the petitioners contended the amendment designated additional acreage for industrial uses in excess of demonstrated need, the Department found the amendment in compliance.29 The Department's decision was based on the County's designation as a Rural Area of Critical Economic Concern 30 This decision was also recently upheld by an ALJ.3i Finally, the Knight property in Bay County is also currently in the process of negotiating with the Department to be approved as a sector plan. The Department overall has also approved a large number of comprehensive plan amendments. In 2008 alone, the Department approved 559 amendments which could allow up to 195,427 new dwelling units and almost 200 million square feet of non - residential development. See Table below for more detailed information. Department's Approved Future Land Use Map Amendments, 2008 Approvals of Approvals of Residential Non - Residential Development Types and Numbers of Numbers of Capacity Development Capacity Jurisdictions Amendments Acres Affected Dwellin Units 3,666 Rural Counties' (14) 50 13,630 17,422 sq.,,, 16,404 881 Rural Municipalities2(12) 23 3,666 130,321 1,842,984 Non -Rural Counties (26) 200 56,427 6,108 72,419,398 Non -Rural Municipalities (76) 266 46,607 41,576 108,011,606 TOTALS 559 150,330 195,427 198,678,869 1. Rural counties include those designated as Rural Areas of Critical Economic concern ( RACEC) and/or Rural Economic Development Initiative (REDi). 2. Rural municipalities include those incorporated jurisdictions that are within RACEC counties as well as those that are individually designated as either RACEC or REDL • 21 Sierra Club v. St. Johns Counq+ & DCA, DOAH 01- 1851GM (May 20, 2002). 28 For more information on Sector Plans, see page 7. as County of Valusia, et al. v. DC.4 and Punam Counry, DOAH 07- 5107GM (Sept. 22, 2009). 30 Id. 31 Id. • Page 6 Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map • Land Use Amendments Denied Based on the Needs Criteria Residential /CommerciaMndustrial: Recently, the Department has found several comprehensive plan amendments "not in compliance" due to a lack of demonstrated need. Specifically, these amendments have not been able to demonstrate a numerical population need. In some of the cases the communities have failed to update the planning time horizons in their comprehensive plans. Because the Department's position is that the need for a plan amendment must be reviewed in conjunction with the planning time horizon adopted in the comprehensive plan, several proposed plan amendments have not been able to demonstrate need However, because of the time and expense associated with updating comprehensive plans, many local governments have had difficulty keeping their plans up to date. In response, the Department has allowed some communities to adopt longer range planning time horizons and multiple time horizons. Marion County Case: The highest profile case where a land use amendment was rejected because of the needs issue was the case of Woods & Recio v. Marion County & DCA, which was recently considered by the Governor and Cabinet 33 In this case, a developer wanted to change the land use on 400 acres from Rural Land and Urban Reserve to Residential Medium Density, to build 800 new homes. Although the Department originally found the amendment in compliance, they later determined they failed to conduct a needs assessment on the proposed amendment. Therefore, when the case went before an ALJ, the Department changed its position and argued that the amendment should not be allowed because the methodology used was unprofessional in regards to its demonstration of need. To properly demonstrate need, an applicant must provide data and analysis showing there is a need for more development, in this case residential dwelling units, within the local government's adopted planning horizon. The Department discourages methodologies that plan for growth beyond the adopted planning time horizon in part because of the potential for urban sprawl. Even if Marion County's adopted planning horizon bad extended out to • 2015,34 the applicant's data and analysis showed that if the amendment was allowed the plan would allow 5 times more residential dwelling units than were needed to accommodate projected population. The ALJ sided with the Department, finding the applicant's methodology unprofessional because it did not demonstrate need within the adopted planning time horizon. The Governor and Cabinet upheld the findings of the ALJ.ss There are several issues highlighted by this case that are of concern to the development community. First, they argue that the strict needs assessment used in this case and the finding that the methodology was not professionally acceptable was a new non -rule policy, inconsistent with prior DCA policy. Second, the time horizon of the Marion County comprehensive plan was 2010. If population projections are limited by the very short time horizon in the comprehensive plan, planning changes that rely on future population projections will be unable to go forward until the comprehensive plan is updated in its entirety. Third, many jurisdictions are over - allocated, meaning there are currently more dwelling units approved within their adopted planning time horizon than population projections indicate will be needed. As a result, if need alone can defeat a plan amendment, a local government will not be able to approve any land use amendment that increases the number of residential dwelling units until population projections are revised or a new planning time horizon is adopted Charlotte County: The Department found an amendment expanding the Urban Service Area by 214 acres and increasing density and intensity of development in this area not in compliance because the methodology presented was not professionally accepted. Therefore, the Department found there was no demonstrated need for the amendment." Washington County: The Department found an amendment changing 876 acres from Agriculture to Mixed Use Planned Unit Development not in compliance because the residential needs analysis was not professionally Sierra Club & Panhandle Citizens v. DCA and Franklin County, DOAH 05 -2731 GM (June 12, 2006). Woods & Recio v. Marion County & DCA, DOAH 08- 1576GM (Feb. 4, 2009). • ''Marion County's adopted planning time horizon was 2010; the submitted methodology used a planning time frame of 44 years. DCA used a six year planning time horizon of 2015 for their analysis; this planning time horizon was purely theoretical and only used for legal argument. Woods & Recio v Marion County & DC4, DOAH 08- 1576GM (Feb. 4, 2009). 35 Woods & Recio v- Marion Count) & DCA, Administration Commission (Sept 4, 2009). 36 Charlotte County Amendment 09 -1 8A 14 Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map Page 7 + acceptable. Although there was a need for an additional 1,058 dwelling units for 2010, the amendment had the potential to create 7,359 new dwelling units." Miami -Dade County: A 2009 amendment expanding the urban service area and changing the land use from Agriculture to Commercial was found not in compliance because the methodology was not professionally accepted and "there is no need for more commercial land in the area of the proposed Lowes site." s The area of the Lowe's site had a projected ratio of 11.3 acres of commercial per 1000 persons, while the countywide ratio was projected to be 6.1 acres per 1000 persons. Alternative Planning Modes Because large rural tracts are typically not located in areas where a need can be shown for more residential, commercial, or industrial lands, the Legislature has created programs to allow some development in rural areas. These programs are known as Optional Sector Planning and the Rural Land Stewardship Program. Additionally, in 2004, the Legislature created the Ave Maria Stewardship District and the Big Cypress Stewardship District as independent special districts. These districts have independent governing bodies, and have been designed to work in concert with the rural land stewardship program in Collier County. Optional Sector Planning In 1998, the Legislature permitted the creation of five optional sector plans as an alternative to the Development of Regional Impact process.'4 A sector plan process consists of an agreement authorizing the preparation of a sector plan between the county and Department, a conceptual long -term build-out overlay, and a detailed specific area plan. Sector plans emphasize urban form, public participation throughout the process, protection of regional resources and facilities and apply to areas greater than 5,000 acres. A sector plan is adopted as a comprehensive plan amendment and similarly reviewed by the Department for consistency. There are currently three sector plans in existence (West Bay Area Sector Plan, Orange County Sector Plan, Brennan Field Sector Plan), a fourth was recently designated (Clear Springs Sector Plan) and a fifth will likely be officially designated in the near future. Rural Land Stewardship In 2001, the Legislature established the Rural Land Stewardship Area Program ( "RLSAP ") as a pilot program." This program allowed counties to designate rural land stewardship areas, within areas that are classified on a future land use map as agricultural, rural, open, or a substantively equivalent land use. Within these areas, planning and economic incentives can encourage the implementation of flexible planning and development strategies to increase densities in some locations while permanently preserving land in other areas. After several legislative changes, in 2006 the Department received its fast RLSAP amendments from St. Lucie County (Collier County had also adopted a similar rural land stewardship program, however it was not adopted under the RLSAP statute) ..41 After initially finding the St. Lucie County amendments in compliance in 2006, the Department undertook a second look at them in 2007 when it drafted its annual RLSAP report for the Legislature. During this review the Department found several shortcomings in the amendments.42 Specifically, the Department found: • The St. Lucie County program was extremely complex. • In Collier County, where development was actually happening, the development was being directed to agricultural areas which the Department contends contravenes the principles of rural sustainability. • The program did not have any requirements that the receiving area be clustered, thus allowing for the possibility of scattered sprawling receiving areas. 3' DCA v. Washington County, DOAH 07- 06096M (June 26, 2009). re DCA v. Hiram -Dade Cormry &DavidBro n,DOAH 08- 3614GM(May 11, 2009). 39 Section 163.3245, F.S. 40 Section 163.3177 (11)(d), F.S. 4' Florida Chamber of Commerce, et al. v. DCA, DOAH 09- 3488RP (Sept. 14, 2009). 42 7d 8A Page S Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map • Due to these shortcomings, the Department has placed little, if any, reliance on the St. Lucie County RLSAP amendments as an example of proper planning under the RLSAP statute.43 There is also no evidence that any development has occurred under the St. Lucie program, and its most recent correspondence indicated that none may ever occur."' Furthermore, Highlands and Osceola Counties which both applied for and were granted authorization by the Department to designate RLSAP's, have since notified the Department that they would no longer pursue them and the authorization was withdrawn by the Department 45 In order to clear up some of the confusion over the program, the Department recently entered into rulemaking for the RLSAP. 4' Although these rules were upheld by an ALI, it remains to be seen whether this program will actually be used. Findings and /or Conclusions Need Assessment is a Factor in Land Use Planning The needs assessment is a fundamental part of land use planning. Specifically, the numerical needs assessment is a useful tool to determine whether the amendment will cause an area to become over - allocated or exacerbate existing over - allocation. It is also a key indicator of urban sprawl. However, the numerical needs assessment is only one factor to consider when conducting a needs assessment. It is also important to consider other policy factors such as job creation potential, urban infill, form of development, or the promotion of development in areas where it is most efficient for the local government to promote growth. Inconsistent Enforcement Although the needs assessment has been in the statutes for a long time, it has not been consistently enforced. In reviewing case law, it appears the Deparnent took a tougher stance against urban sprawl and the needs factor in • the early 1990's during the initial adoption of the comprehensive plans, then relaxed its review of this criterion for many years when reviewing plan amendments, and has now once again been applying a tougher standard. The market factor being used in many current needs assessments is 1.25. Some amendments are approved despite an over - allocation of development in a given jurisdiction. However, the reason that these amendments are approved is unclear. Long Term Land Use Planning is Permitted but Must be Carefully Considered In cases such as Woods & Recio v. Marion County & DCA, °' a one or two-year planning horizon in the comprehensive plan will make a showing of future need for development difficult or impossible to demonstrate. Long term planning can be valuable, but changing an entire comprehensive plan to reflect a 20 or 30 -year planning horizon, while currently allowed under the statutes, may present many difficulties. For instance, because population projections are incorrect, and population projections are required to match the adopted planning time horizon, adopting too long of a planning time horizon can lead to urban sprawl. Therefore, if a local government adopts a longer term planning horizon that allows for more development they are taking a risk that they are allowing development in areas that may never develop. Options and /or Recommendations Planning for growth where growth is needed has a number of benefits including the: • discouragement of urban sprawl and the efficient use of infrastructure dollars; • discouragement of premature conversion of agricultural lands; • prevention of fragmentation of the environment; and • promotion of coordination of the plan with the plans of adjacent local governments. 4d qW 44 4 id. 45 Id. °R Id. 'Woods &Recio v. Marion County &DCA, DOAH 08- 1576GM (Feb. 4, 2009). • Population Need as a Criteria for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map Page 9 . A numerical needs assessment using a market factor is one of the tools the state uses to achieve these important policy objectives. It is possible that a development proposal could fail the numerical needs assessment and still achieve the important policy goals that the test was created to protect Therefore, a clear articulation of how the test relates to the goals may allow interested parties to understand how particularly well - planned and beneficial development might take place even in a jurisdiction that is over - allocated. Rulemaldng or legislative clarification in this area could promote well planned developments where form, function, and location outweigh the detrimental effects of over - allocation. Either the Legislature by statute or the Department of Community Affairs through rule making could clarify the role of needs assessment in the comprehensive planning process. The Department could, through rulemaking, formalize and elaborate on its current policies and guidelines for analyzing a needs assessment. More clearly identifying the factors considered in assessing need and the beneficial public policies supported by having a needs assessment should assist planners, developers, and policymakers to develop plans that avoid over - allocation and urban sprawl without restricting growth where it would be beneficial. Finally, there are certain types of development that may not need to undergo stringent needs analysis. For example, local governments are often interested in gaining the efficiencies of enhanced urban infill and redevelopment projects_ It may be that these projects are needed for public policy reasons and might not need to provide population data that support their proposals. In addition, certain commercial or industrial job creation projects might not require a stringent needs analysis. The Legislature or the Department may choose to exempt or set different criteria for these projects. IWJ • • GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AREA CIGM MAP 2 2 U 0 z_ N T to Q ch U w0 Ix U- 00 LL z ~ ON Q H W Q W J J N � v 04 Z (n Q F y 2 W Q ci ~ zy _ W N W F 04 =0 z w 0 J ,0 V 0 LL K w U 0 °o 0 m c� w z LL 0 J Q U w w 0 0 0 0 LL ❑ 0 U w a 0 a J 0 z z (7 z 0 ii w U z 0 0 0 Q J a U D! W 0 O 0 O C z Q w D 8 2 4 U "e J z _ r ol co N :�+ • {• w 50 o w ... M d ❑ 'a ' A ante s3OVlOn3n3 ,,. r; •R .y t. NOAl9 NOSlM �. o N Yg' z 0 4LL W _- CAI,B 831110 J I O 0 N C6 In a'rame oiosaa -S• -- t Q a0 N n � :+ mitt .. •. +. , v.. � " �.+ v v¢+ H : ' G4 '4• '.. '�. W . s } 4. ❑ t T ♦ . •,�.„ • I. +1 ante saavloa3na . .., y, ,., ; • ..i w • N OA19 NOSIIM , !+ Ir j' N ' �•�: d !4 12o a; z o 11 z j 0 co w j •re TOM ,e, •r .�a• ,ome otosea ;• N M M In N • •y \ .. a. • i. + +. .. ..• . +t 4 •�� f Y• ' • ,.wt,•, •�. r • jy .t. •t ¢. } O Q .•► • ,Y4 • :OAl9 S3Otl1083A3 4• a. `�. �� .'M f •latt. i N � •• •.. +• i... } +'ry CAI. NOS,IM n S a t. 04 gtl' •M'_t• •a _SS •• w � '- nob z w� ( o€ F u. w AIG ( 1111( � F49, A STRAW BALLOT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 02/09/2010 Agenda Item No.� February 9, 2010 Page 1 of 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve a Resolution directing the Supervisor of Elections to place on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot for Precincts 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591 the question of whether the Golden Gate Area Master Plan should be amended to allow for up to a 190,000 square foot commercial development, as requested by comprehensive Plan Amendment 08 -01. Staff is requesting that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve the Resolution to direct the Supervisor of Elections to place a straw ballot question regarding CP- 08 -01, a Growth Management Plan Amendment to the Golden Gate request for an up to 190,000 square foot commercial development within the Rural Golden Gate Estates. CONSIDERATION: On January 19, 2010, at a 2007/2008 Cycle of Growth Management Plan Amendments (including a 2009 Petition) Transmittal Hearing, the BCC voted to indefinitely continue Petition CP- 2008 -1 and to place that proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, which seeks to create an Estates Shopping Center Sub - district at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, on a straw ballot referendum to be voted upon by the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates at the November 2, 2010, general election. Section 125.01(1) (y) of the Florida Statutes authorizes County Commissioners to "place questions or propositions on the ballots at any primary election, general election, or otherwise called special election, when agreed to by a majority vote of the total membership of the legislative and governing body, so as to obtain an expression of elector sentiment with respect to matters of substantial concern within the county." The location of the proposed Estates Shopping Center Sub - district, the northeast section of the Wilson/Golden Gate Boulevards intersection is located within Precinct 552. Based upon the expected impact of the Estates Shopping District upon residents beyond Precinct 552, the straw ballot referendum will be applicable to precinct numbers 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591. Each of these precincts is located east of Collier Boulevard (CR951). All costs related to placing the straw ballot referendum language on the general ballot including but not limited to the cost of translating the ballot into Spanish shall be bome by the Petitioner in CP- 2008 -1. The straw ballot language to be adopted and transmitted to the Collier County Supervisor of Elections is depicted below: Agenda Item No. 16K7 A February 9, 201 H Page 2 of 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment — Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a +40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive - through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes No FISCAL IMPACT: The principal costs associated with the Resolution and the corresponding ballot question is being born solely by the applicant for the CP -08 -01 GMP amendment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no direct impact of the straw ballot question on the GMP, but ultimately if the CP -08 -01 is approved the amendment would alter the existing Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) by allowing for Community Commercial development within the Sub - District. Currently the GGAMP only provides for the development of limited Neighborhood Commercial development LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action SRT. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution directing the Supervisor of Elections to place a straw ballot referendum concerning an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan for an up to 190,000 square foot commercial district on the November 2, 2010, ballot for the general election. Prepared by: Mike Bosi, A1CP, Manager, Comprehensive Planning Department i ! TRANSMITTAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1/19/10 FOR 2007 -2008 G M P AMENDMENT COMBINED CYCLES f •, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Public Hearing for the 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles of Growth Management Plan Amendments, including one 2009 Cycle Petition. (Transmittal Hearing) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 2007 -2008 combined cycles of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan and consider approving said amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • At time of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) hearings, the 2007 -2008 combined cycle of GMP amendments consisted of nine private sector petitions and one County - initiated petition, including one 2009 cycle petition per prior Board direction. However, of the private sector petitions, only six now remain in this cycle as two petitions were withdrawn subsequent to the CCPC hearing and one petition was continued indefinitely by the CCPC at petitioner's request (then added to the amendment cycle with petition CP- 2008 -5, Immokalee Area Master Plan). The four petitions for sites east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) within Golden Gate Estates are depicted on the attached location map. • The (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for these petitions on October 19, 20 and 29, 2009, and November 19, 2009. • This Transmittal hearing for the 2007 -2008 combined cycle considers amendments to the following Elements of the Plan: 0 Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and, 0 Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series. Note: Because this hearing is for the sole purpose of considering GMP amendment petitions, the number of petitions is large (7 total) and the support materials so voluminous, and some exhibits are oversized, the Novus system is not used. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is included in the binders provided to the BCC and is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section office, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples. Needs Analysis Attached to this Executive Summary is The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, October 2009 titled "Population Need as a Criterion for Changes to a Local Government's Future Land Use Map." Also attached is a summary of that Report prepared by Comprehensive Planning staff (Staff Summary of the Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, October 2009). The Report identifies the necessity of preparing a needs analysis for any GMP amendment proposing to increase density or use intensity; indicates that such an analysis must be based upon the supply /demand ratio for the proposed use category (residential, commercial or industrial) — a numerical analysis; and, notes that even if the numerical analysis fails to demonstrate need, other factors may be considered. • 1 FISCAL IMPACT: There are no fiscal impacts to Collier County as a result of these amendments since final action is not being taken at this time (these amendments are not being considered for adoption at this hearing). If approved for transmittal, these amendments will subsequently be considered for adoption at hearings to be held later in 2010. The cost to process, review and advertise the private sector petitions is borne by the petitioner via the application fee. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Executive Summary has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office These proposed Growth Management Plan amendments are authorized for consideration by local government, and subject to the procedures established, in Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, and by local Resolution #97 -431, as amended. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of these proposed amendments by the Board of County Commissioners for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs will commence the Department's sixty -day (60) review process and ultimately return these amendments to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners for final Adoption hearings to be held later in 2010. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: All six private sector amendments to the Growth Management Plan would increase allowable development intensity. For four of those six petitions, no listed plant and /or animal species have been observed or are known to be on the sites, and those sites do not contain jurisdictional wetlands. The other two private sector amendments do contain listed plant and/or animal species and contain jurisdictional wetlands (petitions CP- 2008 -4 and CP- 2009 -1). As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. rezone and/or conditional use, site development plan), the sites will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal environmental protection regulations, including applicable portions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP, and the Land Development Code. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None of the six proposed private sector amendments to the GMP contain lands identified on the County's Historical /Archeological Probability Maps as being in areas of historical or archaeological probability. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders, the sites will again be subject to review for historical /archeological probability. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Most Growth Management Plan amendments are not reviewed by the EAC. However, the EAC did review two petitions on September 2, 2009. Petition CP- 2008 -4 (located in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands designation) was forwarded with a recommendation to transmit to DCA (vote: 5/0), and petition CP- 2009 -1 (located in the Conservation designation and within the Big Cypress Area of Critical Sate Concern) was forwarded with a recommendation to transmit to DCA subject to staff's text revisions (vote: 3/2). � a • COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff's recommendation follows each individual petition listed below. Note: For most petitions, regardless of staff recommendation, staff prepared text revisions to the petitioner's proposed text so as to provide clarity, proper format, correct grammar, etc., as noted in the CCPC Staff Reports. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC's recommendation follows each individual petition listed below and is contained in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments." Note: Where the CCPC forwarded a recommendation of approval, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the CCPC recommendation. Where the CCPC forwarded a recommendation of denial, and where a recommendation for approval failed by virtue of a be vote, the text in the Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text — including revisions submitted subsequent to the CCPC hearing. PETITION CP- 2007 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Mao and Mao Series, to create the Wilson Boulevard Conditional Uses Subdistrict, to allow a maximum of 40,000 square feet of permitted and conditional uses of the Estates zoning district, for property located on the southeast corner of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Wilson Boulevard, in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, consisting of 15.17 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2007 -1 to the BCC with recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petition agent verbally proposed one change to the amendment: if the CCPC would not support the commercial petition, then requested they approve the site to be eligible to apply for conditional uses, i.e. be an exception to the locational criteria for conditional uses. The CCPC recommended the BCC not approve the revised petition CP- 2007 -1 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 8 /0). Speakers: None. Post -CCPC Action: As submitted to the CCPC, this petition was a request for 40,000 s.f. of commercial uses allowed in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted new subdistrict text to replace the original text to instead request a maximum of 40,000 square feet of permitted and conditional uses of the E- Estates zoning district; this new subdistrict text is located behind the tab labeled "Post -CCPC Submittal CP- 2007 -1" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC and is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit A for this petition. The petitioner submitted no needs analysis or other data and analysis to support this modified petition. The staff recommendation not to approve this petition for Transmittal stands. 2. PETITION CP- 2007 -3, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Mao and Mao Series, to create the Mission Subdistrict to allow church and related uses, including schools, adult care and child care, and community outreach, with a maximum of 90,000 square feet of total development, for property located on the south side of Oil Well Road (CR 858), 1/4 mile west of Everglades Boulevard, in Section 19, Township 48 South, Range 28 East, consisting of ±21.72 acres. [Coordinator: Beth Yang, AICP, Principal Planner] 8A Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2007 -3 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petitioner proposed changes to the amendment to remove reference to commercial uses. After discussion regarding what the term `church - related uses" could encompass, the CCPC recommended the BCC approve the revised petition CP- 2007 -3 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 8 /0), subject to staff determination of the appropriate text — as a proposed new Subdistrict OR as a new exception to be listed under the existing Conditional Uses Subdistrict in the GGAMP (for conditional uses (CU) allowed in the E, Estates zoning district). Based upon discussion with Zoning & Land Development Review staff, it could not be clearly determined that the range of proposed uses would fall under the "church" use; therefore, one option would be for the petitioner to submit a Request for Official Interpretation (OI). If the OI process (staff determination or appeal to BOZA) were to yield an affirmative determination, then the CU exception text would be appropriate. However, unless and until that occurs, Comprehensive Planning Department staff believes it best to establish a new Subdistrict to reflect the CCPC recommendation, as set forth in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments." Speakers: There was one speaker; the speaker was in favor of this petition. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted a revised cover letter dated December 1, 2009 that includes revised subdistrict text - which is the same as that recommended by the CCPC (materials are located behind the tab labeled "Post -CCPC Submittal CP- 2007 -3" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC). The staff recommendation not to approve this petition for Transmittal stands. 3. PETITION CP- 2008 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Mao and Mao Series, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to allow a maximum of 210,000 square feet of commercial uses of the C -4 zoning district, with exceptions, and some uses of the C -5 zoning district, with requirement to construct a grocery store, for property located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Blvd. west to 3`d Street Northwest, in Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of 140.62 acres. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2008 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petitioner verbally proposed two changes to the amendment: 1) reduce building height from two stories to one story; and, 2) reduce the proposed building area from 225,000 square feet to 210,000 square feet. There was no CCPC recommendation on revised petition CP- 2008 -1 by virtue of a tie vote (4/4). The failed motion to approve was subject to staff alternative text in the Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph "a." to add a "catchall" prohibited use #14; 4) revise paragraph 'b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f., as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.1." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation; and, 6) 4 • delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. The text that reflects the CCPC's unsuccessful motion is contained in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments." Speakers: There were nine speakers. Two speakers were in favor of the petition, noting there is a need and desire for more commercial and that the petitioner has worked to resolve neighborhood concerns. One of those two speakers represented the First and Third Group, a group of neighbors near the subject site (1" and 3rd Streets NW); he presented a specific list of permitted and prohibited uses, with SIC Codes, the Group endorsed. Seven speakers were opposed to the petition, citing these concerns: project will increase traffic; there are adequate shopping opportunities in or near Golden Gate Estates (GGE); negative impacts during project construction; commercial should not be located in the interior of GGE; project will attract undesirable animals (rats, then snakes that eat rats); not consistent with GGAMP allowance for commercial and maintenance of rural character; questions whether there's enough population in GGE to support this amount of commercial; will disrupt the tranquility, quiet, nature and [nighttime] darkness the speakers moved to GGE to enjoy. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted revised proposed subdistrict text and conceptual map to reduce building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f.; increase landscape buffers; and, increase building setbacks. Also, the petitioner submitted additional data and analysis. All new /revised materials are located behind the tab labeled "Post - CCPC Submittal CP- 2008 -1" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC. Also, this revised subdistrict text and map comprise the Resolution Exhibit A for this petition. In response to The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, dated October 2009 (previously referenced and attached to this Executive Summary), the applicant submitted data and analysis to address policy factors to demonstrate the "need" for the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment; and, submitted additional data and analysis to further address 2008 Legislation, HB 697, which pertains to energy conservation and efficiency. As to HB 697, based on the applicant's information provided, staff is able to conclude that the project would likely reduce vehicle trips traveled by providing commercial and employment opportunities proximate to area residents. Regarding the "needs" analysis, the applicant identified "other policy factors," such as "job creation," and, provided "community input/surveys" in support of the proposed development. These additional factors may be considered by the Board of County Commissioners in assessing the "non- numerical" commercial need for the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment. Staff is still reviewing and evaluating the "needs" analysis and will provide additional comments to the Board at the hearing. The staff recommendation not to approve this petition for Transmittal stands. However, attached is the staff alternative to the petitioner's text (Staff Alternative Text for Petition CP- 2008 -1) which reflects revisions for purpose of proper formatting, clarity, conciseness, use of proper ordinance language, etc. 4. PETITION CP- 2008 -2, Petition requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Mac and Mao Series to expand and modify the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict to allow an additional 370,950 square feet of commercial uses of the C -4 zoning district, with exceptions, for property located on the south side of Randall Boulevard, extending from 8h Street Northeast west to the canal on the west side of the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Station, in Sections 26 and 27, Township 48 South, 8A,LAA Range 27 East, consisting of 156.5 acres. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2008 -2 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: At the CCPC hearing, the petitioner proposed changes to the amendment to: 1) reduce the proposed total allowable building area from 431,950 square feet to 411,950 square feet; 2) increase the proposed building area on the tract containing the Randall Boulevard Center PUD from 21,000 square feet to 31,000 square feet. The petitioner also provided some additional data and analysis at the CCPC hearing. The CCPC recommended the BCC approve revised petition CP- 2008 -2 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 6/2), subject to the staff alternative text in the Staff Report, as revised regarding: 1) allowable square feet figures; 2) the C -4 zoning district reference; and, 3) discontinuance of the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Station and Florida Division of Forestry fire tower. The text that reflects the CCPC's recommendation is contained in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments" Speakers: There were two speakers. One speaker was in favor of the petition. One speaker expressed concern about the public notice process stating some nearby residents did not receive notice. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted additional data and analysis (new materials are located behind the tab labeled "Post -CCPC Submittal CP- 2008 -2" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC). In response to The Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -107, dated October 2009 (previously referenced and attached to this Executive Summary), the applicant submitted data and analysis to address the referenced 1.25 commercial market factor and other policy factors to demonstrate the "need" for the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment; and, submitted additional data and analysis to further address 2008 Legislation, HB 697, which pertains to energy conservation and efficiency. As to HB 697, the applicant's analysis and conclusions reached primarily focused on a grocery use as part of the development proposal. However, it should be noted that the Subdistrict text only allows for grocery store use — the text does not require development of a grocery store. Based on the applicant's information provided, staff is able to conclude that the project, with grocery use, would likely reduce vehicle trips traveled by providing commercial and employment opportunities proximate to area residents. Regarding the "needs" analysis, the applicant provided an analysis of the 1.25 commercial market factor. However, the analysis was based on a 25 percent increase in the Market Area population (primary and secondary areas) rather than a calculation of the supply to demand ratio, and was out to year 2060 rather than for the 10 -year planning horizon adopted within the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the applicant identified "other policy factors," such as "job creation," and provided "public benefit commitments" to support the proposed development. These additional factors may be considered by the Board of County Commissioners in assessing the "non- numerical" commercial need for the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment if the market factor is higher than 1.25. Staff is still reviewing and evaluating the "needs" analysis and will provide additional comments to the Board at the hearing. The staff recommendation not to approve this petition for Transmittal stands. 5. PETITION NO. CP- 2008 -4, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to re- designate from Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands to Neutral Lands property located on the east and south sides leer, of Washburn Avenue, east of the Naples landfill, in Section 31, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, consisting of 28.76 acres. [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2008 -4 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs, subject to reservation of 130 feet along the southern boundary of the site for future right -of -way. CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CP- 2008 -4 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 8/0), per staff's recommendation, and with requirement that the petitioner is to submit to staff prior to the BCC Transmittal hearing data and analysis regarding HB 697 (pertaining to greenhouse gas emissions, lowering vehicle miles traveled, etc.). Speakers: None. Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, and pursuant to their recommendation, the petitioner submitted new data and analysis to address HB 697 (materials are located behind the tab labeled "Post -CCPC Submittal CP- 2008 -4" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC). Staff has reviewed and evaluated the post -CCPC submittal and finds it to be satisfactory. 6. PETITION NO. CPSP - 2008 -7, Staff Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element to add a new Policy 4.11 pertaining to aligning planning time frames in the GMP. [Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, Planning Manager] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CPSP- 2008 -7 to the BCC with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: That the BCC approve petition CPSP- 2008 -7 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (vote: 8/0). Speakers: None 7. PETITION NO. CP- 2009 -1, Petition requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Mao and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), to create the Dade - Collier Cypress Recreation Area District within the Conservation Designation, for property located along the Miami - Dade /Collier County border, in Sections 13, 14, 15 & 16, Township 53 South, Range 34 East, consisting of 1,608± acres. [Coordinator: Thomas Greenwood, AICP, Principal Planner] Staff Recommendation: That the CCPC forward petition CP- 2009 -1 to the BCC with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. CCPC Recommendation: There was no CCPC recommendation on petition CP- 2009 -1 by virtue of a tie vote (4/4). The failed motion to approve was subject to staff alternative text in the Staff Report, as revised in two places regarding lake edge littoral zone requirement. The text that reflects the CCPC's unsuccessful motion is contained in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments." Speakers: None. • I • Post -CCPC Action: Subsequent to the CCPC hearing, the petitioner submitted additional data and analysis (new materials are located behind the tab labeled "Post -CCPC Submittal CP- 2009 -1" in the binder containing the original petition as provided to the CCPC). Staff is still reviewing and evaluating the post -CCPC submittal. As a follow -up to CCPC discussion regarding emergency response capability to the site and impacts upon adopted Level of Service Standards, Comprehensive Planning staff solicited input from the Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) Director. Attached is a memo dated November 9, 2009 from the BES Director addressing these concerns and offering stipulations for consideration. Though these stipulations are appropriate to include during subsequent development order approval, not within the GMP as part of this amendment, they are helpful in alerting the petitioner to the County s concerns and position. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendations for the 2007 -2008 combined cycles of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2009 cycle petition, are as reflected above following each petition. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission held their required public hearing on October 19, 20 and 29, 2009, and November 19, 2009. The CCPC forwarded the 2007 -2008 combined cycles of Growth Management Plan amendments, including one 2009 cycle petition, to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendations as reflected above following each petition and as contained in the attached document titled "CCPC Transmittal Recommendations for 2007 -2008 Combined Cycles Growth Management Plan Amendments." PREPARED BY: "� -- DATE: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GMP MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION DATE: MICHAEL BOSI, AICP, PLANNING MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION --? - !u DATE: o l • 07- r o _ W LIAM LORE , P.E., I ECTOR ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT � L.. !�; �, -�l DATE: NICK CASALANG I ERIM ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION E% SUM Tmnsmittal 2007 -2008 combined Cycle GMPAs G. 1Conprehensive\COMP. PLANNING GMP DATA1Conp. Plan Amendmentsl2007 -2008 Combined Cycle Petitions dw/1 1-3-09 — 117/10 • • a CP- 2008 -1 CCPC TRANSMITTAL STAFF REPORT CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 10 8 e Ci(7r@Y CiOHH�� STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: October 19, 2009 RE: PETITION CP- 2008 -1, ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner AGENT /APPLICANT: Agent: D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 and Agent: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Applicant: Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee C/O Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, containing 40.6± acres, is located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, within Section 4, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, and is within the Rural Estates Planning Community. The site extends west from Wilson Blvd. to 3d Street NW. (Refer to aerial and zoning maps on page 2.) CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. l' 8 A I j� nt �� •' i r � � 1 ' I 4ID) Itr 1% 1$111 lu iu i 2 i i I reposed f 1 P liect site � G O, Ir Highlighted tracts indicate existing acreage within the Neighborhood Center REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner seeks to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) text, Future Land Use Map and map series by: 1. Amending the Estates — Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict to remove Tract 144, Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates from the Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard Neighborhood Center; 2. Amending the Future Land Use Map and Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard Neighborhood Center map of the Future Land Use Maps series to remove Tract 144, Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates; 3. Amending Policy 1. 1.2 of the Estates — Commercial District to add the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict; 4. Amending the Estates — Commercial District to add the proposed Subdistrict; and 5. Amending the Future Land Use Map to add this new Subdistrict, and creating a new Future Land Use Map series map depicting this new Subdistrict. The petitioner's proposed teat changes, shown in strike- through/underline format, are as follows: (Words underlined are added, words struGk thFOUgh are deleted; row of asterisks [ "`] denotes break in text.) Policy 1.1.2: The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: 2 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 108 A <rk xrk rrr rr< rrY r <k rre YYx <kk Yrk rYk kkY rx< xkx <r< «< r« Y <x <r< «< r« rxx <rr r <r «< r« B. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict 2. Pine Ridge Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 3. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 4. Commercial Western Estates Infill Subdistrict 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict 6. Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict kkk kkk kkk kkk YYY YYY kYY YkY kkk YYk YYY YkY #Yk kYk xYY kYk kkk kkt 4kk rkk kYk kkY kYY kkY kkk rkk B. Estates — Commercial District 6. Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict — Recoandna the need to orovide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion of Northern Golden Gate Estates, the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Mao. 11 of Golden Gate Estates, totaling approximately 41 acres. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and Recreation (Groups 7911, 7991, 7993 and 7999. includina onl day camps, avmnastics instruction, ludo /karate instruction, sporting goods rental and yoga instruction) 2. Apparel and Accessory Stores (Groups 5611 -5699) 3. Auto and Home Supplv Stores (Groups 5531, 5541, including aasoline service 4. 5. a stations without repair) 7389 Child Day Care Services (Group 8351) Communications (Groups 4812. 4841) Depository and Non - Depository Institutions (Groups 6021 -6062. 6091, 6099. 6111 -6163, including drive throuah facilities) 3 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 10 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Agenda Item 4.A. w 8 n Eating Places (Group 5812 includina only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use. Educational Services (Group 8299) Engineering, Accounting, Research and Management (Groups 8711 -8721. 8741- 8743.8748) Food Stores (Groups 5411 -5499, includina convenience stores with gas) General Merchandise Stores (Groups 5311. 5331. and 5399) 16. Holding and Other Investment (Groups 6712 -6799) 17. Home Furniture /Furnishings (Groups 5712 -5736) 18. Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311 -6361) 19. Justice, Public Order and Safety (Groups 9221 9222 9229 and 9311) 20. Meeting and Banquet Rooms 21. Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912. 5921 (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932. 5941 -5949. 5992 -5995. and 5999) 22. Personal Services (Groups 7211. 7212, 7215, 7221 -7251, 7291 -7299) 23. Real Estate (Groups 6512 -6552) 24. Security and Commodity Brokers (Groups 6211 -6289) 25. Transportation Services (Group 4724) 26. Video Rental (Group 7841) 27. U.S. Post Office (Grout) 4311, excluding major distribution centers) 28. Any other similar use as may be approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals The following uses shall be prohibited within the Subdistrict: b. The following uses shall be prohibited: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Drinking Places (5813) and Stand Alone Liauor Stores (5921) Mail Order Houses (5961) Merchandizing Machine Operators (5962) Power Laundries (7211) Crematories (7261) 8069 9. Elementary and Secondary Schools (8211) Colleges (8221) Junior Colleges 8222 10. Libraries (8231) 11. Correctional Institutions (9223) 12. Waste Management (9511) 13. Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens c. Development intensity shall be limited to 225.000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. d. The arocery use will be a minimum of 27.000 square feet with the exception of the grocery use, no individual user may exceed 30.000 square feet of building area. CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 8 e. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written reauest from the County. 2. The applicant will gy its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100.000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a arocery store as Dart of this 100.000 sauare feet, and the arocery store must be the first C.O. obtained f. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual Dlan, which identifies the location of the permitted development area and reauired preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation, including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the reauired PUD rezoning. a. Development standards. including Dermitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Anv future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: 1) A minimum twentv -five (25) feet wide IandscaDe buffer must be Drovided adjacent to external rights -of -way. (2) No commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern or western property boundary of this subdistict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned Permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be reveaetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: • CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to for water management. (6) If the proiect is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. i** Ytt !*. k.* *.Y *Y* YY• Y** .iI ♦YY YS* -t kf4 x** - - YYY *,* k*. YYi *k* ♦YY YYM *** **f Yi4 [Page 27] A. Estates Mixed Use District 2) Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: • Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all iauF three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The NW quadFaRt G! the GeRte� is apPFGAFnately 4.98 aGFeG an size and The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. ` 8 A CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. xrx xxr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rxx xxx r,x xrr rrr xrr rrr rrr rrr rxr rrr rrr rxr rrr rrx rrr rrr xrr FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map xxr rrr rrr rxx rrr rxx xxx xxx rrx xxr rxx xrr xxr rrr xrx rxr xrx rxr rxr xxr x» xxx r» rxr xxx xrx Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict Estates Sh000inc Center Subdistrict rrr rxw rrr rrr rrr xr♦ xrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrr rrx rrr rrr rrr rrw rrr xrx rrr rrr xrr PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The petitioner is requesting approval for a new commercial subdistrict on 40.6± acres, allowing up to 225,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area of uses in the General Commercial (C -4) zoning district of the Collier County Land Development Code, with exceptions, and select uses of the Heavy Commercial (C -5) zoning district. SURROUNDING LAND USE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subiect Site: • The subject project boundary includes the following Tracts within Unit 11, Golden Gate Estates. All tracts are zoned E, Estates and are within a Special Treatment (Wellfield) Overlay (ST/W). Tract 106 (s. 180 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a local roadway — 3rd Street NW. Tract 107 (w. 105 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a rural major collector roadway — Golden Gate Boulevard, and a local roadway — 3`d Street NW. Tract 107 (e. 75 ft. of w. 180 ft.): The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 107 (e. 150 ft.): The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a rural major collector roadway — Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 108 (w. 180 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. 7 • i P CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. Tract 108 (e. 150 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 109 (w. 105 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 109 (e. 75 ft. of w. 180 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 109 (e.150 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 110 (w. 150 ft.): The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard. Tract 110 (e. 180 ft.): The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on Golden Gate Boulevard, and a local roadway — 1s' Street NW. Tract 111 (s. 180 ft): The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a local roadway — 158 Street NW. Tract 111 (s. 75 ft. of n. 150 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on 151 Street NW. Tract 142 (s. 180 ft.): The subject site is developed with a single - family home and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a rural minor collector roadway — Wilson Boulevard. (The subject site may be eligible for transitional conditional uses, as provided in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the GGAMP.) Tract 143: The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is located on a rural major collector roadway — Golden Gate Boulevard. (The subject site may be eligible for transitional conditional uses, as provided in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the GGAMP.) Tract 144: The subject site is undeveloped and is designated Estates — Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. The site is located on a rural major collector roadway — Golden Gate Boulevard, and a rural minor collector roadway — Wilson Boulevard. (The subject site is eligible for rezoning to allow commercial development consistent with the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts of the Land Development Code, subject to criteria in the GGAMP.) • CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. Surrounding Lands: • North: Developed (except north of Tract 111 — undeveloped), single - family homes; zoned E, Estates; and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. • South: Across Golden Gate Boulevard, a 4 -lane divided road, developed single - family homes and undeveloped tracts, zoned E, Estates and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map; and a Walgreens pharmacy, zoned PUD (Snowy Egret Plaza) and undeveloped tracts, zoned E, Estates and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. • West: Across 3rd Street NW, developed, single- family homes; zoned E, Estates; and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. • East: Across Wilson Boulevard, a 2 -lane undivided road, undeveloped tract, zoned E, Estates and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map; and a developed tract, zoned 0-2, and two undeveloped tracts, zoned E, Estates and designated Estates (Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict) on the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. STAFF ANALYSIS: Please refer to the document titled "Standard Language for GMPA Staff Reports" located behind the "GMPA Standard Language" tab. This document addresses some items common to all petitions in this cycle — statutory data and analysis, the GMP vision, and HB 697 — and one item common to the six petitions seeking amendments to the GGAMP. Appropriateness of Change: The proposed amendment would allow intense commercial development in an area of the County intended for low density residential development and neighborhood commercial uses. An evaluation of the project site and surrounding area, commercial needs assessment, population growth in the area, development impacts, infrastructure demands, and other considerations will be analyzed to determine the appropriateness of this proposed change. Background and Considerations: • Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) —Goals, Objectives and Policies: Goal 3: Provide for basic commercial services for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate Estates residents, shortening vehicle trips, and preserving rural character. Goals: Future development within Golden Gate Estates will balance the desire by residents for urban amenities with the preservation of the area's rural character... CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agen(Bitilk 4.A. '� The above goals and their related objectives and policies found in the GGAMP demonstrate the community's desire to maintain the rural character of the Estates while providing for the basic commercial needs of its growing population. The proposed expansion and commercial intensification of the Neighborhood Center quadrant to 40+ acres with up to 225,000 sq. ft. of select commercial land uses from the General Commercial C -4 and C -5 zoning districts, is not consistent with, or reflective of, the Estates residents' vision of the area as expressed in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. • Commercial opportunities within Golden Gate Estates In 1991, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan was adopted and incorporated into the county's Growth Management Plan. The Plan established locational criteria limiting commercial development in the Estates designation to the Estates Neighborhood Centers, site - specific commercial subdistricts, and already existing commercially zoned lands. • Estates Neighborhood Centers The Estates Neighborhood Centers were established as a means to direct new commercial development to areas where traffic impacts could be readily accommodated. These Centers were originally located at Pine Ridge and C.R. 951, Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, Golden Gate and Everglades Boulevards, and Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard, along major roadways and distributed according to projected commercial demand in the Estates. In 1992, the Board of County Commissioners denied a commercial rezone petition at the Golden Gate and Everglades Boulevard Neighborhood Center and directed staff to remove all Neighborhood Centers east of C.R. 951, stating the commercial centers were premature. Those centers were removed in 1993. In 1996, the Neighborhood Center concept was reevaluated as part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report review process, required by State Law. As a result, the neighborhood centers at Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards and Immokalee Rd. and Everglades Boulevard were reinstated in 1997 as future centers on the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( GGAMP) Future Land Use Map. In 2002, the GGAMP Restudy Committee was formed by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and authorized, in part, to study the commercial land use needs of the Golden Gate Estates community. County staff worked closely with the Committee and community to identify appropriate areas to locate new commercial development within the Estates. The Committee recommendations to the BCC included added provisions for the expansion and creation of Neighborhood Centers within the Estates. The Board of County Commissioners subsequently adopted amendments to the GGAMP and Future Land Use Map and Map Series in 2003 to include the recommended expansions and new neighborhood centers (in effect, neighborhood centers were reestablished at their original locations but some were increased in size). • Development patterns in the Neighborhood Centers east of Collier Boulevard Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center NE quadrant: Total size is approximately 8.45 acres — Partially DEVELOPED (Approximately 2.65 acres are developed with 8,113 sq. ft. of convenience commercial.) 10 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict NW quadrant Agenda Item 4.A. Total size is approximately 4.98 acres — UNDEVELOPED (Portion of project site) SE quadrant: Total size is approximately 7.15 acres (5.00 acs. commercial & 2.15 acs. buffering and r -o -w) — Partially DEVELOPED (Wilson Boulevard Shopping Center — 41,800 sq. ft. of commercial development). Approximately 12,572 sq. ft. undeveloped commercial sq. ft. remaining — Liberty Gold LLC. SW quadrant: Total size is approximately 11.78 acres — Partially DEVELOPED (16,550 sq. ft. Walgreens store). Balance of quadrant added to Neighborhood Center via GMP amendment (CP- 2005 -2) approved in 2007, and rezoned for up to 60,000 sq. ft. of office, medical office and medical related uses. Everglades Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center NE quadrant: Total size is approximately 5.46 acres — UNDEVELOPED (Big Bear Plaza CPUD approved for C -1 thru C -3 uses) NW quadrant: Total size is approximately 5.46 acres — UNDEVELOPED (pending rezone to Fakahatchee Plaza CPUD for C -1 thru C -3 uses) SE quadrant: Total size is approximately 5.46 acres - UNDEVELOPED SW quadrant: Total size is approximately 5.46 acres - UNDEVELOPED Immokalee Rd. and Everglades Boulevard Center SE quadrant: Total size is approximately 9.20 acres — UNDEVELOPED (4.05 acres have been rezoned from E, Estates to Chestnut Place MPUD [balance of PUD lies outside Neighborhood Center and is approved for church]) SW quadrant: Total size is approximately 5.15 acres- UNDEVELOPED (pending rezone to Singer Park CPUD for C -1 thru C -3 uses) The potential and existing commercial sq. ft. within the Estates Neighborhood Centers located east of Collier Boulevard is 450,186 square feet, based on the CIGM and approved zoning. (It should be noted that the CIGM uses a countywide average of 6,044 sq. ft. /ac. to determine potential commercial development.) • Existing commercial acreage serving portions of the Estates, but not located within an Estates Neighborhood Center: Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict: Approximately 7.53 acres are allocated for up to 41,000 sq. ft. of commercial development, located within Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East. The Subdistrict is located approximately 4 miles from the proposed project site. 11 • i w CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. Commercial development projected to serve portions of the Estates, but not located within an Estates Neighborhood Center: Orange Tree PUD: Approximately 22 acres within the Planned Unit Development are allocated for up to 60,000 square feet of commercial development, located in Sections 22 and 23, Township 48 South, Range 27 East. This PUD is located approximately 4 road miles from the proposed project site (refer to map on page 13). (A petition to increase the commercial sq. ft. up to 332,000 sq. ft. in the PUD is pending.) [Approved for 2,100 dwelling units; pending petition to increase this to 3,350 dwelling units.] Orange Blossom Ranch PUD: Approximately 44 acres within the Planned Unit Development are allocated for up to 200,000 square feet of commercial development, located in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 27 East. This PUD is located approximately 5.50 road miles from the proposed project site (refer to map on page 13). [Approved for 1,600 dwelling units.] Big Cypress Development of Regional Impact (DRI) /Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) - pending: Approximately 564 acres (includes approximately 494,080 sq. ft. light industrial) within the DRI are allocated for up to 987,188 square feet of retail /service commercial and 664,395 square feet of office development, located in Sections 10, 14 and 27, Township 48 South, Range 28 East. This pending DRI is located approximately 7 miles from the proposed project site (refer to map on page 13). [Proposes 8,968 dwelling units.] Rural Villages — (allowed): Two Rural Villages ranging in size from 300 to 1,500 -acres are permitted on the Receiving Lands north and south of the proposed project location (refer to map on page 13). A Rural Village development must include a Village Center and may also include several Neighborhood Centers. A 300+ acre (calculation doesn't include Greenbelt Area) Rural Village will yield a 30 -acre Village Center with approximately 90,000 sq. ft. of commercial development. Neighborhood Centers within the same Rural Village may consist of a 1.50 -acre Center with approximately 5,100 -sq. ft. of commercial development. A 1,500 -acre Rural Village will yield a 150 -acre Village Center with approximately 450,000 -sq. ft. of commercial development. Neighborhood Centers within the same Rural Village may consist of 7.50 acres each with approximately 25,500 -sq. ft. of commercial development within each center. The Receiving Lands range in distance from approximately 1.50 to 6 road miles from the proposed project site. [Density in Rural Villages must range between 2 -3 dwelling units per acre.] 12 CP-2608-1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 8A Agenda Item 4.A. GOLDEN SATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP Rmd-11 Btd. ed NVO 1 1 '6 .... 1.1 P.P.t J, Cy DIU Future commercial development outside of Golden Gate Estates - as part of Rural Village (allowed), SRA (pending) and PUD development (zoned) - will meet some of the projected commercial demand in the Estates area. 13 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • Petitions in Vicinity 68 A Agenda Item 4.A. It should be noted there are five petitions for sites located east of Collier Blvd. and in Golden Gate Estates, inclusive of the subject petition. Four petitions are for commercial uses; one petition request is for mostly institutional uses, but includes a small commercial allocation. The attached location map identifies these five petition sites, what each request consists of, and commercial opportunities in the surrounding area. The table below also provides information about these five petitions seeking amendments to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. The attached map (Pending GMPAs Commercial Market Area) depicts the overlapping market areas of these petitions. Petition Location # Acres Request CP- 2007 -1 SE corner CR846/Wilson Blvd. 5.17 Create Wilson Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict to allow max. of 40,000 S.F. of com'I uses CP- 2007 -2 SW corner of CR846/33rd Ave. NE 1028 Create Immokalee Road /Oil Well Road Commercial Subdistrict to allow max. of 70,000 S.F. of C -1 thru C -3 com'I uses CP- 2007 -3 south side of CR858, 1/4 mile west of 21.72 Create Mission Subdistrict to allow Everglades Blvd. institutional uses (church and related uses, e.g. child & adult day care), and limited C -1 com'I uses (90,000 s.f. total, inclusive of 2,500 s.f, of com'I CP- 2008 -1 NW quadrant of Wilson & Golden 40.62 Create a new Estates Shopping Gate Blvds. Center Subdistrict to allow 225,000 s.f of C -4 com'l uses, with exceptions and select C -5 commercial uses, with requirement to provide a grocery store [portion of site (4.98 acs.) lies within existing Neighborhood Center and could 'eld 30,099 s.f. of com'I] CP- 2008 -2 south side of CR846 & Randall Blvd., 56.50 Expand and modify Randall Blvd from canal east to 8th Street NE Commercial Subdistrict to add 390,950 (inclusive of BCI Fire Station, existing s.f. of C -4 com'I uses [zoning in existing Randall Blvd. Com'I Subdistrict, and Subdistrict allows 41,000 s.f. of com'I on DOF fire tower site). 7.53 acs. sum 13429 769,450 s.f. of com'I [728,450 s.f. is [121.78 new] acres are — new] Two of the five petitions proposed (CP- 2008 -1 & CP- 2008 -2) could be categorized as community serving in nature, providing a wider variety of goods and services and more intense land use activities than the others, which likely would provide convenience goods and services, consistent with existing commercial uses in the Estates Neighborhood Centers. In total, the commercial square feet proposed by these five petitions, if approved, would add approximately 728,450 sq. ft. of commercial uses on approximately 121.78 acres. This figure, combined with the existing and potential commercial sq. ft. allowed in the Estates Neighborhood Centers (450,186 sq. ft.), existing Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict (41,000), OrangeTree PUD (approved for 60,000, but expected to increase to 332,000 sq. ft. via a 14 WE CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. pending petition) and Orange Blossom Ranch PUD (200,000 sq. ft.), would total approximately 1,751,636 sq. ft. (This figure does not reflect the 987,188 sq. ft. in the pending Big Cypress DRI or future development of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, located proximate to the proposed GMPAs.) Commercial Demand: Comprehensive Planning staff reviewed and analyzed the petitioner's commercial demand data and analysis, the Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM), and other available data to estimate and project population within the defined Study area to determine the existing and potential commercial supply, supportable commercial square feet and demand. Additionally, staff analyzed the CIGM population estimates and projections and supportable commercial square feet for all Estates designated lands located east of Collier Boulevard and the Rural Settlement Area to determine the need for neighborhood and community serving commercial centers. Staff began the analysis with the CIGM to obtain baseline population estimates and projections, and housing unit counts for the petitioner's defined market area. Staff examined the projected supportable commercial square feet generated from the resulting population (demand), and then compared those figures to the existing and potential commercial sq. ft. supply in the market area. The Model identified that in 2010 the projected population in the petitioner's market area will be approximately 16,531 people and the supportable neighborhood commercial square feet will be 139,687; and, by year 2030 the population will be approximately 30,687 and the estimated supportable neighborhood commercial square feet will be approximately 259,305. Staff then examined and compared the existing and potential neighborhood commercial supply with the demand generated from future population growth in the market area and determined that the neighborhood commercial supply of 387,283 sq. ft. (refer to Map 4) will exceed the demand in the market area beyond year 2030. Additionally, the Model identified that in this same market area the supportable community commercial square feet will be 123,652 in 2010; and, by year 2030 the estimated supportable community commercial square feet will be approximately 229,539. However, staff acknowledges that no community commercial sq. ft. exists or is planned within the defined market area to serve the area residents. Based upon the foregoing, the requested commercial sq. ft. of 225,000 could not likely be supported in the market area until sometime between years 2025 and 2030. If the project development commences prior to the community commercial demand being fully realized, then it is assumed the project would be built in phases. Early phases would then be presumed to function as neighborhood commercial, thereby impacting the existing and planned neighborhood commercial supply. The following is a complete analysis of this proposed GMPA based on the CIGM for all years, beginning with year 2007 through year 2030. • Collier Interactive Growth Model The East of County Road 951 Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study was a two phase planning effort to assess the County's ability to accommodate growth within the County east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951). Included in the second phase of the study was the development of a Collier County Interactive Growth Model (CIGM). The Board adopted the CIGM as a planning tool at its advertised public hearing on January 13, 2009. This model was developed to assist in projecting population and its spatial distribution over time to 15 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A.8 • build -out in all areas lying east of CR 951. The interactive growth model is also utilized to approximate the timing and location of commercial and industrial centers, school facilities, parks and recreational facilities, fire stations, etc. The commercial sub -model is designed to project the demand for neighborhood, community and regional centers that include retail and other commercial uses. This sub -model helps to spatially allocate the optimal locations for these centers required as a function of time and population, and as a result of disposable incomes of the population. Guidelines for Commercial Development used in the CIGM: • Number of Persons per Neighborhood Center: 13,110 • Number of Persons per Community Center: 34,464 • Number of Persons per Regional Center: 157,324 • Number of Acres per Neighborhood Center: 11 • Number of Acres per Community Center: 28 • Number of Acres per Regional Center: 100 • Square Feet Building Area per Neighborhood Center: 110,734 (8.45 SOFT per Capita) • Square Feet Building Area per Community Center: 257,668 (7.48 SOFT per Capita) • Square Feet Building Area per Regional Center. 1,000,000 (6.36 SOFT per Capita) The above floor area figures are the average sizes of Neighborhood, Community and Regional Centers in existence (built) in Collier County. This means some Centers are larger, and some smaller, than these countywide averages; that is, there is a range in size of each type of Center. Each type of Center is classified based upon size as well as uses. Based on the CIGM, staff has developed a commercial analysis for petition CP- 2008 -1 as follows (the 4 referenced maps are attached to this Staff Report): • Existing and Potential Commercial SOFT (see Map 1, attached) Within the petition's defined custom trade area (CTA), there are 89,813 SOFT of existing commercial development and 297,470 SOFT of potential commercial development (vacant land designated as commercial & vacant land zoned commercial). The total existing and potential commercial SOFT within the CTA is 387,283. • Housing Units & Population (see Map 2, attached) Based on the CIGM, the total housing units and total population in the CTA are /will be: 2007 - 4,660 units and 14,443 persons; 2010 - 5,333 units and 16,531 persons; 2015 - 6,491 units and 20,188 persons; 2020 - 8,111 units and 23,981 persons; 2025 - 9,334 units and 27,532 persons; and, 2030 - 10,460 units and 30,697 persons. Square Footage Demand for a Community Center (see Map 3, attached) The total existing /projected population within the CTA translates into an existing/ projected demand for commercial space within the CTA as follows: 2007 - 14,443 persons yields demand for 108,034 square feet of commercial (7.48 SQ FT per capita); 2010 - 16,531 persons yields demand for 123,652 SQ FT; 2015 - 20,118 persons yields demand for 150,483 SQ FT; 2020 - 23,981 persons yields demand for 179,378 SQ FT; 2025 - 27,532 persons yields demand for 205,939 SQ FT; and, 2030 - 30,687 persons yields demand for 229,539 SQ FT. There is no existing and potential community commercial SOFT (Supply) within the CTA. Based on the criteria established in the CIGM, demand for the proposed 225,000 sq. ft. of community center commercial will not be generated by the population within the defined CTA until sometime after year 2030. 16 W, CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. Square Footage Demand for a Neighborhood Center (see Map 4, attached) The total existing/projected population within the CTA translates into an existing/ projected demand for commercial space within the CTA as follows: 2007 — 14,443 persons yields demand for 122,043 square feet of commercial (8.45 SOFT per capita); 2010 — 16,531 persons yields demand for 139,687 SO FT; 2015 — 20,118 persons yields demand for 169,997 SO FT; 2020 — 23,981 persons yields demand for 202,640 SO FT; 2025 — 27,532 persons yields demand for 232,645 SO FT; and, 2030 — 30,687 persons in 2030 translate to 259,305 square feet demand for commercial space. The existing and potential commercial SOFT (Supply) within the CTA is 387,283; therefore, there will not be a need for additional neighborhood center commercial in this CTA until sometime after year 2030. Data Sources: The CIGM analysis for this petition utilized: (1) the 2008 commercial inventory prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department; (2) present GMP designations that allow commercial zoning; (3) housing unit and population projections prepared by the CIGM consultant, which account for vacancy rates. There is a minor discrepancy between the CIGM population projections and those prepared by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida. • Justification for the proposed amendment and commercial demand analysis (refer to Exhibit V.D.S.) as provided by the petitioner: The Commercial Needs Analysis was prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. The analysis evaluated commercial supply and demand characteristics within a custom market area, consisting of a 10- minute drive time and including select acreage located north and south of Golden Gate Boulevard (refer to red boundary on map on page 18). (Please note that the population and housing unit counts are not consistence with the population and housing counts identified in the Collier Interactive Growth Model.) 17 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. W V n Neighborhood and Community Markets are defined in the Commercial Needs Analysis as follows: Neighborhood: A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area but, in practice, it may range from 30,000 to 100,000 or more square feet. Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. Community: A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area but, in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Community centers sell a wider range of products that include apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20- minute drive time. (Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers.) iE ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT xan � nat rae am_ CU 1 - — - i m wr xvuaqurz � - - wnucucuam I- ZOm6 F_- -- Ln.d ' A,OLORY(1#W f �wt _ — ®i.pRTF4 t. Z17 I Neighborhood and Community Markets are defined in the Commercial Needs Analysis as follows: Neighborhood: A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area but, in practice, it may range from 30,000 to 100,000 or more square feet. Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. Community: A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area but, in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Community centers sell a wider range of products that include apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20- minute drive time. (Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers.) iE CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 8A In addition to the custom trade area established for the proposed project, the consultant also analyzed office space demand within 2 -miles of the subject site. The findings of the study are as follows: Demand for commercial space in the custom trade area was based on population estimates and projections of 12,415 persons in 2008 to 17,379 persons in 2030; household estimates and projections of 3,522 households in 2008 to 4,930 households in 2030; and market retail demand estimates and projections of 119,100 sq. ft. in 2008 to 200,340 sq. ft. in 2030; and supply estimates and projections of 179,906 sq. ft. (total does not reflect potential commercial development allowed in three quadrants of the Neighborhood Center located at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevard, totaling ±99,918 sq. ft. or cumulative total of ±279,824 sq. ft. with an allocation ratio of 2.35) in 2008 and 404,906 sq. ft. (includes proposed project sq. ft., but does not include ±99,918 sq. ft. as noted for Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center) in 2030. The study indicates that although the projected commercial sq. ft. supply is greater than projected demand throughout the years studied, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use compared to the total demand for commercial lands falls below the desired 'allocation ratio of 2.00 in year 2008. Further, the study concludes that by adding the proposed project's commercial sq. ft. (225,000) to the market area, the allocation ratio supply /demand would increase from 1.51 in 2008 to 3.09 in 2010, 2.31 in 2020 and 2.02 in 2030. (Allocation ratios do not reflect potential commercial development of ±99,918 sq. ft. in the Neighborhood Center located at Everglades and Golden Gate Boulevards. Additional sq. ft. would result in allocation ratios of 2.35 in 2008, 2.13 in 2010, 1.60 in 2020 and 1.40 in 2030 without the addition of the proposed project sq. ft.; and, ratios of 2.35 in 2008, 3.85 in 2010, 2.89 in 2020 and 2.52 in 2030 with the proposed project sq. ft.) Demand for new office acreage within the 2 -mile market area was based on the supply of countywide office space, resulting in a per capita office figure of 14.7 sq. ft. The analysis focused on historical population estimates and projections of 2,539 persons in 1990 to 17,379 persons in 2030, and historical office demand and supply of 37,384 sq. ft. demand in 1990 to 255,887 sq. ft. projected demand in 2030 and a stated supply of 156,940 sq. ft. (figure provided by applicant is static) in 1990 and 2030. The study concludes that there is an immediate need for office uses in the 2 -mile market surrounding the project. Further, the study concludes that without the proposed amendment to add sq. ft. the allocation ratio for office land would drop to 0.61 by 2030. (Note: The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land.) Population Projections (CIGM); and, Neighborhood and Community Center supportable sq. ft. (CIGM) in Golden Gate Estates and the Rural Settlement Area: The population in Golden Gate Estates (east of Collier Boulevard) and the Rural Settlement Area is projected to be: 35,136 persons in year 2010; 51,560 persons in year 2020; 65,217 persons in year 2030; and, 81,847 persons by build -out. (see Housing Units and Population Forecast map, attached) 19 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 8 A Based on CIGM criteria, approximately 35,136 persons could support approximately 296,899 sq. ft. of neighborhood serving commercial and 262,817 sq. ft. of community serving commercial; 51,560 persons could support approximately 435,632 sq. ft. of neighborhood serving commercial and 385,669 sq. ft. of community serving commercial; 65,217 persons could support approximately 551,084 sq. ft. of neighborhood serving commercial and 487,823 sq. ft. of community serving commercial; and, 81,847 persons could support approximately 691,607 sq. ft. of neighborhood serving commercial and 612,216 sq. ft. of community serving commercial. As noted in a previous section of this Report, the existing and potential supply of neighborhood serving commercial is approximately 551,186 sq. ft. and community serving commercial is approximately 200,000 sq. ft. (plus 332,000 sq. ft. potential in OrangeTree PUD). If the five proposed GMPAs east of Collier Blvd. are approved, the existing and potential supply of neighborhood serving commercial will increase to 636,686 sq. it_ and community serving commercial will increase to approximately 815,950 sq. ft. (plus 332,000 sq. ft. potential in OrangeTree PUD). Based on the above analysis, it is evident that the existing and potential neighborhood serving commercial supply is sufficient to support the needs of the Estates /Rural Settlement Area for the immediate future to year 2030. Conversely, the data reveal that there is a deficit of community serving commercial sq. ft. beginning in year 2010 in the amount of 63,817 sq. ft. This deficit is projected to increase to 185,665 sq. ft. in year 2020; 287,823 sq. ft. by year 2030; and 412,216 sq. ft. by build -out. (Note: Population in certain sections of the Estates designated lands, located within 2 -miles east of Collier Boulevard, north and south of Golden Gate Blvd. and south of White Blvd. have been omitted from this analysis. This analysis assumes that most of the described population islwill be served primarily by commercial centers located along, or west of, Collier Blvd.) (Note: This analysis does not consider intermodal splits which demonstrate a peak hour of 74% of the trips on Golden Gate Boulevard with an urban destination in the morning. Shopping patterns related to that traffic to the urban area is not factored into the market analysis. As a result, 100% of commercial spending is assumed to be in the market area.) • Site Assessment — General Comments: Roadway: The site is located on Wilson Blvd. and Golden Gate Boulevard, with an intervening local roadway — is` Street NW. Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are expected to be widened in the future. Golden Gate Boulevard Status: Golden Gate Blvd. from Wilson Blvd. to Desoto Blvd. is identified as a future 4 -lane roadway in the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan. In the 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report, right -of -way acquisition is scheduled for this segment in years 10, 11 and 12. Golden Gate Blvd. extends west to Collier Blvd., and east beyond Everglades and Desoto Boulevards into the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. Wilson Boulevard Status: Wilson Blvd. is identified as a 2 -lane roadway in the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan. Wilson Blvd. extends north to Immokalee Rd. and beyond, and south to the edge of Golden Gate Estates and the beginning of the Rural 20 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. Fringe Mixed Use District Receiving Lands where a Rural Village could potentially be developed. Access: Access to the proposed project will be from Golden Gate Boulevard, Wilson Boulevard, 1" Street NW and 3rd Street NW. Site Depth and Width: The site consists of two development tracts, each comprising several GGE properties; the tract at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 560 feet (width) x 760 feet (depth), and the parcel between 13' Street NW and 3d Street NW varies from approximately 750 -820 feet (depth) X 1170 feet (width). However, the site's developable area will be reduced to accommodate future roadway and intersection improvements to Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Additionally, the property will be reduced further by buffering requirements - at least 75 feet adjacent to residential tracts. Utilities: The proposed project will not be served by central water and sewer. Adjacent Properties: The subject property is almost entirely surrounded by residential development or vacant residential tracts, except for the neighborhood center located at the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard intersection. Rural Character Impact: The proposed project will most likely alter the rural character of the area. Typically, the residents in the area can expect to experience increased noise, light/glare and traffic volumes at the site and in the surrounding area. It will be critical at time of rezoning, if the GMPA is approved, to address project uses, unified theme of development, buffers, setbacks, heights, hours of operation, and noise and light mitigation in order to minimize resulting project impacts and to protect the rural character of the area. Environmental Impacts: The environmental report prepared by Marco Espinar of Collier Environmental Consultants and submitted with this petition, dated October 2006 and amended April 2009, indicates the following: • The project site includes 9 single family homes, roadway and a pump station. The vegetated habitats include palmetto, pine flatwoods, cabbage palm, cypress canopy with Brazilian pepper, and drained pine - cypress- cabbage palm. The soils found on site are listed as pineda, limestone substratum and boca fine sand. The listed species survey conducted on site concluded that there were no listed species found foraging or nesting, and there were no signs of gopher tortoises, red cockaded woodpeckers, big cypress fox squirrels, Florida panther or Florida black bear. Non - listed species observed include songbirds, Cooper's hawk, black vulture, various reptiles, and evidence of raccoons, rabbits and other small mammals were visible_ The only protected plant species found on site were species of Tilandsia [air plants]. Environmental Specialists with the Collier County Engineering and Environmental Services Department reviewed the application and provided the following comments: 21 IV, a a CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. • No special environmental concerns are associated with the establishment of the Subdistrict on the subject site. Native vegetation preservation requirements will be specifically addressed during subsequent development order review (rezone and/or site development plan). Therefore, the following language should be removed from the proposed text. In the paragraph beginning with "A conceptual plan..." remove the sentence, 'The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation, including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME." The exact preserve location is determined at rezone /development order review stage. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan cannot be evaluated for consistency at this time due to the additional information required for an evaluation as explained in the proposed text in the paragraph beginning with "Development standards, including permitted uses..." If the area is proposed for water management, an evaluation must be done showing no detrimental effects to the native vegetation. This cannot be done until more detail is provided at a later stage of the development. Historical and Archeological Impacts: The Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded archeological sites within the project acreage. However, the Florida Dept. of State, Division of Historical Resources cautions the property owner that sites may contain unrecorded archaeological resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. The Department suggests that a historic resource survey be conducted on most sites to ensure no archeological resources are present. Further, this site has not been identified on the County's Historical and Archeological Probability maps. Traffic Impacts and GMP Consistencv: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that this project can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan with the provision of mitigation. Staff comments are limited to the significant impacts shown on the initial concurrency links. Traffic Impacts: Golden Gate Boulevard The first concurrency link that would be impacted by this project is Link 17, Golden Gate Boulevard between CR -951 and Wilson Boulevard. The project would generate up to 130 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 5.53% impact. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 530 trips in the draft 2009 AUIR and is at Level of Service "D ". Network improvements and specific dedications have been proposed that will mitigate the significant impacts on this link. The second concurrency link that would be impacted by this project is Link 123, Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard. The project would generate up to 111 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents a 10.99% impact. This concurrency link reflects a negative remaining capacity of -53 trips in the draft 2009 AUIR and is at Level of Service "F ". This roadway is currently in the County's 22 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 5 year CIE. Contributions towards network improvements and specific dedications have been proposed that will mitigate the significant impacts on this link. Wilson Boulevard The first concurrency link on Wilson Boulevard that would be impacted by this project is Link 118, Wilson Boulevard between Golden Gate Boulevard and the northerly terminus of Wilson (north of Immokalee Road). The project would generate up to 74 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on this link, which represents an 8.04% impact. This concurrency link reflects a remaining capacity of 529 trips in the draft 2009 AUIR and is at Level of Service "B ". Network improvements and specific dedications have been proposed which mitigate the significant impacts on this link. • Consistency with the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP): Transportation Element Policy 5.1 Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that this project can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, if the applicant provides adequate mitigation. The following mitigation and conditions proposed by staff are anticipated to accommodate the impacts that would result from the approval of this amendment. 1. Up to four primary project access locations are recognized: a. One direct connection to Wilson Boulevard; located as far to the north as can be reasonably accommodated on the final SDP. This connection is anticipated to be a full- movement driveway until such time that Wilson Boulevard median improvements are made, which may restrict left -in, left -out, or right -out movements at the discretion of Collier County Transportation Division. b. Access to Golden Gate Blvd via 1s' Street NW will remain; and is subject to any median revisions created by Collier County. c. Access to Golden Gate Boulevard between 151 Street NW and 3rd Street NW with a possibility for a median opening. Refer to condition no. 2 below, referring to signalization. d. Access to Golden Gate Blvd via 351 Street NW will remain; and is subject to any median revisions created by Collier County. e. No other provisions or restrictions are currently stated for project driveways connecting to 15' Street NW or 3`d Street NW, which shall otherwise be governed by the CCAMP. 2. Signalization: a. A signal is acknowledged as a possible provision at either 3r4 Street NW, or the project entrance between is` and 3`d. The final conceptual location of this signal, if warranted and approved by the Transportation Division, shall be determined at the time of rezoning. If allowed at the project's entrance between 15' and 3rd, then the following conditions must already be in place: i. Closure of the full median opening at 15' Street NW to limit it to a RI /RO only. ii. Directionalization of 3rd Street NW median opening (restricted left turn movements as deemed appropriate by Transportation Division.) b. Any traffic signal serving any of this project's primary aocess(es) to Golden Gate Boulevard shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assign to install. The Developer, his successors, or assign shall also pay annual operation and maintenance fees for said signal, if installed, for the lifetime of the signal. 23 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 8 A 3. The developer, his successors, or assign agree to donate to the County any necessary rights of way along the Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to accommodate capacity improvements associated with County Project Number 60040; within 180 days of approval of the first subsequent zoning change. 4. Phasing: a. The first phase of development, inclusive of the required grocery store and recognized to be no greater than 100,000 sq, ft. shall have a proportionate share responsibility towards intersection improvements at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard. 60040 b. The remaining 125,000 sq. ft. shall not obtain SDP approval from the Transportation Division until such time that project number 60040 has commenced, unless the Developer has elected to construct the complete intersection improvements shown in project 60040 (at Wilson and Golden Gate) prior to the County's commencement (some of which will be eligible for impact fee credits). This phase shall also have proportionate share responsibility toward the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard. Public Facilities Impacts: • Water and Wastewater: The subject property is not located within the Collier County Water and Sewer District boundary and is not part of any other existing utilities district. Development of the property will require installation of a potable well and private sector package sanitary sewer or septic treatment system, permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD. Additionally, the proposed project site is located within the zone of the Collier County Tamiami Wellfield for the North and South County Regional Water Treatment Plants; compliance with all rules and regulations to protect the wellfield will be required (LDC Section 3.06.00). All well sites and pipeline easements located on and close to this project need to be shown on all future site development plans, PPL or any other site plan applications. Potable Water Demand: Proposed Uses: Office (60,000 sq. ft.) — 9,000 GPD; Retail (148,500 sq. ft.) — 14,850 GPD; and Restaurant (19,500 sq. ft.) — 9,750 GPD. Potable Water Demand: Existing Land Use Designation: 17 Residential Units — 4,250 GPD. Incidental Use for Irrigation - Seating Areas: 3,000 GPD The net difference in demand for potable water is 32,350 GPD. Sanitary Sewer Demand: Proposed Uses: Office (60,000 sq. ft.) — 9,000 GPD; Retail (148,500 sq. ft.) — 14,850 GPD; and Restaurant (19,500 sq. ft.) — 9,750 GPD. Sanitary Sewer Demand: Existing Land Use Designation: 17 Residential Units — 4,250 GPD. The net difference in demand for sanitary sewer is 32,350 GPD. Solid Waste: The service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2008 AUIR identifies that the County has sufficient landfill capacity up to the year 2031 for the required lined cell capacity. The project's change in land use from a potential of 17 residential units (425 cy /yr) to 60,000 sq. ft. of office (630 cy /yr), 148,500 sq. ft. of retail uses 24 • >I CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. (6,450 cy /yr) and, 19,500 sq. ft. of restaurant uses (8,090 cy /yr) would permit [result in] an increase in daily trash generation of 7,655 cy /yr. • Drainage: The subject property is located in Flood Zone D. Future development will be required to comply with the SFWMD and /or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of storm water events by both on -site and off -site improvements. Schools, Libraries, Parks and Recreational Facilities: The application does not propose an increase in residential density; therefore, no additional demand for services is anticipated. EMS, Fire, Police and County Jail: The subject project is located within the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District. The nearest fire station and EMS services are located approximately four miles from the subject site and sheriff substation is located approximately ten miles from the site. The proposed Subdistrict is anticipated to have minimal impacts on safety services and jail facilities 2008 Legislation — HB 697 This legislation, which pertains to energy conservation and efficiency, went into effect on July 1, 2008. The DCA (Florida Department of Community Affairs) will be reviewing GMP amendments for compliance with this legislation. The petitioner has submitted the following data and analysis in support of the project's compliance with the new legislation. `The pending Estates Shopping Center Sub - district amendment to the Golden Gate Estates Master Plan proposes to establish a grocery- anchored community shopping center within close proximity to several thousand households located within the Northern Golden Gate Estates subdivision. Approval of this plan amendment will provide convenient shopping and job opportunities for the central portion of Golden Gate Estates which will reduce vehicle trips and driving distances for many residents. By capturing these trips presently on the local roadway network, the amendment will assist in reducing future road network improvements and traffic impacts to other areas within the more urbanized area of Collier County. The reduction in vehicle miles traveled will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Golden Gate Estates is one of the largest subdivisions in the United States and encompasses approximately 175 square miles (112,000 acres), and is an example of urban sprawl. Almost all of the Golden Gate Estates area has been platted into 1.25 acre or larger single - family home sites with very little commercial development planned to serve the residents of the area, requiring residents to travel by automobile into the more urbanized portions of Collier County for most of their daily shopping and service needs. While the area provides for a semi -rural lifestyle because of the large lots and zoning that permits the keeping of horses, fowl and other livestock, it has a population exceeding 36,000 in 2008 and is anticipated to continue to grow to a population approaching 45,000 by year 2020. There is presently a large deficit of commercial land in Golden Gate Estates; thereby, exacerbating the need to utilize the automobile for daily commercial needs and increasing the vehicle miles traveled for residents of this subdivision. It is documented that the automobile is the largest generator of green house gases for most communities. The proposed amendment provides conveniently located retail services, including a grocery store where none currently exists or can exist under the current comprehensive plan. The grocery store and other retails services will result in the reduction of vehicle trip lengths. 25 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. to 8 A House Bill 697 encourages energy efficient land use patterns. The proposed plan amendment, located at the intersection of two major roadway corridors serving the Northern Golden Gate Estates area, is an efficient land use pattern. The proposed grocery- anchored shopping center located at this prominent intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard will capture numerous trips that otherwise would be passing through the intersection in route to the urban area for daily shopping needs. This location is also well- suited for a community sized shopping center due to its location along a current Collier Area Transit (CAT) route serving Golden Gate Estates. Proximity to a transit route is an efficient land use pattern and is an example of smart growth by allowing residents to have an alternative to automobile use for shopping or employment. Locating goods and services in closer proximity to the residents will equate to reduced dependence on the automobile, reduced vehicle miles traveled and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions." Staff has reviewed this petition for adequacy of data and analysis to demonstrate how it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Based upon the petitioner's information provided, staff is able to conclude that the project would likely reduce vehicle trips traveled by providing commercial and employment opportunities proximate to area residents. However, the analysis provided was not quantified in terms of trips captured by internal and external users. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on September 14, 2009, after the applicantlagent duly noticed and advertised the meeting, as required by the Collier County Land Development Code. Approximately 100+ people attended the NIM, held at Restoration Church, located at 7690 Running Buck Court, Naples, FL 34119. The following is a synopsis of the meeting: The County staff planner gave a brief explanation of the GMPA process, including public hearing dates, and the agents discussed the proposed project in its entirety. Individuals spoke about the following: • Traffic impacts and circulation — timing of planned intersection improvements, access to project from 1s' Street NW, 3rd Street NW, Wilson Blvd. and Golden Gate Boulevard. • Commercial demand — requests for grocery store use, burdensome to travel to urban area for groceries and other services /need for commercial uses in Golden Gate Estates, and need competition for same goods and services in the Estates area. • Estates rural character — maintain quiet rural setting/moved to Golden Gate Estates to be away from intense development, proposed commercial intensity would change the character of the Estates, commercial project would be the first of more to come, and no additional need for commercial development in the area. • Well and Septic — general discussion of package plant and location on site. • Project impacts — discussions about lighting, drainage, height of buildings, buffering adjacent to residential homes, and other related project impacts. The meeting began at approximately 6:00 p.m. and concluded at approximately 8:30 p.m. 26 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A.8 A [Synopsis prepared by M. Mosca, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: • The proposed site specific commercial amendment is a departure from the residents' established vision for Golden Gate Estates. Visioning requires public input and coordinated efforts to locate commercial centers where appropriate, considering project impacts, available infrastructure, growth trends, etc. • Approval of the proposed Subdistrict circumvents the master planning process and limits public involvement. • The GGAMP limits new commercial projects in the Estates to uses generally found in the C- 1 through C -3 zoning districts of the Collier County Land Development Code, which are intended to serve the basic shopping needs of area residents. • The proposed development will most likely alter the semi -rural characteristics of the Estates area. Additional noise, light, traffic and etc. can be expected at the site and the surrounding area. • The intensity and scale of the proposed project is consistent with commercial intensities found in urban commercial centers. • Approval of this amendment may result in nearby properties seeking to expand existing or potential commercial acreage or establish new commercial subdistricts. • No significant public facility impacts, except those related to the transportation network, are expected to occur as a result of the approval of this amendment. • Approval of this request to add 225,000 square feet of commercial uses at the subject location may be deemed consistent with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, if the proposed mitigation is approved by the Board of County Commissioners. • The petitioner's market analysis identified that within the Custom Trade Area there is a total commercial supply of 179,906 sq. ft. and a commercial demand of 200,340 sq. ft., based on a population of 17,379 persons and 4,930 households by year 2030. The consultant reduced the commercial inventory by 99,918 sq. ft. from the available sq. ft. /acreage supply at the Everglades /Golden Gate Blvd. Neighborhood Center to account for limited population growth around that Center and the improbability that this Center would develop within the 2030 planning period. The Study concludes that the project sq. ft. of 225,000 is needed immediately to allow flexibility in the market. • The CIGM identified that within the petitioner's Custom Trade Area there is a total existing and potential neighborhood commercial supply of 387,283 sq. ft. and a commercial demand of 259,305 sq. ft., based on a population of 30,687 persons by year 2030. The CIGM identifies that within the project's Custom Trade Area (CTA) there will not be a demand for the requested 225,000 sq. ft. of community center commercial until sometime after year 2030, based on a projected population of 30,687. 27 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 8A The CIGM identifies a deficit in community commercial serving land uses in the Estates and Rural Settlement Area beginning in year 2010 in the amount of 63,817 sq. ft. and increasing to 412,216 sq. ft. by build -out. However, this deficit does not take into account the potential commercial sq. ft. supply in the pending Big Cypress DRI petition, located approximately 6+ miles from the project site, that will likely provide commercial and employment opportunities to residents residing in the eastern areas of the Estates. [It should be noted that 390,950 sq. ft. of community commercial uses are proposed in petition GMPA- 2008 -2, which includes much of the same trade area as this petition.] • The Estates Neighborhood Centers are not large enough to accommodate a grocer /drug store anchored neighborhood or community shopping center, due to limited parcel size in each quadrant, buffering requirements, and other development standards. • The subject property consists of assembled properties centrally located in the Estates. Staff is not aware of other such properties in the Estates that could accommodate a grocery anchored neighborhood or community shopping center, except for property located on Randall Boulevard that is the subject of a GMPA — Petition CP- 2008 -2. • The project will not be served by central water and sewer, rather by on -site utilities. • The site has access to two collector roads, both of which will be 4 -lane divided roads. • All development in this Subdistrict will be subject to the lighting requirements in Policy 5.1.1. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2008 -1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to not transmit to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. However, should the CCPC choose to recommend transmittal, staff recommends the following revisions to the proposed subdistrict text, mostly to maintain consistency and harmony within the GGAMP, for proper format, use of code language, succinctness and clarity. (Note: single underline text is added, as proposed by petitioner; double underline text is added, double Wike thFew@h text is deleted, as proposed by staff). 6. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located baeio goods and services within a portion 28 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict r Agenda Item 4. . A Ibis Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopoina, personal services and employment for the surrounding area Gate-�. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents, assist in minimizing the road network required, and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the followina reauirements and limitations: 29 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 68 A a. 1. Drinking Places (5813) and Stand Alone Liauor Stores (5921) 2. Mail Order Houses (5961) 3. Merchandizina Machine Operators (5962) 4. Power Laundries (7211) 5. Crematories (7261) 6. Radio, TV Representatives (7313) and Direct Mail Advertising Services (7331) 7. NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges. Waterslides, etc. (7999) 8. General Hospitals (8062), Psychiatric Hospitals (8063). and Specialty Hospitals (8069) 9. Elementary and Secondary Schools (8211). Colleges (8221). Junior Colleges (8222) 10. Libraries (8231) 11. Correctional Institutions (9223) 12. Waste Management (9511) 13. Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens e.b.Develooment intensitv shall be limited to 225.000 sauare feet of Dross leasable floor area 4g6c.444e A grocery use wW shall be constructed, and it shall contain a minimum of 27,000 square feet d. No individual use€ caay shall exceed 30,0.00_ square feet of building area, with the exception of Grocery use. e. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the Countv at no cost within 429 AM days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant wiµ shall pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100.000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a arocery store as part of this 100.000 square feet. and the arocery store must be the first C.O. obtained f. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). ,, Ibe rezone ordinance a*wf shall contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. 30 08A CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. exteFRal 0001A E4 � hA� No commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern or western property boundaries * of this s Subdistict. The native veaetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: M1 443 There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. storaae of water in the water management area. i. All buildings shall have tile roofs. `Old Style Florida' metal roofs, or decorative Parapet walls above the roofline. The buildings shall be finished in light, subdued colors, except for 31 CP- 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Agenda Item 4.A. 32 Agenda Item 4.A 8 A PREPARED BY: AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DAVID WEEKS, AICP, PLANNING MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: - -__1t 2 v DATE: 1 3 0 -of REVIEWED BY: EW t^-R (� RANDALL COH N, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: DATE: JOS K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR CO UNITY DEVELOPMENT & EN ONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Petition No: CP- 2008 -1 Staff Report for the October 19, 2009 CCPC Meeting Note: This petition has been scheduled for the January 19, 2009, BCC Meeting. 33 F- Z W U Q OD O O J N LLI 4 0 00 Q � d S 2 H C7 �0 o0� LL CO LLI �U QQ Z Ir a LL H J Q Z UV U' LY Z LL Q' U EVERGlAOEH HLVD ° a ', S E $ - a 22 E W F ..�E www W W 0 pp U Lc m Qpqqqq °a LL _ W Ua'w •� L iii as °E S n< m A 0-1 W (j W E o WILSON HLVD u X 3 o $as U aa a S'p�73 J ♦— t W ItE g$i < ,rar t F 06 %p Iap� (A gSfaU�g �: 8 '$I x 6 €� AI I' w z LLf `� .� 6 (� <G �` � O tit �i .... '� F \� I t �' r "5j u L\ v. w ° O m a Y �' y Ial y ju ni a 8 e w oa Mli I 1 , n i � q�l �$ �s I. L_ -__ �� I I j J, i Z LLI U la— Q ao 0 O J W a� Up Q2 0- 1: :�F F (D i;: x OD� LL CD � W V) �p Q Z Q W I— J Q Z U (D of Z W U) D O U i o N g Z {� � n Co. I ��N P4 t` j Q N, W = N 0 E R $ w 00 o Ac.e �5 =� ° E z�m pro u88b IX o ° O _.._ m . N III. a Mo 13 O •0�= tlr� is F• d t ` Ln (D Q o p a's° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o �� 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V U zz'z izz mmr� F �' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •• •• ••- Q c] 6M N NN O� N J POPULATION � I o_ I I O o_ I, xs II Z ', �S y R, r; ifil "�I i•i'� � k",.fP � I ria �� ;�I � 018 j...i Z tu, I,bt I �, C 'j ow ��\ \ d f/lI N rc u9 t s�41�tlT dl,i)I m rP' "I it, s f �m $ $ i I- '111 I .nll � c$ o E I cue 9i 'll'I� � • m E aw 8 e pi it 14i, �ildllrli u m a o �'ggS'v �ru I � 1 j 7 Z W U H Q M co 0 O J N W 4. p 00 4. 2 1 F U � �O 0 O LL O U) W 1U 2- Q; W F Q z 00 of z LLI — 2 D CO CI I, Rn� g j w U a^ Q O Fab Q. 7„ �rt� Z m oN G "3r°n Q iE t c G OF tYg W �,I aS O « o O W - uo F K° 00 z W e y U r_u p a f.t V yi. O N %g HSn U U; N E a c O C\ Z ti UUUSs KSs� �yqry LL' a E E N ndR z¢ wrnm s w v 05` xx F OLL m m m z Q jai OU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ON °d° aa� & &� f Jag o °o °0 0 0 C °o sea to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (9 0 4 yy n° M O N O 0 O to V L± i i g Z H m O E U �E i O LL i p i I z ¢ 4 Irat 14rn } i'el'6 i��r� �' .Ilk it Y '� i Ftl r�`Yr� }�{tJ��yq -,j+ (.r �y �''- r 4 �. 7m m �iumSi Fy �S^ dlit i R� - i 1 rl rc gI lick � K'Ilrr kFa �I�I - -- J amesaain�nan3 W Om*-'1 ml11a 1 ow° Il+.l I #I I I�III I'py. VV Q o m G� 7 h III I rc a u° Et'F DIY + +r r1dIA� l \ 1' g it :\ I 3 "1 n I Ill - i I,1� ° E m m° :i eamx v ,,, "2 san le nos a.v, - d -� 4-Itl,l, III In a E a E L.f E O °m .T f3 N mI £I , o Fro a L Z W V h Q m G O J N W n O V 4; � 2 �F C7 � �O O� u. C7 � W } U Q Q Z Q W Q Z U (� Q� Z W— 0 U I Z o C d nm- u dau R q V N 10, �VU O RR = °au d o Q�I�R O N > NDpLL an d ^E m� OZ N 6 � a °o:d', F- o E 'M OE Z yE Fa r 8 N U N w W Go u a' 8 "-ffi $Sgggg U rc 5 E wZ g w m �1° U Dy s!1$ W d 'rA N N� [igii zutt Q�c 1'00y/ c E _ -O • n$ 0�0 n a O 3 i p O C� N, N CI^C E 0 0 o 0 0 0 $ O 0 .,. O V U € €O 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 W 0 1) 90 Z SOFT �a O ILL i Z E ,,SS yyyy y m �' 010934 6 1 k( IPI 3 'I l T`+ HI 11135Oi . - -_ N S ��_ -ame saav��a3n3°gf� P* wl4�r `�i+% 1 1 rk 1 yon, _I zd a it a m 'iii +fl11 I�y omen UJ o hq V �: A r $ Ili 17itl � or" $ Sl eia E�'�4+'� 11 sr �T it i � it I �i f � 4'- a � 3 l— ao os .e m.� ::^� llsn a,easnLL - a u a s ! fl - p� I a rs I o� e 8° 1IP I:i 3 �' -p "j, o a o A g "•' � e l '�?:� 4'Y I I i. I o u �2e 'Y�J n wl Illlpl. 43 y1' J 1 10 i o e O/ A 3 0 3 OL W m a — cnI. c' a mn C v n <D 00 m0 1-0 p d Lo J,N 47 Z D O �m �Djn� am �o O i N 0 o A r2 z � a o m m (n CD A CO/1 CG � ;u c Q CL O n :r and 3 CD 3 a 0 o N O O (n 00 p 1 n N c N Q N O; N y O o ilz r� ` COLm LIER BLVD�� 'O fD O IN C) rL a) o 6 `1; O m m is O n r (D ro w m 0 M N o ti o I' O (A 4 C n (a A CL O O O m O N 0 WILSON BLVD d y M c D all O O y J a m O a \ A \\\ \' Q o, CL .9D^ md ^v z I\\\ ilz r� ` COLm LIER BLVD�� 'O fD O IN C) rL a) o 6 `1; O m m is O n r (D ro w m 0 M N o ti o I' O (A 4 C n (a A CL O O O 3 3 O n' m m n WILSON BLVD d y WILSON BLVD c D all Q < N G $ m 3 A \• `. I\\\\ \ \ " a \ A \\\ \' Q o, c .9D^ flD ^v z I\\\ m\ \�\..\ \� D Zr.�. O v O m O CD 0 N 0 0 z mvI 3 " V; O d a�i O EVERGLADES BLVD N ,.. vl M D p' n 0 m m W r M m all C) m 3 O.. O O 0 N CD CD r C c .9D^ flD ^v z ow m o M { O m O CD 0 N 0 0 o -n 3 " V; O d a�i O EVERGLADES BLVD N ,.. vl M D p' n 0 G) Q. 3 O C W pD N O N NO(O m o g� Vf g m °'(nom 3 z° / O A (Al NNc 3 z� o m 3 u O Nl N,' c 3 y -4 0 m C) O O! f'� r O n m o M o N (o n• n N C •'« O' O 00 DESOTO BLVD Q N N O. O O O O V1 T a m O V n � p N j m W CL all m 3 O.. O 0 N CD CD r C OCn O .9D^ o O U1 CL -, ow m X m Q (D 00 O m O CD m (A GI (D (n _ Ia o -n 3 " V; O d a�i O EVERGLADES BLVD N vl M D p' O /y 2 .� l7 3 O C W D N O N NO(O m o g� Vf g °'(nom m / 3 n NNc 3 z� L J m 3 u m N,' ° u p aD 0 m c m O m , Lo CL Q m n m o M o a (o n• n N 1 co �' •'« 0 _ fj O 00 DESOTO BLVD Q N N O O O O . O.N T a m O V n � j (O Q O m N N O 7 Ul 0 1 M CL 0 .0 (D N (7 'n 1 m T 0 N r 3 D - n m ,v 1 Ids r x '1 , 17 1� %• 0 •A N W SR 29 C v D 8A r� M y V m 3 O.. o A o v ow m X m m O m O CD m A ch -n i- Cn a. a�i O O r �d N vl M D p' '. 2 .� l7 O D N O 0 X d Ra a O <p g� Vf ., o a n o L J d m N,' ° n 0 m c m O m , y M a G, N m fn •'« (3D i a m 7^ gy m ) (,o 0 1 (D N (7 m _ m 1 Ids r x '1 , 17 1� %• 0 •A N W SR 29 C v D 8A r� M y V Yy I � Q m I � I < ,ZI XI D Vi ti D W M v A L' m 3 IM ow m ; O m O CD n� = ch / d N m r �d N d 9z y o9 g� Vf a n o L J d b m m 0 O' M , Yy I � Q m I � I < ,ZI XI D Vi ti D W M v A L' v N O O W u COLLIER BLVD mm mm Om9 Ca .00 10 o!^�- ow 51 U) � N to com\ A W O C 3 Z \ i 3 O D v nD _ 3 D �v m (a v jm n _N m n nro d zp o m o W (n o cn (Dw I< 0 one A �� 1 v/ V m 0 N d O A N N G d C ? cn _ 'WILSON BLVD a >mo� IMMOKALEE RD m m�i a I< m oy\ 0 0 cn mv; cio N a =� A (D m EVERGLADES BLVD DESOTO BLVD i 11000 K v 0 0 0 0 fU m d o' d D N N N N 0 00 to O O 0 Q N > N m 'r N fD cD (D N 0o D D - D J N N N _ O N >O C n O 3 G. d (p 3 p 2k d CD m n y m D 0 m =� m m m I � Z - - - -- Ir r W o v m c a I p m > O N gm O N CL CL H m 3 �_ -__ D n V <; I ��Im� r °3 c D 3 ova; m 3-V O B Q n r n 3 3 o 0 Cl 3 N Q A m 1 p y N I i O G v i w o• o m CL I o 'o i N ` 0 _ O er O ^� Z D pe < m I C � Z AD i N � N � 'n A Oo ao i - - -- — SR 29 • m d C m C!) C) 0� 0m s�1 � L m z O a 0 a b F V n e F L C cam Fm .`E ew o � a a z 'o • z d z 00 F • w �p • d t;l n z g�. w d W a CV N � o M K w a o � Y" W 0 p N e- v7 r a H � N N F G CL w p w o W • Q '.r Y Y �T - .�,. 8 m s 4 Noann� .,I : � b F V n e F L C cam Fm .`E ew o � a a z 'o • z d z 00 F • w �p • d t;l n S z O h w d W a CV o M K w a � Y" W 0 p r a H N N F w o W • Q 5 - .�,. .,I : � :} 74, ., S d N O h w d W a CV O N u7 � N ~O � o W 0 p r a • - TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATION FOR CP- 2008 -1 • CCPC TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATION FOR CP- 2008 -1 Petition CP- 2008 -1, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict CCPC Recommendation: No recommendation. Motion to Transmit failed by 4/4 vote. Motion was subject to staff alternative text in the Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph "a." to add a "catchall' prohibited use #14; 4) revise paragraph "b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 s.f. to 210,000 s.f., as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.1." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation, and, 6) delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. (Staff Report pages 29 -321 a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and Recreation (Groups 7911 7991 7993 and 7999 including only day camps gymnastics instruction, judo /karate instruction sporting goods rental and yoga instruction) 2. Apparel and Accessory Stores (Groups 5611 -5699) 3. Auto and Home Supply Stores (Croups 5531 5541 including gasoline service stations without repair) 4. Automotive Repair and Services (Groups 7514 7534 including only tire repair, 7539 including only minor service lubricating and diagnostic service) and 75421 S. Business Services Groups 7334 -7342 7371 -7376, 7379 7382 7383 7384 and 7389) 6. Child Day Care Services (Group 8351) 7. Communications Groups 4812 4841) 8. Depository and Non - Depository Institutions (Groups 6021 -6062 6091 6099 6111 -6163 including drive through facilities) 9. Eating Places (Group 5812 including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use. 10. Educational Services (Group 8299) 11. Engineering Accounting, Research and Management (Groups 8711 -8721 8741 -8743 8748) 12. Food Stores (Groups 5411 -5499 including convenience stores with gas) 13. General Merchandise Stores (Groups 5311 5331 and 5399) 14. Government Administration Offices (Groups 9111 -9199) 15. Hardware Garden Supply and Paint/Wallpaper Stores (Groups 5231 5251 and 5261) 16. Holding and Other Investment (Groups 6712 -6799) 17. Home Furniture /Furnishings (Groups 5712 -5736) 18. Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311 -63611 19. Justice Public Order and Safety (Groups 9221 9222 9229 and 9311) 20. Meeting and Banquet Rooms 21. Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912 5921 (accessory to grocery or pharmacy onlv) 5932 5941 -5949 5992 -5995 and 5999) 22. Personal Services Groups 7211 7212 7215 7221 -7251 7291 -7299) 23. Real Estate (Groups 6512 -6552) 24. Security and Commodity Brokers (Groups 6211 -62891 25. Transportation Services (Group 4724) 26. Video Rental (Group 7841) 27. U.S. Post Office (Group 4311 excluding major distribution centers) b. The following uses shall be prohibited: • 1. Drinking Places (5813) and Stand Alone Liquor Stores (5921) 2. Mail Order Houses (5961) 3. Merchandizing Machine Operators (5962) 4. Power Laundries C7211) S. Crematories (7261) 6. Radio TV Representatives 7313) and Direct Mail Advertising Services (7331) 7. NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges Waterslides etc (7999) 8. General Hospitals (8062) Psychiatric Hospitals (8063) and Specialty Hospitals (8069) 9. Elementary and Secondary Schools 82111 Colleges (8221) Junior Colleges 8222) 10. Libraries (8231) 11. Correctional Institutions (9223) 12. Solid Waste Management Services (9511) 13. Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens 14. Any use not listed in paragraph "a" above c. Development intensity shall be limited to 210,000 square feet of gross floor area d. A grocery use shall be constructed first and it shall contain a minimum of 27,000 square feet e. No individual use shall exceed 30,000 square feet of building area with the exception of grocery use. f. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right-of-Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 180 days of a written request from the County after rezoning approval 2. The applicant shall pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy CCO) for more than 100.000 square feet of development The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained g. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) The rezone ordinance shall contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses h. A 25 -foot wide landscape buffer shall be provided abutting the external right-of-way. This buffer shall contain two staggered rows of trees that shall be spaced no more than 30 feet on center, and a double row hedge at least 24 inches in height at time of planting and attaining a minimum of three feet height within one year. A minimum of 50% of the 25 -foot wide buffer area shall be comprised of a meandering bed of shrubs and ground covers other than grass Existing native trees must be retained within this 25 -foot wide buffer area to aid in achievin this buffer requirement other existing native vegetation shall be retained where possible to aid in achieving this buffer requirement Water retention /detention areas shall be allowed in this buffer area if left in natural state and drainage conveyance through the buffer area shall be allowed if necessary to reach an external outfall LOOE i. No commercial building maybe constructed within 125 feet of the northern or western property boundaries of this Subdistict. j. Any portion of the Project directs abutting residential propeM (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide at a minimum a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106 which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.H of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) The native vegetation retention area may consist of aperimeter berm and be used for water management detention Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.H of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements) Additionally, in order to be considered for approval use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: 1. There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro-period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. 2. If the project requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District the project shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. 3. If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. k. All buildings shall have tile roofs 'Old Stile Florida' metal roofs or decorative parapet walls above the rooFline The buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 1. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) story and a maximum of thirty -five (35) feet m. All lighting shall be architecturally designed and limited to a height of twenty -five (25) feet. Such lighting shall be shielded from neighboring residential land uses n. Commercial uses shall encourage pedestrian traffic through placement of sidewalks pedestrian walkways and marked crosswalks within parking areas Adjacent projects shall coordinate placement of sidewalks so that a continuous pathway through the Subdistrict is created. o. Drive - through establishments shall be limited to financial institutions with no more than three lanes The drive - through areas shall be architecturally integrated with the rest of the building. p. Fences or walls may be constructed on the commercial side of the required landscape buffer between adjacent commercial and residential uses If constructed such fences or walls shall not exceed five (5) feet in height Walls shall be constructed of brick or stone Fences shall be of wood or concrete post or rail types and shall be of open design (not covered by slats boards or wire . CCPC Transmittal Recommendation for CP- 2008 -1 G.ICDES Planning Services\Comprehensiv6COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles pettons12010 Cycle Pebbons\BCC Transmittal dw11 -0 -10 — 311111 Agenda item 9.E. 8A STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: JANUARY 20, 2011 RE: PETITION NO. CP- 20010 -1, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] AGENTS /APPLICANT /OWNER Agent: Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Agent: Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, PA 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Agent/Applicant: Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Applicant: Tripp Gulliford, Vice President EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Owner: EverBank 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, totaling ±9.2 acres, Road and Livingston Road, within the Township 48 South, Range 26 East. l 14_ i Proposed Project Site A0 !1,8 A is located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Urban Estates Planning Community in Section 31, 6y + "ya I -r�InJ n; HISTORY /REQUESTED ACTION: In 2005, the subject site (and Parcel 2, presently zoned CFPUD, The Vanderbilt Trust — 1989) was the subject of a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) request (Petition CP -2004- 3) that established the existing Subdistrict to allow the permitted and conditional uses of the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, other limited commercial and non - commercial uses, and residential uses up to 16 dwelling units per acre. The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved the petition on June 7, 2005 with the limitation that a single commercial user may not exceed 20,000 square feet after discussing neighboring properties' development expectations, potential "big box" development, and future commercial development on the intervening parcels (zoned "A" on the above zoning map) that were not included within the GMPA request (refer to the attached June 7, 2005 BCC Minutes). The applicant now seeks to amend the Subdistrict (Parcel 1 only) to allow a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft /hobby store, home furniture /furnishings store or department store use to exceed the existing 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet; the uses proposed to exceed the square feet cap are allowed uses within the existing Subdistrict. The petitioner's proposed text changes to the Subdistrict are identified below in underlined text. A. Urban Mixed Use District 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed -use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. The Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units pe acres. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet except for a grocery /supermarket, physical fitness facility, craft/hobbv store, home furniture /furnishing store or department store use, which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. b. Parcel This parcel is located approximately '/4 mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. Words underlined are added, as proposed by the petitioner SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Existing Conditions: The subject site is zoned Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD — Bradford Square), and is approved for up to 100,000 square feet of C -1 through C -3 commercial uses, 10 residential multi - family units, and other non - residential uses such as essential service and open space and recreational uses. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Commercial Mixed Use District, Vanderilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict. The site is undeveloped. 3 Surroundina Land Uses: North: The Pelican Marsh PUD /DRI is located to the north of the subject property an(a presently developed with a golf course. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. East: The land east of the subject property is zoned Agricultural "A," and is presently developed with a pet hospital and resort, and an equestrian center. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. South: The land to the south of the subject property, across Vanderbilt Beach Road, is the Vineyards PUD /DRI and is currently developed with multifamily homes. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. West: The land to the west of the subject property, across Livingston Road, is part of the Pelican Marsh PUD /DRI and is developed with a golf course and a golf course maintenance facility. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS Considerations: The proposed change to allow certain uses to exceed the 20,000 square feet cap for a single commercial user within the Subdistrict is not expected to generate additional impacts. The existing Subdistrict allows the same uses as those proposed by this Growth Management Plan amendment and the existing Subdistrict does not contain development standards specific to this parcel. Additionally, the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) approved for the subject site contains appropriate development standards to ensure that the existing approved development within the project is compatible with surrounding properties. Further, the proposed increase in commercial intensity, from 20,000 to 50,000 square feet for certain commercial uses, will be reviewed for compatibility with surrounding properties at time of rezoning /PUD amendment. There are no additional public facilities impacts resulting from the proposed GMPA, as noted in the analysis below. Because commercial demand, and project intensity and density were established with the original GMPA approval in 2005, and no additional uses and commercial square feet are proposed by this GMPA, staff did not request a needs analysis for this petition. Environmental Impacts: Environmental conditions have not changed since the original Plan amendment in 2005 and subsequent PUD rezoning. Further, an environmental analysis will be required as part of a subsequent rezoning /PUD amendment. Traffic Capacity/Traffic Impacts: The proposed amendment does not modify the previously approved maximum intensity of development. The previously approved impact statement for this site had an adjusted Total Daily trip count of 5185 with 480 adjusted PM Peak Hour trips (6880 Total Daily, 635 P.M. Peak Hour Trips — Unadjusted). The PM Peak hour service volume on Livingston Road between Vanderbilt and Immokalee Roads is 3,840 vehicles (Total Volume is 1510 trips and Remaining Capacity is 2330 trips). The PM Peak hour service volume on Vanderbilt Beach Road between Logan and Livingston Roads is 3,540 vehicles (Total Volume is 1934 trips and Remaining Capacity is 1606 trips). 4 I Transportation Planning staff has reviewed this petition and concluded that no cha e'tb the maximum traffic impact is evident as a result of the proposed re- allocation of commercial square feet within the Subdistrict (certain commercial uses allowed to exceed the existing 20,000 square feet limitation for a single commercial use, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet, as part of the shopping center use). Further, staff recommends that this application may be found consistent with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Public Facilities Impact: Public Facilities (water, waste water, parks, etc.) conditions have not changed since the original Plan amendment in 2005 and subsequent PUD rezoning. Further, public facilities analyses will be required as part of a subsequent rezoning /PUD amendment. The Neighborhood Information meeting was held on Monday, November 1, 2010 from 5:35 p.m. to 6:50 p.m. at the Hampton Inn Naples /1 -75, located at 2630 Northbrooke Plaza Drive, Naples, FL, after the agent dully noticed and advertised the meeting as required by the Collier County Land Development Code. D. Wayne Arnold, agent for the applicant opened the meeting at 5:35 p.m. In attendance was Michele Mosca, representing Collier County, and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., agent for the applicant. At the time the meeting began, eight people were in attendance. A sign -in sheet was provided at the entrance of the meeting room and all eight attendees signed -in. Aerial photographs of the site and surrounding area were displayed. Mr. Arnold explained the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment application process, project location, and description of the proposed text changes to the Future Land Element of the Growth Management Plan. Mr. Arnold emphasized that the proposed increase from 20,000 square feet to up to 50,000 square feet for a limited number of commercial uses is necessary in order to establish a successful commercial center with key anchor tenants. The overall maximum commercial development on Parcel 1 of the Subdistrict will remain unchanged at 100,000 square feet. Ms. Mosca provided the tentative transmittal hearing dates for the CCPC and BCC — CCPC in December and BCC in January /February. Questions were raised in regard to landscape buffering, building heights, traffic volumes, and hours of operation. The neighbors were also concerned about empty store fronts and the over abundance of vacant commercial in the area and asked how this project would benefit the surrounding neighborhoods. The residents also expressed that they did not want to see a Wal -Mart or Target on the site. Mr. Arnold answered questions from the neighbors, and both Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Arnold agreed that they would work with the neighbors as they had done in the past with the original Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. Several attendees indicated their opposition to the proposed amendment in its current form but agreed to meet with the applicant to address outstanding concerns. Mr. Arnold invited anyone with further questions to contact his office or contact Ms. Mosca. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: • The magnitude and scale of this project (100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area of C -1 to C- 3 commercial uses, and other similar commercial uses) are consistent with neighborhood commercial development at the upper size limits. • The subject site abuts an arterial road — Livingston Road and a collector road — Vanderbilt Beach Road. • No additional commercial uses or overall commercial square feet are proposed by this$ amendment. • No additional public facilities impacts will be generated as a result of the proposed change. • The petition is generally compatible with surrounding land uses. A more detailed compatibility analysis will be performed at time of rezoning /PUD amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's office. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2010 -1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval to transmit to the Florida Department of Community of Affairs. 't Prepared By: / Date: {Michele R. Mosca f P, Principal Planner Comprehensiv anning Section Reviewed By:1 David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Reviewed By:_ _ Date: Michael Bosi, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager Comprehensive Plannin Section Reviewed By: �j �'' _Date: ;,liam D. Lorenz, i'r., PE, gireEtor Lan velopment Services Department Approved B C, __. _Date: Nick Casal g ' DepU-t'y Administrator Growth Management Division PETITION NO.: CP- 2010 -01 Staff Report for the January 20, 2010 CCPC Meeting. / -&- it 1 - /0 -i! �t •10 �tl/ NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the March 22, 2011, BCC Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN. CHAIRMAN 8A June 71 2005 CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner Fiala, second by Commissioner Halas -- MS. MOSCA: Commissioners, if I may, I just have a correction for the record. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. MS. MOSCA: If I may. I apologize for interrupting. For the record, Michele Mosca with the comprehensive planning staff. The only change I have is a correction to the ordinance. What we'd like to do is accurately reflect the project acreage. The redesignation of 79 acres, rather than 80 to sending, and the redesignation of 153 acres to receiving, with a total project acreage of 232. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'm fine. I was going to make a motion, but Commissioner Fiala did. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. Any opposed by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us with to the next item, which is Petition CP- 2004 -3. Petition requesting amendment to the future land use element and future land use map to create a new Page 62 June 7, 2005 Vanderbilt Beach Road neighborhood commercial subdistrict to allow for C -1 through C -3 commercial uses, other comparable and/or compatible commercial uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts. Mixed use development and indoor self - storage on two parcels, one located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston Road, which is 9.18 acres, and one parcel further east on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, eight acres, zoned Vanderbilt Trust PUD, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, urban estates planning community. And Mr. Arnold, Wayne Arnold, will present. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. Wayne Arnold for the record, here with Rich Yovanovich, Tammy Kipp, Amy Turner, who are the property owners of the subject petition. Staff report was very clear. The property is two parcels located on Vanderbilt Beach Road; one at the corner of Livingston Road, the other is just slightly removed by two parcels to the east. This started out under your original transmittal to the state with the reference to indoor self - storage. Between the transmittal and our adoption today, and in fact before the planning commission, we held a neighborhood informational meeting out at the Vineyards Community School, well attended by residents from Wilshire Lakes, as well as some residents from Village Walk, which is across the street from the two parcels. And one thing was very clear at that meeting, nobody was supporting indoor self - storage. So after that meeting, we modified our request to eliminate the indoor self - storage reference in this. I understand that the text that's before you today still has one stray reference to indoor self - storage that I think staff s going to tell you it should be removed. But that was probably the largest discussion point at that meeting. And so we eliminated that request. We did have follow -up meetings with certain residents of Wilshire Lakes and Fieldstone Village Condominium that's part of Page 63 8A June 7, 2005 Wilshire Lakes, as well as representatives from Village Walk board of directors. And after that meeting, I think it was clear that the self - storage was a use that they were very happy that we were willing to give up. Also out of that meeting we learned that there was a concern over gas station uses. We agreed to eliminate gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps. The other significant amendment was there was a concern about certain types of fast food restaurants. Not all fast food, but -- I could name some of them, but they're primarily the type that serve hamburgers of the fried variety, and we agreed that the most appropriate reference, rather than naming specific chain restaurant names, was to -- I think it was David Weeks who actually coined the phrase, it would be limited fast food restaurants would be prohibited. So you'll now find this a little bit reorganized, but there's prohibition on self - storage, prohibition on gas stations and a limitation on certain types of restaurants, if you will. And the other couple things that we did do, we agreed to provide a minimum 30 -foot buffer adjacent to the Wilshire Lakes property, which would be our eastern boundary, and we agreed to allow the county and Wilshire Lakes to work along our common property line to bring a sound wall, if required, as part of the six -lane improvements for Vanderbilt Beach Road, to turn it north along our common property line to help satisfy some of the noise concerns that the Fieldstone Village residents had with the six - laning. The other thing that we agreed to do that I think both groups that we've primarily worked with here were happy to hear was the fact that we were willing to bring forward a specific landscape plan and architectural standards as part of the zoning that we'll certainly follow so that we can demonstrate to them that this isn't your typical commercial type development. And in fact, on the eastern parcel, with the limitations that we have, there is no retail even permitted, it's R 175 A June 7, 20 now primarily office, professional service type uses and assisted living type facilities, those types of community facilities. And I think we have concurrence from all of our neighbors that we're on the right track and they would hope that we could move forward endorsing the plan amendment. One of the other suggestions that the planning commission had that would be certainly something tied to zoning was that in the zoning document, they would look for assurances that no Certificates of Occupancy for either parcel would be issued until October of '07, which coordinates with the six -lane improvements for Vanderbilt Beach Road. But with that, that's really my presentation. We would encourage you all to adopt it. We've had unanimous recommendation from Planning Commission. I think you'll hear from at least one of our neighbors here that they're now in favor of it with the elimination of self - storage, the gas stations and limited restaurant uses. CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have one public speaker. Would you like to listen to speakers first, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure. MS. FILSON: Your speaker is Kathleen Adams. MS. ADAMS: Kathleen Adams, Village Walk Homeowners Association. Many of you may remember that you did receive a letter from us, along with a petition, asking for residential. And after meeting with the folks from the Turner family and their representation, we're convinced that what they're proposing is something that we can live with and we have absolutely no objection to it, and we urge you to vote for it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I think you were -- what is Page 65 June 7, 24 the height of the buildings going to be in that general area? I think you were looking at coming up with assisted living and some office space. MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. Right now the assisted living that was approved as part of the Vanderbilt Trust PUD on the easternmost parcel, which is known as parcel two, allows for 50 -foot building heights on that parcel. One of the things that we had talked about was adding a building height to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment language, and the Planning Commission eliminated that early on, thinking that if we put a height then we're entitled to get it. And I think there was a thought that let us be silent on height in the comprehensive plan and let's debate that point of what's the appropriate height when we come back for zoning. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion for approval. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, motion for approval by Commissioner Halas, second by Commissioner Fiala. Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioners, this is boxing in a parcel in between that I can see the only future use for that one would be commercial. And why would you put residential in between two commercials? So my concern is that we limit it, that there won't be any big boxes on either one of these parcels, Parcel A or Parcel B. CHAIRMAN COYLE: So Parcel 1 or Parcel 2? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Both. CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. MR. ARNOLD: If I might address that. I don't -- in the context that I think of big box retail, if that's like some of the other users that we've had, the Toys R Us, the Sports Authorities, things of that size, your code talks about them being 20,000 square feet or larger •.:• .: Ell June 7, 2005 qualifies under the big box regulations that you have in the land development code. The only way that I see any individual user exceeding 20,000 is if we end up with an assisted living facility that would house that much square footage. But otherwise, I really envision on the corner you would end up with more of a retail center that would have outparcels. And that in itself may exceed 20,000 square feet, but I don't think we've envisioned a single user that would connote a big box user -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: And the only for that is this parcel might languish for years and years, and then the people in the middle here come back for a comprehensive amendment and therefore demonstrating a big box, so -- MR. ARNOLD: Well, if it would satisfy the Commissioners' concerns, I guess if we could keep it to single user not exceeding the 20,000 square -foot standard, I think that that's something that works for us. We don't certainly envision that -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's in my motion. MR. ARNOLD: -- on the retail or commercial side of things. No retail or commercial -- COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's the difference between what I said and what you're saying? MR. ARNOLD: I don't know that there is. I was just trying to clarify that we meant a single use. COMMISSIONER FIALA: I wonder if your assisted living is 20,000? Then all of a sudden you've defeated that, right? MR. ARNOLD: Maybe what we should say is no retail or commercial use would exceed the 20,000. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Retail or commercial. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So we have a motion by Commissioner Halas -- MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, staff has to put a couple of things on the record. Page 67 !1'8 A June 7, 2005 Mr. Moss? MR. MOSS: Good morning, Commissioners, John -David Moss, Comprehensive Planning. As Mr. Arnold mentioned, if you look at the exhibit that's been provided to you, there is in the second line the phrase "and indoor self - storage," which needs to be stricken. So I just wanted to point that out. I also wanted to point out that I did speak with another community group in the neighborhood, and although they were opposed to it initially, they are perfectly satisfied with the changes that have been made and they're 100 percent in support of it also. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Halas, seconded by Commissioner Fiala for approval with the stipulation that no single commercial or retail user will occupy either of these sites and that we will strike any -- COMMISSIONER HALAS: Size of the building, less than 20,000 feet -- square feet. CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think it's greater than 20,000 feet. But if we -- is that where we are, no single user -- MR. YOVANOVICH: No individual user can exceed 20,000 square feet of retail. And there's no retail at all on Parcel 2, so -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: You don't mean individual user, you mean individual retail user. Isn't that what you said? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. On Parcel 1 where commercial and retail is allowed, no individual single retail user will be allowed to exceed 20,000 square -- CHAIRMAN COYLE: Retail or commercial user will be committed (sic) to build there. And we will strike all references to indoor self - storage. Okay, Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think the key word is commercial. That's retail and offices. And the other one about the 5._- .: 1P 8A June 7, 2005 indoor storage, Commissioner? CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, I've already stipulated that and it's included in this motion. I want to make sure we're clear on what you're saying, Commissioner Henning. We're saying retail or commercial. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if you just say commercial, that takes care of office and retail, that you can only limit it to 20,000 square feet. It would be on both parcels. MR. ARNOLD: Right. I don't think we have an objection to the direction we're headed. I guess the only hesitation I would have is the only C -1 to C -3 use that we would envision that could ever exceed that 20,000 might be something like a supermarket or grocery store. It could be an anchor tenant that has that type of square footage. I don't know if that use is a specific concern, but, you know, I understand which way we're headed. I don't want to make this too confusing, but like I said, I think that would be the only type of use I can envision under those C -I to C -3 as a retail type commercial use that could gain that kind of square footage. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I'm trying to get the specific language for this motion in place. Are we going to say retail and commercial not to exceed 20,000 feet for a single user, or are we just going to say commercial? COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commercial, Commissioner, is anything. It's office, it's retail, it's industrial, it's -- COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it assisted living? COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, there's still some discussion about this issue. MR. ARNOLD: Could I just ask clarification? Is there a concern specifically about a grocery store? Because I -- that would be the only hesitation I'd have about boxing ourselves in to something that we didn't intend -- Page 69 *8A June 7, 2005 COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't think a grocery store even enters into this, with the size of the parcel that's here. And I think from my understanding talking with the particular people that own this property, the discussion was that it may be a certain type of restaurant, it may be little curio shops, and then it may be also assisted living on the other part. So that's my understanding. So as far as exceeding the 20,000, I don't even think that really enters into the picture. MR. ARNOLD: To be honest, Commissioner, it didn't to me either until the issue was raised by Commissioner Henning about the big box. And just not knowing exactly what the mix of tenants is, that was the only tenant that I could envision that could exceed that 20,000 square feet. But I certainly understand and I don't want to overcomplicate something I think we're headed in the direction we need. CHAIRMAN COYLE: What's the motion going to say? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the motion should say that this is strictly for small -scale retail or restaurants that fit the agenda that's been discussed by not only the petitioner but also by the community that was accepted. And I think the things that were brought forth through all the negotiations with the property owners that surrounded this particular piece of property, I think that's what we need to address in that manner. And I think that everybody realized that what was going to be there is basically assisted living on Parcel No. 2, and on Parcel No. 1 there would be no gas stations, but there could be a restaurant there, an upscale restaurant or whatever else, and maybe some upscale type of coffee shops or whatever else. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning? COMMISSIONER HALAS: Does that help clarify? CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, stop, okay? You guys sit down. Commissioner Henning, go ahead. Page 70 June 72065 - COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me clarify the motion and you can correct me, Commissioner. It's a motion to approve removal of self - storage out of the parcel and limit the square foot of commercial space to single user to 20,000 -- not to exceed 20,000. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Not to exceed 20,000. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And that's okay with your second, Commissioner Fiala? COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye. Any opposed by like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimously. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Commissioners. MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to Petition CP- 2004 -4. It's a petition requesting an amendment to the future land use element to change the rural fringe mixed use district sending lands to add three transfer of development rights, TDR bonus provisions, each for one TDR credit for, number one, early entry into the TDR program; number two, environmental restoration and maintenance; and number three, fee simple conveyance to a government agency by gift and to amend the rural village development standards. And Mr. Bruce Anderson is going to present. MR. ANDERSON: Good morning again, Commissioners. My Page 71 CPSP- 2010 -2 CCPC TRANSMITTAL STAFF REPORT INCLUDING STAFF REPORT REVISIONS 1/12/11 Agenda Item 9.D. CO���JSY COL1"L'l�y STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION • FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 16, 2010 RE: PETITION NO. CPSP- 2010 -2, STAFF PETITION REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] Coordinator: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager REQUESTED ACTION and STAFF ANALYSIS: This petition consists of several individual staff - initiated text and map amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series. These amendments were specifically, or generally, authorized by the Board of County Commissioners on September 14, 2010. Most, but not all, of the amendments seek only to add clarity, correct text and map errors and omissions, and provide harmony and internal consistency. However, there are exceptions, including: 1) changes to Policy 5.1 to allow redistribution of use density and intensity; 2) modification of the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict pertaining to its applicability; 3) changes to the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay (B /GTRO) to delete a development standard, add a use, and add clarity regarding applicability of FLUE Policies; and, 4) update the Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. Each amendment is identified below with brief explanation /analysis. [Within the proposed amended text, words underlined are added, and words are deleted.] Future Land Use Element Text 1. Revise FLUE Policy 5.1 so as to allow, through rezoning, re- distribution of zoning and uses for sites with "non- conforming" zoning districts, including adjacent sites without "non- conforming" zoning, so long as acreages remain the same. This amendment will provide greater development flexibility but will still allow the County to determine appropriateness of allowing that flexibility through the rezone review and hearing processes. There should be no impact upon infrastructure but there will be the potential to result in a better development pattern. Policy 5.1: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: Agenda Item 9.D. *8A >........ « « «.« ._.... «. « « « « « « «..... text break d. For property deemed to be consistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of policies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may, through a zoning change be combined and developed with other property, whether such other property is deemed consistent via those same policies or is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. Such combination of properties may include re- distribution of zoning districts so long as the acreage for each existing zoning district that is deemed consistent via the referenced policies does not increase. For residential and mixed use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, as applicable. 2. Revise the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict to allow for its applicability when a proposed rezone site is abutting commercial -zoned property within an Infill Subdistrict if the site also abuts commercial zoning not within an Infill Subdistrict. Not doing so results in either that site not qualifying at all for rezone to commercial or that site being limited to (transitional) low intensity commercial zoning - even though that site may abut high intensity commercial zoning within the Infill Subdistrict. There is at least one such instance - a parcel on the south side of Pine Ridge Road abuts commercial zoning within an Activity Center on one side and abuts commercial zoning within an Infill Subdistrict on the other side. Office and In -fill Commercial Subdistrict „«..«,«.««„«« «.« ................. «... «, « « « «« text break The criteria listed below must be met for any project utilizing this Subdistrict. « «. «.. « .............. «.. «,« text break * " * * * * ** ._.. .......... «. « « «, «.. «......«. «.« 1. For properties zoned commercial pursuant to any of the Infill Subdistricts in the Urban Mixed Use District or in the Urban Commercial District, said commercial zoning shall not qualify to cause the abutting property(s) to become eligible for commercial zoning under this Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict if said commercial zoning is the only commercial zoning abutting the site for which rezoning is sought. 3. Correct a date in the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict. Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict text break Projects within this Subdistrict shall comply with the following standards and criteria: Commercial Component text break 5. Allowable commercial uses in the commercial component shall be limited to those uses permitted in the C -1, C -2, and C -3 zoning districts as contained in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on Arne 27 .Tune 7, 2005) 4. Modify the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands provisions for essential services for proper organization, to specifically list water pumping stations and raw water wells, and to re -letter subparagraphs as necessary. RFMUD Sending Lands text break 7. Permitted Uses: f) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section -55-.0 7=a) through 3 ej ) such as a. F�'a �a private wells and septic tanks; ti4' - ' � °� °_ _ lines. seAeF _ 1:..,.,. .,..,J 1:A ,...1., if 1,.,. --,ed :thin .. .. �.TT)DA C,,.. A:.. T ,J A 1 if J- Agenda Item 9.D. Q A fieeessai� te serve the Rum! Tf&askien Water aed Sewef Dist6et; and, water pHii1ping statiells g) Essential Services as follows necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District' utility lines except sewer lines' sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within non -NRPA Sending Lands and only if located within already cleared portions of existing rights-of-way or easements' and water pumping stations and raw water wells. g) b) Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. h) i) Oil and gas exploration. Where practicable, directional- drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. 5. Modify the Conservation designation provision for essential services for proper organization, to specifically list water pumping stations and raw water wells, to add reference to Urban areas, to re -letter subparagraphs as necessary, and to re -letter the paragraph reference under the conditional uses provision as necessary. Conservation Designation ..........._< ....... .................... <., text break .... <............ _..........,........... . The following uses are authorized in this Designation. ... ............. ........................... text break ., .....,.... .....,.............,,......,... h. Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section a through g above such as he re's -ems private wells and septic tanks, etility lines, _eept sewer lines; , ... er lines ai,a lift i if located within non wronA Pengep,ation r aoate and only if lee..ted within o a publicly ewned ef privately R4'vsed Pentral sewaf system pfaviding service fn wr4�a­n a-reas and- -- publiely ewited af privately awned eentfal v atef system pfeviding seB4ee te HF-ban areas and�af i. Essential Services as follows necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District' utility lines except sewer lines' sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within non -NRPA Conservation Lands and only if located within already cleared portions of existing rights-of-way or easements and if necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central sewer system _providing service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District' and water pumping stations and raw water wells necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central water system providing service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District. ti Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. J7 k. Oil extraction and related processing. Where practicable, directional - drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. The following uses may be permitted as Conditional Uses: a) The following uses are conditionally permitted subject to approval through a public hearing process: (1) Essential services not identified above in paragraph h.�. and i-. j. Within one ... ........... ....................... ......� text break ,,..........,.. ....,,........ _.> __.. & Make five changes to the B /GTRO, Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. In part, these amendments will aid the Community Redevelopment Agency in their efforts to promote development and redevelopment within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle area. a. Correct a date. b. Add performing arts center type uses. The proposed use is not listed in the C -1 thru C -3 zoning districts though some theater use(s) is allowed in C -3 by conditional use. Agenda Item 9.D. 8 The BCC has designated the B /GTRO area as a "cultural district" and this use is appropriate, perhaps necessary, for such a district. The CCPC and BCC should be aware that there is, or may be, a difference in the community theater presently allowed in B /GTRO by C -1 thru C -3 zoning districts vs. that proposed — larger size (visual /bulk impact), greater attendance possible (thus greater traffic impact). Nonetheless, staff supports the use addition. c. Clarify that uses are allowed as provided by FLUE Policies. d. Delete the development standard of feet per story. This is a unique development standard in the FLUE. Deleting it leaves such a determination to the Land Development Code (LDC), or possibly building codes. It may not be appropriate to even have such a standard in the LDC — within the Bayshore Mixed Use District (BMUD) — but if it is in the LDC, then it would be subject to deviation and variance processes such that a case -by- case evaluation would be possible, if the BCC determined it was warranted /justified, then they could approve a development order exceeding that standard. One intent of the B /GTRO is to develop at a human scale. The limitation on the number of stories combined with a story height limit serves to cap the total building height. A different way to accomplish this would have been to simply impose a maximum building height in the FLUE, e.g. 50 feet. The same principal as above applies — such a development standard is best located in the LDC where a case -by -case review could allow for an appropriately justified deviation or variance. e. Re- letter subparagraphs as needed to correlate with deletion of the development standard entry. Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay The Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, depicted on the Future Land Use Map, is within the boundaries of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on Mareh 14, 2000 June 13, 2000. text break ........... ...........:,....,..,.....t.... 1. Mixed -Use Development: Mix of residential and commercial uses are permitted. For such development, commercial uses are limited to C -I through C -3 zoning district uses; plus hotel /motel use; theatrical producers (except motion picture), bands, orchestras, and entertainers: and, uses as may be allowed by applicable FLUE Policies. Mixed -use projects will be pedestrian oriented and are encouraged to provide access (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas. The intent is to encourage pedestrian use of the commercial area and to provide opportunity for nearby residents to access these commercial uses without traveling onto major roadways. Parking facilities are encouraged to be located in the rear of the buildings with the buildings oriented closer to the major roadway to promote traditional urban development. text break ............... .......t...,.......,........... 8. To qualify for 12 dwelling units per acre, as provided for in paragraphs 44 and 45 above, mixed use projects within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay must comply with the following standards: a. Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories. b. Buildings containing only residential uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories except such buildings are allowed a maximum height of four stories if said residential buildings are located in close proximity to US -41. c. Buildings containing mixed use (residential uses over commercial uses) are limited to a maximmn height of four stories. d. Flotels /motels will be limited to a maximum height of four stories. e. For purposes ef this ONefla�, eaeh buildifig stoF� may be up to 14 feet in height: e. For mixed -use buildings, commercial uses are permitted on the first two stories only. Agenda Item 9.D. IF 8 e g. £ Each building containing commercial uses only is limited to a maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet gross floor area. I-. Z. One or more zoning overlays may be adopted which may include more restrictive standards than listed above in Paragraphs a—g a_f. 7. Correct an omission by adding the missing FLUE Policy reference. The hard copy FLUE text already includes this Policy reference - and others; however, the policy reference was not adopted, and the other policy references were not adopted and they do not correlate with the Properties Consistent By Policy Map. FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES ............. ................�.........,..,, text break .._.._....<_. ......,..._........_<.......... Properties Consistent By Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11 5 12) Future Land Use Map and Map Series Future Land Use Map (countywide). a. Expand Incorporated Areas to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road and north of the Naples Airport (35 -49- 25); a portion of the Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road and north of Freedom Park (27- 49 -25); and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway opposite Freedom Park and on the west side of the Gordon River (27- 49 -25). b. Correct South Golden Gate Estates NRPA (Natural Resource Protection Area) boundary at US41, Port of the Islands and at 1 -75: shift boundary north so it follows 1 -75, follows US41, and follows the south line of Sections 33, 34, 35, Township 51 South, Range 28 East (so is no longer over Port of the Islands Urban area). c. Correct Agricultural /Rural boundary near US41 /CR29 /Everglades City: shift boundary to west to run along CR29, to follow ACSC (Area of Critical State Concern) boundary, and to follow west Section line of Sections 28 & 33, Township 52 South, Range 29 East; and, shift boundary to south to follow US41. d. Correct Agricultural /Rural -Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay- Conservation boundary along CR850, northwest of Immokalee: remove jog along common line for Sections 8 & 9, Township 46 South, Range 28 East - from near southeast corner of Section 7 — so that boundary runs along CR850 to the northeast. e. In map legend, add Interchange symbol under Overlays and Special Features and label: "Interchange." 2. Activity Center Index Map. Revise Activity Center #18 boundary to match the boundary on Activity Center #18 Map, to reflect prior expansion in southeast quadrant. Revise Activity Center #14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road and north of Wilderness Country Club PUD (22- 49 -25); and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road (35- 49 -25). 3. All Activity Center Maps. Revise to update underlying map features — zoning, lot/parcel creation, street names, etc. — and to reflect parcel development and generalized building footprints. 4. Activity Center #12 Map. Agenda Item 9.D. 8 A Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Moorings Park, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road and north of Solana Road /Burning Tree Drive (15- 49 -25); and, a church zoned RSF -4, on south side of Seagate Drive and west of Seagate Elementary School (16- 49 -25). 5. Activity Center #14 Map. Revise Activity Center #14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of a portion of Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road. 6. Map FLUE -10, Consistent by Policy Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway, a church zoned RSF -4, on south side of Seagate Drive; Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road. 7. Rivers and Floodplains Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road, and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. 8. Estuarine Bays Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road, and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. 9. Soils Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. 10. Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road, and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. 11. Stewardship Overlay Map. Amend to add additional approved Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs 10 -15), as required by Policy 1.6 of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and to correct the boundaries of SSA 7. 12. Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Replace existing map with proposed map based upon the latest hydrologic modeling report (prepared by the Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department), as required by Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub - Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) and subsequent policies. More explanation is provided in the attached Staff Report to the EAC for their December 1, 2010 meeting. The hydrologic modeling report is also attached. • As required by CCME Policy 3.3.2, public notice specific to this map was provided prior to the EAC and CCPC meetings, and will be provided prior to the BCC meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: Only the proposed amendment to the Wellhead Protection Map is germane to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). The EAC heard that amendment at their December 1, 2010 meeting. Their recommendation will be presented at the CCPC hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CPSP - 2010 -2 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. J� "4 W t- '�t —�' Date: Prepared By: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager I 7,. f / -- 5 o !� Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Department Reviewed By: - -? Date: Michael BosPlanning Manager Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Department I Reviewed By: r2k)"aa � Date: it iam D. Lorenz, Jr., P.E : Director Land Development Services Department Approved IZ-C) I -zC1C> By:(-�, _ %- 7u � l Nick Casalanguida, eputy dm�or Growth Management Division /Planning & Regulation Petition Number: CPSP- 2010 -2 Staff Report for December 16, 2010 CPCC meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the February 22, 2011 ECC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Mark P. Strain, CHAIRMAN CPSP- 2010 -2 CCPC Transmittal Staff Report dw 11 -30-10 G:IComprehensivelCOMP PLANNING GMP DAWComp Plan Arrendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petAion$ 010 Cycle PetitionsZPSP- 2010 -2 bath =PC Transmittal dwl11 -30 -10 CPSP- 2010 -2 Staff Report Revisions 1/12/11 8 A ) Below are two provisions from the Staff Report for the December 16, 2010 CCPC hearing, followed by proposed revisions based upon discussion at that hearing and subsequent collaboration between Comprehensive Planning Section staff and staff from the Office of the County Attorney. 1. FLUE Policy 5.1 (pages 1 -2 of Staff Report) Text as proposed in Staff Report: Policy 5.1: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** text break * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** * ** d. For property deemed to be consistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of policies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may, through a zoning chance, be combined and developed with other property, whether such other property is deemed consistent via those same policies or is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. Such combination of properties may include re- distribution of zoning districts so long as the acreage for each existing zoning district that is deemed consistent via the referenced policies does not increase. For residential and mixed use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, as applicable. REVISED text d Any property deemed consistent may be combined and developed with other property provided the density and intensity of development derived from the property deemed consistent is not increased. Words in single underline &t4ke `R ""' "h are added /deleted per Staff Report for 12/16/10 CCPC hearing. Words in double underline -` are added /deleted per 1/12/11 REVISIONS. ! `= '-- °- ° °-`- '- °- - - -- - -� - ° -. °------ -- =- =- a -= - - =--- - - = -_ - -- d Any property deemed consistent may be combined and developed with other property provided the density and intensity of development derived from the property deemed consistent is not increased. Words in single underline &t4ke `R ""' "h are added /deleted per Staff Report for 12/16/10 CCPC hearing. Words in double underline -` are added /deleted per 1/12/11 REVISIONS. • CPSP- 2010 -2 EAC TRANSMITTAL STAFF REPORT • Item V11.13. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF December 1, 2010 L NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: CPSP- 2010 -2 Petition Name: Various Amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Maps in the GMP` - Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map ONLY (Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment initiated by the Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department) [Transmittal hearing] Applicant: Collier County II. LOCATION: This petition does not pertain to a specific property. - III. BACKGROUND and PROJECT DESCRIPTION: In the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub - Element (NGWAR) and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) and subsequent policies, requires the County to maintain maps of potable water wellfields that are most sensitive to contamination from nearby development activities and other activities and conditions. Every two years, the County is to revise and update its three - dimensional computer models, based upon a variety of data, and revise wellfield maps, as necessary. In the GMP, there is a single map in the Future Land Use Element known as the Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map that is part of the Future Land Use Map series. Section 3.06.00 of the Land Development Code (LDC) contains "wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zone maps," maps that are similar to, but with greater detail than, the map in the Future Land Use Element. Similar to the GMP, the LDC requires review of the wellfield maps, but on an annual basis. The biennial process in the GMP consists of updating the computer model, then, if warranted, revising the map in the Future Land Use Element. Subsequently, any affected map(s) in the LDC would need to be amended_ Since the LDC includes regulatory provisions, it is important to amend the LDC map(s) as soon as possible after the GMP map has been amended. EAC Meeting 12/1/10 IV V 0 The attached 33 -page report provides the technical basis for the proposed map amendment; a similar report was used to support such map amendments in 2007, and in other prior years. The proposed Wellfields map itself is located on page 6; the summary of map changes (affected wellfields) is identified on pages 4 and 5. Also, attached is the existing Wellfields map. The proposed amendment is technical in nature and is based upon the sound science of the computer modeling; it has no impact upon public infrastructure or surrounding properties (though properties newly added to a protection zone would be subject to additional regulatory scrutiny). Consideration of this proposed amendment at this EAC meeting was duly advertised in the Naples Daily News as required by CCME Policy 3.3.2. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: This is a proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map series. It is required to be periodically revised, as necessary, pursuant to Objective 1 of the NGWAR and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the CCME and subsequent policies. RECOMMENDATION: That the EAC recommend approval of petition CPSP- 2010 -2, proposed amendment to the Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map. PREPARED BY: David Weeks, AlCP, GMP Manager Comprehensive Planning Section, Land Development Services Dept. REVIEWED BY: William D. Lorenz; Jr., P.E., Director Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Date Date 1l`IL -lI Date EAC Staff Report Transmittal CPSP- 2010 -2 batch petition - FLU Wellhead Map only GAComprehemnvelCOMP PLANNING GMP DATA1Comp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petlfions12010 Cycle PetitionslCPSP- 2010-2 batchtEAC Transmittal dvd11 -15 -10 • EXISTING WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS MAP COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs CR 8) AVE VARIA RANJEFRFI WE FILE WEL FIFLI CE CIR 8,D11 a I I1 ) -T.�, ( )) II ClIY DE NAPLES AS' GOLDCN GATT E - [v VA rc � �I PlNFC \ COUN fYr unl uLs WL_LFILE I )� l J} / � ! KW j PPOFOSE D SEEN ,LAST PEG ONAI WATER 7RF 11MENT P1 ANT IT SE 1A WFLI FIE III AREA 1 CARIGA KOAC I AREA, .)F IN LtLS ASR � Cr; fSdb �_ L— - --P CR 8) AVE VARIA RANJEFRFI WE FILE WEL FIFLI CE CIR 8,D11 a I I1 ) -T.�, ( )) II ClIY DE NAPLES AS' GOLDCN GATT E - [v VA rc � �I PlNFC \ COUN fYr unl uLs WL_LFILE I )� l J} / � ! KW j CITY G F I 8 w 011LILATION NAPLES _ ,le L.- (OASTAL �.�. CRI)A COVFR'3IALN -A_ R L UTI Y AUT IOfY Iv FFLD1 N WN )ICED CAI WATER 1RI ATMCNI IANI I Flf D � of fP re SOL III IAWTHORN -/F WELLI I EXTF%SIDN EJ STILL FJNDD2 GONSTRUGION, 11 I AU_ OP GOMP _F- (IN) 0 w f'I MAAATEE �Y1 6) v4J FVFRGLADES CITY P -� wFll FIELD SCALE AMENDED EDi N�3FR 2003 Ord N Ir O Jt.3 -A r - - AMEND L JANI AkY 25 OG/ -- �y/�� RLLA3YIId WLL 4J 0, d h 2(07 I8 O (CiR YCK , SH OR rkh `W WAlF 4) AMENDED 7 CEId5ER 4 200] V N IUC7 -82 L _ - — - WI11 IL D AREA _ A,R - AOU.FFR STORAG} AND RECOVERY PREPARr I) BI GRAPHICS ANO IFFIIIAl 5111 CPT FCIION COMMUNII DEVFLO. MENT AND ENVIRONMENiAI SI RVEI D- `ASION SoURCF. LOLLER COUAIY POL_JTION CDN'RNL ANN 'RFVEN'IDN 0121. DAF'. "1 /2007 IIL1 WFPZRIJ 2007 DWG ml II • I • I e — • s • WELLFIELD MODEL REPORT � 08A Collier County y Public Utilities Division Pollution Control GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT - 2010 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT MAP OF COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS, AND AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY WELLS NOVEMBER, 2010 GMPpaper 2010 - Weloeld Protection Report V511- 15- 10.docz Page l of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE SUMMARY............................................................................ ............................... 3 L AMENDMENT REQUEST .................................................. ............................... 4 2. HISTORICAL WELLFIELD PROTECTION MODELING IN COLLIER COUNTY......... 7 2.1 INITIATION OF MODELING IN 1989 ............................ ............................... 7 2.2 MODELING OF 2003 .................................................... ............................... 9 2.3 MODELING OF 2004 .................................................. ............................... 13 2.4 MODELING OF 2007 ................................................. ............................... 13 3. MODELING OF 2010 LEADING TO 2010 LDC AMENDMENT REQUEST ................. 15 3.1 STAKEHOLDERS .................................................... ............................... 15 3.2 METHODS ............................................................. ............................... 15 3.3 RESULTS ................................................................ ............................... 15 4. REFERENCES ................................................................ ............................... 16 APPENDIX A. TABLE OF OWNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS FOR THE 2010 WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONE MODELING ....................................... ............................... 19 B. 2010 WELLFIELD MODELING DATA .................................. ............................... 21 MAP 1. PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN...... 6 GMPpaper 2010 - Wellfield Protection Report P5 11- 15- 10_docs Page 2 of 33 Groa th Management Plan Paper 3 i P SUMMARY The Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department (PCD) is responsible for protecting the potable groundwater resources of Collier County under the Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.06.00, titled "Groundwater Protection." This Section of the LDC relates to public water supply wellfields permitted to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 gallons per day of groundwater from the topmost "surficial" and next lower "intermediate" freshwater aquifer systems of the county. In addition, the PCD is responsible under Section 9J -5.006 of the Florida Administrative Code (FAC), relating to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, to update and make input to the county's future land use maps when appropriate. A recent review and modeling of the municipal water supply wellfields within Collier County indicated that the existing 2007 approved "Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas, Proposed Wellfields, and Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells (ASR's) Map" (Map) requires updating. This proposed amendment to the 2007 version will update the Map so it reflects more closely what presently exists in Collier County. In summary, there are eight major municipal wellfields currently falling under LDC Section 3.06.00. Due to recent modifications, either to the number of wells in a field or to the permitted well pumpage rates, very minor changes are required to the computer generated shapes of the wellfield protection zones for all eight wellfields. The latest shapes of these wellfield risk management special treatment protection zones are shown on Map 1. In addition the installation three new shallow water supply wells at Port of the Islands, has resulted in this wellfield being added to the Map. Map 1 also shows the currently approved potential future wellfield areas and the permitted ASR wells within the county, as required by FAC Section 9J- 5.006. The purpose of this Paper is to present and describe the current conditions found within the proposed Future Land Use Map as pertaining to freshwater wellfields and ASR's, and to request the appropriate committees and bodies accept and approve inclusion of the revisions into the future Land Use Map for use in the Growth Management Plan for Collier County. GbfPpaper 2010 - Weloeld Protection Report V5 11- 15- IO.docx Page 3 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper 1. AMENDMENT REQUEST The PCD is pursuing an amendment to the -'Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas, Proposed Wellfields, and Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells (ASR's) Map" (Map) located within the Collier County Growth Management Plan's Future Land Use Element. This proposed amendment will update this Map so it more closely reflects what presently exists in Collier County. Through this process the public will be informed by Public Notices, and will have an opportunity to share their opinions and thoughts during public hearings held by the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and, finally, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC), where the proposed amendment will be considered for adoption. If this amendment is approved, it will then be forwarded to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for their review to determine compliance with Florida Statutes. Following this process the PCD will then pursue the amendment of Collier County's LDC Section 3.06.00 "Groundwater Protection" to ensure the outdated wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones are revised to reflect what presently exists. The purpose and intent of LDC Section 3.06.00 is to protect future and existing public water supply wellfields, protect natural aquifer system recharge areas, protect countywide ground water resources, and protect the public and resources from potential pollutant point sources. This regulation requires that the public water supply wellfields within the county are protected by means of "wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones" commonly known as Wellfield Protection Zones. These zones are derived from a three - dimensional computer - modeled analysis of ground water and solute transport in the county's freshwater aquifer system. This modeling has been done by the PCD since 1989. Following the initial setup of the model by a consultant in 1989, the model was run in 1991, 2003, 2004, 2007 and, most recently, in 2010. Each run of the model produced changes to the previous run results because of the input of new data and revised, increasingly stringent, wellfield permit conditions imposed by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) (i.e., wellfield changes that occurred since the previous run of the model). The proposed map, "Map 1," reflects the results of the 2010 modeling. The reference statutory Geographic Information System (GIS) map of the Wellfield Protection Zones for each wellfield resides in the county's GIS map library. Shown below is a summary of the historic wellfield updates and hence modeling changes between 2004, 2007, and 2010. Wellfield 2004 Modeling 2007 Modeling �13 2010 Modeling Immokalee wells l3 wells ---no change 16 wells -3 new wells Orangetree 2 wells 4 wells —2 new wells 4 wells — changed pumping Ave Maria Utility Co. 0 wells 6 new wells 6 wells — changed pumping Florida Governmental Utility Authority 8 wells -- j 8 wells --greater pumping 8 wells — changed pumping (FGUA) Golden Gate City Everglades City �3wells �3 wells —no change 3wells— changed pumping GAITpaper 2010 - a ellfield Protection Report 1311 -15 -10 docx Paec 4 of 33 Groiath Management Plan Paper • Wellfield 2004 Modeling 2007 Modeling 2010 Modeling Collier County Utilities (Golden Gate) 32 wells 34 wells - 2 new wells & greater pumping 36 wells — 2 new wells City of Naples (Coastal R dge) 26 wells 26 wells — no change 31 wells — 5 new wells City of Naples (East Golden Gate) 23 wells 23 wells — no change 23 wells — changed pumping Port of the Islands Not modeled Not modeled 3 new shallow wells The impact of these changes, in either the number of wells or the pumping rate of the wells in a particular wellfield, typically reflects in a change to the Wellfield Protection Zone shapes. Some of the shape changes, especially in large wellfields with many wells, are essentially very minor — and this is the case for the Immokalee, Everglades City, Collier County (Golden Gate), City of Naples (Coastal Ridge) and City of Naples (East Golden Gate) wellfields. However, for the small Ave Maria, Orangetree, and FGUA (Golden Gate) wellfields, the changed permitted pumping rates applied in the 2010 model have, in each case, resulted in a noticeable change to the Wellfield Protection Zone shapes. Map 1 presents and the PCD requests adoption of the actual results of the 2010 modeling — whether the Wellfield Protection Zone shape change was small or large. As required by Section 9J -5.006 of the FAC relating to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan, also shown in Map 1 are the locations of approved potential future wellfield areas, planned surficial aquifer supply wells, and the SFWMD- permitted ASR wells in the county. The potential future wellfield areas and the planned surficial aquifer supply wells shown on Mapl are extracted from Figure 5 -lof the 10 -Year Water Supply Work Plan. The original approval of this potential future wellfield area resulted when the BCC approved a comprehensive plan amendment to adopt the 10 -Year Water Supply Work Plan on February 24, 2009, by Ordinance No. 09 -04 (DCA 09- RWSPI). The ASR's shown on Map 1 are those documented as having received SFWMD ASR Permits within the county. The Map shows four sites at which ASR well permits have been issued to county wellfield stakeholders: Marco Island (9 Wells), City of Naples (4 Wells), Manatee Road (1 Well), and Livingston Road (1 Irrigation Quality Well). The Carica Road ASR shown in the 2007 Map is withdrawn because following completion of a test well at the site no ASR was installed. The following Sections and Appendices provide supplementary details of the proposed and historic amendments, an explanation and intent of the model, the stakeholders who were contacted, and the wellfield data collected during this consultative process. The PCD requests the adoption of Map 1 as the Future Land Use Map relating to the wellfield protection areas, proposed surficial aquifer wells, and current ASR's for incorporation into the Growth Management Plan of Collier County. GNIPpaper 2010 - Wel0eld Protection Report V5 11- 15- I0.docs Page 5 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper 8 A MAP 1. PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPO'SED'vVELL FIELDS AND ASRs u f",:RD 4"R, ZT -jF 4 'WELL E�MT-1 0 ::Id as YOGI -19 Ap 1- "27 LIE 4, 2R1; c,�TE TLItt c A� IT, /ELLFIE1i do I su, TH H--ATHE:er, LTILITES CSR W-KATEE RDA:) Asq L Ut.'r I- I- b U Lq "LArJYEl WATER IR h ADJIFER URAGE ?E 11.11 lim ITY 5F PCTEITIAL FJ7-"E LLZI �E� IA , T-L L NE Vu It ZT -jF 4 'WELL E�MT-1 0 ::Id as YOGI -19 Ap 1- "27 LIE 4, 2R1; c,�TE TLItt c A� IT, /ELLFIE1i do I su, TH H--ATHE:er, LTILITES CSR W-KATEE RDA:) Asq L Ut.'r I- I- b U Lq C,i :496 rJr AvE kAP. A AELLFIED XPEA CITY OF KAr LEI El-,-T :;3LJ:EN GSTE AYLL EW -7R1 ..IF 1-l:KcLkoEs qTY WELLFULl CMFpapur 1010 - ff"elUieldProzection Report P511 -15 -10 do, Page 6 of 33 Growth Afawgcment Fla, Paper "LArJYEl WATER -L--LI WELLS ADJIFER URAGE ?E 11.11 lim PCTEITIAL FJ7-"E LLZI �E� aWIILFI L C,i :496 rJr AvE kAP. A AELLFIED XPEA CITY OF KAr LEI El-,-T :;3LJ:EN GSTE AYLL EW -7R1 ..IF 1-l:KcLkoEs qTY WELLFULl CMFpapur 1010 - ff"elUieldProzection Report P511 -15 -10 do, Page 6 of 33 Growth Afawgcment Fla, Paper 2. HISTORICAL WELLFIELD PROTECTION MODELING IN COLLIER COUNTY 0 8 A 2.1 INITIATION OF MODELING IN 1989 The following are extracted portions from the 1989 and 1991 reports that described the initial motives, directives, setup and running of a wellfield protection zone model in Collier County. Some of the concepts and opinions expressed at that time may not be valid now or may have been overtaken by events; they are provided to record the development of this modeling within the county. Chapter 163.3203, RS, mandates the adoption of Land Development Regulations that "...provide for protection of potable water wellfields ". The Collier County Growth Management Plan translates this mandate into a series of Goals, Objectives, and Policies for implementation of ground water quality protection in Collier County. The goals state that the County shall: (1) identify and protect natural ground water aquifer recharge areas from activities that could degrade and/or contaminate the quality of ground water; (2) protect natural ground water aquifer recharge areas from activities that unacceptably alter the ground water recharge; (3) protect the County's ground water resources to ensure the highest water quality practical; and (4) conserve, protect, and appropriately manage the County's fresh water resources. Objectives and Policies included in these goals are: (1) to develop and maintain a 3- dimensional computer ground water flow model for existing and planned wellfields; (2) to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include modeled areas as "environmentally sensitive areas"; (3) to develop an ordinance to provide for an appropriate level ofprotection for all Collier County ground water; (4) to develop an ordinance(s) that will address well construction, rock mining and excavation, blasting, and confining units; (5) to develop an- ordinance that will address both existing and future land use and surface activities relative to petroleum storage tanks, stormwater, regulated substances, industrial and domestic wastes; (6) to develop a ground water protection ordinance to protect existing and future wellfields; and (7) to develop technical criteria for determining what areas are critical to the County's long -terns ground water needs, e.g., Natural Aquifer Recharge areas. The citizens of Collier County derive their potable water largely from the Surficial Aquifer System via either the permitted public water supply wellfields or the private and household water wells. Water consumption from these sources are divided into three main use areas; potable water, agricultural use, and recreational uses. The Surficial Aquifer System in Collier County is composed of the unconfined water table aquifer and the underlying, semi - confined Lower Tamiami Aquifer, both of which are recharged by direct infiltration of precipitation that accumulates on the surface. The water table of this aquifer system lies at or within a very few feet of the ground surface, being visible in such situations as canals, ponds and lakes, wetland areas, and wet retention stormwater areas. The unsaturated soil or rock above the water table is commonly only a few inches to a few feet thick and provides little attenuation of most contaminants or pollutants passing from the surface downward to the water table. Thus, the Surficial Aquifer System is very susceptible to contamination resulting from land use activities. The sedimentary rock units underlying Collier County represent several millions of years of mixed carbonate and siliciclastic marine shelf and coastal deposition under subtropical to tropical GMPpaper2010- Welheld Protection Report V511- 15- 10.docr Page of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper 8A climatic conditions. These rock units exhibit generally unpredictable vertical and lateral microlithologic as well as permeability and porosity, variations with some generally recognized laterally extensive zones of relatively low permeability separating other zones of relatively high permeability. These latter zones or aquifers contain producible water and are separated by zones of lower permeability, i.e., aquitards. Nearly all of the potable water in Collier County is obtained from two permeable zones of the Surficial Aquifer System. This System is unconfined and is recharged directly from the surface. Hence, accurate knowledge of ground tooter flow directions and recharge characteristics is extremely, important when attempting to predict ground water movement. Potential ground water contaminants from land use activities are introduced into aquifer systems via moving water. This movement may be in vertical andlor lateral directions. The conventional wisdom is that with increasing distance traveled in heterogeneous soils /rocks, the more attenuated or "diluted" a pollutant will become. However, even extremely minute amounts of some contaminants have high toxicity levels. Natural attenuation processes include filtration, sorption, chemical processes, dilution, and microbiological decomposition. The thin, sandy soils of Collier County are less capable ofproviding extensive natural attenuation of many pollutants generated by land use activities as compared to thicker, more heterogeneous soils. Hence, contaminant- generating land use activities should be regulated in order to reduce the potential for introduction of pollutants into the ground water system. Potential ground water contaminants are as numerous and as varied as the land use activities that produce them. In addition, each contaminant (e.g., bacteria, dissolved solids, petroleum products, pesticides, fertilizers, septic or sewage waste) behaves differently in the water system in terms of its residence time, movement with other pore fluids, reactivity ivith or to pore fluids and soilhrock; and reactivity to/with other chemicals 14 ithin the aquifer system. Because of the lack of a complete understanding of contaminant behavior in the aquifer system, combined with only a very general knowledge of local soillrock characteristics affecting this behavior, it is difficult to predict with a high degree of certainty exactly how far or in what direction a particular contaminant will travel in a given lime. Numerous studies have been conducted in attempts to estimate travel characteristics, gavel times, and residence Hines of commonly introduced contaminants in aquifer systems. Because of the inhomogeneity of the soilhrock and aquifer systems, most of these estimates provide either ranges of values for velocity, distance, and residence time for the contaminants or present some minimum setback distances based on risk potential to human health and welfare. Hence, rate, distance and longevity of contaminant data for an aquifer system should be recognized as a range of values when considered in the light of risk analysis. In order to develop an effective ground water protection program, an effort must be made to establish a minimum County 14 ide water quality baseline applicable to all potable water wells and against which to compare suspected contaminated areas. bn addition, areas around public water supply wed feids should be provided protection in the form of land use restrictions and prohibitions- The extent of such areas should be predicated on geologic and hydrogeologic data as well as knowledge of the behavior of contaminants in these systems. Wellfreld protection zones are in reality risk management zones. Such zones must be based on the best available regional and local geologic and hydrogeologic information; historic and projected water demands; evaluation of contaminant behavior in the ground water systems; natural attenuation processes; remediation time and technology' and establishment of specific contaminant targets and thresholds. Computer models can evaluate data and generate projections of ground GMPpaper 2010 - Weldfield Prolectlon Report 15 11- 15- 10.docx Page R of 33 Groirth Management Plan Paper • I water flow, contaminant travel, and drawdown characteristics within some confidence limits, but it still remains a policy decision of "how much risk is too much risk ". The three - dimensional ground water flow model for wellfzelds employed as a predictor in this study was programmed with a 20 year planning horizon. Input such as that mentioned above was then used to define a 20 year risk management zone around each public water supply well geld. All ground water within this zone has the potential to reach the wellhead within 20 years, and numerous pathways were modeled to illustrate this. Within this zone, three additional zones were established Zone 1 is defined as that area closest to the wellhead which contains five percent of the total ground water within the 20 -year planning zone that will generally reach the wellhead within one year. The rationale for this zone is one of sanitary hazard versus natural attenuation and risk limits for most contaminants related to sanitary systems. Zone 2 is defined as that area closest to the wellhead, but outside of Zone 1, that contains ten percent of the total ground water within the 20 year planning zone. The model indicates that water in this zone will generally reach the wellhead within 2 years. The establishment of zones 2 and 3 is predicated on travel times, natural attenuation, and remediation time concerns for contaminants in the regulated or hazardous products and wastes categories. Zone -3 is defined as that area within the 20 year planning horizon in which 25 percent of the ground water will reach the wellhead within approximately five years. Zone 4 is defined as the remainder of the 20- ear planning zone and is the immediate Zone of Contribution for these wellfields within the planning horizon time frame. Significant contamination of ground water has occurred in every state of this nation, and is being detected with increasing frequency in urban and rural areas; in industrial as well as in agricultural regions, and is adversely effecting development and quality of life in many regions of the world (e.g., Love Canal). In Collier County, the water table is generally within six feet of the surface and the main potable water aquifers are recharged from infiltration through thin soils and semi - consolidated rock units. Natural attenuation of contaminants is not as effective as in other areas where there are thick soil horizons and the where the water table lies deeper beneath the surface. In addition, development in Collier County exposes the water table directly to land use pollutants via quarries, landscaping, stormwater retention/detention systems, accidental /incidental surficial pollution and poorly constructed and maintained wells. The only long term approach to maintaining an acceptable level of ground water quality is to reduce the possibilities for ground water contamination rather than to depend on remediation. This approach must be based on the acquisition and analysis of accurate hydrologic and geologic data, understanding of the nature and reactions of contaminants in the ground water system, knowledge of background water quality levels, and realistic projections offuture demands. From this data can be developed a comprehensive ground water protection program that addresses overall water quality across the County as well as that in the zones of contribution for public water supply welfields. 2.2 MODELING OF 2003 The purpose of the 2003 modeling and reporting by the PCD's consultant, Dr. M.L. Voorhees, was to update the methodologies and results of the initial Collier County regional three - dimensional ground water flow model, and the subsequent wellfield submodel transport simulations performed by Voorhees et al, August 1989. The 2003 report describes an updated computer model of the aquifer system in Collier County, Florida, with a concentration on the simulation of wellfield GMPpaper 2010 - Weltfleld Protection Report V511- 15- 10.docx Page 9 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper protection areas and efforts in the determination of wellfield protection regions. The following is largely extracted from the Voorhees 2003 report. The purpose of the 2003 Voorhees investigation in Collier County was as follows (1) To update a wellfield protection computer model of the aquifer system in Collier County; (2) To describe the effects of future ground water withdrawals on ground water flow in the vicinity of each study wellfrelds; (3) To describe the one (1), two (2), five (5), and twenty (20) -year diversion area (i.e., protection zones or travel times) associated with the annual permitted allocation rate for each study wellfleld; and (4) Provide extensive software development and training on this software to enable County staff the ability to update wellfield protection zones frequently. The diversion area is defined as the area, in plan view, through which ground water moves within the aquifer system to a production well in a prescribed number of years. All analyses were performed assuming steady -state conditions. The term "Study Area," as it was used in this 2003 report, refers to a 2,220 square -mile area included in the model and enclosed by the regional model grid. In addition, seven separate study wellfields were investigated as follows: City of Naples (East Golden Gate) — SFWMD Permit No. 1100018W; City of Naples (Coastal Ridge) — SFWMD Permit No. 1100017W; Collier County Utilities — SFWMD Permit No. 11 00249 W; Immokalee — SFWMD Permit No. 110001 3 W: Florida Cities Utilities (now Florida Governmental Utility Authority) — SFWMD Permit No. 1100148W; Everglades City — SFWMD Permit No. 11001 60W; and Orangetree — SFWMD Permit No. I I00419W. The extent of the 2,220 square -mile study area encompasses approximately the western two thirds of Collier County, the southern third of Lee County, and a small part of southern Hendry County in south Florida. The north boundary divides the topographic high about 7 miles north of Lake Trafford. The south boundary is south of the major portion of Lower Tamiami Canal. The east boundary is located far east in Big Cypress Swamp to minimize boundary effects on regional flow. The west boundary is the Gulf of Mexico. An extensive general description of the study area hydrogeology is provided by Knapp et al, 1986, Bennett, 1992, and Voorhees et a], 1989. The reader should review Voorhees et al, 1989, Section 3, and Bennett, 1992 for details associated with hydrogeologic data for the study area. The rock units from which most potable water is withdrawn in Collier County are grouped according to previously defined stratigraphie units and by their hydraulic properties. The sources of geologic and hydrologic data for Collier County, Florida as used in the model to the present are as follows: GMPpaper2010- Wellfield Protection Report P51145- 1O.docx Page 10of33 Grox th Management Plan Paper Information Source 08 A Canal system Collier County U.S. Geological Survey Bennett, 1992 Geologic structure Knapp et al, 1986 Lee County study (Voorhees et al, 1988) Bennett, 1992 Hydraulic aquifer Knapp et al, 1986 characteristics Lee County study (Voorhees et al, 1988) Collier County County utilities Bennett, 1992 Canal topology U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps Municipal pumping well Collier County topology South Florida Water Management District Burns and Shih, 1984 Knapp et al, 1986 County utilities Municipal wellfield South Florida Water Management District pumpages Collier County Knapp et al, 1986 County utilities Agricultural pumpage Knapp et al, 1986 Collier County Collier County Agricultural Extension South Florida Water Management District Hydrologic investigations Knapp et al, 1986 Bums and Shih, 1984 Jacob, 1983 Gee & Jensen, 1980 Swayze and McPherson, 1977 Bennett et a1, 1992 Voorhees et al, August 1989 Calibration of the ground water model is critically important to modeling studies such as being described. For the 2003 modeling work the regional model calibration was performed by combining the calibration results from reports from Voorhees et al, 1989 and Bennett, April 1992 (SFWMD). Voorhees et al, 1989 calibrated a regional model to a course grid and used the regional model to establish boundary conditions for several wellfield submodels. The technique of computerized optimization was used to achieve calibration. Bennett, April 1992 used a coarse grid in manually calibrating a regional model, which extended in depth vertically to the Hawthorn aquifer. By GMPpaper 2010 - Wellfield Protection Report V5 11- 15- IO.docx Page 11 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper f combining the calibrated parameters from these two studies and performing deta5i e grid optimization to place model nodes as close as possible near wells in a single regional model, the original Voorhees et al, 1989 study with wellfield submodels has now been replaced with a single regional model. This provided a unified, streamlined, and easier wellfield protection modeling update procedure for Collier County staff. fhe deeper Hawthom aquifer is now included in this model, which is an update as it was not part of the 1989 study, and as in the SFWMD model, the Hawthorn aquifer is configured as a fixed head boundary condition. Due to artesian conditions and extensive confining units above the Hawthorn aquifer, pumpage in the Hawthorn is assumed to not require wellfield protection analysis. The theory associated with the delineation of wellfield protection zones is presented by Voorhees et al, 1989; Section 5 p29, and Section 11 p85. The reader is referred to that discussion for details of the procedure. The only departure in 2003 from that documented procedure is the initial placement of travel time particles at a production well over the entire producing aquifer, vertically. In the prior study by Voorhees et al, 1989 particles were placed at the vertical midpoint of the producing aquifer. The result of this procedural enhancement has been made possible by the availability of more accurate travel time delineation and more powerful computing resources. Running of the model and hence delineation of the wellfield protection zones can be determined very easily by data entry of a few values that include the following: (1) an exactly two character wellfield identifier for the well -- user selected; (2) an exactly three character well identifier -- user selected; (3) the SFWMD permitted wellfield average annual allocation in MGD for the well -- obtained from utilities with confirmation from SFWMD; (4) the NAD81 Easterly and Northerly State Planar well coordinates in feet for the well -- based on GPS measurement by County or utility staff; (5) the aquifer from which the well pumps -- obtained from utilities; (6) the well pump capacity in GPM -- obtained from utilities with confirmation from SFWMD; and (7) comment regarding the well -- user selected. The item numbers coincide with the well data entry sequence for the software developed for this study. The wellfield protection pumpage for each well is then computed by the software developed for this project using the formula: where: Qi = Qwa(Qci/EiQci) /1440 (Eq 1) Qi is the wellfield protection pumpage for well in gallons per minute (GPM); Qwa is the SFWMD permitted wellfield average annual allocation in Millions of Gallons per Day (MGD); Qci is the pump capacity of well in the wellfield, gallons per minute (GPM); and EiQci is the summation of all well capacities in the wellfield. GMPpaper 2010 - Wellfield Proteenon Report 65 11- 15- 10,docx Pa_ee 12 of 33 Grou th Managennent Plan Paper • For this study these data were obtained from the various utilities by County staff and are presented in Appendix `B" with cross - references to the numbered items (1) through (7) listed above. For all wellfield protection simulations a conservative transport porosity of 0.15 was used to generate all ground water flow path lines. The methodologies used in the 2003 study are consistent with those previously applied by Voorhees et al, 1989 and the guidelines published for determination of wellhead protection areas (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987). The use of wellfield protection zones provides a consistent planning tool for the County and the extensive software development performed for the project provides a user- friendly system for County staff to update and change wellfield protection areas. Significant improvement of computational resources since the Voorhees et al, 1989 study provided improved accuracy for the determination of wellfield protection areas based on three dimensional ground water flow and the development of an integrated system which is more accessible by County staff. 2.3 MODELING OF 2004 The wellfield protection modeling undertaken in 2004 was carried out by Collier County staff- primarily Mr. Michael Lucas, Environmental Specialist. This modeling followed the methods described above and set up at that time on the county computers by the PCD's consultant, Dr. M.L.Voorhees. The data collection phase of the work took place between approximately May and September 2004, and the computer modeling was completed by November 2004. As described above the specially designed program suite comprises two linked computer codes: - a hydrogeological model, and - a freeware CAD program called IntelliCAD (a clone of AutoCAD). The wellfields covered in the 2004 modeling exercise included: Immokalee Wellfield Orangetree Wellfield Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City Wellfield Everglades City Wellfield Collier County Utilities Wellfield - Golden Gate Wellfield City of Naples - East Golden Gate Wellfield City of Naples - Coastal Ridge Wellfield The results of the modeling provided the LDC required W -1, W -2, W -3, and W -4 protection zones for each wellfield. These zones were included in Collier County Ordinance No. 05 -27 as Sub Section 3.0. Amendments to Section 3.06.06 Regulated Wellfields. 2.4 MODELING OF 2007 The necessary raw data for the 2007 modeling exercise was gathered from the public water supply wellfield owners and stakeholders in October and November 2006. The wellfield protection modeling undertaken in 2007 was carried out by PCD staff member Dr. Alister Burnett, Environmental Specialist. GMPpaper 2010 - Wellfleld Protection Report V5 11- 15- 10.docx Page 13 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper :0 The wellfields modeled in 2007 included: Immokalee Wellfield Everglades City Wellfield Orangetree Wellfield Collier County Utilities Wellfield Ave Maria Utility Co. Wellfield City of Naples - East Golden Gate Wellfield City of Naples - Coastal Ridge Wellfield Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City Wellfield For the Everglades City Wellfield where there was no change in the input data from that used in 2004, the 2007 modeling resulted in exactly the same time path flowlines and, hence, the same one, two, five, and twenty year special treatment overlay Wellfield Protection Zones as the 2004 model. For the extensive City of Naples Coastal Ridge and East Golden Gate Wellfields, and the Immokalee Wellfield, although minor model input changes were applied because of minor well or pumping changes, the resulting Wellfield Protection Zones are unchanged from the 2004 modeling. For wellfields with new or significantly altered input data, new timeline flow path shapes files were generated resulting in new one, two. five, and twenty year Wellfield Protection Zones. This was the case for the Orangetree Wellfield, FGUA (Golden Gate) Wellfield, and Collier County Golden Gate Wellfield. The entirely new Ave Maria Wellfield input data was compiled and applied to the model, which then generated new one, two, five, and twenty year timelines; i.e., special treatment overlay Wellfield Protection Zones ST /W -1. ST /W -2. S "F/W -3, and ST /W -4. A summary of the changes between the 2004 and 2007 modeling, which gave rise to the previous request for Amendments to the "Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map" located within the Collier County Growth Management Plan's Future Land Use Element, are listed below. Wellfield 2004 Modeling 2007 Modeling Immokalee 13 wells 13 wells -no change Orangetree 2 wells 4 wells — 2 new wells Ave Maria Utility Co. 0 wells 6 new wells Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City 8 wells 8 wells - greater pumping Everglades City 3 wells 3 wells —no change Collier County Utilities (Golden Gate) 32 wells 34 wells - 2 new wells & greater pumping City of Naples (Coastal Ridge) 26 wells I 26 wells — no change GMPpaper 2010 - Wellfield Protection Report Y511- 1?- 10.docx Paue 14 of 33 Grmvth Marwgewnt Plan Paper Wellfield 2004 Modeling 2007 Modeling City of Naples (East Golden Gate) 23 wells 23 wells — no change Port of the Islands Not modeled Not modeled 3. MODELING OF 2010 LEADING TO 2010 LDC AMENDMENT REQUEST 3.1 STAKEHOLDERS • • The necessary raw data for the 2010 modeling was gathered from the public water supply wellfield owners and stakeholders in November 2009 and the wellfield protection modeling was carried out in early 2010 by PCD staff member Dr. Alister Burnett, Environmental Specialist. The wellfields modeled in 2010 included: Immokalee Wellfield Orangetree Wellfield Ave Maria Utility Co.Wellfield Port of the Islands Wellfield Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City Wellfield Everglades City Wellfield Collier County Utilities Wellfield City of Naples - East Golden Gate Wellfield City of Naples - Coastal Ridge Wellfield The full listing of organizations and personnel that were the primary contacts for the 2010 modeling is provided as Appendix A. 3.2 METHODS The purpose of the 2010 modeling was, as before, to establish areas of increasing vulnerability surrounding each public wellfield that needed special protection from pollution. The methods used were exactly as described and used previously: collecting the relatively limited amount of input data; keying this data into the software; running the modeling software; generating the one, two, five, and twenty year particle flow path lines; drawing the shapes /polygons that surround each of these flow path shapes; and, copying and superimposing these zone shapes onto a base map of the county. These Wellfield Protection Zone maps then form the basis of the LDC content. 33 RESULTS An important issue that became clear with this modeling was that every wellfield experienced some change since the 2007 modeling. Many of the changes were relatively minor; e.g., one or two wells abandoned or new wells drilled, new pumps with changed capacities installed, SFWMD annual withdrawal allocation changes, revisions to provided well coordinates, etc. There was no wellfield with exactly the same Wellfield Protection Zone as for the 2007 modeling. Since 2007 the new shallow Port of the Islands Wellfield input data was compiled and applied to the model which then generated new one, two, five, and twenty year timelines; i.e., special treatment ovelay Wellfield Protection Zones ST /W -1, ST /W -2, ST/W -3, and ST /W-4. This new wellfield is included in Map 1 for the first time. GMPpaper 2010 - Wel�fleld Protection Report 1/511- 15- 10.docx Page 15 of 33 Growth Matugement Plan Paper 8A A summary of the changes between the 2004, 2007, and 2010 modeling, which gives rise to this request for Amendments to the "Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map" located within the Collier County Growth Management Plan's Future Land Use Element, is listed below. Wellfield 2004 Modeling 2007 Modeling 2010 Modeling Immokalee 13 wells 13 wells - no change 16 wells — 3 new wells Orangetree 2 wells 4 wells -2 new wells 4 wells— changed pumping Ave Maria Utility Co. 0 wells 6 new wells 6 wells — changed pumping Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City 8 wells 8 wells - greater pumping 8 wells — changed pumping Everglades City 3 wells 3 wells — no change 3wells— changed pumping Collier County Utilities (Golden Gate) 32 wells 34 wells - 2 new wells & greater pumping 36 wells -2 new wells City of Naples (Coastal Ridge) 26 wells 26 wells — no change 31 wells — 5 new wells City of Naples (East Golden Gate) 23 wells 23 wells — no change 23 wells — changed pumping I Port of the Islands Not modeled Not modeled 3 new shallow wells Detailed model input data for each wellfield is attached in Appendix B. 4. REFERENCES Bennett, M.W., April 1992, A Three - Dimensional Finite Difference Ground Water Flow Model of Western Collier County, Florida: South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 92 -04. DRF, 312, 358p. Bums, W.S., and Shih, George, 1984, Preliminary evaluation of ground water monitoring network in Collier County, Florida: South Florida Water Management District Technical Memorandum, 46 p. Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., 1987, Final Report, Wellfield Protection Zone Modeling, Lee County Florida, Prepared for Department of Community Development Division of Environmental Services, Fort Myers, Florida: Page 4 -8. Pollution Control Department, 1991, Collier County Environmental Services Division, Ground Water Protection Ordinance Technical Report, PC- OFR- 91 -05, 247p. de Marsily, Ghislain, 1986, Quantitative Ilydrogeology: Academic Press, London, 440 p. GMPpaper 2010 - lCel[field Protection Repor( 6'5 11 -i i- IO.docx Pa ^c 16 of 33 Growth Managemew Plan Paper .a Gee and Jenson, 1980, Big Cypress Basin water resources study No. 2201: contract report 77- 186, Gee and Jenson Engineers, Architects, and Planners, Inc., West Palm Beach, 118p. Gethar, L.W., 1986, Stochastic subsurface hydrology from theory to applications: Water Resources Research, Vol. 22, No. 9, p. 1355 -1455. Hunter/HydroSoft, Inc., April 1989, Appendix Report - Collier County Three- Dimensional Ground water Modeling Study: Hunter/HydroSoft. HydroSoft, Inc., 1988, Three - dimensional model of ground water flow in Collier County, Florida: Data assimilation, model conceptualization, and parameters: Contract Letter Report 1, Hunter/HydroSoft, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, 47p. Jacob, P.G., 1983, Hydrogeology of the shallow aquifer south of Naples, Collier County: South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 83 -3, 52p. Journel, A.G., and Huijbregts, Ch.J., 1978, Mining geostatistics: Academic Press, London, 600p. Knapp, M.S., Bums, W.S., and Sharp, T.S., 1986, Preliminary assessment of the ground -water resources of western Collier County, Florida: South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication 86 -1, Parts 1 and 2, 142p. Prickett, T. A., 1967, Designing Pumped Well Characteristics into Electric Analog Models: Ground Water v. 5(4), National Water Well Association. Prickett, T.A., T.G. Naymik, and C. G. Lomiquist, 1981, A Random -Walk Solute Transport Model for Selected Groundwater Quality Evaluations: Illinois State Water Survey Bulletin 65p. Swayze, L.J., and McPherson, B.F., The effect of the Faka Union Canal system on water levels in the Fakahatchee Strand, Collier County, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Water - Resources Investigations 77 -61, 19p. Hunter/HydroSoft, Inc., 1988, Interim InterTrans Users Guide: Hunter /HydroSoft, Inc. Voorhees, M.L., 1981, Advanced methods for the selection of urban runoff design storms: Doctoral thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana - Champaign, 207p. Voorhees, M.L., and Kirkner, R.A., 1987, Users guide for applied ground water flow with InterSat: HydroSoft, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, 132p. Voorhees, M.L., and Mades, D.M., August 1989, Three- Dimensional Simulation of Wellfleld Protection Areas in Collier County, Florida, 120p. Voorhees, M.L., Mades, D.M., and Ruskauff, Greg, 1988, Report on Lee County kriging analysis, water -level network optimization, and water budget: contract report, HydroSoft, Inc., Sarasota, 38p. Voorhees, M.L. March 2003, Update of Three - Dimensional Simulation of Wellfield Protection Areas in Collier County, Florida, 80p. GMPpoper 1010 - Wel Feld Protection Report V511- 15- IO.docx Page 17 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper Walton, W.C., 1985, Groundwater supply and contamination: National Water Well AssociatiSn. " - Walton, W.C., 1970, Groundwater resource evaluation: McGraw -Hill. GMPpaper 2010 - H elltield Protection Report f 11- 15- 10,docz Paee 18 of-' 3 Gronah Management Plan Paper 1!8A GMP- FLUEAmendment Request - APPENDIX A: TABLE OF OWNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS FOR THE 2010 WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONE MODELING Oreanization Role Contact Address of Contact Contact Teleobone # Contact Email — Person (s) Dr. Alister 3301 Tamiami Trail East AlisterBumett @colliergov.net Collier County Project Bumett Health & Comm. Bldg. 239 732 -2502 ext 5087 RobW�d@collicrgov.net Pollution Control Coordinator Rob Ward 3rd Floor 239 732 -2502 ext 5388 &Prevention Dept Supervisor Naples, FL 34113 Independent Wellfield Mode] Dr. Michael C/o Hazlett- Kincaid Inc Consultant Program Voorhees 15 Rockhil] Drive, 610 325 -2174 mvoorc@michaellvoorhees.com Designer Broomall, PA 19008 Dottie Joiner City Clerk Everglades Everglades City Scott City 781 239 695 -9714 dsmallwood @cityofeverg(ades.c Everglades City Wellfield 102 Broadway Avenue 239 253 -9 Owner /Operator E., Everglades City FL om Tim Stevens 34139 Florida Golden Gate City Robert Dick FL Government Utilities Government Wellfield (Severn Authority 2394554704 rdick @stes.com Utility Authority Owner /Operator Trent) 4300 Golden Gate Pkwy 239 707 -4275 aples, FL 34116 Naples, Immokalee Immokalee Water& Immokalee City Wellfield Jerry Warden Sewer District 101-0 Sanitation Road 239 658 -3630 jeri wauden @IW- SD.com rator Owner/Operator Immokalee, FL 34142 Kimberly Orange Tree Utility Co Orange Tree Orange Tree Retallic Inc., 4500 2395964088 Utility Co. Wellfield William Executive Drive # 110, wmurchie @gmail.com Owner /Operator Murchie Naples FL 34119 Principal Environmental Golden Gate Specialist Collier County Wellfield Steve Lan g Collier County, Water 239 252 -6113 stevelang @colliergov.net Utilities Owner /Operator Administration 4370 Mercantile Ave. Naples, FL 34104 East Golden Gate Dept of Public Works, Wellfield Bobb Reeder Utilities 239 213 -3005 breeder@naplesgov.com City of Naples Owner /Operator 380 Riverside Circle, 239 213 -3001 Fax Naples, FL 34102 Ave Maria Water David Utilities Genson 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy, Dgenson@barroncollier.com Barron Collier Ave Maria Naples, FL 34142 Companies Water Wellfield David Johnson Engineering, 239 262 -2600 dhoffman@johnsonengineering Utilities Owner /Operator Hoffman 2122 Johnson Street, Ft. 813 874 -0777 Myers, FL 34105 GMPpaper2010- Wellfield Protection Report V511- 15- 10.docx Page 19 of 33 Growth Management Plan Paper GMP- FLUEAmendmenVeet A Organization Role Contact Address of Contact Contact Telephone # Contact Email — Person (s) Jennifer Drozd Water Use Regulation South Florida Water Use (Water Use Dept jdrozd @sfi+md.gov Water Permitting Regulation) SFWMD, Gun Club 561 682 -_095 561682-2729 Management ApthoriTy Donna Road drickabu @sfwmdgov District Rickabus West Palm Beach, FL (Water Use) Robert Dick (Sevem Trent) 5726 Corporation Circle, � 239707 -4275 rdick(a stes.com Port of the Islands Ft. Myers, FL 33905 Port of the Islands Wellfield Ronald Hole Montes, 950 Encore Benson Way, Naples, FL 34110 239 254 -2000 RonBenson @hmeng.com (Hole Montes) Water Utilities City of Marco Marco Lakes Bruce Department bweinstein @cityofmarcoisland.c Water Utility 50 Bald Eagle Drive, City _�9 389 -5182 23 Island Owner /Operator Weinstein of Marco Island, Fl- om 34145 GMPpaper 2010 - 4'elllfw1d Protection Report 4511 -15 -10 doer Pa -e 20,f 33 Urtai th Management Plan Paper d r v a v Q j 'L U A z w A O A a w w F� I� w 3 0 0 N A z w a Pr v � Q y R py V' N N N N O N N N O O N 3 C •' sa E N m la E m N m is E N E E H m N E H co ro v ro v m v ro w v m v ro v ro w v m v m v ro v ro � 0 8 O �, OE� O E O OE� O E Or4 OF� O Or a ro a ro a N .-7 N a ro a N a ro r] N a ra i-7 ro a ro py F H F F H H E E H F 0o y z G l9 r � r N r 1p r �D r lD r 1p r 1p r N r N r N r z M T W M M Q� M N r N 01 cn r pp y^ W N M lD � t0 O N H m M d N N H m Ol Ol W m l0 1p N z W N N N N N N N N N N N W .. M M M th M M M M M M M Q A H N M r M a' N VO r m Ol N O O O O O O O O O O O 3 9 d y.y H H H H H H H H H H H d 3 r N N N N N N N N o ro ro m ra ro ro ro ro v cu v x x x x x x xgg .x v v v y H H H H H H H H O O O A Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z H H H H H H H H H H H C rl N M r M d' N lO m W fn 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 m a 4 4 v 'c v 0 U 0 N Op 0. K s a o_ r j 0 v C 0 v 4 3 ti 3 O N y y J C i v U J L ti J V1 d fl R w C 3 0 00 m R 0 C d E E 0 0 C� G 3 J_ J y D U ^ J o V i U L'1 � V � o u j h v v � r N th U 3 v W i 'J d N cc G C ? u V � °p F o�Jq y � N J u CU v w m r, 0 7 a_ _W a 3 a a Q' L-1 • i i C i d 6 a a M N N m v u I o G oF� o E� o F� o a a m a m � i H l � H c• � L o I i l I I O❑ � '.9 lil' j�D �'D � 0 ❑ Iw c7 m v I U r:•.Q D iD D IrJ D 3 I ! I I i � I I I •G k N �C �C '� u EE �til US E I V1 d fl R w C 3 0 00 m R 0 C d E E 0 0 C� G 3 J_ J y D U ^ J o V i U L'1 � V � o u j h v v � r N th U 3 v W i 'J d N cc G C ? u V � °p F o�Jq y � N J u CU v w m r, 0 7 a_ _W a 3 a a Q' L-1 • i i C i d 6 a a M N N m v y v a v R j -L c L ti L v L '-J c m c � o a CJ 7 m 7 G q O G � � v � 3 W 9 m N U m a m o � 3 w is F � O T C L U L w a ti R$ N a Ci. d ✓J v �Q w cvV m m m m U " °' a ro a m a rt a ro F F F E Z r r r r Q ri 4 Q O Ol O lD lD a �fI v' w.. ws� qrl N F E TOO 0 Q_ 9 F F !;. O O O O u 3 F E F F p O O O O V N N N N y c 3 3 3 3 N N N N N N N N N N N N G G G G ro ro ro ro N N N N O 0 O O • • N Q y tl 4 `e c ro g 3 0 U m 0 N ro a d y R G L i Ol �9 Cl U Ci y Q G L r c ro ro ro ro a OMO V ^ O N z V z R N N Q q N N u Q � N O C 3 0 u U O O 3 O �L y i ^u ~ i C d � � 3 � C o 0 rD �u z r r r r r z I I - -I I I I13 I, v ! Q rl N `1 ro I ro I b I d ma, ti I�ror my �Nn;m� N- • 1 • v C a v d J m V N C a y R G L i Ol �9 lr U ou G L c ro ro ro ro a OMO V ^ O N z V z R N N Q q N N u Q � N O C 3 0 u U 3 O �L y ^u ~ i C d � � 3 � C o 0 rD �u v C a v d J m V N C a v v N C Q V c Y z d 0 D M �n w 0 N 00 w R 0 y° v L �.y t a C l0 lD �D C Iii ^^y �I 3 R py V' N N N J V G L Sa N Si N Sa N a H F a L V pMp lD l`l t`l bD o v Sa v 1; v Sa v � a c ro ro ro m m ro m m ro ro ro ro 3 F 3 F 3 F 3 F 3 H 3 H 0. C Q � d n Q a N M N U u U U u 3 r r r r r r a U U L•+ W W W d 3 � N 6 V m W W m W W W N N N N N N u 3 3 3 u T T T U U U �i u V M rn Q� Ol S Ol Cl 0 s s s U Q w w w N O O O O ri ti 3 q W W W W � LUv GU. v 3 O a u v Q o � c v m v v v v o o o c c Y z d 0 D M �n w 0 N 00 w R 0 y° v L �.y t a C l0 lD �D C Iii ^^y �I 3 R py V' N N N V G L Sa N Si N Sa N a H F a L pMp lD l`l t`l o M T m W rh zw �, w C Q a N M N U u U U u 3 W W W a a U U L•+ W W W d 3 � N M U U U = W W W u 3 3 3 u T T T U U U 0 s s s U w w w c Y z d 0 D M �n w 0 N 00 w R 0 y° v v d v V v V J 3 a O O V G L N N J � Ivy 7v VV E 4 E i-: E� E ;_ N ro CJ m 4: b N ro -E N fJ F N tC N CO N N O m 3 N ro 3 O m 3 N N N ro -E OE� O E O O 0 f C F 0 F, 0 r. 0 5 O E O F 0 Ei 0 U pip y^ N 1p N n f c rl o ul �fl ul O O t In In [+1 C (h N I`l .� OJ 1p CJ l9 ^N l9 (YJ 1p CJ lJ [D h (li l0 CO V'J Q1 iD 'S �. lD Ql lD M T lfl N N ti c) (� i9 In O l0 O N « m INt^ N N N N N N m N m f P f r f r f lE � ll IF, I U � -. In ,n �n j'.n Lq in �n N N N N N N N N I O O O U O Z U U h i I y y y c; m U U C: U U U m C O O O O O C O D O O O O U U fa 4. SJ I Li ;ti S1 si fa N la 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n o 0 0 0 0 G I U U U I U U V U U U 3 a O O V G L N N J d r s c m Q j v V • i v a 4 Y N d Q 3 U w 0 fV m [L • ,-i rn m rn rn m rn m m � rn m rn m Qu y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Si rz S-I 'u ti v ro v ro v m v m v m v ro v ro v ro v m v ro v m v m v ro v m 3 -.i 3 -F 3 -� 3 3 -E 3 -r+ 3 --1 -E -E c O E o f O E O E, O E O E E o f O E O F o� o� o� O E O� Q a N a N a b a N a m a N .7 R1 a ro a ro a ro a N a N a N a ro r� H F E F H F H F E H H H H F M L 0o N N P l0 10 N O m 61 d' M 6l <T r y Ol Ol m W m m m m m r r r r W z%O. lD l9 l0 lD lD l0 W ':9 W l0 l9 lD l9 l0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N W O '� �p l0 l0 lD lD l0 1D l9 �D 1p tp 1p 1p l9 N N N N N N N N rl N f"l d' N lD r m N N N N N N N N 3 O O O O O O O U A a u U v v v v v U U U U U U U w^ U U U U v v U U U U U U U v v v 3 N W r m 6� O rl N M � to l0 r m ,� ri ri ri ri H � ri r1 ri r1 rl ri fi C N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 �+ C7 U C7 U U U C7 V V C7 U C7 C7 C7 L U' U V U U U C7 U U U U U U U U U U U U U U u U U U U U U Y C C G C C C C C C C C C C G C 7 7 7 a 7 0 7 7 C 7 C C 7 O O O O O O O O O O O O C U U U V U U U U U :.J U U U U u E f I 1+ N N N N N 4 U sa U N Si Si N N N N 41 N N N N N N Q� N N ' r 1 ri . H r i . r l O O O 0 O O O 0 O 0 O O O O 0 0 O O 0 O U U U U U U I U I U ju ju I U I U I V U • i v a 4 Y N d Q 3 U w 0 fV m [L d a s d Q o o h V G A u T � R � O O O O O O O O = u 8 LO � V a rJ as H M L � Y � l0 T 0 0 o O O .,, o n O c o o O N N 3 G G .w U" N rl 3 7 � b cd. N rJ W ro N N N N rt1 m n G rtl N m fJ O � OE�, O- m O E O O y O= r-. a c � U ✓� O pMp N r O O O M :V rl CD N v r� z fJ7 L CJ 4' lO IP C l:V Q' r C Q m �• ♦.� M N Lo r ,ti ur yr :n R O tD n i0 O N N 3 p I I v U i I I ^3. C7 U' C7 C9 C9 U' V UD U L l9 U' l9 l7 l9 l7 I(9 m u O u V v U U U C C G iC P 0 7 a 0 7 7 O O O O O O d CJ v U U O V d a s d Q o o h V G A u T � R � M U " = u 8 E- a rJ as H M L � Y � l0 z W � V p -a N N G .w N rl 3 7 3 ori L u r{ y � 3 y r-. a c � U ✓� O U v y C a v O 'o 3 O oG N c _a L v N S N Q ti U � d • i v C O y c ro C 3 0 U `o a N m ro 0. L N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U W L O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r^ � V 5 Vi F �T. W� m m m m m m m m m ch m r'i m m -e -rl E u E s+ E �+ E u E s� E �a E u E u E u E rz U E s4 E 'u v ro v ro v m v m v ro v m v ro v ro v ro v ro v ro v m v m v ro _�: Q' O E O r O E o f O r O E O E O O E O FE O E O E O E O E Q a ro a ro a ro a ro a m a a ro a 10 a ro a ro a a ro F H F F H l F H H H E H F E �' �" O r o Ol N 1p 1 u1 m O N to r ifl pMp m N O r N ri m Ol Ol m W M O N L� Q O O O ri N a v N r m Ol O .ti N 0 r r r r r r r r r r r m m m z M T m Q1 r N N m N N m m Ol f+l ri m Q � ra ri � LfI N m N � l0 rl ri rl Ol Ol W m m m m m m m m m m m m m m W Q N N N N N N N N N N N N N N � rl rl ri ri ri r-I rl f-I rl N i-1 ri .-1 rl Q Q rl N N m v� in lD r m Ci O .-i N th v N 3 q d x x x x x x x x x x x x x x d 3 O O O O O O O O rl ri .-1 ri N ri y N N N N N Cil N N N N N N N N 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 A N N N N N N N O N O N N N N b 'o b d x a x x x x x x x x x x x x ro ro m ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro o V U1 N ff1 ffl Ul V] f/l � N N ro ro m ro m ro ro ro ro ro ro m m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v v v v v c.) v v v v v v v v � d • i v C O y c ro C 3 0 U `o a N m ro 0. h v a z N N j L ti U w C y 4 6 0 n M w O O G ^.y J y N N v 1 N L' „y O O O O O O O I� O O O O O O p O O O O O O M :� CJ m N m m m �n N m M N M M Ll an rl 4 U v+ f� 3 HH (d Ld ro (7 ld 1 fd !d (� f0 Ci) .E CiJ 3 E b Q O C O� O� O Fi O � O c O= O� O� O ° O� O E� C O E i Ca S ,Z R C1 6l Ol 6l :T Q� m Q1 Cl .,. Cl m L N N N N � v v d I 3 ar, t� U 'U U U � � I I i I I I m L9 N N I N N N O O m [n of Ol t+) N Cl !m :V f m m m M M m N N Cil CJ N U ! y U I m a: N N N N FC O` b b b N '. M r0 T n U rJ N N O in In m m m n n n n ✓� n co m N 0 @ r0 r0 �0 b fJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o s; w C y 4 6 0 n M w O O G ^.y J h 3 N r N j ti U v a a a c DO r 0 V m m 0 U m c L O O e t a p+r h r N r r h h = L •• °_Q a m a ro Q V N 6\ z is W t`l 0�0 L m N tQ 6l Ol ' W .. N N r�I FV UU.I f7 Q' O' a N M m 3 -E A -F -F� r� m 3 L Q a m a ro a ro �0 0 a ro m M v M y H H L � � H H H M 3" 3 3 A � y N N 61 r l9 Ol �p M d N 61 E � m m E m o m ro o O Y -r1 Y -rl U m > m > ro v ro v O O f-i U C1. U d v a a a c DO r 0 V m m 0 U m c e t a p+r h r N r r h h Q v U eu -E -F -F� r� L Q a m a ro a ro a m a m a ro a ro a m y H H H H E H H H M 3" � y N N 61 r l9 Ol �p M N 61 �fJ ri Ol � N O1 f7 >a .� P ri m 1p l0 6� l0 Gp i. O O 61 if1 M m � to q m^ r r io r r r r r V cQ m m m m m m m m W Q M rl M M M M M M ai u U M m m m m m m m m Q Qti N M C ul lD r m N O O O O O O O O 3 Q 7 v 3 r1 ri r-1 rl ri .i rl rl N N Cl N N N N N 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 N N Cl N N N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ro ro m ro ro m m m L N N d N N N N N a O O O O O O O O U1 U] UI N U] UJ f� y u a o. a a o4 a a a E m m m m m ro m ro E' Z Z Z Z 2 Z Z Z O W W W w W W W W o o c o 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U v a a a c DO r 0 V m m 0 U m c 3 P d y d ca r+ b O O O O 3 O O O O O O 1{ J! E H F, S," N E 4 F. Y,' E SJ Fl .r .E -5 3 -E 3 .E G o o k' O E E o f o m E o r+ o >,~ o f o f o f o f o f i< a m ro m. -� ro a m a m - - ro f d .a .a m a m a m a m a r E-1 E, Ol t N O �9 �9 lG 5 �C l0 r r r r lfl z V e�C m m m u_ a m `-� N rl iti rl N rl .ti .ti - rl rl ri - Q 9z Ql O :-I N nl CO Cl O N N M N O N N N N 3 v 3 i N N O y N CJ U N N N CJ � N O N N N O N N N N N N N N CJ ro ro m ro m �� m m .m ro ro ro m o C7 V` U U' C7 C� U _ ��. �G r� C7 C7 C9 C9 G r G G G � �' G G ❑ t7 G a v 71 p o o o 0 0 v 0 o c o 0 0o icy c7 U, a a .� ro ro j ro m m m ro N N m z z z 11 �z. F O O O O O O O 0 O O O O _J J� w w 1 w w ` 6 3 z x c n ry C m P N N ^ N q L W O /y A G Q U " •u v N � 0.. H 00 y N d L v zz U " W L d zw � o � w • M u V M w?g m d m q Cdd N N 3 N q H d � v 3 a m N N � i rl N ro o c� a G L N d q � o 00 L c9 [� w m �••` cv _ E w E o U � w v 1 L 1 a 4 0 4 `e W ro a 0 a O N n 4y v G Q .T. n U " � o � G L u Cdd b b N E H ro m ro � N rl ri p m O\ O 00 L O [� O �••` w a w m m m d d q N 3 3 3 u 3 w a w 3 r W W W •a o � o 3 3 3 L Ul f� ry] b � a q ro ro ro m � m y v O E O W W W U o 0 0 a � w N N 0 0 0 0 a a a 1 L 1 a 4 0 4 `e W ro a 0 a O N n 4y v cOfte r C7 -i4 -Kty ` 8A STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2011 RE: PETITION No. CPSP - 2010 -5, BOARD DIRECTED STAFF PETITION REQUESTING AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 22.83 -acre subject property is situated on the southeast corner of the intersection of Davis Boulevard (SR 84) at County Barn Road, in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. The property lies within the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community. REQUESTED ACTION and STAFF ANALYSIS: This petition consists of staff - prepared text and map amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series. These amendments were authorized by the Board of County Commissioners on December 14, 2010, with the stated concurrence of the owner /petitioner. The two amendment alternatives consist of both text and map revisions, and are identified below with brief explanation /analysis. In June of 2005, Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) adopted an amendment to the County's Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) establishing the Davis Boulevard /Count Barn Road Mixed Use Subdistrict (DB /CBRMU Subdistrict). The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict consists of 22.8 acres and includes as allowable uses, a 5 -acre (maximum 45,000 square feet of gross leasable area) commercial component limited to certain uses set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) C -1 through C -3 uses (generally office, personal services, and convenience retail uses). The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict also provides for residential uses on the balance of the property, with the eligible density being determined by the Density Rating System in the FLUE. Additionally, the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict requires a component of the residential units to be affordable housing. The amendment establishing this Subdistrict was initiated by the private sector — except for the affordable housing requirement. - 1 - M After the establishment of the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict, the property owner submitted a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone application. The review process has been protracted by Several continuances by the applicant after Collier County Planning Commission meetings (in order to resolve issues of concern). The ultimate hearing before the BCC occurred on December 14, 2010, wherein the applicant agreed to continue the PUD rezone hearing while staff prepares and submits an amendment to the GMP's FLUE for changing the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict. The Amendment will either revise the Subdistrict to eliminate the commercial component, affordable housing requirement, specific development standards and requirements, and establish a maximum density of five (5) dwelling units per acre [BCC direction] or "repeal" it and leave allowable density to application of the Density Rating System [staff alternative] to be determined by the BCC. If the Subdistrict were repealed, then the land use designation would return to the Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. In either case, the amendment will eliminate the commercial component and requirement for developing affordable- workforce housing. The following supporting comparative analysis is provided as the supporting data required for Growth Management Plan amendments, using existing data associated with this Subdistrict. It should be noted that the basis for the Board determination to delete the DB /CBRMU Subdistrict and redesignate the site included all of the following: neighborhood concerns over compatibility; traffic impacts; changes in local conditions over time and the lack of need or desire for the commercial component at this location now or in the near future: and, the prevailing development pattern in the neighborhood. The Collier County Density Rating System allows for a base density in the Urban designated area of up to four (4) dwelling units per gross acre, typically excluding any commercial or industrial component of a mixed use PUD. The DB /CBRMU Subdistrict specifically provides that the commercial component of the mixed -use project may be used in determining the maximum eligible residential density. The entire Subdistrict (22.8 acres) is under unified control and the rezone application would apply to the entire acreage. Analysis Under the current Mixed -Use Subdistrict language, the most recently amended PUD rezone request provided for the following: • 35,000 square feet of (retail, personal service and office) use; and • 234 residential units. The traffic impacts provided by the applicant's Transportation consultant are as follows: Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total (2 -way) Multi - Family LUC 230 20 100 120 95 45 140 1,605 Shopping Center (LUC 50 35 80 155 160 315 3,430 820 Total Trips 70 15 205 250 205 455 5,035 2- M t The proposed removal of the commercial component and a limitation on residential density to a maximum of up to 114 residential dwelling units (5 units per gross eligible acre) versus the currently proposed density of 234 dwelling units (10.25 units per gross eligible acre) would result in a significant reduction of public facilities impacts, as follows: Land Use Scenario Weekday PM Peak Hour (highest demand) Land Use In Out Total Total Trips 260 205 465 Less 15% internal Capture -40 -30 -70 External Trips 220 175 395 Less Retail Pass-by -35 -35 -70 New External Trips 185 140 325 M t The proposed removal of the commercial component and a limitation on residential density to a maximum of up to 114 residential dwelling units (5 units per gross eligible acre) versus the currently proposed density of 234 dwelling units (10.25 units per gross eligible acre) would result in a significant reduction of public facilities impacts, as follows: Land Use Scenario Total Trip Generation Current Residential 1605 Commercial 3430 Total Current Scenario 5035 Under Proposed Amended GMP Residential 786* * Represents a +A 85 percent reduction in Total Trip Impacts With this reduction in intensity and density, there is sufficient capacity to serve the proposed maximum allowable density of 114 dwelling units. CPSP - 2010 -5 involves a number of Future Land Use Element text and Future Land Use Map and Map Series changes that remove or revise the Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road Mixed -Use Subdistrict entries in the FLUE. These changes are reflected in the two different Exhibit A sets presented for your consideration, as follows: One version of the Exhibit A reflects revised Subdistrict provisions and Subdistrict map relabeling. The second version of Exhibit A reflects a wholesale deletion of the Subdistrict and coinciding Subdistrict map [and map listing]. This version is characterized by its strike - through of all Subdistrict provisions on ExhibitA pages 2, 3 and 4. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on Thursday, February 3, 2011, 5:30 p.m. at Terracina Grand, located at 6825 Davis Boulevard, Naples. Approximately twenty people other than the applicant's team and County staff attended. Corby Schmidt, AICP, staff Principal Planner, and Robert Mulhere, FAICP, consulting Planner provided a description of the proposed amendments. Developing the subject property as a residential project would no longer incorporate commercial uses or require affordable- workforce housing. Mr. Schmidt explained the GMPA Transmittal process including tentative hearing dates, to the group in attendance indicating how if the GMPA were approved in Transmittal, a subsequent GMPA Adoption process would be required. 3- Discussion surrounded differences between the two alternatives being presented for consid tB. A The applicant expressed a preference for the "repeal" of Subdistrict provisions in their entirety. This alternative would allow the desired flexibility in developing the project that re- written Subdistrict language may not allow, including reliance on established provisions for accessory uses and conditional uses in a residential zoning district. An attendee commented with observations on traffic congestion at the intersection of Davis Boulevard and County Barn Road. Another attendee asked about the nature of the residential development. The applicant indicated a variety of single - family and multi - family housing options are under consideration, with intentions to offer housing styles that are in demand in the area. No specific plans are envisioned to cluster the residences in a certain area of the property. Typical amenities such as a community pool and clubhouse can be expected, located on the property to provide a measure of buffering from traffic on Davis Boulevard. Clarification was provided to the group that the residential project would no longer incorporate commercial uses or require an affordable - workforce housing component. No one in attendance expressed opposition to the project. No major issues or contentions were raised or discussed. No statements of commitment were made by the agent, applicant or developer. Mr. Schmidt announced that another Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) has been scheduled to be held on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, 5:30 p.m. at this same location [due to a notice issue], which will afford neighbors additional opportunity to hear about the proposal and provide their input. The meeting was completed by 6:15 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt AICP Principal Plannerl LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Office of the County Attorney's review of this Staff Report provided observations and comments on the legal aspects of CPSP- 2010 -5 planning considerations. These observations and comments were used in the preparation of this Staff Report for the February 17 consideration before the CCPC. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CPSP- 2010 -5 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for Transmittal one of the two discussed alternates for CPSP- 2010 -5 to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. 1. The Exhibit A, reflecting revised Subdistrict provisions and Subdistrict map relabeling. 2. The Exhibit A, reflecting wholesale "repeal" of the Subdistrict and Subdistrict map [and map listing] and re- designation as the Urban Residential Subdistrict. M PREPARED BY: Corby Schmi t, AICP, Principal Planner ComprehensIve Planning Section REVIEWED BY: c `1 David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Michael Bosi, AICP, Director Comprehensive Planning Section NVilliam D. Loren Jr., P.�' Director Land Development Services Department APPROVED BY: Nick alangu' Inistrator Growth Management S ices Division – Planning and Regulation Petition Number: CPSP- 2010 -5 Staff Report for February 17, 2011 CPCC meeting sa D e 2-7 -11 Date 2 -7- Date ,D 2, — Date 2 -8 -/1 Date NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the March 22, 2011 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Mark P. Strain. CHAIRMAN G:ICDES Planning Services\ComprehensiveZOMP PLANNING GMP DATXComp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitlons12010 Cycle PefitlonstCPSP- 2010-5 Revamp of Davis Blvd - Cnty Sam Rd MU SubMCCPC TransmiltahCPSP- 2010 -5 Staff Report.doc LOT RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN, INCLUDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE TRANSMITTING THIS AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following element of its Growth Management Plan: Golden Gate Area Master Plan, including the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission on October 19, 2009 considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, ending in a tie vote 4 -4, forwarding no recommendation on the amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners on January 19, 2010 voted 4 -0 (Commissioner Coyle absent) to indefinitely continue Petition CP- 2008 -1 and to place the proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, to create the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, on a straw- ballot referendum to be voted upon by the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates on the November 2, 2010 general election; and 1 Words underlined are added; Words st+aekthrettglt are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. 8 A LAO' WHEREAS, the adjacent residents of Golden Gate Estates voted on November 2, 2010 in favor of the referendum and to return the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners for final vote on March 22, 2011; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have sixty (60) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said sixty (60) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed text and map Growth Management Plan amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this _ day of 2011. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BY: , Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FRED W. COYLE, Chairman Words underlined are added; Words stfesk threugh are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. • Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: 3rd' Heidi Ashton - Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Use Section Chief CP- 2008 -1 Tmnsmitlal Resolution 0 /Comprehensive /GMP Amendments/Transmittal Words underlined are added; Words strasli threno are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * ** ) denotes break in text. Exhibit A GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN C P- 2008 -1 • [Page 4] Policy 1.1.2: The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: B. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict 2. Pine Ridge Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 3. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 4. Commercial Western Estates Infill Subdistrict 5. Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict 6. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict B. Estates — Commercial District the southern 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopping personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents assist in minimizing the road network required and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: Words underlined are added; words struck t rGugh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( "' "' "') denotes break in text. CP- 20080 8 A a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and recreation Groups 7911— Dance studios, schools and halls excluding discotheques 7991 — Physical fitness facilities 7993 — Coin - operated amusement devises 7999—Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified, including only day camps gymnastics instruction, ludo /karate instruction sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales Groups 5611 — Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 — Women's clothing stores 5632 — Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 — Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 — Family clothing stores 5661 — Shoe stores 5699 — Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 3. Automotive dealers and qasoline service stations Groups 5531 — Auto and home supply stores 5541 — Gasoline service stations, without repair IM Groups 7514 — Passenger car rental 7534 — Tire retreading and repair shops including only tire repair 7539 — Automotive Repair Shops Not Elsewhere Classified including only minor service, lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 — Carwashes, as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Building materials, hardware garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 — Paint, glass and wallpaper stores 5251 — Hardware stores 5261 — Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 6. Business services Groups 7334 — Photocopying and duplicating services 7335 — Commercial photography 7336 — Commercial art and graphic design 7338 — Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 — Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 — Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 — Equipment rental and leasing not elsewhere classified Words underlined are added; words Struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text CP- 2008 -1 7371 — Computer programming services 8 n 7372 — Prepackaged software 11 7373 — Computer integrated systems design 7374—Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7379 — Computer related services not elsewhere classified 7382 — Security systems services 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 — Cable and other pay television services 9. Construction special trade contractors (office use only,_ no on -site equipment storage) Groups 1711 — Plumbing heating and air - conditioning 1721 — Painting and paper hanging industry 1731 — Electrical work industry 1741 — Masonry, stone setting, and other stone work 1742 — Plastering, drywall acoustical and insulation work 1743 — Terrazzo the marble and mosaic work industry 1751 — Carpentry work 1752 — Floor laving and other floor work, not elsewhere classified industry 1761 — Roofing siding and sheet metal work industry 1771 — Concrete work industry 1781 —Water well drilling industry 1791 — Structural steel erection 1793 — Glass and glazing work 1794 — Excavation work 1795 — Wrecking and demolition work 1796 — Installation or erection of building equipment, not elsewhere 1799 — Special trade contractors, not elsewhere classified 10. Depository institutions Groups 6021 — National commercial banks 6022 — State commercial banks 6029 — Commercial banks, not elsewhere classified 6035 — Savings institutions, federally chartered 6036 — Savings Institutions, not federally chartered 6061 — Credit unions, federally chartered 6062 — Credit unions not federally chartered Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP_2008_, 8A 6091 — Non - deposit trust facilities 6099 — Functions related to depository banking not elsewhere classified 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812 including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use, no outdoor amplified music or televisions) 12. V I I I— u 141110011114 0CI VIUCD 8712 —Architectural services 8713 — Surveying services 8721 — Accounting auditing and bookkeeping services 8741 — Management services 8742 — Management consulting services 8743 — Public relations services 8748— Business consulting services, not elsewhere classified 13. Executive, legislative, and qeneral government, except finance Groups 9111 —Executive offices 9121 —Legislative bodies 9131 — Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 — General government, not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores .JtG I —rvlcal 01 IU 11011 100414UU) 11101 now, nluuun 14 It CCCCI provisioners 5431 — Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 — Candy, nut, and confectionery stores 5451 — Dairy products stores 5461 — Retail bakeries 5499 — Miscellaneous food stores, including convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 — Department stores 5331 — Variety stores 5399 — Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 16. Home furniture, furnishings, and eaumment stores Groups 5712 — Furniture stores 5713 — Floor covering stores 5714 — Drapery, curtain, and upholstery stores 5719 — Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 — Household appliance stores 5731 — Radio, television, and consumer electronics stores 5734 — Computer and computer software stores 5735 — Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 $ A 5736 — Musical instrument store 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 — Life insurance 6321 — Accident and health insurance 6324 — Hospital and medical service plans 6331 — Fire marine, and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 — Title insurance 6371 — Pension, health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified 6411 — Insurance agents 18. Justice, public order and safety Groups 9221 — Police protection 9222 — Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5912 — Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 5945 — Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 — Tobacco stores and stands 5994 — News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores 5999— Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified (excluding gravestone, tombstones, auction rooms, monuments, swimming pools, and sales barns) 21. Non - depository credit institutions Groups 6111 — Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies 6141 — Personal credit institutions 6153 —Short-term business credit institutions, except agricultural 6159 — Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 — Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 — Loan brokers Words underlined are added; words Neagh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 Q n 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021) 23. Personal services Groups 7212 — Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 — Photographic studios, portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barber shops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified, excluding massage parlors, Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance, taxation, and monetary policy (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 — Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 — Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 — Title abstract offices 6552 — Land subdividers and developers except cemeteries 26. Schools and educational services, not elsewhere classified (Group 8299) 27. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges, and services Groups 6211 — Security brokers, dealers, and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified 28. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 29. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31. Video tape rental (Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals) Words underlined are added; words skask tlxeagh are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 • ! 32. United states postal service (Group 4311, excluding major distribution centers 33. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC. b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: a. UtilitV buildings b. Essential service facilities c. Gazebos, statuary and other architectural features c. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services. not elsewhere classified (Group 7999 NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste management (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313 — Radio, television, and publishers' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertising services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 5. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 5813) 6. Educational services Groups 8211 — Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges, universities, and professional schools 8222 — Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 — Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 — General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 — Psychiatric hospitals 8069 — Specialty hospitals, except psychiatric 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 — Liquor stores 5961 — Catalog and mail -order houses 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators Words underlined are added; words s#ask-through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 9. Personal services Groups 7211 — Power Laundries, family and commercial 7261 — Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services excluding adult day care centers 8361— Residential care, including soup kitchens and homeless shelters d. Development intensity shall be limited to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. e. One grocery use will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet. With the exception of one grocery use, no individual user may exceed 30,000 square feet of building area. f. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. q. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual plan, which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks (...... "') denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 A h. Development standards, including permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: • 15`/3`° Streets- Minimum 30' wide enhanced buffer • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building, no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106, which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.H of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: a. There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. b. If the project requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District the proiect shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. c. If the proiect is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. Words underlined are added; words skaskthrough are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CP- 2008 -1 Q n [Page 27] A. Estates Mixed Use District 2) Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all fouf three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The —NVu 144 IJRit „ of Golden Gate Estates The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict to Words underlined are added; words StFUGk are deleted. Row of asterisks ( "' "' "') denotes break in text. F is UI C F °z F C O C In F Iy F OR AF GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP MWAALRE ROAD LEGEND -_ ®� off._"' o�:n.� O❑MRAYi.o,.. C F °z F C O C In F Iy F OR AF GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP MWAALRE ROAD SCALE F�.P""'F-s -r�� —. .1ZYE I Olns'Ge/ RNIXNW a P[wV11M oen�i %e�� NE. D' -ims I -nOR R 26E R27 E R26 E 0 1 • mc SCALE F�.P""'F-s -r�� —. .1ZYE I Olns'Ge/ RNIXNW a P[wV11M oen�i %e�� NE. D' -ims I -nOR R 26E R27 E R26 E 0 1 • EXHIBIT A GOLDEN GATE ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS Collier County, Florida nvkN" IMMOKALEE ROAD PETITION CP- 2008 -61 m 0 1 MI 2 Al PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DMSION EILE: GGMP -47- 2008 -2.DWG DATE: 9/2009 AMENDED — OCTOBER 26, 2004 (Ord. No. 2004 -71) AMENDED — JANUARY 25, 2007 (Ord. No. 2007 -19) AMENDED — OCTOBER 14, 2008 (Ord. No. 2008 -59) GIXDQ! GAR EStAIES NEIGNBIXINOOG DENIERS LEGEND NOGHBORHOOD CENTERS EXHIBIT A PETITION CP -20 1 WILSON BOULEVARD /GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD CENTER Collier County, Florida WIAO� IMMOKALEE D A a 0 0 a i A V Ej 0 1/2 MI. 1 MI. PREPARED BY: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE GGMP -43- 2008 -5.DWG DATE: 9/2009 ADOPTED — S SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 ESTATES AREA NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER EXHIBITA PETITION CP -200 A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Collier County, Florida Of Ovk WIA IMMOKALEE D O /a o / 0 7o-08 G A V LEGEND GOLDEN GATE SETTLEMENT ESTATES AREA ESTATES SHOPPING 0 1/2 MI. 1 MI. CENTER SUBDISTRICT PREPARED 6Y: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISIGN FILE: GGMP -43- 2006 -6.DWG DATE: 9/2009 z W IL Q C� W Q 7 Q4 V N V L k O I� U xyE i 4 u A =. I a U W a p 0 a �a o � � a a �o m v U ,C O := � A d 3 a � 3 5 to 0. O N a N � N � U ¢s Q z a F W OQ W z c x F O C7 p a _Z F #� U O I� U xyE i 4 u A =. I a U W a p 0 a �a o � � a a �o m v U ,C O := � A d 3 a � 3 5 to 0. O N a N � N � U ¢s 1. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT CP- 2008 -1 UPDATED PROJECT INFORMATION BCC Transmittal Hearing March 22, 2011 8A i.4 MGradyMirior 8 A Civil Engincers • Land StII'Vt:V01's • pli,111tiers • Landscape ArchILects January 10, 2011 Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 Re: CP2008 -01; Golden Gate Estates Area Master Plan Amendment; Estates Shopping Center Dear Ms. Mosca: As one of the authorized representatives for the application, I wanted to provide to you supplemental information related to the recent results of the November 2, 2010 straw ballot question concerning the proposed Estates Shopping Center. We also wanted to provide you with results from an on -line poll from the Naples Daily News (Collier Citizen). Both of the supplemental items demonstrate the high level of support for the proposed amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit construction of grocery anchored commercial project at the Northwest coiner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. On the straw ballot question, a total of 7,038 votes were cast in support of the proposed shopping center, which represented over 76% of the total certified votes on the question. There were 1,924 votes cast against the shopping center, which represented slightly over 21 % of those voting on the issue. The on -line poll results were similar to that of the general election. Readers were asked to respond to a question regarding two proposed shopping centers in Golden Gate Estates. One located near Randall Blvd. and Immokalee Road and the other is the subject center located at Wilson Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. A total of 1,603 votes were cast in the poll and of those responding a total of 76% said they supported either the center at Golden Gate Blvd. and Wilson Blvd. or both centers. A total of 21% supported either center, or only the center at Randall Blvd. and Immokalee Road. We are requesting that staff include the election and poll results information in the agenda packets provided to the Board of County Commissioners for their upcoming Q. Grady Minor & Associeles, PA. Ph. 239-947-1144 • Fx: 230 -047 -0376 3000 Vin Del Rey 1{13 0005151 • 1,110005151 • LC 26050266 Bonita Springs. FL 34134 ��ww.gradyminor.com Ms. Michele Mosco, A1CP V ■ Re: CP2008 -01; Golden Gate Estates Area Master Plan Amendment; Estates Slmpping Center January 10, 2011 Page 2 oj2 transmittal hearing on this matter. Previously, we provided staff with back -up material which outlined the extensive public outreach effort associated with the proposed plan amendment. It would be appreciated if the election and poll results could be included in the public outreach section of the application materials. If you have any questions regarding any of the election or poll information, please feel free to contact Rich Yovanovich at 435 -3535 or me. Sincerely, 4,I r- ` - - - -ice D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Director of Planning Election and Poll Results Transmittal.doc Page 2 of 218 8A .4 ht L/ /nanesnews.col oils /2010ftu1 /��olden °ate estates shopping centers /results/ Poll: Does Golden Gate Estates need the shopping centers? Response Percent Votes Only at Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards 53% 862 Yes, both 23% 381 No, neither 12% 202 Only at Randall Boulevard and Immolcalee Road 9% 158 Total Votes: 1603 GAPROJ - PLANNINMRCGMPA\Poll - Golden Gate Estates Shopping Chs.doc Page 3 of 218 Collier County -- Supervisor of Elections Page 2 of 3 _ .. 0.$ A 2010 General Election November 2, 2010 Final Official Results - Updated 11112/2010 EARLY VOTING TOTALS-- 100% ABSENTEE TOTALS -- 100% ELECTION DAY TOTALS -- 100% WITH 94 OF 94 PRECINCTS REPORTING Provisional ballots included Federal ballots included GOLDEN GATE SHOPPING CENTER QUESTION Last Undalen Nov 13,2010 10 12 AM Back Precinct: 551 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct; 1241 YES /SI 931 (75.0 %)I NO 266 (21.4 %) Over Votes 0 (0 %) Under Votes 44 (3,54 %)C_ Precinct: 552 Total Number cf Votes in this Precinct: 1014 YES /SI 735(72.4%) NO 265 (26.1 %) Over Votes 0 (0 %) Under Votes 14(1.38 %)� Precinct: 554 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1291 YES /SI 1,044 NO 224 (17.3 %)Il Over Votes 0 (0 %) C__ Under Votes 23(1.78 %)�___. Precinct: 555 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 1592 YES /SI 1,081(67.9 %) -. Y- ' " " - -- _ NO 421 (26.4 %) Over Votes 0 (0 %) Under Votes 90 Precinct: 590 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct: 2415 YES /SI 1,840 (76.0%) NO 463 (19.1%) Over Votes 1 (0,04 %)�� Under Votes 114 (4.71%)L j Precinct: 591 Total Number of Votes in this Precinct'. 1747 li YES /SI 1,407 (80.5 %) NO 285 (16.3 %) Over Votes 2(0.11 %)( Under Votes 53(3.03 %)� Back http: / /www.colliervotes.com /index.php ?id = 185 &spanish =N 12/7/2010 Page 4 of 218 8 A v H W W O N Q N N w .i N N Z N-1 P ePY � lD O1 J1 � N N f W � N r O O p O o O O O O o O O Page 5 of 218 N N w .i N N `i r N-1 P ePY � lD O1 J1 � N N f � N r w CI 1`l C O Ol 'i ri H M 'i M H T N � N � Z O �] H W O E �+ U a E W Z [J a 0 N a m O N N Ol O Jl �D N N O U rl o O O Z v m N P H 0 N O N N N N l0 N VI P O N Ul M O ul M N ip P 1p (P M 1p P M N N N N 00 N W N H Vl o io m r Wo F W a. N r .. W H W Z U E U IZ-i W OF F ❑ Cl. W VHI C'1 Ha U O p off 2 `J C H o Q H F E H Yi•i ✓ o W z o U Gl a m 1: a n H £ ❑ x Y [: E N N In 3 N 4 N C N u O W ❑ N N a N Y % 01 z T N 7 t W !-0 W 9 Z N N FN U a z Y % U N C H y E Q N O H N 3 ry H H m H W 0 o u z W H F Q ( W a W o U H W W H O H .'I'. W ✓ Page 5 of 218 M� O O O O O O (J O O O O O O O O O O O {D r 8A N M o m V+ N N [l O O O O O O (J O O O O O O O O O O O {D r lD N M N I r { V+ iD [l iD O v In ✓I M N M M N (M1l { W 1`- W l0 O O{ r W O M lP N r lP P i0 l0 O lO l0 N N y{ M { t'1 N {� N M r ✓1 N R1 N P In N m .y N [l y M M N M t'1 N {� N M r ✓1 N R1 N P In N m .y r N ry m o N �D 'i r m • 1 v. M M m c r to M m r •o .� N •ti �o w f o N F U W H G1 F W F U U ✓1 U IA U U £ N O W Pt �+ U O U U U W m u a E w F v o - •] — 51 a o-1 L� W- H O L. w C(. i. W H a� 1+ -N p. Z N IY a O W M P N O i. N �J �� rS O rn W v 1 { W •H i-+ O W W u -- Page 6 of 218 l0 N O O r N N vl N O �O 8 A l0 ri m a Y1 N OI N V i O O O O O O O O O O O O O ul M1 10 lO M OI l9 m M1 M l0 ri m a Y1 N OI N O M O G' vl N V' N M N P IO N u) P N M �fl ul 61 l0 C lO N O P �O l0 O O M O ul O\ N N .� M � •� N N p M fy N M1 10 lO M O1 m M1 m a OI N O O N O N M �➢ f� Ol M p M fy N O M j N N N O M N M N tO T Ifl N M1 N r N M M1 N Ol N C P O N M1 N M O l0 U M lO M 1� M G' 1� Ill U1 l9 M P Ifl N O T C M1 N V M1 N l0 N N W W [. — W 0 F o O H O U O U r. E y O H p U F y O M H W VI H H U H F H) U U K U F F Q H Z F H ❑ H W Z ❑ U W ❑ Z H W T [L y W W N F F H F N W a O H U P N W H N 4' V G Y X O 4 O Y W ✓1 O H 'H U W VI N C X O W VI O y 4 .� m Y ro i Q v -ti C N W Z — m P d 'O 9 N � N N W tL .. � 3 ❑ ✓] S. _. N O h U .-I W tC .� m H 4 5 3 N N O H S N ✓I f; W H 2 LL N S 9 'N d H fu W H Q C N Y N W S .0 S d' W W CG W H T. CG W W W v V w W m N C E £ v Y E N u O N v N w F m Y v 7 a N w F v Y Y Y u 4 w F m V H O N O N O U Page 7 of 218 ✓1 N O M N nl N 8A O O J. P O O h f� p N N O O O O O O m NW m l0 V rl M ul '.fl \O N O O. CI W r ti N N N l0 M p O M m lD Ol V' N Ol lD .i f -- N M N N I1 N O y v1 V' tD N ry Ji lD N y Jl C M N N N V' N m M LLJ ail n N r -J V v f+l tO m M ,fl M D D p p S Z N U a U U a .-0 U a U W M U W w' a n P, n, W u P, W u a m � a u a -, w a F a• ., .. a. I-, H O d ra . -I a tL H H W K ro O H z o v U 41 T. H I+ O p N G N N A O 11 D O m a o N a a [L u O N W O 6: Il. O , n fil O 0, O v� [il O Pi ✓ O Page 8 of 218 8A m r r m fi (,1 N (•l � N N M N O O O O O O O O O O O O O .a r ti P r m m r m N P N M M f m ri N M tO a t0 N N N N m m r N N N M N N N N N N rl N .y N M r m ip ri m M m N � m m � w . m N N q q Q E E Q vI Z a U 5 a a u w x p x 0 £ u z m u m m m m Q M Q G •J H O H � w Q w P N T ❑ N S .M O N O S H D O is O T p U o w F H H H O U w H O H m U w N U y 3 N H N y Fy y (!l H N ✓ N F m Y N F w j� Z Q > w Y 02. w 7 N Z > N > N Z H > N Page 9 of 218 O M la O M ry rn N 0 8A lL h N N N N N N N N �9 O O O O O O O O O O O CO O M la O M ry rn N 0 h lL h 61 lV O1 N Ul N N m M r fi o M o �9 rn O1 w N ay pl r w h LD O p� o N l0 C N l0 C N fl CO N W N T M N r O m r l m M m P O ✓1 0 m lO N v io l(] m h N to m rn N M u N w ✓1 n Ul M m 1p P P � m h m Ln P C {P P P P m • Z F U H F Q Z Q 2 u u � 4l H lil H i -i W w W P. ] Q M U LL U P. F rc FI P rn m O O H 'l: H O H S :� O 1, S H aJ u w u G H Y m H A� VI 0 L V 0 O H {{ O O O N O f] O Vl O [Wv] O 'J: X O N U [C O N NUC O O O Page 10 of 218 N O N N O Ol O N N O ~ O N O O O N O N O O O N ry N N N N N O N N 6l O 61 1`t Ol O ill P N M N V1 O N r N P N 'y O +p r4 l0 \p N O O N f� V O1 N N 1� N N Ul y p ul M M m 1� o O N +p N O P N M N Ol fl Mm O P N N M M LLJ M ill M e4 N O +!) W y O U F W z O U E w 2 UO w O U Z W F U rZi w N F U m H O H W W a U W U N F U H O U F U d N tFn H U d ❑ Z Z W C U C P FC W U P N E Z W a >. h W O P U ✓ O a W '4 O M O N N � W v C O H W � O m m W •'+ W O v x > a u u x ❑ c m u u x v.+ H £ N W £ w a Q >+ x w H a al h h W w a �, z o ti w d +n a al b � O d Y i A > ✓ ++ O F N A -i O � A 3 Page 11 of 218 8A N N w lD �P 4' l9 N M w w w H H F F F O O O O O O O O O O O O W O ut 4 .n M t0 f- l9 l¢ U N U N N U U I� N M m O Ol N r N l0 O p Z O m ¢ ry Q Z ZI N N M N .ti .y N N u1 P w w w w w H H F F F N J O N 0 O O O W O Q O F R U N U U U U p Z p ry Q Z ZI w N w tl v w N W o w v Z N W N W a O G m a 41 C O E o� Il n W fil O 0 v m W W O N .c C w U U O v z U > ul H 'u ?. $ 6 � C C >✓ C Si E � O C ✓ 1! N N 1./ Si N �� 1-1 l9 t-i w .. .T !.1 7i !/1 !.l rY ¢1 GI Page 12 of 218 r r N#8A 0 0 0 0 0 N m �n v1 m N y N N N OJ .n m 0 0 ° ti m N N N � N P 1'1 vfl P ✓1 N . -1 P O N .n m p o o W w o W z O U N m N H y E vWi H H z H z W q ,z, v O .z, U uVi 5 F Z O O H 'Ei Q 3 Y O 3 y N O 3 0.l N D v 3 O v 3 b T v „ U p a > U U O d 4 w Page 13 of 218 8 �A P p p P V V N ti N N I� N 0 f N N m Itl N N V' 1 t•1 In N V N O O O O O O O O O O P p p P V V N ti N N I� N 0 f N N m N V m m u1 4 1 i .4 m N P N O Ip O CO m V1 m P N O m OI � M N 1n m ➢ m �Il P p p P V V N ti N N I� N N n N m m ui v N fl S N W m N m In m N m �➢ m OI � M N 1n m ➢ m �Il O W ul N � W W � N V V l'1 W O O j H W H O 2 O Z H C W r W w to I W a N r.l a a ti o a w a 0 ril y .N ' N 9 H [ Z SI O f �• E 7. ll 2 O F F Z N O [H I',' O F W [S 64 F I] W VI W p (] 2 f.y ] W c w O Cl 2 il N �O � N O Ll W u 4) Y O ✓ W 1 O 1.1 Y O 4 1 0 2 1 O } Z >. 7 5 :" .1 y 1G. >i T. i� D N 2 O > Page 14 of 218 18A P N N N O O O O O O N 4 O N � M - m N m 0 r tP N M P � { ✓1 N N r M N M - N M N 0 l0 Vl r P P N O J1 � P N O Ol l0 l7 ✓1 P ltl r N N r �O M �O O r ❑ a O m ry a Z Q N 1p � Z N N O 2 H N W � P ❑ C W W Z I p H H N � r. ❑ W F a Z O � W Z O M ❑ W O 2 � rn O F ❑ H r U F O I{ N E p m H O U Z O U H x e0 u H a ❑ y H a ❑ O z H a E a ❑ O u W H a ❑ u WW . W ff G a P N W O a ? a W H U W O O N m N W O 2 p U H m N W O 2 O U U N n O vl O U U N N O . W `,L a0 O F p v{ g W QW IG O W h a cC O U �/I ❑ m =� '� O H W H H S UI U 6' O H ❑ O H �y 3 \ F m ❑ � ry H H O rvEi H W N 3 m v d' H M ❑ r. . H x O N H W N 3 y y N Z p U m Y > VI W W � O W O H W {O O W O W O: Y VI � O N 2 W a Y vl i i Page 15 of 218 N N O O N m N O C N .1 O N M 'N m r v, m m - n m P r N ? C N N f1 N N Cll CV p r W E z l0 O U y H N U T f H N U W c a 4 f f1 < Z f W O j U C O H � U L O N '- J� W W [ O L fil O C P. N ? C N N f1 N N Cll CV N I� O1 CN N !? N EO N I N El Z 0 U N H U n. U� J 4, El t ti W O W O ;J z � O �O V m � m m lO m T m lU m r f N O N O 01 W G] z O U N U 7 U W N G. O V N z 1 a E. w y 1 O) 1 ✓ 1 O w W O b18 Page 16 of 218 l0 N T N C f.] E� Z L D U C F c U L U W L C P. m C ti I.. O E O W O C N I� O1 CN N !? N EO N I N El Z 0 U N H U n. U� J 4, El t ti W O W O ;J z � O �O V m � m m lO m T m lU m r f N O N O 01 W G] z O U N U 7 U W N G. O V N z 1 a E. w y 1 O) 1 ✓ 1 O w W O b18 Page 16 of 218 � 1 Estates Shopping Center Public Outreach The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan amendment proposes to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit a phased grocery store anchored shopping center to be developed on a 41 acre site near the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The Subdistrict will permit a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial space, including a required full- service major grocery store component and other uses commonly found in neighborhood and community commercial centers such as banks, restaurants, phased general retail and personal services. The grocery store will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet and be the first use to receive a certificate of occupancy The site is central to the northern Golden Gate Estates area residential population, and is located at one of the significant commercial node within Golden Gate Estates. This central location makes the site ideally situated to provide convenient shopping and service opportunities currently not available in this area of Golden Gate Estates. In addition, the proposed development intensity of 5,500 square feet per acre is less than the intensity of approximately 6,000 square feet per acre utilized by staff in its analysis for the current neighborhood centers. In addition it should be recognized that approximately 50% of this site will remain open space and extensive buffering will shield it from neighbors. The property owner has worked diligently over the last four years to enlist the input of area residents in determining their support for a shopping center at this location and to determine what uses are needed to best serve the residents of Golden Gate Estates. An extensive public outreach effort has occurred, pending Board of Collier County Commissioner review. The outreach effort has included mail surveys, independent newspaper surveys, public meetings and numerous focus group efforts. A summary of the community outreach effort is described below: • Two Focus Group Input ( November 2007) The Petitioner invited a number of area residents to participate in two initial focus group meetings to share their ideas on what types of uses would be well received in a shopping center at this location. The participants identified several uses that were needed in their community such as a major grocery store, sit -down restaurant, hair salon, bank, etc. • Informal Meeting at fire station with Nearby Property Owners (January 15, 2008). Participants received an invitation by mail. • Golden Gate Estates Civic Association Meeting at fire station (January 16, 2008). The meeting was advertised in the newspaper. Page 17 of 218 • County NIM Meeting (February 19, 2008). The meeting was advertised in the newspaper and property owners within 1000 feet were sent a mailed notice. At the NIM it was clear that there was a tremendous amount of misinformation pertaining to the project. In addition, at that NIM, the nearby residents requested that there be more details presented as part of the comprehensive plan amendment process. The Petitioner voluntarily withdrew from the 2007 amendment cycle and resubmitted its petition as part of the 2008 amendment cycle After the petition was resubmitted to the County as part of the 2008 cycle, the Petitioner then continued to present the petition and solicit information through public outreach meetings and presentations. Results of the Fathom analysis (described below) and a more detailed comprehensive plan petition which included a conceptual master plan were presented to the public in several public information meetings. The process is outlined below. As a result of the outreach, the petition and site design has become more detailed than is typically found in other comprehensive plan amendments. • Fathom Study Interview Meetings (February 2 -5 and February 28129, 2008) The Fathom study consisted of over 30 ninety minute interviews with project neighbors and area property owners to determine how a center should function and feel. • Mail Survey (March 4, 2008) A survey was prepared by the marketing and research firm of Dolly Roberts and mailed to more than 5,500 property owners by a professional independent print and marketing company in our defined market area, with a response rate of approximately 28 %. A highly respected independent accounting firm tabulated the results, in which 83% of the respondents indicated that they supported a community -sized shopping center at this location. Respondents also indicated their preference for prospective tenants to include a major grocer, post office, family restaurant, drug store, hardware store and bank. • Immediate neighbors meeting (November 5, 2008). The immediate neighbors were mailed a written invitation to the meeting. • General area meeting (November 13, 2008). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. • General area meeting in Spanish at Max Hasse Park (November 20, 2008). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. I KPOE Page 18 of 218 • General area meeting at Max Hasse Park (January 15, 2009). Notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. • Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association meeting (January 21, 2009) • Collier County Fair, Community Outreach Booth (February 5 -15, 2009) • Homeowners Organization of Golden Gate Estates (February 25, 2009) • Collier Citizen newspaper independent poll (March 6, 2009) February 2 °a thru March 6`h, 2009, Yes or No For a 40 acre 225,000 square foot shopping center at the Northeast corner of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard. 2.365 total vote YES 65% NO 34% County NIM (September 14, 2009). Residents within 1000 feet received a mailed notice and notice of the meeting was advertised in the newspaper. • Meetings with representative of the First and Third group both prior to and after the September 14, 2009 NIM. After the BCC decided to place the straw ballot question on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot, the following additional outreach activities occurred: • MAY 2010 Launched website Launched Facebook page Direct mail to existing supporters- letter with brochure English version (2,000) May 12 Spanish version (620) May 25 • JUNE 2010 Sent brochure to all registered voters (12,401 English/ 2,681 Spanish) Presentation - Realtors Luncheon June 2 � i • Page 19 of 218 • JULY 2010 • Community Candidate forum (Golden Gate Community Center) July 12 Community Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) July 31 • AUGUST 2010 Community Center Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) Aug. 28 Presentation - Big Cypress Elementary Aug. 31 • SEPTEMBER 2010 Election Yard Signs notifying supporters & non - supporters of upcoming vote Sept. 10 Community Yard Sale (Max Hasse Park) Sept. 25 Yard Sale (Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church) Sept. I 1 Direct Mail Postcard #I Sept. 20 Registered voters 13,000 English/ 3,000 Spanish • OCTOBER 2010 Taped interview with Naples Daily News Oct. I Editorial Board — posted online Presentation - Sable Palm Elementary Oct. 12 Community Yard Sale at Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church Oct. 9 Direct Mail to all registered voters Postcard #2 Oct. 4 Postcard 43 Oct. 1 1 Postcard #4 Oct 18 Postcard 45 Oct. 25 Advertising Full Page ad Collier Citizen Oct. 22 Full Page ad Collier Citizen Oct. 29 4 Page 20 of 218 r 8A i Naples Daily News Online Poll Readers were asked to respond to a question regarding two proposed shopping centers in Golden Gate Estates. One located near Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road and the other is the subject center located at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. A total of 1,603 votes were cast in the poll and of those responding 53% supported just the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center and a total of 76% said they supported both the center at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard and the center at Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. • NOVEMBER 2010 Election Nov. 2 The following the straw ballot question was presented to the registered voters in Golden Gate Estates: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment — Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a +40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive - through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes M A total of 7,038 votes were cast in support of the proposed shopping center, which represented over 76% of the total certified votes on the question. C Page 21 of 218 GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects December 6, 2010 Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 Re: CP2008 -01, Golden Gate Estates Shopping Center; Green House Gas Reduction Analysis Dear Ms. Mosca: As you are aware, the maximum commercial square footage proposed in the subject Golden Gate Estates Master Plan amendment application has been modified since the last Board of County Commissioner transmittal hearing. The application now seeks a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses. The original green house gas emission analysis was prepared by Keystone Development Advisors in November, 2009, and used 210,000 square feet of commercial development to analyze the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and green house gas reduction. Rather than prepare an entire new report to reflect the reduction in maximum commercial development, we will summarize the revised calculations in this correspondence as a supplement to the 2009 evaluation. The original report did understate the annual vehicle miles traveled attributable to employment due to an error in the calculation. The original calculation which had the math error was: 303 employees x 9.56 miles /trip x 5 trips/week = 11,945 (14,483 corrected)miles /week saved. The reduction in commercial square footage for the project results in a slightly lower number of full time employees from 303 to 269. The adjusted employment number equates to a weekly reduction in VMT with the proposed shopping center of: 269 employees x 9.56 miles /trip x 5 trips/week = 12,858 miles/week saved The revised annual reduction in VMT based on employment and the number of households in 2010 is 4,153,302 miles. M There is also a significant reduction in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions due to the annual employee trip reduction. The revised volume of fuel conserved due to Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239 -947 -1144 • ft: 239 - 947 -0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 • LB 0005151 • LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP , 8A Principal Planner Re. CP2008 -01, Golden Gate Estates Shopping Center; Green House Gas Reduction Analysis December 6, 2010 Page 2 of 2 the annual trip reduction is 199,678 gallons. Using the figure of 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide produced per gallon of gas as provided by Collier County, the revised annual reduction in green house gas would be 1,956 tons. Fuel savings in 2010 based on the average fuel price of $2.71 /gallon would be $2.71 x 199,678= $541, 127. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, l ` I - D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Cc: Richard D. Yovanovich Page 24 of 218 ME ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.E.1 PUBLIC FACILITIES La. Potable Water Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a potable water well to be permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD and capacity will minimally meet the standards of the Florida Administrative Code. It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 110,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Water Demand: Office: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpd/sf = 9,000 gpd Retail: 110,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpd /sf. = 1 1,050 gpd Restaurant: 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpd /sf = 9,750 gpd Total = 29,800 gpd Assumed incidental use for irrigation near seating areas per health code requirements: 3,000 gpd New Subdistrict Generation = 32,800 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x 250 gpd /unit =4,250 gpd Net Impact= (New Subdistrict— Existing Residential) = (32,800 — 4,250) gpd = 28,550 gpd Data Source: Tables in Chapter 64E -6 F.A.C. Lb. Sanitary Sewer Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a private sector package sanitary sewer or septic system treatment system permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD. Exhibit V.E.I Revised February 2011 Page 1 of 3 CP- 2008 -1 Page 25 of 218 • 1 It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 110,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Sewer Generation: Office: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpd /sf = 9,000 gpd Retail: 110,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpd /sf. = 1 1,050 gpd Restaurant: 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpd /sf — 9,750 gpd Total = 29,800 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x 200 gpd /unit = 3,400 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (29,800 — 3,400) gpd = 26,400 gpd l.c. Arterial & Collector Roads Please refer to Exhibit V.E.Ic, the Traffic Impact Statement. Project Transportation Consultant, TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., has prepared a Transportation Analysis for the conceptualized development program for the subject property. The proposed subdistrict is expected to result in a significant capture rate from pass by traffic as well as mitigating (reverse) directional flows (opposite of the rush hour directional pattern). The result shall be a more efficient use of the roadway capacity. This shall be one result of the satisfaction of community commercial need in the Estates. Another result will be the shortening of the trip lengths taken on the roadway system which is presently necessitated by the lack of commercial availability and services in the Estates. The roadway link LOS for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard is not ideal under 2013 background conditions, but all intersections and turning movements are shown to operate acceptably. Additionally, the shorter trip lengths as a result of the added commercial development in the Estates will improve the LOS conditions on Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road as well. l.d. Drainage The proposed development will be designed to comply with the 25 year, 3 -day storm standards and other applicable standards of the LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including the SFWMD. Exhibit V.E. l Revised February 2011 Page 2 of 3 CP- 2008 -1 Page 26 of 218 Le. Solid Waste The established Level of Service (LOS) for the solid waste facilities is two years of landfill disposal capacity at present fill rates and ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present fill rates. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities from the proposed project of 190,000 square feet of commercial uses. Solid Waste Generation: Office: 60,000 sf x 0.01 lb /sf /day x 1 cy /250 lbs = 876 cy /yr Retail: 110,500 sf x 0.025 lb /sf /day x 1 cy /180 lbs = 5,602 cy /yr Restaurant: 19,500 sf x 0.05 lb /sf /day x 1 cy /300 lbs = 1,186 cy /yr New Subdistrict Generation = 7,664 cy /yr Existing Residential: 17 units x 25 cy /unit/yr = 425 cy /yr Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (7,664— 425) cy /yr = 7,239 cy /yr Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues ", Tchobangolous /Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation ", Salvato. l.f. Parks: Community and Regional The proposed development will not significantly increase the population density and therefore will have no effect on the community and regional parks beyond those mitigated by the payment of associated impact fees. The site, as presently allowed by the Future Land Use Element, Density Rating System and the Land Development Code, may be developed with up to 17 dwelling units. Using the average County household occupancy rate of 2.39 people per unit, this could represent 40 -41 residents. Conversion to the proposed commercial subdistrict represents a slight reduction in the County population. The 2010 Annual Update and Inventory Report establishes two Level of Service Standards (LOSS) for Parks and Recreation. The Board of County Commissioners requires 1.2 acres of community park land per 1,000 residents and 2.7 acres of regional park land per 1,000 residents. If the subdistrict is approved, the County will be required to provide 0.05 acres less community park space and 0.11 acres less regional park land. In this case, the County would be required to account for an additional 0.22 acres of community park land and 0.49 acres of regional park land. In any event, these impacts are usually mitigated by the payment of impact fees during permitting. Exhibit V.E.1 Revised February 2011 Page 3 of 3 CP- 2008 -1 Page 27 of 218 8A t 14 Exhibit IV.B Proposed Growth Management Plan Text a. Estates — Commercial District (Vlll)1) Residential Estates Subdistrict — Single- family residential development may be allowed within the Estates — Commercial District at a maximum density of one unit per 21/4 gross acres unless the lot is considered a legal non - conforming lot of record. Golden Gate Estates. the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates, totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shoppina Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopping personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents, assist in minimizing the road network required and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: Amusement and recreation Groups 7911 — Dance studios, schools and halls, excludin discotheques 7991 — Physical fitness facilities 7993 — Coin - operated amusement devises 7999 — Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified including only day camps, gymnastics instruction iudo /karate instruction, sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5611 — Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 — Women's clothing stores Exhibit IV B- Amended Language 11- 2010.doe Page I o£11 Exhibit IV.B Page 29 of 218 gA�mA 5632 — Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 — Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 — Family clothing stores 5661 — Shoe stores 5699 — Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 3. Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations Groups 5531 — Auto and home supply stores 5541 — Gasoline service stations, without repair 4. Automotive repair, services and parking (no outdoor repair /service. All repairs /services to be performed by authorized automotive technician.) Groups 7514 — Passenger car rental 7534 — Tire retreading and repair shops, including only tire repair 7539 — Automotive Repair Shops, Not Elsewhere Classified, including only minor service, lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 — Carwashes as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Building materials hardware, garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 — Paint glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 — Hardware stores 5261 — Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 6. Business services Groups 7334 — Photocopying and duplicating services 7335 — Commercial photography 7336 — Commercial art and graphic design 7338 — Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 — Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 — Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 — Equipment rental and leasing, not elsewhere classified 7371 — Computer programming services 7372 — Prepackaged software 7373 — Computer integrated systems design 7374 — Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7379 — Computer related services not elsewhere classified 7382 — Security systems services 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 2 of I I Exhibit IV.B Page 30 of 218 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 — Cable and other pay television services 9. Construction special trade contractors (office use only, no on -site I / I I — rIUIIIUIIIU, IlCatIIIq allu all-UU11UlUUllllly 1721 — Painting and paper hanging industry 1731 — Electrical work industry 1741 — Masonry, stone setting, and other stone work 1742 — Plastering drywall, acoustical, and insulation work 1743 — Terrazzo, the marble and mosaic work industry 1751 — Carpentry work 1752 — Floor laving and other floor work, not elsewhere classified industry 1761 — Roofing siding, and sheet metal work industry 1771 — Concrete work industry 1781 — Water well drilling industry 1791 — Structural steel erection 1793 — Glass and glazing work 1794 — Excavation work 1795 — Wrecking and demolition work 1796 — Installation or erection of building equipment, not elsewhere 1799 — Special trade contractors not elsewhere classified 10. Depository institutions Groups 6021 — National commercial banks 6022 — State commercial banks 6029 — Commercial banks not elsewhere classified 6035 — Savings institutions, federally chartered 6036 — Savings Institutions, not federally chartered 6061 — Credit unions, federally chartered 6062 — Credit unions, not federally chartered 6091 — Non - deposit trust facilities FnA9 — Functinns related to denository bankil 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812, including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use no outdoor amplified music or televisions) Exhibit IV B -Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 3 of 11 Exhibit IV.B �0 k Page 31 of 218 • 4 LO 12. Engineering, accounting research, management, and related services Groups 8711 — Engineering services 8712 — Architectural services 8713 — Surveying services 8721 — Accounting auditing, and bookkeeping services 8741 — Management services 8742 — Management consulting services 8743 — Public relations services 8748— Business consulting services, not elsewhere classified 13. Executive. legislative, and general government, except finance Groups 9111 — Executive offices 9121 — Legislative bodies 9131 — Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 — General government not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores Groups 5411 — Grocery stores (minimum 27,000 square feet 5421 — Meat and fish (seafood) markets, including freezer provisioners 5431 — Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 — Candy, nut and confectionery stores 5451 — Dairy products stores 5461 — Retail bakeries 5499 — Miscellaneous food stores, includinq convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 — Department stores 5331 — Variety stores 5399 — Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 16. Home furniture furnishings and equipment stores Groups 5712 — Furniture stores 5713 — Floor covering stores 5714 — Drapery, curtain, and upholstery stores 5719 — Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 — Household appliance stores 5731 — Radio, television and consumer electronics stores 5734 — Computer and computer software stores 5735 — Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) 5736 — Musical instrument stores Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 4 or I t Exhibit IV.B Page 32 of 218 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 — Life insurance 6321 — Accident and health insurance 6324 — Hospital and medical service plans 6331 — Fire, marine and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 — Title insurance 6371 — Pension health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers not elsewhere classified 6411 — Insurance agents 18. Justice public order and safety Groups 9221 — Police protection 9222 — Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5912 — Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 5945 — Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 — Tobacco stores and stands 5994 — News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores 5999— Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified (excluding gravestone tombstones, auction rooms, monuments swimming pools, and sales barns) 21. Non - depository credit institutions Groups 6111 — Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies 6141 — Personal credit institutions Exhibit IV B -Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 5 of 11 Exhibit IV.B • Page 33 of 218 • 6153 — Short-term business credit institutions, except agricultural 6159 — Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 — Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 — Loan brokers 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021) 23. Personal services Groups 7212 — Garment pressing and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 — Photographic studios, portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barber shops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified excluding massage parlors, Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance taxation and monetary policy (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 — Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 — Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 — Title abstract offices 6552— Land subdividers and developers, except cemeteries 26.Schools and educational services, not elsewhere classified (Group 8299 27. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges, and services Groups 6211 — Security brokers dealers, and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Pugs 6 of I 1 Exhibit IV.B Page 34 of 218 OOE 28. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 29. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31.Video tape rental (Group 7841 excluding adult oriented sales and rentals 32. United states postal service (Group 4311. excluding major distribution centers 33.Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures including, but not limited to: a. Utility buildings b. Essential service facilities C. Gazebos statuary and other architectural features c. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified (Group 7999 NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges. Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste management (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313 — Radio television and publishers' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertising services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 5. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 5813) Exhibit IV B -Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 7 of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 35 of 218 I MOM 6. Educational services Groups 8211 — Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges, universities, and professional schools 8222 — Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 — Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 — General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 — Psychiatric hospitals 8069 — Specialty hospitals, except psychiatric 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 — Liquor stores 5961 — Catalog and mail -order houses 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators 9. Personal services Groups 7211 — Power Laundries, family and commercial 7261 — Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services, excluding adult day care centers 8361— Residential care, including soup kitchens and homeless shelters d. Development intensity shall be limited to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. e. One grocery use will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet. With the exception of one grocery use, no individual user may exceed 30,000 square feet of building area. f. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. request for reimbursement. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 3 of I1 Exhibit IV.B Page 36 of 218 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete. the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a _grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. q. Rezoninq is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual plan, which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. h. Development standards, including permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: (1) Landscape buffers adjacent to external rights -of -way shall be: • 15t /3`d Streets- Minimum 30' wide enhanced buffer • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building, no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the at a minimum a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106, which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of retained or re- planted constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.H of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page 9 of I I Exhibit IV.B Page 37 of 218 o order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: (4) There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. (5) If the project requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District, the proiect shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. a. Estates — Mixed Use District (VI)2— Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. (VI) a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. (III)(V)(VI) b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all fouf three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page loot I I Exhibit IV.B Page 38 of 218 i share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. T-4e NW . ad-F nt of the Game. is approximately 4 oa aGres and nnns,sts; of TraGt 144, Unit I I of Golden Gate . The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. Also revise as follows: �jR7��i7�K�]�i1�►1�� �6�il�t�i /_1 [Page 1] Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add name of this inset map in FLUE where maps are listed. Policy 1.1.2: [Page 5] The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: 1. ESTATES — MIXED USE DISTRICT a. Residential Estates Subdistrict b. Neighborhood Center Subdistirct C. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict d. Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT a. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add the new Subdistrict in FLUE policy 1.1.2.2 that lists all Desig nations /Districts /Subd istricts. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 11- 2010.doc Page I I of 11 Exhibit IV.B Page 39 of 218 Q a o, T z w x W C F W F z W iQ 6 W O� J Q W W F Z W mg CL o� J Q W W D i F7 O 0 N S� F Oeu N G O a N N U U R 4. O U � L C FPa. G O ro Q C O p, v. U u O O s � F � m � ro ab U .0 U LN td y 3 a s° N 3 U N a N a v � 4 0 ae40of218 Estates Shopping Center Sub district Commercial Needs Analysis April 15, 2008 Revised and Updated 2 -1 -11 Prepared for Mr. Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Mr. Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. Prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane, Suites 346/347 Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 254 -8585 z Page 41 of 218 • Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary ...................................................................................... ............................... 3 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................... ............................... 10 1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................... .............................10 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis ...................................................... ............................... 10 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population ................. ............................... 11 1.4 Analysis Process ....................................................................... ............................... 15 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space..... ................... .......................................................... 16 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market ......................... ............................... 16 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands . ............................... 18 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site ............................................ ............................... 19 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites ..................................... ............................... 20 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the Custom Trade Area 21 3.1 Overview ................................................................................... ............................... 21 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio .......................... ............................... 21 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment .................. ............................... 25 4.0 Commercial -Office Uses ................................................................... ............................... 26 5.0 Conclusions for Custom Trade Area ................................................ ............................... 29 6.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the TAZ Area....... 29 6.1 Overview ................................................................................... ............................... 29 6.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio .......................... ............................... 30 6.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment .................. ............................... 34 7.0 Commercial -Office Uses ................................................................... ............................... 35 8.0 Conclusions for TAZ Trade Area ...................................................... ............................... 38 9.0 Conclusions for Comparison between Custom Trade Area in relation to the TAZ Trade Area 38 APPENDIX1 ............................................................................................... ............................... 42 APPENDIX2 ............................................................................................... ............................... 51 APPENDIX3 ............................................................................................... ............................... 52 APPENDIX4 ............................................................................................... ............................... 53 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 2 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 42 of 218 W, Executive Summary o Crown Management Services, Inc. ( "Client ") is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). The proposal is for a 190,000 square foot grocery anchored shopping center on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ( "Project') in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ( "County'). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ( "Consultant') to prepare commercial needs analysis. o In the context of amending the adopted Plan, the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. As part of the analysis, typically there is a comparison of: • The supply of existing, vacant, and potential land /square footage planned for various commercial uses; • The demand for commercial land /square footage based on projected households in the market o Based on the current character of the region and proposed commercial development, the Consultant has analyzed the market need for additional neighborhood and community retail development within a custom 10- minute drive time market surrounding the Project. This trade area will be referred to throughout this report as the Custom Trade Area. An additional analysis was conducted utilizing the TAZ zones geography and corresponding demographic data prepared by the Collier County Compressive planning department. A map showing the two geographies is located below. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 3 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 43 of 218 � 1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT • Golden Gate Estates is located in Collier County primarily east of 1 -75. The majority of the Golden Gate Estates land and housing is east of CR 951. This area is semi -rural in nature and consists of lots ranging in size from 1.14 acres to over 5 acres. The sites that are currently 5 acres or more can be split to the minimum 2.5 acre site. The area east of CR 951 has very limited services for consumer support. This area of the county is expected to be the fastest growing in the future due to it affordability and supply of land for future development. o The metric utilized for the comparison of supply -to- demand is the allocation ratio. • The allocation ratio (supply /demand) measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to directly utilized acreage. The additional acreage is required in order to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints must be accounted for. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 4 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 44 of 218 — � z I Eft n•A':e IF Q gbT AV'e NE 3 BMN &'xh4n :£ vLP 4w nE Y4 Z 9n � p a„TNn RBd r Iim 4'.[N_ p .co Oran VR- w JSn AVa NE OJ Well RC Q 8 nE F L O R 1 D A g 9fl � J56 315 [N- BT 4r[NE � S � 311 eN- � ¢ ye [ F2 p i I ke - - - - - -- - - - Vpnderplt Beach RC - �K B t6t 31' al[ 213 312 Y myBNs LzJ- P.ro Ritlga Rd rp A • ... � '. 'v v'e 1fim A,�S'N JL 33.1 Z5 .z3 2 3 c 3J Legend L—L__ OCWOM Trade Area n O TAZ Trade Area a Ik w Eragladey Pk -f%l6 A16 pWAI1a M aBh 4w SE SMA 4`c SE • Golden Gate Estates is located in Collier County primarily east of 1 -75. The majority of the Golden Gate Estates land and housing is east of CR 951. This area is semi -rural in nature and consists of lots ranging in size from 1.14 acres to over 5 acres. The sites that are currently 5 acres or more can be split to the minimum 2.5 acre site. The area east of CR 951 has very limited services for consumer support. This area of the county is expected to be the fastest growing in the future due to it affordability and supply of land for future development. o The metric utilized for the comparison of supply -to- demand is the allocation ratio. • The allocation ratio (supply /demand) measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to directly utilized acreage. The additional acreage is required in order to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints must be accounted for. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 4 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 44 of 218 WK Consultant believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the Plan, this area should have a commercial allocation ratio of approximately 2.0 for the short -term. o Summary results of the retail needs analysis for each geography are shown in Table E1 and E2 below. Table E1. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. in Custom Trade Area General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand ( sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Existing Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.73 0.46 0.35 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w/FLUN 0.82 1.36 1.50 Table E2. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. in TAZ Trade Area Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) Existing Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) Vacant Commerical Total Supply 2010 249,333 344,845 413,175 94,506 94,506 94,506 14,701 14,701 14,701 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.44 0.32 0.26 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM 0.49 0.93 1.12 o Table E1 above indicates that currently the retail allocation for the custom trade area is below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio for the custom trade area is expected to drop to 1.50, which supports good planning and economic policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. Table E2 above indicates that currently the retail allocation for the TAZ trade area which is bigger in size. By 2030, the allocation ratio for the TAZ trade area is expected to drop to 1.12. Regardless of the trade area, there is adequate demand for retail space in this area of the county. As the situation currently stands, the lack of Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 5 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 45 of 218 available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market area can expect to increasingly experience: • Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; • Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County -wide; • Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply; • Downward pressure on residential land prices due to a lack of support facilities. o Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this market. Any ratio less than 2.0 justifies the addition of land to the inventory of the market. Below is the analysis inclusive of both the Randall Center and the Proposed Estates Shopping Center Sub District for each geography. Table E3. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. with Inclusion of Project (Custom Trade Area) General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail ( sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.73 1.26 0.97 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM 0.82 2.16 2.11 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 6 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 46 of 218 *8A Table E4. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. with Inclusion of Project (TAZ Trade Area) General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 109,207 109,207 0 190,000 413,175 109,207 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.44 0.87 0.72 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUTY 0.49 1.49 1.58 • In 2020, the additional land in the custom trade area increases the allocation ratio from 1.36 to 2.16. For the TAZ area, additional land increases the ratio from 0.93 to 1.49. An allocation ratio of 2.16 or 1.49 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. • Based on this analysis, there are insufficient lands designated for commercial uses in the market or the lands are not expected to be developed within the planning horizon of 2030. The under - allocation of suitable commercial land supports the need for the additional retail acreage proposed by the applicant. • Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provides for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. o Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries, i.e. Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 7 Page 47 of 218 • cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. o The Consultant has analyzed the demand for new office space in the County, on a per capita basis, as well as the implied need for additional office acreage within the custom trade area surrounding the Project site. o Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. o Also using updated records from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. o Table E5 below shows the Consultant's population forecast for the market surrounding the Project for the custom trade area, followed by the TAZ Trade area. Additionally, Table E5 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table E5. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Table E6. Historic & Forecast Population for TAZ Trade Area Without the Proposed Amendment Without the Proposed Amendment Per Capita Total Office Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 16100 17.3 278,935 156,940 0.56 Population (2015) 20212 17.3 350,182 156,940 0.45 Population (2020) 23917 17.3 414,379 156,940 0.38 Population (2030) 29119 17.3 504,499 156,940 0.31 Table E6. Historic & Forecast Population for TAZ Trade Area Without the Proposed Amendment Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 8 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 48 of 218 Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 27138 17.3 470,175 156,940 0.33 Population (2015) 31618 17.3 547,791 156,940 0.29 Population (2020) 35136 17.3 608,741 156,940 0.26 Population (2030) 39408 17.3 682,766 156,940 0.23 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 8 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 48 of 218 o According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in both the custom trade area and the TAZ trade area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.31 in the custom trade area and 0.23 in the TAZ trade area. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. o The Randall Blvd Commercial Center was approved in 2010 and utilized an analysis to estimate market need for shopping in the general area of the subject. The concluding analysis is found in Appendix 4 of this report. Even though this methodology is different than that used by the consultant, its conclusions are the same, in that there is need for both centers in the Golden Gate Estates area of Collier County. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 9 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 49 of 218 REVISED AND UPDATED Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Project Commercial Needs Analysis (February 2, 2011) 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to present a commercial needs analysis for the proposed change to Collier County's Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). Crown Management Services, Inc. ( "Client ") is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). The proposal is for a 190,000 square foot grocery anchored shopping center on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ( "Project ") in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ( "County "). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ( "Consultant ") to prepare commercial needs analysis. 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis In the context of amending the adopted Plan the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. As part of the analysis typically, there is a comparison of: o The supply of existing land /square footage currently planned for various commercial uses o The demand for land /square footage based on projected population in the market Historically, these comparisons have focused their studies County -wide. This analysis studies the market for commercial retail demand around the project and portions of the County within a custom trade area based on driving distances from the site and adjacent areas unserved by retail uses. There are two related reasons for this type of analysis. First, consumers are assumed to maximize benefit over all goods and services consumed subject to their income. This type of analysis requires that travel costs are either explicitly or implicitly accounted for during the consideration of the consumers' income constraint. This analysis requires the Consultant to narrow the scope of the analysis from the county level down to a local market level. Second, the Consultant considers whether the choice of location is a Pareto improvement for consumers. ( Pareto improvement means that no consumers are made worse off, and at least one is made better off.) That is, the Consultant asks the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 10 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 50 of 218 0 question whether additional retail space makes at least one local market better off, without reducing the welfare of all others. An analysis of commercial retail space over the whole of a county may lead to the wrong conclusion of where to develop new space. That is, the county as a whole may appear to need more retail space to support the aggregate level of demand generated by its residents. With many County -wide choices of commercially -zoned lands available, the development of one site over another may lead to an oversupply in one location and an under supply in another. This is precisely the outcome the County wants to avoid. Therefore: o By narrowing the focus of this study to the local market, the Consultant determines if this market has a need for additional retail space; o The Consultant can replicate a competitive outcome, and ensure that the welfare of all other local markets is improved or unchanged. 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population According to the Urban Land Institute', "A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 30, 000 to 100, 000 or more square feet." Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. "A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers." Community centers sell a wider range of products that includes apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20- minute drive time. Utilizing the above information as a guide, the proposed retail component of the Project is classified as a hybrid combination of both neighborhood and community serving. Beyard, Michael D., W. Paul O'Mara, et al. Shopping Center Development Handbook. Third Edition. Washington, D.C.: ULI -the Urban Land Institute, 1999. p.11 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 11 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 51 of 218 Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provide for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries, ie Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. The project is proposed for 190,000 square feet of commercial retail space of which some of the ancillary supportive uses will be office in nature. These office uses desire a retail exposure, however do not impact the parking as heavily as more traditional retail uses might. These uses may include offices for real estate, insurance and mortgage companies, banks, governmental offices, federal, state and local, securities firms, etc. The inclusion of some office uses in this area will help to further support the area. The Consultant concurs with County Staffs assessment that analysis of a 10- minute drive time market area surrounding the Project would be supportive in terms of determining the need for additional retail development. This is because the region surrounding the Project is generally semi -rural in nature with a limited transportation network. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 12 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 52 of 218 Located below, is a map showing the 10- minute drive time with the addition of those sections of Golden Gate Estates located south of Golden Gate Blvd, hereafter called the "Custom Trade Area'. The map also illustrates 3 -mile trade area buffers surrounding the existing center at Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Blvd to the west, and the planned centers at Immokalee Road and Orange Blossom and at Big Cypress, to the north and north east respectively. As we can see from this map, the Estates Shopping Center Sub District serves the Central and southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates which cannot be effectively served by any other areas. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 13 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 53 of 218 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT SIPAimm In. KIT11 J- 1---, .- Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis MKIN WE ` w r_ 3 � w 1- w e w 0 r- L,..d w 14 Page 54 of 218 I, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, — i COMMERICALAND — INDUSTRIAL ZONING ______. __.= __.'....-----Jr-- Legend -- W t. PUD CONLIERCIAL -- '.{; ®PUD IfIDUSTRiAL - INDUSTRIAL -_ -COIJIJERCIAL ",�I,r^ T 3 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis MKIN WE ` w r_ 3 � w 1- w e w 0 r- L,..d w 14 Page 54 of 218 � I Although the Project is classified as a community center with a 20- minute drive time market area per the ULI guidelines above, the "Custom Trade Area" will be utilized for this analysis due to the semi -rural nature and limited roadway network of Golden Gate Estates. This Custom Trade Area consists of a 10- minute drive time surrounding the site and the addition of the units of Golden Gate Estates located along Everglades Blvd south of Golden Gate Blvd. The proposed center falls within the threshold of community serving centers and will sell a wider range of goods than a neighborhood center, therefore the Consultant has accounted for a portion of the trade area's community center expenditures in addition to neighborhood expenditures. Therefore, the need for additional retail development is based on an analysis of: o A 10- minute drive -time with the additional southeast GGE units market surrounding the Project; "Custom Trade Area" o The "Custom Trade Areas' need for additional neighborhood goods and services and a portion of community goods and services . Estimates of existing and projected housing units and households for the Custom Trade Area are provided for years 2010, 2020 and 2030 in Table 3. These figures were estimated using parcel data from the Property Appraiser and occupancy rates for the trade area from (- Site, Census -based Demographics package. 1.4 Analysis Process The process of determining the need for additional retail land is a four -step process, as outlined below. • Inventory existing supply of commercial space in the market area; • Inventory vacant commercial space and parcels designated as having the potential for commercial space by the Future Land Use Map (FLUM); • Project future housing units /households to determine future commercial land needs and compare against commercial land allocation ratios; • Determine impact of the Project's proposed commercial land on land allocation ratio within the market area. 2 See Appendix Al, 'Index of Sales by Center Type' for details Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 15 Page 55 of 218 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market The analysis begins with the supply of existing, vacant, and potential commercial square feet in the market area. The site is located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard in the Golden Gate Estates area of the County. The Custom Trade Area, or market serving the Estates Shopping Center Sub district, is an aggregation of a 10- minute drive time radius surrounding the site and the addition of those units of Golden Gate Estates located east and south of the drive time radius surrounding the subject site (map in Appendix 2). Table 1 provides the current inventory of commercial space based on the Property Appraiser's ('PA ") data, as well as data provided by the Comprehensive Planning Department ( "CPD "). These data provide an estimate of 596,313 (rounded) square feet of existing, vacant, and potential commercial - retail space. This includes the approved 340,950 sqft Randall Blvd Commercial Sub district. Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial - Retail Space in Mixed Use Project's Custom Trade Area Folio Acres Sqft' Description 37280040002 2.41 14,701 N. of E's Country Store Acres Sqft' Description 16 340,950 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 2.12 12,932 E. of E's Country Store 5.46 33,306 Everglades 5.46 33,306 Blvd /Golden 5.46 33,306 Gate Blvd 5.46 33,306 Center 39.96 487,106 Folio Acres Sqft Description 37221120101 5.00 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 37169520009 4.19 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 37280040109 2.65 11,224 E's Country Store 37744040001 2.53 21,926 Randall Blvd 37745180009 1.14 4,356 Randall Blvd 15.51 94,506 Total Inventory 57.88 596,313 ssumed 6.100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SQFT / 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 16 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 56 of 218 "I The potential commercial includes the four separate corners that make up the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd center. These parcels fall in the Neighborhood Center Sub district designation of the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. This neighborhood designation states the following; "The neighborhood center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning ", The fact these parcels of land are located the furthest from the existing concentration of households, and are not of similar functional utility to the subject project, suggest the probability of commercial development is very limited before the end of the planning horizon used in this report. The inclusion of these sites increases the potential commercial supply by 27 percent, which is a substantial amount considering their inferior location and functional utility. Based on these factors, it is the Consultant's opinion these parcels not be included especially considering we have included the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub district. The reasoning for including the demand of existing households in this area is to account for limited population which currently resides there. Future households are anticipated to be located closer to the employment centers of Collier County, which supports the increase in demand calculated in this report. Located below we have recalculated the allocation ratio assuming that none of the parcels within the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center parcel are included. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 17 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 57 of 218 Table 2. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial - Retail SpacoIVOTt+ 4 INCLUDING THE EVERGLADES BLVD /GOLDEN GATE BLVD CENTER in Mixed Use Project's Custom Trade Area Acres Sqft* Description 2.41 14,701 N. of E's Country Store Folio Acres Sqft* Description 37745120001 16 340,950 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 37280080004 2.12 12,932 E. of E's Country Store 40629000001 5.49 33,306 Everglades 40680004000 5.46 33,306 Blvd /Golden 40930760001 5.46 33 -306 Galealvd 40930720009 5.46 33,306 Center 18.12 353,882 Existing Commercial Folio Acres Sqft Description 37221120101 5.00 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 37169520009 4.19 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 37280040109 2.65 11,224 E's Country Store 37744040001 2.53 21,926 Randall Blvd 37745180009 1.14 4,356 Randall Blvd 15.51 94,506 Inve 36.04 *Assumed 6,100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SQFT / 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 The exclusion of four parcels located in the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center reduces the total inventory by 133,224 sqft. The remaining inventory of 463,089 sgft of commercial inventory is considered reasonable within the planning horizon of 2030. 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands County Staff has indicated two Rural Villages ranging in size from 300 to 1,500 acres are permitted in the Receiving Lands to the north and south of the Project. Portions of these Receiving Lands are within the periphery of the Custom Trade Area market surrounding the Project. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, these Rural Villages must include a Village Center and several Neighborhood Centers which would yield additional commercial development in the region. To date, landowners in these Receiving Lands have not given any indication of action or intent on initiating the lengthy permitting and review process necessary for development. However, the Consultant has not included potential commercial development within these Receiving Lands as supply for two additional related reasons: Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis M Page 58 of 218 o First, commercial development within Rural Villages is intended to be self - sustainable and serve the residents of the Village. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, "Rural Villages may be approved..... to reduce the need of residents of the District and surrounding lands to travel to the County's Urban area....... Village Centers shall be designed to serve the retail, office, civic, government uses and service needs of the residents of the village." o Second, development of Rural Villages in the Receiving Lands will generate a substantial increase in the number of households in the region. This information indicates the region's demand for commercial space would also substantially increase. Therefore, commercial development within the Rural Village would likely accommodate the incremental increase in demand generated by new, internal households and have a net neutral effect to the surrounding markets. 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site Functional Utility is defined as: The ability of a property or building to be useful and to perform the function for which it is intended according to the current market tastes and standards; the efficiency of a building's use in terms of architectural style, design and layout, traffic patterns and the size and type of rooms3. The Estates Neighborhood Centers were established as a means to direct new commercial development to areas where traffic impacts could be readily accommodated. The Project is located at the Northwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. The Plan designates 4.98 acres for commercial development at this quadrant. The size of this parcel is not of adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area for three reasons: o Buffering /Setback Requirements — In order to preserve the rural character of the region, a buffer of 75 feet is required for projects abutting residential property which is consistent with the typical lot frontage of sites in this area. By minimizing developable area, this stipulation significantly reduces the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; o Utilities —There are no sewer /water connections available on the NW quadrant of the Neighborhood Center. New development must utilize a package plant s The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition © 2002, Appraisal Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 19 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 59 of 218 system to provide utilities. This requirement minimizes developable area, thus even further reducing the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; o Financial Feasibility — A grocery store is proposed as part of the Project. It is not financially feasible for a tenant of this type, or any anchor tenant, to locate at this site without supporting periphery uses. The 4.98 acre size of the NW Neighborhood Center quadrant, coupled with the buffering and utility implications, does not provide adequate functional utility for a grocery store or other anchor tenant to be financially feasible. The Project is situated at the most optimum location for access at two arterial roadways in the center of Golden Gate Estates. The site's proposed 41 +/- acre size provides for adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area. 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites A review of sites within the Custom Trade Area reveals that no parcels are over 20 acres in size, which in the consultant's opinion, offers adequate physical and functional utility to accommodate a grocery anchored center, adequate buffers between residential uses, and additional land to accommodate central utilities. Access to the site is also considered, as no other sites offer similar ease of access from heavily traveled roadways. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 20 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 6D of 218 M 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the Custom Trade Area 3.1 Overview As noted above, the need for amendments to the adopted FLUM revolves around whether or not the FLUM contains a sufficient degree of flexibility to satisfy the future projected level of demand for land. The applicant must demonstrate that the amount of land allocated in the FLUM to neighborhood and community retail uses is insufficient to accommodate future demand while providing for a reasonable degree of market flexibility. For this study, the supply of land with existing commercial - retail development, vacant commercial designated land and the supply of lands having the potential for commercial as designated by the FLUM were compared to the demand for commercial - retail land as generated by the projected households growth of the market area. The discussion below provides this analysis. 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 3 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the Custom Trade Area. Parcel data from the Collier County Property Appraiser formed the basis for the forecast. Table 3. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser; I -Site, Census -based Demographics racKage; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I -Site Census -based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9 %. Considering the foreclosures in this area, it is the consultant's opinion the occupancy rate should be lowered to 90 %. The household projection is shown in Table 4. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 21 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 61 of 218 Housing Housing Unit Year Units Growth Growth/Year 2010 5,026 2020 7,466 2,440 244 2030 9,090 1,624 162 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser; I -Site, Census -based Demographics racKage; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I -Site Census -based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9 %. Considering the foreclosures in this area, it is the consultant's opinion the occupancy rate should be lowered to 90 %. The household projection is shown in Table 4. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 21 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 61 of 218 • Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package. Fishkind & Associates. Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 5 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the sites currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the Custom Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010, 212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases from .82 in 2010 to 1.50 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 22 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 62 of 218 Table 4. Housing Unit and Household Projections Housing Year Units Households Growth Growth / Year 2010 5,026 4,523 2020 7,466 6,719 2,196 220 2030 9,090 8,181 1,461 146 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package. Fishkind & Associates. Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 5 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the sites currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the Custom Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010, 212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases from .82 in 2010 to 1.50 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 22 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 62 of 218 Table 5. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 149,068 237,253 309,462 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.73 0.46 0.35 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply WFLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand WFLUN 0.82 1.36 1.50 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. As noted in Table 1, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 5, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 149,068, 237,253, and 309,462 square feet of commercial space in the Custom Trade Area for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 5, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, including the phasing of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, to include 200,000 sqft in 2020 and the total build out of 340,950 in 2030, the supply increases to 463,089. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.73, 0.46, and 0.35 and with the FLUM lands is 0.82, 1.36, and 1.50 for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short -term. As the time Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 23 Page 63 of 218 • 1 • , horizon increases, the allocation ratio must increase as well. (Please refer to Appendix #3 for a detailed memo on the use of Allocation Ratios) Table 5 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is sufficiently below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to be 1.50. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market can expect to increasingly experience: • Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; • Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County -wide; • Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply • Downward pressure on residential land prices due to the lack of access to support facilities. Figure 1 illustrates the trend of commercial allocation ratios. Figure 1. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will reach 1.50 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 24 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 64 of 218 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demandw/FLUM Potential 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 }Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential Source Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will reach 1.50 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 24 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 64 of 218 types of situations that make it good planning policy to have a sufficiently high ratio 8 /1 accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment As noted above, the proposal for the Project would add a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial - retail land to the market. The following Table 6 displays the impacts of adding this additional land to the inventory. In 2030, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.50 to 2.11. An allocation ratio of 2.11 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. This is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2. Allocation Ratios with the Inclusion of the Proposed Additional Commercial Acreage for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential and Project 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 2010 2020 2030 --*—Allocation Ratio Supply/Demand w /FLUM Potential and Project source: risnKina a Associates, inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 25 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 65 of 218 Eli] .'4, Table 6. Analysis of Adding the Mixed Use Project's Proposed Land Use Plan Change to the Inventory of Commercial Space Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 2010 2020 2030 149,068 237,253 309,462 109,207 109,207 109,207 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.73 1.26 0.97 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUN 0.82 2.16 2.11 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Commercial -Office Uses The commercial office analysis utilized the same Custom Trade Area as the retail analysis because the office uses proposed cater to a wide market and are convenience oriented in nature. These office uses would include Real Estate, Insurance, etc, which accommodate the growing population of this affordable, lower density part of our community. Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined: o There are two planned unit developments within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. 1) The Wilson Blvd PUD on the Southeast Quadrant of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard has been approved to consist of 42,000 square feet of retail and /or office uses. To date, a 35,856 sgft retail strip center is complete. The bank is approximately 3,000 square feet and will compete with the Project in terms of office space. 2) The Snowy Egret Plaza CPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. This CPUD consists of a single parcel owned by Walgreen Co. and is designated to comprise of 15,000 square feet of commercial development on 4.19 gross acres. Currently there is a 14,232 square feet Walgreens drug store on the site. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 26 Page 66 of 218 o There is one vacant commercial parcel on the Northeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, folio 37280040002. This parcel is 2.41 acres in size located adjacent and to the north of E's Country Store and is under the same ownership. o There are three parcels totaling 6.92 acres on the Southeast quadrant of Vt SW and Golden Gate Boulevard approved to consist of approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. The folio numbers for these parcels are: 37169480000, 37169440008, and 37169560108. Utilizing a County -wide average density of 11,000 square feet of office space per acre as determined by Property Appraiser Records, there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Located below is a Table showing the parcels and their potential or approved square feet. Table 7. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial -Office Space in Mixed Use Project's Market Vacant Commercial Folio Acres Sgft* Description 37280040002 2.41 26,510 N. of E's Country Store 37221120208 2.08 3,000 Liberty Gold LLC Potential Commercial Folio Acres Sgft* Description 37745120001 4.01 44,110 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 37280080004 2.12 23,320 E. of E's Country Store 37169440008 2.34 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169480000 2.81 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169560108 2.34 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** Total Office Supply 156,940 County Office Acreage 435 4,900,920 County Office Coverage Area 11,266 *Rounded to 11,000 ** Ordinance Number 08-44 is approved for 60,000 sgft of commerical office uses. When determining the demand for office uses, the Consultant utilized the Collier County Property Appraiser's database to determine the total square footage of all existing office uses as of 2010. This includes the total square footage of all office space regardless of its current occupancy. This total was then divided by the 2010 Collier County total permanent population as determined by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) to arrive at an implied per capita office need. Total square footage of office space was utilized in the per capita calculation because the comparison of supply -to- demand is done utilizing the total supply of office space — Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 27 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 67 of 218 • j M• assuming full occupancy. Table 8, indicates the total office development in Collier County, corresponding population, and per capita office need. Table 8. Collier County Per Capita Office Need Office Type 2010 Bldg Soft 2010 Collier Pop. Per Capita One -Story Professional 1,075,840 Class A 4,163,144 Medical and Professional 502,737 Total 51741,721 331,405 17.3 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser, BEBR Population Studies Through our analysis, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. This per capita estimate accounts for all office space currently existing in the county, including occupied and vacant space. In our opinion, the trade area analysis prepared below best illustrates need for office space in this area of limited support facilities. Within the Custom Trade Area the Consultant has determined that by the year 2030, the permanent population will reach approximately 28,253 persons. The Consultant's population forecast for the Custom Trade Area is shown in Table 9. Additionally, Table 9 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table 9. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Without the YrODOSea Amenament ource: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, Collier Count Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 28 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 68 of 218 Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need SgftSupplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 16100 17.3 278,935 156,940 0.56 Population (2015) 20212 17.3 350,182 156,940 0.45 Population (2020) 23917 17.3 414,379 156,940 0.38 Population (2030) 29119 17.3 504,499 156,940 0.31 ource: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, Collier Count Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 28 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 68 of 218 • • I According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.31. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. 5.0 Conclusions for Custom Trade Area Taking into account all developed, vacant and FLUM designated commercial land in the market; there is currently an insufficient degree of flexibility in the market's ability to accommodate future demand. The 2030 retail allocation ratio, including the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, Estates Shopping Center sub district and excluding the subject is estimated at 1.50 indicating a tight relationship between the demand for, and the supply of, retail space in the future. The 2030 office allocation ratio also indicates a tight relationship between the demand for, and supply of, office space. The commercial retail and commercial office components of this Project are designed to serve the community and neighborhood demand for commercial space. The location provides the access and visibility that are required for this type of development. The size and functional utility of the site offers the development of sufficient retail offerings which will limit future sprawl. The under - allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for the additional commercial acreage. Based on the map located earlier in the report, we can see the central Golden Gate Estates area would not be served at all would it not be for this project. There is current demand for retail uses and the demand will continue to grow at a rate higher than supply, which is why this project fulfills sufficient commercial need. 6.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM for the TAZ Area 6.1 Overview Prior we prepared an analysis for the custom trade area which includes the southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates. The TAZ areas selected are those which intersect with the custom trade area. Located below is a map showing the custom trade area and the intersecting TAZ areas. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 29 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 69 of 218 • ESTATES SHOPRNG CENTER SUBDISTRICT The same analysis will be prepared for the TAZ area as was prepared for the custom trade area. 6.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 10 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the TAZ Area. The data for this projection is based on the TAZ updated report provided from the county for the specific TAZ area identified above. Table 10. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Housing Housing Unit Year IAIT AUe M1E Q 2010 7,846 2020 58f: a +e M1E M1 2030 11,738 1,382 138 Saa Pw A: C &n4 B+vW GI:E z Fi I — Oranpetrea tJ __)9n e+e xE OJ WMI Rd o , e s � " tape !99 vE E 4 F L O R I D A `GO n.a +�oye; __ •_..— -_ —_ Ra -EtAi enc E o 3 931 � NE Bm ee r:E P 353 Va erdl)aeadl Rd S - 21 1 31) 313 a i i _ -- 2 ......ds 4 za ne1 z:e z 2" n< C t l E 6 � P'[ne RVdgefld v Wn 'Y W'4 - n c��c9na, v ,. Gore d .4- zss Tie Legend.__ r —_.– OGustam Trade Area =TAZTrade Area e84 el w Evrgbdea Pk—VQ- ky AR, .. N 99i aw 5f PdM o SOM 4K SE 'S. The same analysis will be prepared for the TAZ area as was prepared for the custom trade area. 6.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 10 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the TAZ Area. The data for this projection is based on the TAZ updated report provided from the county for the specific TAZ area identified above. Table 10. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 30 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 70 of 218 Housing Housing Unit Year Units Growth Growth /Year 2010 7,846 2020 10,356 2,511 251 2030 11,738 1,382 138 Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 30 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 70 of 218 Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I -Site Census -based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9 %. Considering the foreclosures in this area, it is the consultant's opinion the occupancy rate should be lowered to 90 %. The household projection is shown in Table 11. Table 11. Housing Unit and Household Projections Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning; I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 12 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the site's currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the TAZ Trade Area. Based on this demand. the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010, 212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases from 0.49 in 2010 to 1.12 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 31 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 71 of 218 Housing Year Units Households Growth Growth / Year 2010 7,846 7,061 2020 10,356 9,321 2,260 226 2030 11,738 10,564 1,244 124 Sources: Collier County Comprehensive Planning; I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package; Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 12 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the site's currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the TAZ Trade Area. Based on this demand. the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 12,932 in year 2010, 212,932 in 2020 (200,000 square feet developed of Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District) and 353,882 in 2030 which includes all of the 340,950 sqft of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases from 0.49 in 2010 to 1.12 in 2030. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 31 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 71 of 218 *8 A Table 12. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 413,175 Existing Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.44 0.32 0.26 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUN 0.49 0.93 1.12 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. As noted in Table 12, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 12, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 249,333, 344,845, and 413,175 square feet of commercial space in the TAZ Trade Area for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 12, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, including the phasing of the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, to include 200,000 sqft in 2020 and the total build out of 340,950 in 2030, the supply increases to 463,089. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.44, 0.32, and 0.26 and with the FLUM lands is 0.49, 0.93, and 1.12 for the years 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 32 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 72 of 218 4 8 A allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short -term. As the time horizon increases, the allocation ratio must increase as well. Table 12 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is sufficiently below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to be 1.12. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market can expect to increasingly experience: • Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; • Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County -wide; • Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply • Downward pressure on residential land prices due to the lack of access to support facilities. Figure 1 illustrates the trend of commercial allocation ratios. Figure 3. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will be 1.12 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 33 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 73 of 218 Allocation Ratio Su pply/Deman d w/FLUM Potential 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 —*-- Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential Source: Fishkind & Associates. Inc. Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will be 1.12 by 2030. It is just these Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 33 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 73 of 218 8A types of situations that make it good planning policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. 6.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment As noted above, the proposal for the Project would add a maximum of 190,000 square feet of commercial - retail land to the market. The following Table 13 displays the impacts of adding this additional land to the inventory. In 2030, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.12 to 1.58. An allocation ratio of 1.58 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. This is illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4. Allocation Ratios with the Inclusion of the Proposed Additional Commercial Acreage for Estates Shopping Center Sub District Project Source: h SnBina & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 34 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 74 of 218 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demandw/FLUM Potentialand Project 1.80 1.60 1.40 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 2010 2020 2030 --t— Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential and Project Source: h SnBina & Associates, Inc. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 34 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 74 of 218 � E • Table 13. Analysis of Adding the Estates Shopping Center Sub District Proposed Land Use Plan Change to the Inventory of Commercial Space General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand ( sq.ft) 249,333 344,845 413,175 Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.44 0.87 0.72 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 122,139 512,139 653,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUN 0.49 1.49 1.58 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 7.0 Commercial - Office Uses The commercial office analysis utilized the same TAZ Trade Area as the retail analysis because the office uses proposed cater to a wide market and are convenience oriented in nature. These office uses would include Real Estate, Insurance, etc, which accommodate the growing population of this affordable, lower density part of our community. Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined: o There are two planned unit developments within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. 3) The Wilson Blvd PUD on the Southeast Quadrant of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard has been approved to consist of 42,000 square feet of retail and /or office uses. To date, a 35,856 sqft retail strip center is complete. The bank is approximately 3,000 square feet and will compete with the Project in terms of office space. 4) The Snowy Egret Plaza CPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. This CPUD consists of a single parcel owned by Walgreen Co. and is designated to comprise of 15,000 square feet of commercial development on 4.19 gross acres. Currently there is a 14,232 square feet Walgreens drug store on the site. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 35 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 75 of 218 • c There is one vacant commercial parcel on the Northeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, folio 37280040002. This parcel is 2.41 acres in size located adjacent and to the north of E's Country Store and is under the same ownership. o There are three parcels totaling 6.92 acres on the Southeast quadrant of 1St SW and Golden Gate Boulevard approved to consist of approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. The folio numbers for these parcels are: 37169480000, 37169440008, and 37169560108. Utilizing a County -wide average density of 11,000 square feet of office space per acre as determined by Property Appraiser Records, there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the TAZ Trade Area surrounding the Project. Located below is a Table showing the parcels and their potential or approved square feet. Table 14. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial -Office Space in Mixed Use Project's Market Vacant Commercial Folio Acres Sgft* Description 37280040002 2.41 26,510 N. of E's Country Store 37221120208 2.08 3,000 Liberty Gold LLC Potential Commercial Folio Acres Sgft* Description 37745120001 4.01 44,110 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 37280080004 2.12 23,320 E. of E's Country Store 37169440008 2.34 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169480000 2.81 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169560108 2.34 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** Total Office Supply 156,940 County Office Acreage 435 4,900,920 County Office Coverage Area 11,266 *Rounded to 11,000 ** Ordinance Number 0844 is approved for 60,000 sgft of commerical office uses. When determining the demand for office uses, the Consultant utilized the Collier County Property Appraiser's database to determine the total square footage of all existing office uses as of 2010. This includes the total square footage of all office space regardless of its current occupancy. This total was then divided by the 2010 Collier County total permanent population as determined by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) to arrive at an implied per capita office need. Total square footage of office space was utilized in the per capita calculation because the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 36 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 76 of 21 8 8A comparison of supply -to- demand is done utilizing the total supply of office space — assuming full occupancy. Table 15, indicates the total office development in Collier County, corresponding population, and per capita office need. Table 15. Collier Countv Per Capita Office Need One -Story Professional 1,075,840 Class A 4,163,144 Medical and Professional 502,737 Total 5,741, 721 331,405 17.3 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser, BEBR Population Studies Through our analysis, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 17.3 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. This per capita estimate accounts for all office space currently existing in the county, including occupied and vacant space. In our opinion, the trade area analysis prepared below best illustrates need for office space in this area of limited support facilities. Within the TAZ Trade Area, the Consultant has determined that by the year 2030, the permanent population will reach approximately 53,276 persons. The Consultant's population forecast for the TAZ Trade Area is shown in Table 16. Additionally, Table 16 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table 16. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Without the Proposed Amendment furce: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraisers Office, Collier Cou Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 37 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 77 of 218 Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sgft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 4005 17.3 69,388 156,940 2.26 Population (2000) 13684 17.3 237,081 156,940 0.66 Population (2010) 27138 17.3 470,175 156,940 0.33 Population (2015) 31618 17.3 547,791 156,940 0.29 Population (2020) 35136 17.3 608,741 156,940 0.26 Population (2030) 39408 17.3 682,766 156,940 0.23 furce: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraisers Office, Collier Cou Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 37 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 77 of 218 • According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.23. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. 8.0 Conclusions for TAZ Trade Area Taking into account all developed, vacant and FLUM designated commercial land in the market; there is currently an insufficient degree of flexibility in the market's ability to accommodate future demand. The 2030 retail allocation ratio, including the Randall Blvd Commercial Sub District, Estates Shopping Center sub district and excluding the subject is estimated at 1.12 indicating a tight relationship between the demand for, and the supply of, retail space in the future. The 2030 office allocation ratio also indicates a tight relationship between the demand for, and supply of, office space. The commercial retail and commercial office components of this Project are designed to serve the community and neighborhood demand for commercial space. The location provides the access and visibility that are required for this type of development. The size and functional utility of the site offers the development of sufficient retail offerings which will limit future sprawl. The under - allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for the additional commercial acreage. 9.0 Conclusions for Comparison between Custom Trade Area in relation to the TAZ Trade Area Above we have analyzed the commercial retail and commercial office demand for both the custom trade area and the TAZ trade area. The TAZ Trade area encompasses the Custom Trade Area and is the main source for planning in Collier County throughout the Comprehensive Planning Department. Analysis of both areas indicates a need for additional retail and office uses, Located below we have prepared summary comparing the findings from each trade area. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 38 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 78 of 218 • Table 17. Comparison of Allocation Ratios between the Custom Trade Area and the TAZ Trade Area. General Commercial 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) TAZ Area 249,333 344,845 413,175 Market Retail Demand ( sq.ft) Custom Trade Area 149,068 237,253 309,462 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand TAZ Area 0.44 0.32 0.26 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand Custon Trade Area 0.73 0.46 0.35 FLUM Potential Supply 12,932 212,932 353,882 Total Supply w/FLUM Potential (including Randall Center) 122,139 322,139 463,089 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential TAZ Area 0.49 0.93 1.12 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential Custom Trade Area 0.82 1.36 1.50 Estates Shopping Center Sub district 190,000 190,000 Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand TAZArea 0.49 1.49 1.58 Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand Custom Trade Area 0.82 2.16 2.11 The comparison between both trade areas indicates a need for commercial retail uses. This area of the county is expected to experience the highest rate of growth over the next 20 years. The analysis above quantifies the demand based on the projected increases from the county. The practical consideration for this retail supply is also evident by the support of the residents during the straw vote done during the November election. Located below are graphs to illustrate the comparison in allocation ratios between the custom trade area and the TAZ trade area. The last graph shows the comparison of the allocation ratios including both the Randall Center and the Estates Shopping Center sub district. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 39 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 79 of 218 8A Figure 5. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Estates Shopping Center Sub District with existing commercial uses only. Figure 6. Comparison of Allocation Ratios for Estates Shopping Center Sub district with existing and FLUM uses. General Commercialw /FLUM 1.60 1.40 1.20 --------------- --- 1.00 - --� - - -- 0.80 0.60 - -- 0.40 ----- --- _.___._--.__..._- - - -- 0.20 0.00 - 2010 2020 2030 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential TAZ Area — Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential Custom Trade Area Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 40 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 80 of 218 General Commerical Existing 0.80 0.70 -- - - -- _ -- - - - 0.60 - 0.50 0.40 0.30 _- 0.20 0.10 0.00 — — 2010 2020 2030 —Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand TAZ Area I— — Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand Custon Trade Area - - --- - - - -- - -- - -- Figure 6. Comparison of Allocation Ratios for Estates Shopping Center Sub district with existing and FLUM uses. General Commercialw /FLUM 1.60 1.40 1.20 --------------- --- 1.00 - --� - - -- 0.80 0.60 - -- 0.40 ----- --- _.___._--.__..._- - - -- 0.20 0.00 - 2010 2020 2030 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential TAZ Area — Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential Custom Trade Area Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 40 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 80 of 218 ME Figure 6. Comparison of Allocation Ratios for Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict with existing and FLUM uses. Inclusive of Both Centers 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 -- 0.50 0.00 — 1 2 3 — Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand TAZ Area — Allocation Ratio Supply and Demand Custom Trade Area Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 41 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 81 of 218 APPENDIX 1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRCT MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS RETAIL DEMAND METHODOLOGY 1.0 Methodology The methodology employed in the analysis of the demand for retail space at this site is based on a consumer expenditures model. This model can estimate the aggregate market demand for retail space, the demand for retail space at a specific location, and the effective supply of competing retailers in the area. The net demand for retail space at the location being studied is determined as the difference between the site demand and the effective supply of competition. 2.0 Aggregate Market - Retail Demand Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ( "Fishkind ") has developed an in -house model to determine retail demand. This model estimates retail demand by square footage, shopping center type and store type. The model incorporates multiple data sources. These sources are census based (1- Site") local area households, local area household income data, and local area consumer expenditure profiles from the U.S. Department of Labor, Department of Revenue Gross Sales data, and Urban Land Institute shopping center tenant profiles, square footage requirements and average sales per square foot by store type from the publication Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The model operates by first determining retail household expenditures for market area households. Expenditures are determined through application of the results of the 2000 Consumer Expenditure Survey, conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor. This survey of over 30,000 households nationwide provides detailed information on average dollar expenditure amounts and the expenditure percent of household income, for all household expenditures. The income expenditure percentage is determined for the specific market area and then applied to the average local area household income and multiplied by the number of households to determine market area spending potential for retail store goods. Next, the historic Department of Revenue (DOR) Sales data (for the county in question) is indexed by tenant classification 4, from the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The expected expenditures on retail goods are then applied to this county specific (DOR) index to determine an estimate of spending by major store type (tenant classification). The determination of sales by retail center (neighborhood, community, regional, super - regional) is determined through the construction of an index of surveyed sales by center type (also located in the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers). Supportable square feet of a retail center is determined by applying the average sales per square foot of GLA, found in Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, to the expected sales by store type (tenant classification). In addition to determining the supportable square feet of retail ° Tenant Classification are: general merchandise, food, food service, clothing and accessories, shoes, home furnishings, home appliances /music, building materials and hardware, automotive, hobby /special interest, gifts /specialty, jewelry, liquor, drugs, other retail, personal services, entertainment/community. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 42 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 82 of 218 *8A space, Fishkind & Associates has determined the expected sales by DOR retail classification, which is a subset of the individual store types (tenant classifications). Provided below are income and expenditure data utilized in the analysis. Custom Trade Area - Households & Incomes Year HHs Median HH Income Total Income 2010 4,523 $59,839 $270,651,480 2020 6,719 $64,109 $430,762,613 2030 8,181 $68,683 $561,867,214 TAZ Trade Area - Households & Incomes Year HHs Median HH Income Total Income 2010 7,717 $58,527 $451,654,548 2020 9,991 $62,521 $624,670,106 2030 11,206 $66,788 $748,446,266 Source: Collier County PA; ]-Site Census -based Demographics Package Note: HH Income figures are inflation adjusted; not nominal Note: Calculations in figure reflect rounding Income Expenditure Percentages INCOME EXPENDITURE % ON RETAIL 32.49% Source: I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package Retail GENERAL MERCHANDISE FOOD FOOD SERVICE CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES SHOES HOME FURNISHINGS HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE AUTOMOTNE HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST GIFT / SPECALTY JEWLERY LIQUOR DRUGS OTHER RETAIL PERSONAL SERVICERS ENTERTAINMENT TOTAL Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis For Project's Custom Trade Area Expenditures and Square Foot Supportability Total Experditure SQFT Supportable 2010 2020 2030 2010 2020 2030 $1,264,511 $2,012,566 $2,625,100 8,904 14,172 18,485 $9,928,427 $15,801,854 $20,611,221 28,901 45,999 59,999 $4,267,764 $6,792,474 $8,859,795 16,592 26,408 34,445 $599,541 $954,216 $1,244,636 3,119 4,964 6,474 $48,837 $77,728 $101,385 253 403 525 $2,328,478 $3,705,952 $4,833,875 11,966 19,045 24,841 $840,755 $1,338,126 $1,745,391 3,626 5,771 7,527 $3,184,524 $5,068,415 $6,611,010 19,678 31,319 40,851 $10,244,303 $16,304,594 $21,266,973 38,383 61,089 79,681 WITH GIFT /SPECIALTY WITH GIFT /SPECIALTY $456,232 $726,128 $947,129 2,929 4,661 6,080 $68,498 $109,021 $142,201 167 266 347 WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE $494,890 $787,655 $1,027,381 1,260 2,005 2,615 $488,314 $777,190 $1,013,731 2,407 3,830 4,996 $288,688 $459,470 $599,312 2,036 3,240 4,226 $773,823 $1,231,598 $1,606,441 8,848 14,082 18,368 $35,277,585 $56,146,985 $73,235,581 149,068 237,253 309,462 43 Page 83 of 218 For Project's TAZ Trade Area 8 A Retail Expenditures and Square Foot Supportability Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Distribution by Store Type DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE Total Expenditures SQFT Supportable GENERAL MERCHANDISE 2010 2020 2030 2010 2020 2030 GENERAL MERCHANDISE $2,115,041 $2,925,251 $3,504,879 14,894 20,599 24,681 FOOD $16,606,449 $22,967,891 $27,518,897 48,341 66,859 80,107 FOOD SERVICE $7,138,332 $9,872,816 $11,829,080 27,752 38,383 45,989 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES $1,002,802 $1,386,946 $1,661,765 5,216 7,215 8,644 SHOES $81,686 $112,977 $135,363 423 585 701 HOME FURNISHINGS $3,894,651 $5,386,576 $6,453,907 20,015 27,682 33,167 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $1,406,261 $1,944,958 $2,330,344 6,065 8,388 10,050 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE $5,326,487 $7,366,908 $8,826,634 32,913 45,521 54,541 AUTOMOTIVE $17,134,788 $23,698,621 $28,394,419 64,199 88,792 106,386 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIFT /SPECIALTY WITH GIFT /SPECIALTY GIFT /SPECIALTY $763,101 $1,055,423 $1,264,551 4,899 6,775 8,118 JEWLERY $114,572 $158,461 $189,859 279 386 463 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS $827,760 $1,144,851 $1,371,699 2,107 2,914 3,491 OTHER RETAIL $816,763 $1,129,640 $1,353,475 4,025 5,567 6,671 PERSONAL SERVICERS $482,865 $667,836 $800,166 3,405 4,709 5,642 ENTERTAINMENT $1,294,309 $1,790,120 $2,144,826 14,799 20,468 24,524 TOTAL $59,005,866 $81,609,276 $97,779,863 249,333 344,845 413,175 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Distribution by Store Type DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% FOOD 15.27% FOOD SERVICE 10.73% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% SHOES 0.37% HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 11.73% AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% JEWLERY 0.56% LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% OTHER RETAIL 1.44% PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Uepartment or Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 44 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 84 of 218 Index of Sales by Center Type 6'8 a INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD *COMMUNITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.0804% 17.7493% FOOD 50.1268% 47.9941% FOOD SERVICE 16.2423% 58.1773% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.7763% 26.9659% SHOES 2.1635% 25.4356% HOME FURNISHINGS 4.8325% 65.0722% HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 4.5826% 43.0018% BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 8.3074% 45.2640% AUTOMOTIVE 0.0000% 100.0000% HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST With Gifts and Specialty GIFT /SPECIALTY 7.06% 41.68% JEWLERY 2.0271% 11.8288% LIQUOR 34.2238% 65.7762% DRUGS 36.8476% 56.2922% OTHER RETAIL 11.3333% 54.8145% PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.9793% 49.1430% ENTERTAINMENT 8.75266/6 34.4114% Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Hevenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute *Note: Consultant has utilized only 50% of Community Center Sales Shown Above to Account for Projects Outside of the Trade Area that Will Capture a Portion of Retail Spending from Households within the Periphery of the Market. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 45 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 85 of 218 s , Median Sales per Square Foot of GLA Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 46 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 86 of 218 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY MED /SF MED $ /SF GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 FOOD 347.1 336.3 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 SHOES 165.39 198.66 HOME FURNISHINGS 147.35 204.32 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 137.85 271.31 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 143.3 169.9 AUTOMOTIVE n/a 266.9 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST 163.15 201.46 GIFT /SPECIALTY 186.32 147.58 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 LIQUOR 254.1 321.25 DRUGS 408.4 374.26 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 PERSONAL SERVICERS 127.73 158.14 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 88 Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 46 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 86 of 218 68 A Retail Demand Calculation Guide Calculated figures are highlighted in yellow. Please note, this guide reflects calculations for year 2010 retail demand only. Repeat the same steps below for each year covered in the analysis. Figure 1 Source: I -Site Census -based Demographics Package & Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Please note not all tlgures above are whole numbers, and as such may yield slightly different results if hand - calculated. Figure 1 above: Column `C' (Total Market Income) = Column 'A' (x) Column 'B' Figure 1 above: Column `E' (Income Available for Retail) = Column 'C' (x) Column 'D' Figure 2 A B C I D E 1 %1 Allocation Expenditures IS7 Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year HHS AVG HH Income Income % Retail 2010 4,523 $59,839 $270,651,797 32.4198% $87,744,771 Source: I -Site Census -based Demographics Package & Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Please note not all tlgures above are whole numbers, and as such may yield slightly different results if hand - calculated. Figure 1 above: Column `C' (Total Market Income) = Column 'A' (x) Column 'B' Figure 1 above: Column `E' (Income Available for Retail) = Column 'C' (x) Column 'D' Figure 2 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc, Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 47 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 87 of 218 A_ B DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE ALL CENTER TYPES 1 %1 Allocation Expenditures IS7 GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% $12,702,238 FOOD 15.27% $13,394,416 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $9,414,700 CLOTHING &ACCESSORIES 4.48% $3,929,033 SHOES 0.37% $328,176 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $6,231,130 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% $3,223,329 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 11.73% $10,292,805 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $20,488,659 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIFTS /SPECIALTY GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% $1,635,358 JEWLERY 0.56% $494,847 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $761,443 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $1,260,476 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $607,117 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $2.981,033 Total 100.00% $87,744,771 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc, Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 47 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 87 of 218 Figure 2 above: Column 'B' (Expenditures by Store Tenant Classification) = 8 A Column 'E' from Figure 1 allocated along the distribution in column 'A' Figure 2. Figure 3 "Reflects only 50% of total community center expenditures Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 3 above: Columns 'C' & 'D' (Expenditures by Store Center Type) = Expenditures by each tenant classification (each row item in Figure 2, Column 'B') allocated across the distributions in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 3. Please note Column 'D' in Figure 3 above reflects a reduction of 50% of the calculated total for community center expenditures (see full report for further information). Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 48 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 88 of 218 A B C D E INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER Neighborho od Center Community Center Neighborhood Center `Community Center Allocation Allocation ( %) Expenditures ($) Expenditures (s) TOTAL o� GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.08% 17.75% $137,231 $ 1,127,279 $1,264,510 FOOD 50.13% 47.99% $6,714,168 $ 3,214,258 $9,928,426 FOOD SERVICE 16.24% 58.18% $1,529,160 $ 2,738,603 $4,267,763 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.78% 26.97% _ $69,792 $ 529,749 $599,541 SHOES 2.16% 25.44% $7,100 $ 41,737 $48,837 HOME FURNISHINGS 4.83% 65.07% $301,117 $ 2,027,360 $2,328,477 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 4.58% 43.00% $147,711 $ 693,044 $840,755 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 8.31% 45.26% $855,061 $ 2,329,462 $3,184,523 AUTOMOTIVE 0.00% 100.00% $0.00 $ 10,244,303 $10,244,303 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST GIFT /SPECIALTY WITH GIFTS 7.06% /SPECIALTY 41.68% WITH GIFTS /SPECIALTY $115,421 $ 340,810 $456,231 JEWLERY 2.03% 11.83% $10031 $ 58,467 $68498 LIQUOR DRUGS WITH FOOD 36.85% SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE 56.29% $280,573 $ 214,316 $494,889 OTHER RETAIL 11.33% 54.81% $142,853 $ 345,461 $488,314 PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.98% 49.14% $139,510.89 $ 149,178 $288,689 ENTERTAINMENT 8.75% 34.41% $260,916.20 $ 512,907 $773,823 TOTAL $10,710,650 $24,566,934 $35,277,584 "Reflects only 50% of total community center expenditures Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 3 above: Columns 'C' & 'D' (Expenditures by Store Center Type) = Expenditures by each tenant classification (each row item in Figure 2, Column 'B') allocated across the distributions in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 3. Please note Column 'D' in Figure 3 above reflects a reduction of 50% of the calculated total for community center expenditures (see full report for further information). Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 48 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 88 of 218 W d Figure 4 -" Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department at Revenue; ln Dollars & Cents Or Sn000a Centers - uroan Lana Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 4 above: Columns 'C' &'D' (Square Feet Supportability) = Expenditures by center type (each row item in Figure 3, Column 'C' and Column 'D') divided by the respective median sales /sqft in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 4. Figure 4 above: Columns 'E' (Total Site Square Feet Supportability) = Figure 4, Column 'C' plus column 'D.' 3.0 Determination of Expected Location Sales & Impacts to Competition The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.2. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base -line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 49 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 89 of 218 A B C D E NEIGHBORHOO D COMMUNIT Y NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY TOTAL SITE MED /SF MED /SF SOFT SUPPORTABILIT SSG FT SUPPORTABILIT SOFT SUPPORTABILIT Y Y Y GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 1,332 7572 8904 FOOD 347.1 336.3 19,344 9558 28901 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 6,818 9774 16592 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 416 2703 3119 SHOES 165.39 198.66 43 210 253 HOMEFURNISHINGS 147.35 204.32 2,044 9922 11966 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 137.85 271.31 1,072 2554 3626 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 143'3 169.9 5,967 13711 19678 AUTOMOTIVE n/a 266.9 0 38383 38383 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST 163.15 201.46 - -- GIFT /SPECIALTY 186.32 147.58 619 2309 2929 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 36 131 167 LIQUOR 254.1 321.25 - -- DRUGS 408.4 374.26 687 573 1260 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 897 1509 2407 PERSONAL SERVICERS 127.73 158.14 1 1,092 943 2036 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 68 3,020 5828 6848 TOTAL 43,386 105,682 149,068 -" Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department at Revenue; ln Dollars & Cents Or Sn000a Centers - uroan Lana Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 4 above: Columns 'C' &'D' (Square Feet Supportability) = Expenditures by center type (each row item in Figure 3, Column 'C' and Column 'D') divided by the respective median sales /sqft in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 4. Figure 4 above: Columns 'E' (Total Site Square Feet Supportability) = Figure 4, Column 'C' plus column 'D.' 3.0 Determination of Expected Location Sales & Impacts to Competition The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.2. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base -line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 49 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 89 of 218 then applied to the estimate of existing store space to determine a total "base -line' sales estimate. This "base -line' estimate will be less than the total potential expenditures. Therefore, an estimate of excess spending can be made from the difference between the estimated total expenditures and the "base -line' estimate. After the determination of "base -line' sales per square foot and excess sales per square foot, the proposed project needs to be added to the supply of retail space. At this point adjusted total sales can be determined from the "base- line" sales per square foot and the adjusted supply of retail space (existing plus proposed). The adjusted excess spending, as a result of the proposed retail project, is determined by the difference between the (adjusted) "base- line" expected spending and the estimate of total expenditures. An estimation of the expected sales for the proposed project is determined by the size of the project and the total estimated spending per square foot, which is the "base -line' sales per square foot plus the adjusted excess spending per square foot as a result of the project. The final impact to sales per square foot of competing retailers in the market surrounding the proposed project is calculated as the difference between the excess sales per square foot, with and without the proposed project. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 50 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 90 of 218 APPENDIX 2 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ^6"- K2bt 4 WWI W-1i W ti • q s � v W PUD __ PLANNED UNIT .• _ `` — ♦,� DEVELOPMENTS, . ® PUD INDUSTRIAL COMMERICALAND INDUSTRIAL - INDUSTRIAL - ZONING ♦ ♦.0 -�' —- -COMMERCIAL Legend W PUD __ O PUD COMMERCIAL .• _ `` — ♦,� Lagend Q ^�"�'v+�- �.r,.000c W �n ® PUD INDUSTRIAL _ - INDUSTRIAL - ♦ ♦.0 -�' -COMMERCIAL Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis 51 Page 91 of 218 • ` • , APPENDIX 3 Letter to Mr. Mark Strain, Chairman of the Collier County Planning Commission explaining the 2.0 allocation ratio methodology. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 52 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 92 of 218 FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES MOLL M6 IL k. k MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Explanation of 2.0 allocation ratio DATE: October 2, 2008 VIA: E -Mail .I At your request, the following is an explanation of the 2.0 allocation ratio used in the data and analysis reports we provide to the County during Comprehensive Plan land use changes. The explanation begins with the data and analysis requirements in Rule 9J -5 (2). The rule states the following (with our emphasis added): "(2) Data and Analyses Requirements. (a) All goals, objectives, policies, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents, and within plan amendments and their support documents, shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and the analyses applicable to each element. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. Data or summaries thereof shall not be subject to the compliance review process. However, the Department will review each comprehensive plan for the purpose of determining whether the plan is based on the data and analyses described in this chapter and whether the data were collected and applied in a professionally acceptable manner. All tables, charts, graphs, maps, figures and data sources, and their limitations, shall be clearly described where such data occur in the above documents. Local governments are encouraged to use graphics and other techniques for making support information more readily useable by the public. Page 93 of 218 • (b) This chapter shall not be construed to require original data collection by local government; however, local governments are encouraged to utilize any original data necessary to update or refine the local government comprehensive plan data base so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. (c) Data are to be taken from professionally accepted existing sources, such as the United States Census, State Data Center, State University System of Florida, regional planning councils, water management districts, or existing technical studies. The data used shall be the best available existing data, unless the local government desires original data or special studies. Where data augmentation, updates, or special studies or surveys are deemed necessary by local government, appropriate methodologies shall be clearly described or referenced and shall meet professionally accepted standards for such methodologies. Among the sources available to local governments are those identified in "The Guide to Local Comprehensive Planning Data Sources' published by the Department in 1989. Among the sources of data for preliminary identification of wetland locations are the National Wetland Inventory Maps prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (d) Primary data sources such as United States Census reports, other government data documents, local computerized data, and original map sheets used to compile required maps need not be printed in their entirety within either the support documents or the comprehensive plan. Summaries of support documents shall be submitted to the Department along with the comprehensive plan at the time of compliance review to aid in the Department's determination of compliance and consistency. As a local alternative to providing data and analyses summaries, complete data and analyses sufficient to support the comprehensive plan may be submitted to the Department at the time of compliance review. The Department may require submission of the complete or more detailed data or analyses during its compliance review if, in the opinion of the Department, the summaries are insufficient to determine compliance or consistency of the plan. (e) The comprehensive plan shall be based on resident and seasonal population estimates and projections. Resident and seasonal population estimates and projections shall be either those provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, those provided by the Executive Office of the Governor, or shall be generated by the local government. If the local government chooses to base its plan on the figures provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, medium range projections should be utilized. If the local government chooses to base its plan on either low or high range projections provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, a detailed description of the rationale for such a choice shall be included with such projections." A variety of studies are used when we undertake a needs analysis within the State of Florida. They are basically broken down into three categories depending on the type of land use being studied. They are residential needs analysis, commercial needs analysis and a peculiar needs analysis that economically does not fit the standard residential and commercial models. Our analysis has evolved over time with input primarily coming from County Staff with regard to the analysis at hand. In looking at comprehensive plan changes, we first must collect the data that goes into the analysis. That data includes population estimates, existing inventory, approved inventory and potential inventory. 2 Page 94 of 218 ME With regard to population estimates, we generally try to use the population data that is used by the County when and where it is available. Our second source is the population data from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) at the University of Florida. Our third source is I -Site, Site Selection Software, produced by GeoVue, Inc. These estimates and projections are compiled by Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc. AGS uses historic Census data from 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; USPS and commercial source ZIP +4 level delivery statistics; Census Bureau population estimates and projections at varying levels of geographic detail; Internal Revenue Service statistics on tax filers and year -to -year migration; as well as the Census Bureaus Current Population Survey. The next required data set pertains to the particular land use we are analyzing. We primarily utilize the Collier County Property Appraiser data to determine the existing inventory of that particular land use, the approved inventory of that land use and finally all of the lands on the Future Land Use Map that have potential for that particular land use. We have also used data sources provided by Collier County staff such as the commercial inventory list and the planned unit development list. We then use a variety of models from retail demand gravity models to office employment demand models to determine the current and future demand for the land use type in the designated market area. The future demand generally looks out to the Comprehensive Plan's horizon year, which is currently either 2030 or 2035 depending on the jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and growth management plan horizon year requirements. It is at this point of the analysis that has caused an anomaly in determining a true economic supply and demand result. On the supply side, it is relatively easy to determine the amount of existing and approved supply from the property appraiser data. The difficulty lies in the vacant non - approved potential lands. The staff has required us to take all of those lands that have a commercial or residential overlay on them and include them as supply by putting a floor area ratio figure to the acreage. The issue becomes apparent when all of the lands that are not in the existing or approved category are included in the particular land use analysis. By putting all of the potential lands in the supply category, the assumption is that all of that land would be developed as that particular land use and nothing else. For example in the case of the Airport - Corradi parcel, there were 117 potential commercial parcels totaling 270.68 acres in the 20 minute drive time market (Table 1 on the next page). Those parcels represent a potential of 1,469,723 square feet of office space. Page 95 of 218 Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial -Office Space in Project's Market Existing # of Parcels 340 Acres 457.97 Square Feet 2.549,138 Vacant # of Parcels 523 Square -Feet 1 6 # of Parcels 117 Acres 270.68 Total Acres 1 1821.24 Square Feet 1,10,093,867 - Source: Collier County Property Appraiser 'Assumed 5,430 square feet per acre based on market average There are a number of flaws in the representation of total capacity (supply) which suggest a greater number of acres be designated in the Comprehensive Plan than would be indicated simply by an analysis of forecast demand. First, all of those vacant approved parcels and parcels designated by the Future Land Use Map ( "FLUM ") as having the potential to be developed as office, in reality, also have the potential to be retail space or some other commercial use. The same parcels are also counted as competing supply when a commercial needs analysis is performed for another commercial use. To include these lands in both retail and office analyses would be double counting the supply. These lands will actually be developed as the market demand dictates, with some lands used for office and the remainder for retail and other permissible uses. A general economic principal states that all markets are efficient and that supply for the most part is generated as demand dictates. It is a rare situation where supply generates demand. Second, though the lands in question are designated with a FLUM category, this does not mean that 100% of these lands are developable. Within these lands there may be wetland areas, conservation areas, water bodies, incompatible adjacent uses, policy setback requirements, drainage and road requirements and infrastructure or access constraints. As a result of these and other myriad conditions, the maximum density /intensity of lands designated through the FLUM does not represent the holding capacity of these lands. Typically, development thresholds are found to be from 50% to 75% of maximum allowable density due to the physical characteristics of the land. M LIM Page 96 of 218 - Third, while lands are designated with a FLUM land use, there is no requirement tt�g be used at all over the planning horizon. Many properties are held in land bank trusts, held by absentee owners, held in estate transfer litigation or held in family ownership with no intent or desire to use or sell the land. Florida and Collier County in particular have very large tracts of land held in long term family trusts where lands are not developed or are purposefully held off the market. In these and other similar instances, a land use designation on the FLUM does not assure the capacity allocated to these lands will be available to accommodate future growth within the planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. Fourth, even if all the lands designated were developable and available it would be inappropriate to limit supply to exactly the level of forecast demand, represented by a ratio of 1:1 where there is one acre of land supply allocated for every acre of land demand identified. Doing so would limit choices, limit market flexibility and constrain the market. Constraining supply will drive prices artificially high and decrease the attractiveness of the market due to price. For example in choosing a new home one does not typically look at only one house in the selection process. The selection process may involve multiple properties, perhaps a dozen or more. So too for commercial land investments, choice and flexibility are required in the selection process. Fifth, the supply of land is determined and allocated such that it will accommodate the forecast demand. The forecast demand is most often based on population forecasts provided by the University of Florida Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BEBR). Research has shown the BEBR forecasts to be highly accurate in locations where the local economic structure does not change substantially over time. In locations where structural change does occur, the error rate for BEBR medium forecasts can be from 30% to more than 100% too low in terms of forecasting population levels over a 25 year forecast period. Rapidly growing locations, locations which benefit from major highway or interstate expansions, locations which benefit from enhanced airport facilities and locations which benefit from major employer locations are all examples of conditions which represent structural change and tend to result in faster population growth than is forecast in the BEBR projections. Collier County is subject to these structural change forces, and as such, it can be expected that BEBR forecasts will have a comparatively higher degree of error than in other locations across the State. This supports the need for additional flexibility in the allocation of developable land to accommodate a higher probability of population forecast error. Table 2 on the next page documents the analysis of forecast error findings. 5 Page 97 of 218 Table 2. Comparison of Long -Term Population Projections Source: Projections of Florida Population Bulletin 33, June 1975, U. FL and US Census 2000 These conditions have been well documented and supported in administrative hearings. In the course of the evolution of Florida's comprehensive planning process, allocation of land in the FLUM often exceeds the 1:1 ratio. In general, the allocation ratio of between 2.0 and 2.5 has been determined to be a reasonable level, has been supported in administrative legal hearings and has been implicitly adopted in comprehensive plans across the State. To account for the conditions described above, comprehensive plan FLUMs typically represent an allocation of acres for land use by category in excess of a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage over the course of development in the jurisdiction to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. For the reasons discussed, the additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing, to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, and that the property will develop at historic average densities, not maximum allowable densities, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. As a result of these discussions, analyses and rulings, growth management practices have evolved such that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market as shown in the discussion regarding population forecasts and structural change. Fishkind believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 2.0 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the multiple sets of conditions which might otherwise restrict land usage. M Page 98 of 218 1975 BEBR Year 2000 projections for 2000 Actual Variance Counties Flagler 21,700 _ 49,832 - 129.6% with St. Johns 71,000 123,135 -73.4% Structural Lake 143,300 210,527 -46.9% Shift Marion 191,000 258,916 -35.6% St. Lucie 149,800 192,695 -28.6% Counties DeSoto 36,700 32,209 12.2% without Highlands 81,400 87,366 -73% Structural Polk 471,300 483,924 -2.7% Shift Pasco 343,600 344,768 -0.3% Counties with Shift Total 576,800 835,105 -44.8% Counties without Shift Total 933,000 948,267 -1.6% Source: Projections of Florida Population Bulletin 33, June 1975, U. FL and US Census 2000 These conditions have been well documented and supported in administrative hearings. In the course of the evolution of Florida's comprehensive planning process, allocation of land in the FLUM often exceeds the 1:1 ratio. In general, the allocation ratio of between 2.0 and 2.5 has been determined to be a reasonable level, has been supported in administrative legal hearings and has been implicitly adopted in comprehensive plans across the State. To account for the conditions described above, comprehensive plan FLUMs typically represent an allocation of acres for land use by category in excess of a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage over the course of development in the jurisdiction to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. For the reasons discussed, the additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing, to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, and that the property will develop at historic average densities, not maximum allowable densities, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. As a result of these discussions, analyses and rulings, growth management practices have evolved such that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market as shown in the discussion regarding population forecasts and structural change. Fishkind believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 2.0 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the multiple sets of conditions which might otherwise restrict land usage. M Page 98 of 218 ME Although the allocation ratio figure has fluctuated over time depending on who is reviewing the amendment at the state level, Fishkind's recent experience with the Florida Department of Community Affairs indicates that the DCA has seen and approved allocation ratios in the 1.8 to 2.4 range and in some cases even larger allocation ratios for longer forecast horizons. Otherwise, if allocation ratios are not used in the analysis, the likely outcome is the Comprehensive Plan will fail to adequately accommodate growth resulting in higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and a less efficient pattern of growth which results from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. 7 Page 99 of 218 1 FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES &6L L O L MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Examples of 2.0 Allocation Ratio Acceptance DATE: October 2, 2008 VIA: E -Mail Mark, You have asked for specific examples where the Allocation Ratio measurement has been used elsewhere. Here is one example of a legal case and two other examples in Florida where is has been approved and accepted by both the local jurisdiction and in some cases the Department of Community Affairs. Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. versus Department of Community Affairs In the matter Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. (PCC) vs. Department of Community Affairs (DCA), a petition was filed by PCC to challenge DCA's finding that the West Bay Detailed Specific Area Plan (WB DSAP) was in compliance as an amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan. The findings of fact in this case include item #92 which reads: "In addition to projecting population growth and assessing capacity to accommodate growth an allocation needs ratio (or multiplier) is necessary to ensure housing affordability and variety in the market; otherwise, the supply and demand relationship is too tight, which may cause a rapid escalation of housing prices. Because the farther in time a local government projects growth, the less accurate those projections tend to be, actual need is multiplied by an allocation needs ratio to produce an additional increment of residential land to accommodate this potential error." Page 100 of 218 • Finding #93 states: "Small Counties that experience above - normal growth rates may use allocation ratios as high as three more in order to realistically allocate sufficient buildable land for future growth. The County's allocation ratio of 2.2 before the WB DSAP and FLUM amendments was low from a long term forecasting perspective. When the WB DSAP amendments are factored into the allocation ratio, such growth would raise the allocation ratio to 2.3, which is still relatively low." Further, in finding #94 it is stated: "A land use plan should allow for sufficient inventory to accommodate demand and to provide some choice in order to react to economic factors." The Administrative Law Judge found the proposed land use amendments in compliance with section 163.3184 (1) (b) in part because the demonstration of need with respect to the allocation ratio indicated the allocation ratio of 2.3 was too low to properly accommodate projected future growth over the planning horizon. Acceptance of 2.0 Allocation Ratio in the case of Newberry Village Retail in Alachua County Newberry Village is a development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. A comprehensive plan change was required to allow for this use in the County. The applicant performed a commercial needs analysis as a requirement for their data and analysis portion of their application. The analysis is attached as Exhibit A. The Florida Department of Community Affairs found the plan amendment compliant with no requests for further data analysis. We have attached the notification of compliance as Exhibit B. City of Leesburg. Florida implicit Allocation Ratio The City of Leesburg, Florida has an adopted comprehensive plan where the implicit residential allocation ratio of 2.5 is embedded in the plan. The estimated land requirement projections are found in the approved 2003 Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan on page III -17. The Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan indicates an allocation ratio of 2.5 in the following passage: "Based on figures provided by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, a total of 8,295 dwelling units will be needed to serve the household population of the City by year 2010 ...... the City will be able to accommodate approximately 13,292 additional units, for a total of 21,031 residential units by 2010." 2 Page 101 of 218 M • ! Given the 2010 demand for 8,295 units and 21,031 unit capacity, the empirical allocation ratio found is 2.5 in the current and approved 2003 Leesburg Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Allocation Ratios of other Florida Counties with updated Comprehensive Plans Allocation ratios are not only used in analyzing commercial comprehensive plan amendment changes. The ratios are also used in analyzing residential comprehensive plan amendment changes as noted here and in the City of Leesburg, Florida above. In reviewing a number of needs analysis reports submitted for residential comprehensive plan amendment changes around the state, Fishkind has discovered that there are number of counties across the state that have substantial allocation ratios that are embedded in their comprehensive plans. Fishkind has analyzed allocation ratios in counties across the state with recently updated comprehensive plans that have been approved by the Department of Community Affairs. As shown in Table 5.6.1, the future land use maps of these counties contain allocation ratios that are consistent with those suggested by Fishkind. Table 5.6.1. Allocation Ratios in other Florida Counties County Allocation Patio Iorecast Horizon (years) Hendry 5.38 15 St. Johns 3.18 15 Nassau 4.54 15 Martin 3.91 15 Indian Pi =er 4.61 11 Source: Fishkind and Associates, Inc The counties noted above have incorporated significant allocation ratios into their comprehensive plans to adequately accommodate growth and limit higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and less efficient patterns of growth which result from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. Page 102 of 216 EXHIBIT A Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis m • a • Page 103 of 218 Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis Prepared For: NewUrban WORKS Development Prepared By: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 12501 Corporate Blvd. Orlando, Florida 32817 (407) 382 -3256 October 25, 2005 Page 104 of 218 Table Of Contents Section Title Page 1.0 Introduction ............................................ ............................... 1 2.0 Current market Conditions ...................... ............................... 2 3.0 Community -Type Retail Allocation Ratio . ............................... 3 4.0 Need for Additional Community -Type Retail Zoning ............... 3 5.0 Conclusion ............................................. ............................... 4 _. Appendix 1 — Existing Competitive Supply Appendix 2 — Vacant Future Supply Appendix 3 — 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics g 1 Page 105 of 218 • 1 — Retail Needs 1.Q Introduction 1.1 Purpose This report analyzes the need to amend the Alachua County Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the proposed Newberry Village development. The development program calls for development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. 1.2 Overview of needs analysis In the context of amending the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Alachua County the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. Typically, this takes the form of a comparison of: • The supply of existing land currently planned for retail uses • The demand for retail lands based on market conditions The applicant must determine whether there is sufficient supply of retail land in the Plan to accommodate future retail space demand. The analysis was conducted based on a 20 minute drive time market area surrounding the project site, comparing demand and supply, both existing and future, within the project market area. The retail market study further considered both demand and supply for community -type retail space only. Figure 1 shows the 20 minute drive time market area. Fiaure 1 — 20 Minute Drive l ime Market Area i is i l rwaow LLkL aeL LL c Page 1 of 8 Page 106 of 218 — Retail Needs 2.0 Current Market Conditions 2.1 Existing Supply The community -type retail supply in the market was determined using the US Shopping Center directory, listing community type retail centers in Alachua County. Based on a gravity model of retail shopping patterns, calibrated for local market conditions, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. determined the effective competitive retail square footage surrounding the site, applicable to the subject location. Of 1.6 million square feet of community type retail space within 20 minutes of the site, Fishkind determined 1.3 million square feet of this existing supply directly competes with community type retail space at the subject site. Appendix 1 lists the existing competitive community -type shopping centers within 20 a minute drive time of the site, the square feet associated with each center, and its competitive characteristics based on the market conditions. 2.2 Future Supply To determine future supply, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. examined all vacant commercial parcels within the 20 minute market area. Vacant commercial parcels as designated by the Property Appraiser were then checked for current zoning. Parcels with current zoning of Business (BR), highway oriented business (BH), and Automotive (BA) were determined to represent competitive vacant supply. The analysis showed there are 38 vacant parcels meeting the criteria for future competitive supply. The criteria include, vacant parcels having the required zoning, and of sufficient size to accommodate community -type retail space, meaning parcels generally greater than 10 acres and less than 30 acres in size. Parcels with proper zoning in excess of 30 acres were excluded, as these more appropriately accommodate regional -type retail demand. Parcels with proper zoning under 10 acres were excluded as these more appropriately accommodate neighborhood -type retail demand. Numerous parcels under 10 acres were also included in the analysis as these are parcels with adjacency allowing combined parcel sizes of approximately 10 acres or greater. The sum total of competitive sites is 215 acres. An additional 57.7 acres were added to the supply based on further planning analysis of properties which appear to qualify for community type capacity. The vacant competitive supply is 272.7 acres. At .18 FAR this translates to potential future community -type retail supply of 2.1 million square feet, within the Newberry Village market area. The combined existing competitive supply plus future supply equals 3.4 million P"a v Page 2 of 8 "LI LLl LL L. A � Page 107 of 218 Newberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis H 8 A k ?v{ square feet of Community -type retail space capacity in the Newberry Village market area, through year 2020. Appendix 2 shows the list of parcels designated for future community type supply. No representations are made as to the availability for sale or whether there is owner intention to develop the vacant lands at any time in the future. Because there is no assurance as to whether these lands will be developed, a market flexibility factor (allocation ratio) must be included to assure proper supply over the long term. 2.3 Community -Type Retail Space Demand The market analysis shows there are 76,090 households within the 20 minute drive time surrounding the site, as of 2005 (see appendix 3). Average household income is $45,260. This generates community -type retail demand of 1.6 million square feet of space as of year 2005. Household growth to year 2020 is expected to raise market area households to 96,208 households and 2.0 million square feet of demand by year 2020. 3.0 Community -Type Retail Allocation Ratio AM" a. The community -type retail allocation ratio in the Newberry Village market area is 1.7. This is determined by dividing the 3.4 million square feet of supply /capacity by the 2.0 million square feet of demand, through the planning horizon year of 2020. The addition of 250,000 square feet of retail space through the proposed Newberry Village retail land use change results in a marginal increase in the overall Plan allocation ratio from 1.7 to 1.8. Fishkind & Associates believes an allocation ratio of under 2.0 leaves insufficient flexibility to accommodate long term retail space needs. Table 1 shows the supply /demand calculation and resulting allocation ratio. Table 1- 2020 Summary Community Retail Market Conditions Vacant Community Retail Acres 272.7 Future Community SQ FT. Supply 2,138,043 Existing Competitive Supply 1,266,947 TOTAL SUPPLY 3,404,990 Proposed Newberry Village 250,000 Total Demand 2,045,865 Community Commercial Allocation Ratio 1.8 Page 3 of 8 Page 108 of 218 Newberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis t n w 4.0 Need for Additional Community-Type Retail Zoning /VS /[i' With the revised allocation ratio so low in the Newberry Village market area, there is a need for additional retail capacity to be allocated for the long -term. 4.2 Acceptable Over - Allocation Ratio The Department of community Affairs has indicated an acceptable over - allocation rate for future land use planning purposes is 2.0. Many communities have considerably higher allocations for retail land uses. The Newberry Village market area has a current allocation ratio of 1.7. The addition of 250,000 square feet of community -type retail space in the proposed project will increase the allocation ratio to 1.8, leaving the market below 2.0 and only slightly above the original County allocation. 5.0 Conclusion Newberry Village has petitioned Alachua County to revise the Comprehensive Plan to allow the inclusion of 250,000 square feet of additional community -type retail space in the Newberry Village market area. The current analysis of available community -type retail lands indicates a need for additional retail acres in the market area by year 2020, in order to provide proper long range planning flexibility. This report concludes there is an under - allocation of available community -type retail lands in the Newberry Village market area. The conversion of lands to retail uses will still provide the ability of the remainder of the site to reach 80% of the maximum residential density allowed under the existing zoning and land use. However, by including the mixed use component, needed additional retail capacity is provided while still achieving a high proportion of the maximum residential capacity. Based on this finding, there is justification to include the Newberry Village lands in the Future Land Use Map as inventory of future retail lands. Page 4 of 8 LLLL LLL L4. l Page 109 of 218 — Retail Needs APPENDIX 1 - Existing Competitive Supply riswnra Page 5 of 8 4Y (L4 4LL Ll k. Page 110 of 218 SITE % CENTER NAME GLA DIST COMPETING SF COMPETING NEWBERRY SQUARE 180,524 0.63 98.01% 176,939 NEWBERRY CROSSING 111,010 1.37 95.68% 106,217 OAKS SQUARE 119,000 1.37 95.68% 113,862 OAKS MALL PLAZA 105,252 1.55 95.12% 100,111 TOWER CENTRE 165,000 1.92 93.95% 155,018 CENTRAL PLAZA 132,000 10.00 68.97% 91,043 GAINESVILLE SHOPPING CENTER 186,173 10.08 68.73% 127,959 GAINESVILLE MALL 289,850 11.02 65.92% 191,077 WAL -MART PLAZA 177,766 11.33 65.00% 115,552 WINN DIXIE MARKETPLACE PLAZA 139,337 11.67 64.00% 89,171 TOTAL 1,605,912 1,266,947 riswnra Page 5 of 8 4Y (L4 4LL Ll k. Page 110 of 218 Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis 8A APPENDIX 2 - Future Vacant Supply OBJECTID_1 ZONEDISTRI ZONEDEFIN PIN CALCACRES SQFT 200 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06041- 003 -001 21.8 0.000000 89 BP Business and Professional (BP) 06041- 002 -005 9.3 0.000000 135 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 002 -003 6.0 0.000000 142 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06800 - 028 -000 1.0 0.000000 277 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 005 -003 1.5 0.000000 278 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 005 -005 4.0 0.000000 117 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 005 -003 1.5 0.000000 118 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 009 -000 1.1 0.000000 119 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 -003 -000 0.5 0.000000 120 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 - 004 -000 1.0 0.00000( 121 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 - 006 -000 6.2 0.000000 122 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345- 010 -000 0.5 0.000000 354 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 001 -000 8.6 0.000000 355 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345- 006 -000 6.2 0.000000 313 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.000000 132 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06038- 022 -000 10.5 0.000000 353 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 -006 -000 6.2 0.000000 59 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04344 - 001 -000 8.6 0.000000 205 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06233 - 006 -001 1.3 0.000000 100 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 002 -003 6.0 0.000000 101 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331 - 005 -000 2.9 0.000000 - 102 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 006 -000 1.0 0.000000 315 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.000000 284 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04345 - 006 -000 6.2 0.000000 124 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 009 -000 1.1 0.000000 285 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04344- 001 -000 8.6 0.000000 286 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04345 - 006 -000 6.2 0.000000 160 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 07251 -017 -000 1.2 0.000000 10 BR Business, Retail Sates, and Services (BR) 06655 - 002 -003 29.4 0.000000 116 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 009 -000 1.1 0.000000 312 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 009 -000 1.1 0.000000 314 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.000000 134 SH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06655 - 015 -000 4.9 0.000000 263 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06656 - 002 -008 3.4 0.000000 152 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 002 -003 6.0 0.000OOC 153 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331 - 005 -000 2.9 0.000000 154 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 006 -000 1.0 0.000000 316 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.000000 mworo LL 1. LLL LL L Page 6 of 8 215.0 Page 111 of 218 nsxnaa .LL,4l� it — Retail Needs Analysis 8 n Appendix 3 — Newberry Village 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics Page 7 of 8 Page 112 of 218 Site Location: Let: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Household Trend Report 8A Page A -1 10125105 SITE NAME: Newberry Village - TRADE AREA SIZE. 20 min IN, atfc Settings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 3p50,65,20,30,40 VALUE 'opulation Population (1990) 143,256 Population (2000) 172.121 Population (2005) 174.990 Population (2010) 177,778 Pct. Population Growth ('90'00) 20.15 Pct. Population Growth ('00 -'05) 1.67 Pct. Population Growth ('05'10) 1.59 Geographic Area Size 221.5974 Population Density (2005) 789.68 Daytime Marketplace (2005) Total Business Establishments 7,406 Total Daytime Employment 112,110 Households Households (1990) 57,054 Households (2000) 70,015 Households (2005) 76,090 Households (2010) 81,946 Married Couple Family With Children (2005) 11,417 15.0% Gender (2005) Male (2005) 85,523 48.9% Female (2005) 89,466 51.1% Race & Ethnicity (2005) Race: White (2005) 128,502 73.4% Race: Black (2005) 31,825 18.2% Race: Asian or Pacific Islander (2005) 7,914 4.5% Race: Other Race (2005) 3,122 1.8% Race: Two or More Races (2005) 3,627 2.1% Ethnicity: Hispanic (2005) 11,907 6.8% Age Distribution (2005) Age 0-4 (2005) 9,448 5.4% Age 5 -9 (2005) 8,564 4.9% Age 10 -13 (2005) 7,049 4.0% Age 14 -17 (2005) 8,516 4.9% Age 18 -24 (2005) 30,904 17.7% Age 25 -34 (2005) 40,035 22.9% Age 35-44 (2005) 18.947 11.4% Age 45 -54 (2005) 19,857 11.3% Age 55 -64 (2005) 13,756 7.9% Age 65 -74 (2005) 8,384 4.8% Age 75 -84 (2005) 5,839 3.3% Age 85+ (2005) 2,288 1.3% Source: AGS Report Created with [SITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 113 of 218 Site Location: Let: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Household Trend Report OT Page A -2 10/25105 siTENAMe Newberry Village - TRADEAREASIZE 20 mill affc Settings: Heavy, Travel Sp s: 30,50.65,20, 3D,40 Median Age Median Age (2005) 31.31 Median Household Income Median Household Income (1990) 24.711 Median Household Income (2000) 34,389 Median Household Income (2005) 37,442 Median Household Income (2010) 41,571 Per Capita Income Per Capita Income (1990) 12,221 Per Capita Income (2000) 17,795 Per Capita Income (2005) 20,389 Per Capita Income (2010) 23,469 Average Household Income Average Household Income (1990) 30,686 Average Household Income (2000) 43,960 Average Household Income (2005) 45,268 Average Household Income (2010) 49,184 Median Disposable Income Median Disposable Income (2005) 32,082 Aggregate Income Aggregate Income ($MM) (2005) 3,567.80 Income Distribution (2005) HH Inc. $ 0 - $ 15k (2005) 20,657 27A% HH Inc. $15-$25k (2005) 10,641 14.0% HH Inc. $25 -$35k (2005) 8,865 11.7% HH Inc. $35 -$50k (2005) 10,143 13.3% HH Inc. $50 - $ 75k (2005) 10,976 14.4% HH Inc. $75 - $100k (2005) 6,092 8.0% HH Inc. $100k - $150 (2005) 5,471 7.2% HH Inc. $150 - $200k (2005) 1,608 2.1% HH Inc. $200K+ (2005) 1,637 2.2% Employment By Industry (2000) Employment Status: Total Labor Force 90,720 52.7% Employment Status: Employed 83,786 487% Industry: Agriculture (2000) 505 0.6% Industry: Mining (2000) 12 0.0% Industry: Construction (2000) 3,550 4.2% Industry: Manufacturing (2000) 2,804 3 -3% Industry: Wholesale Trade (2000) 1.237 1.5% Industry: Retail Trade (2000) 9,348 11.2% Industry: Transport. and Warehousing (2000) 1,444 17% Industry: Utilities (2000) 714 0.9% Source: AGS Report Created with iSITE, version: 2005.01.16 Page 114 of 218 Site Location: Let: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Household Trend Report z Page A -3 10125105 SITEMME Newberry Village - TRAOEAREASIZE: 20 min VALUE affic Se ings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30,50,65, 20, 30,40 :mployment By Industry (2000) Industry: Information Services (2000) 2,640 3.2% Industry: Finance and Insurance (2000) 3,076 3.7% Industry: Real Estate (2000) 1,635 2.0% Industry: Professional Services (2000) 4.721 5.6% Industry: Management (2000) 16 0.0% Industry: Admin. Services And Waste Mgmnt (2000) 2,296 2.7% Industry: Educational Services (2000) 18,924 22.6% Industry: Health Care and Social Assist. (2000) 13,505 16.1% Industry: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation (2000) 1,567 1.9% Industry: Food and Hospitality Services (2000) 7,821 93e/ Industry: Other Services, except public (2000) 3,815 4.6% Industry: Public Adminstration (2000) 4,156 5.0% lousing (2000) Housing Units (2000) 76,020 Housing Units, Occupied (2000) 70,015 92.1° Housing Units, Vacant (2000) 6,005 7.9% Housing Units, Owner - Occupied (2000) 33,624 48.0°/ Housing Units, Renter - Occupied (2000) 36,391 52.0% Median Rent (2000) 441 Median Home Value (2000) 99,302 Consumer Expenditures (2005, $ /HH) Total Consumer Expenditures (2005) 40,661.64 Total Retail Expenditures (2005) 17,708.70 Educational Attainment (2000) Education: Less than 9th Grade (2000) 2,903 3.1% Education: Some High School (2000) 6,492 7.0% Education: High School Graduates (2000) 15,973 17.2% Education: Some College (2000) 17,634 19.0% Education: Associate's Degree (2000) 9,039 9.7% Education: Bachelor's Degree (2000) 20,404 22.0% Education: Graduate School (2000) 20,408 22.0% Population, Age 25+ (2000) 92,852 53.9% Source: AGS Report Created with (SITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 115 of 218 EXHIBIT B Newberry Village Retail Comprehensive Plan Amendment Florida Department of Community Affairs Notice of Compliance Page 116 of 218 08 A " \h STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS - Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" CHARLIE CRIST THOMAS a PELHAM Govemw Se etary July 221. 2008 The Honorable Rodney J. Long Chairman. Board of County Commissioners Alachua County P.O. Box 2877 Gainesville, FL 32602 -2877 RE: Alachua County Adopted Amendment 08 -R1 Dear Chairman Long: The Department has completed its review of the adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Ordinance Number 08 -10; DCA Amendment Numbers 06 -2 and 08 -R1) for Alachua County, as adopted on August 17, 2006 and June 10, 2008, and determined that it meets the requirements of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, for compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(l)(b), Florida Statutes. The Department is issuing a Cumulative Notice of Intent to find the plan amendment in compliance. The Cumulative Notice of Intent was sent to the Gainesville Sun for publication on July 23, 2008. The Department's cumulative notice of intent to find a plan amendment in compliance shall be deemed to be a final order if no timely petition challenging the amendment is filed. Any affected person may file a petition with the agency within 21 days after the publication of the notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes. No development orders, or permits for a development, dependent on the amendment may be issued or commence before the plan amendment takes effect. Please be advised that Section 163.3184(8)(c)2, Florida Statutes, requires a local government that has an internet site to post a copy of the Department's Notice of Intent on the site within 5 days after receipt of the mailed copy of the agency's notice of intent. Please note that a copy of the adopted County Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and the Notice of Intent must be available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Alachua County Growth Management Office. 10 SW 2 "d Avenue. Third Floor, Gainesville. Florida, 32601 -6294. 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD ♦ TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 -2100 850. 488 -8466 ipt ♦ 850. 921 -0781 rf) • WeDSIIe .v ,, .v Cc9_; ; r. • 60MMUNITYPLANNING pSG:'P.:."`5Pi B'p4Ee3JL9.q ♦ HOUSINGAND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 6if4U- 79%•pi 6'6512 -'d:3 if Page 117 of 218 The Honorable Rodney J. Long July 22, 2008 M Page 2 If this in compliance determination is challenged by an affected person. you will have the option of mediation pursuant to Subsection I63.3189(3)(a). Florida Statutes. If wu choose to attempt to resolve this matter through mediation. you must file the request for mediation kith the administrative law judge assigned by the Division of Administrative Hearings. The choice of mediation will not affect the right of any party to an administrative hearing. If you have any questions, please contact Ana Richmond, Planner, at (850) 922 -1794. Sincerely, Mike McDaniel Chief, Office of Comprehensive Planning MM /ar Enclosure: Notice of Intent cc: Mr. Scott Koons. AICP, Executive Director, North Central Florida RPC Mr. Steven Lachnicht, AICP, Director of Growth Management Mr. C. David Coffey Mr. Bradley Stith Page 118 of 218 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS CUMULATIVE NOTICE OF INTENT TO FIND THE ALACHUA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REMEDIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS) IN COMPLIANCE DOCKET NO. 08- Rl -NOI -0 102- (A) {1) The Department issues this cumulative notice of intent to find the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment adopted by Ordinance No. 06-26 on August 17, 2006 and the remedial amendment(s) adopted by Ordinance No. 08 -10 on June 10, 2008 IN COMPLIANCE, pursuant to Sections 163.3184, 163.3187 and 163.3189, F.S. The adopted Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report, (if any), are available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Alachua County Growth Management, 10 S.W. Td Avenue, Third Floor, Gainesville, Florida 32601.6294. Any affected person, as defined in Section 163.3184, F.S., has a right to petition for an administrative hearing to challenge the proposed agency determination that the Remedial Amendments are In Compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(1), F.S. The petition must be filed within twenty-one (2 1) days after publication of this notice, and must include all of the information and contents described in Uniform Rule 28- 106.201, F.A.C. The petition must be filed with the Agency Clerk, Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -2100 and a copy mailed or delivered to the local government. Failure to timely file a petition shall constitute a waiver of any right to request an administrative proceeding as a petitioner under Sections 120.569 and 120.57,17.S. Ifa petition is filed, the purpose of the administrative hearing will be to present evidence and testimony and forward a recommended order to the Department. If no petition is filed, this Notice of Intent shall become final agency action. If a petition is filed, other affected persons may petition for leave to intervene in the proceeding. A petition for intervention must be filed at least twenty (20) days before the final hearing and must include all of the information and contents described in Uniform Rule 28- 106.205, F.A.C. A petition for leave to intervene shall be filed at the Division of Administrative Hearings, Department of Administration, 1230 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3060. Failure to petition to intervene within the allowed time frame constitutes a waiver of any right such a person has to request a hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S., or to participate in the administrative hearing. After an administrative hearing petition is timely filed, mediation is available pursuant to Subsection 163.3189(3)(a), F.S., to any affected person who is made a party to the proceeding by filing that request with the administrative lawjudge assigned by the Division of Administrative Hearings. The choice of mediation shall not affect a party's right to an administrative hearing. Mike McDaniel, Chief Division of Community Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -2100 • Page 119 of 218 • APPENDIX 4 Need for Commercial Space utilizing Estates as Market Area (With Inclusion of the Proposed Estates Shopping Center Sub district) 2007 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Estates (2 Miles E of 951) Population 30,404 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 65,217 Community Demand (7.48 sqft /Per) 227,422 249,443 301,422 372,564 441,290 487,823 Neighborhood Demand (8.45 sqft /Per) 256,914 281,791 340,510 420,878 498,516 551,084 Total Trade Area Demand 484,336 531,234 641,931 793,441 939,806 1,038,907 Community sgft Supply Randall Commercail Subdistrict 100,000 340,950 340,950 340,950 Orange Blossom Ranch PUD 100,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Estates Shopping Center Sub District 100,000 190,000 190,000 190,000 Total Community sgft 300,000 730,950 730,950 730,950 Trade Area Supply 300,000 730,950 730,950 730,950 Surplusl(Deficit) Commerical Supply (484,336) (531,234) (341,931) (62,491) (208,856) (307,957) The data above is from the Randall Blvd Commercial Center market study and represents a different methodology than what the consultant in the above analysis. The Collier County planning department asked that this format be used as an alternative to estimate the demand for commercial space. The Estates Shopping Center sub district was included in the calculations to illustrate the surplus of deficit commercial supply. Based on this methodology, there is a commercial need throughout the time horizon. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 53 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 120 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. • TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PROJECT NO. F0801.31 -20) PREPARED BY: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 -9356 (239) 278 -3090 REVISED December 6, 2010 Page 121 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC I. INIRODUCTION CONTENTS II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IV. TRIP GENERATION V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION Vt. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS VII. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY AND IMPROVEMENT'S VIII. CONCLUSION • Page 122 of 218 TRANSPORTATION k 8 CONSULTANTS, INC. H 1. INTRODUCTION TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact statement for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment submittal for the +/- 41 -acre Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site located along the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard between its intersections with Yd Street NW and Wilson Boulevard in Collier County, Florida. This report has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking approval for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The site location is illustrated on Figure 1. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would modify the existing land use designation on the subject site to allow a total of 190,000 square feet of commercial floor area on the subject site. However, pursuant to discussions with County Staff, this analysis was conducted based upon a total of 225,000 square feet of commercial floor area consistent with the analysis previously submitted for the proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. Trip generation and assignments to the area intersections will be completed and analysis conducted to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding intersections. An initial methodology meeting was held with Collier County Staff on February 21, 2007 to discuss the parameters required as a result of this analysis. No methodology notes were created in 2007 since none were required at the time of this meeting, however, this Traffic Impact Statement is consistent with the items discussed at that meeting, such as trip generation, pass -by trip reduction and trip distribution. Page 1 Page 123 of 218 Page 124 of 218 TRANSPORTATION 8 n CONSULTANTS, INC. v !1 H. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site currently contains vacant land and some single family dwelling units. I" Street NW divides the subject site into two parcels. The site is bordered to the north by vacant land and additional single family dwelling units. To the east of the subject site is Wilson Boulevard. Golden Gate Boulevard borders the site to the south. To the west of the site is 3`d Street NW. Golden Gate Boulevard is an cast/west four -lane divided arterial roadway to the south of the subject site. The intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard allows full turning movements under signalized conditions. Currently, the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with 3`d Street NW and I" Street NW allow full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. Golden Gate Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. The Level of Service Standard on this section of Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard is LOS "D ", or 2,350 vehicles. Wilson Boulevard is a north/south two -lane roadway that borders the subject site to the east. Wilson Boulevard's intersection with Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements operating under signalized conditions. Wilson Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Wilson Boulevard has a Level of Service Standard of LOS "B ", or 920 vehicles. 151 Street NW is a north /south two -lane local roadway that divides the subject site into two parcels. The intersection of I" Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. I" Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Concurrency is not currently measured on 1" Street NW. Page 3 Page 125 of 218 TRANSPORTATION 8 A CONSULTANTS, INC. 3" Street NW is a north %south two -lane local roadway that borders the subject site to the west. '1'11e intersection of Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides fill] turning movements under unsignalized conditions. 3'-d Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County Concurrency is not currently measured on 3'1 Street NW. In order to gain a better understanding of the traffic conditions in the vicinity of the subject site based on the methodology meeting held with County Staff, AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with Collier Boulevard, 3`" Street NW, 1" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as the Wilson Boulevard /Innnokalee Road intersection. These turning movement counts were performed during the peak season of the adjacent street in March based on the information contained within the 2006 FD01 Traffic Information CD, so no peak season adjustment was required. Figures 2A and 2B indicate the resultant 2007 peak season turning movements at the subject intersections. I11. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site will amend the current future land use designation on the subject site to allow conunercial retail uses. The property owner has agreed to cap the maximum amount of retail uses at 190,000 square feet of floor area. However, as previsouly discussed this analysis was based upon a total of 225,000 square feet of commercial floor area consistent with analysis previously conducted for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict. Table I summarizes the uses for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. Table I Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Proposed Use I_ Shopping Center 225,000 square feet Page 4 Page 126 of 218 �o r� 1�3 I1,((7) x1 (877) (18)8JIh t ?, (1,068)395♦ -Of (22) 6.� 6 o C ri ol I w 0 M M rn o in *13 (6) �n �_� *142 (4 �/rn1oo``•• 4-1.092 (881) M1oN, ♦7141 r ♦_ 1_* 4 (4) � ♦ `I � 1 (5) EN GATE BOULEVARD (9) 01 f (167) 1471 1,052)404♦ °ON (878)255♦ °' 'T (17)1 ��� (18) 4 ��v M F- w w H :n r Q w O m LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 127 of 218 Z Z Z LU w w w w w w co c co c co Q p p- 9; c cn 1�3 I1,((7) x1 (877) (18)8JIh t ?, (1,068)395♦ -Of (22) 6.� 6 o C ri ol I w 0 M M rn o in *13 (6) �n �_� *142 (4 �/rn1oo``•• 4-1.092 (881) M1oN, ♦7141 r ♦_ 1_* 4 (4) � ♦ `I � 1 (5) EN GATE BOULEVARD (9) 01 f (167) 1471 1,052)404♦ °ON (878)255♦ °' 'T (17)1 ��� (18) 4 ��v M F- w w H :n r Q w O m LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 127 of 218 ri ol I w 0 M M rn o in *13 (6) �n �_� *142 (4 �/rn1oo``•• 4-1.092 (881) M1oN, ♦7141 r ♦_ 1_* 4 (4) � ♦ `I � 1 (5) EN GATE BOULEVARD (9) 01 f (167) 1471 1,052)404♦ °ON (878)255♦ °' 'T (17)1 ��� (18) 4 ��v M F- w w H :n r Q w O m LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 127 of 218 M F- w w H :n r Q w O m LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 127 of 218 IMMOKALEE ROAD VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD N O I� N � k392(144) 864 (373) `► GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 8A / N W E =NS Q k13(2 oe 4 -1,14' 4� i `192 (46) 6 +� (810) 237-0- M �� (61) 14 M o. MTV O O m N Q M O ❑ oe Ma Q W J O O m m Q� Z w O J co J J O LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC RANDALL BOULEVARD 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2B Page 128 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. • At the map amendment stage, a detailed site plan has not been prepared. "Therefore, it is difficult to asses the access that will be provided to the subject site. Preliminary discussions with the County were held regarding access. ft is understood that access is not specifically approved at the Comprehensive Plan Amendment stage, but rather at the Planned Development stage and even as much at the Site Plan Approval stage. Therefore, a "conceptual" access plan was developed in order complete the traffic impact analysis. Access to the subject site must ultimately be approved by the Department of Transportation and the Board of County Commissioners. For this analysis, assumptions were made regarding the proposed access to the subject site. It was assumed access would be provided directly to Golden Gate Boulevard via a full access, to Wilson Boulevard via a full access and additional access drives on 3 "1 Street NW and 1" Street NW. The access points to ls1 Street NW were shown to provide access to the subject site on both sides of the roadway. Again, this is a conceptual access plan that will be further developed as the project proceeds through the re- zoning and site plan approval process. IV. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation calculations were performed for the proposed uses as a part of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site. Upon approval of this Amendment, as conditioned, the Comprehensive Plan allocation on the subject site will allow a total of 225,000 square feet of various mixed commercial floor area. The site will be analyzed based upon the use that indicates the highest trip generation in order to perform a "worst case" analysis on the County Roadway network. The resultant trip generation for each use was determined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation, 7m Edition. A comparison of the 8"' Edition to the 7t' Edition of the ITE report, included in the Appendix, indicates that the total weekday P.M. peak hour trip generation would increase by a total of 25 vehicles (in and out) and the peak direction would only increase by one (1) vehicle during this same time period. Therefore, the trips generated for the project based on the 7`h Edition trip Pagc 7 Page 129 of 218 8A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. generation, as previously utilized in the studio, submitted to Collier County in Jantimy 2008, remained in this report as the resultant change to the 8 °i Edition would make no appreciable difference in the analysis conducted herein. Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) was utilized in order to perform the necessary trip generation on the subject parcel. According to the land use description for the shopping center use, "A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned and managed as a unit. A shopping center's composition is related to its market area in terms of size, location and type of store. A shopping center also provides on -site parking facilities sufficient to serve its own parking demands. " The retail floor area proposed as a part of this development will function most similarly as a shopping center based oil the IT land use description. Table 2 indicates the trip generation of the retail use proposed as a part of the Comprehensive plan Amendment on the site The trip generation equations utilized to calculate the trip generation can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 2 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Trin Generation ITE estimates that a shopping center use of comparable size may attract a significant amount of its traffic from vehicles already traveling the adjoining roadway system. This traffic, called "pass -by" traffic, reduces the development's overall impact on the surrounding roadway system but does not decrease the actual driveway volumes. Collier County allows a maximum "pass -by" traffic reduction of 25% for shopping centers. However, as a part of the methodology meeting held with County Staff, there was discussion on the fact that the site would primarily serve the Golden Gate Estates area, Page 8 Page 130 of 218 Shopping Center 155 100 255 513 557 two 11,504 (225,000 sq. ft.) ITE estimates that a shopping center use of comparable size may attract a significant amount of its traffic from vehicles already traveling the adjoining roadway system. This traffic, called "pass -by" traffic, reduces the development's overall impact on the surrounding roadway system but does not decrease the actual driveway volumes. Collier County allows a maximum "pass -by" traffic reduction of 25% for shopping centers. However, as a part of the methodology meeting held with County Staff, there was discussion on the fact that the site would primarily serve the Golden Gate Estates area, Page 8 Page 130 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. • which is currently lacking in commercial goods and services. A retail center in this area would attract a higher percentage of "pass-by" trips due to the fact that there are very few commercial services available to the residents within a five mile radius of the subject site. Therefore, a "pass -by" rate of 35% was approved for the site by Staff in the methodology meeting. In addition, a greater pass -by reduction is reasonable (beyond the 25 %) for the subject site due to the significant amount of commuter traffic experienced during the peak hours of the adjacent street along Golden Gate Boulevard. For this analysis, the "pass -by" traffic was accounted for in order to determine the number of "new" trips the development will add to the surrounding roadways. Table 3 summarizes the pass -by reduction percentages utilized. Table 4 summarizes the development traffic and the breakdown between the total project trips and the net new trips the development is anticipated to generate after the pass -by reduction is applied. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the "pass -by" - reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. Table 3 Pass -by Trip Reduction Factor Estates Shunning Center Subdistrict i v 'm + + %N au• o Shopping Center 35% Table 4 Trip Generation — New Trips Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Page 9 Page 131 of 218 Q,ut � r < a.., 2 a . _ .. .� Total Trips 155 100 255 513 557 1,070 11,504 Less Retail Pass -by -45 45 -90 -187 -187 -374 -4,026 ( %% ass -by) New Traffic 110 55 165 326 370 696 7,478 (Total Tips — Pass -by Tiatric) Page 9 Page 131 of 218 �gA TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. The Level of Service analysis and the intersection analysis at Golden Gate Boulevard /Collier Boulevard and Inunokalee Road /Wilson Boulevard performed within this report is based solely on the new trips generated as a result of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. The intersection analysis at the intersections surrounding the subject site was performed based on the total trips. V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The new trips based on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment indicated within Table 4 were then assigned to the surrounding roadway system based on the anticipated routes the drivers will utilize to approach the site. The resultant traffic distribution is indicated in Figure 3 as approved within the rnethodologv meeting held with StaJJ. Based on the traffic distribution indicated within Figure 3, the new development traffic was distributed to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 4A and 4B indicates the site traffic assignment to the conceptual site access plan utilized in this analysis and previously described. The assigmnent was also carried to the external intersection beyond the site boundary and within the Study area. The new site related traffic was assigned to the significantly impacted roadway links as a part of the net new project trips graphic identified as Figure 4C. Furthermore, an assignment of the pass -by traffic generated as a result of the subject site can also be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. Page 10 Page 132 of 218 IMMOKALEE ROAD ♦ 5% ♦ ♦ 5% 0% 1 VANDERBILT I + 10% DROP OFF BEACH ROAD 10% TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS Q 1 10 % DROP OFF 20% T 15% DROP OFF GOLDEN GATE 4-40 %♦ A A -15 %-10- (r B BOULEVARD w 1 10% cl O Q Q 20% I If J J LLJ m d OIL WELL ROAD % ♦ ♦2 %♦ DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL 41% AREAS 7k 10 % OF THE PROJECT TRAFFIC WAS ASSUMED TO TERMINATE AND ORIGINATE BETWEEN COLLIER BOULEVARD AND THE SITE ALONG GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE SITE ALONG WILSON BOULEVARD. I C�=Kln ♦20 %-► PERCENT DISTRIBUTION TRANSPORTATION PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 3 Page 133 of 218 7k 10 % OF THE PROJECT TRAFFIC WAS ASSUMED TO TERMINATE AND ORIGINATE BETWEEN COLLIER BOULEVARD AND THE SITE ALONG GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE SITE ALONG WILSON BOULEVARD. I C�=Kln ♦20 %-► PERCENT DISTRIBUTION TRANSPORTATION PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 3 Page 133 of 218 N \1 W E) NTS. D w J 0 CO Z 0 U) >J_ M O V (O (7 1) 151 (60) 15.1 v� N 5(10) z z LU mu v w w w w ♦57 (155) 0 (0) w (3 0) 10 % ~ in (60) 16 % (40) 5 (17 5) 51 ♦ `N' N \1 W E) NTS. D w J 0 CO Z 0 U) >J_ M O V (O (7 1) 151 (60) 15.1 v� N 5(10) ro m 15 (64) mu v 4 / ♦l3X(198) '.1 0 0 m*-52 (145) ` ► x-15 (70) r ; ♦57 (155) 0 (0) 41 + `I (3 0) 10 % Z (115) 351 13OULLEV (60) 16 % (40) 5 (17 5) 51 ♦ ° RDTE (60) 16 ♦ (203) 30♦ ° (122) 20-0 (0) 0 1 ! (0) 01 ° (41)5-% LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 7 (34) 40 (120) 0 (0) QJ� � m TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS, wc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4A Page 134 of 218 tr W Z Z J w w w w O 0 w w m or: c Z O cn >J_ LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 7 (34) 40 (120) 0 (0) QJ� � m TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS, wc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4A Page 134 of 218 000 X0(0) 000 1-0(0) IMMOKALEE ROAD 6 (16) (0) 01 �1 /► (0)0 -b. MOM (16)6N mom VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD M o� 6(37) r 11 (74) GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I C('�GAlll ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC RANDALL TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS, INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4B Page 135 of 218 Y. 'ti $ (O WO 1 J J 0] m � Z W O J (n J J O I C('�GAlll ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC RANDALL TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS, INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4B Page 135 of 218 Y. 'ti $ �j TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. LEGEND 4- 000 AM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ♦(000) PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC NET NEW HROJEG I I KAI -FIG ON SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED ROADWAYS Figure 4C ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 136 of 218 TRANSPORTATION 8 „ CONSULTANTS, INC. VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table 1A, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2 % -2 % -3% Significance Test. The new project related traffic from Table 4 was compared with the corrected 10 -month Level of Service Standard for Peak Hour — Peak Direction traffic conditions in order to determine the project impact percentage. Based on the information contained within Table 1A, Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard, Wilson Boulevard from south of Golden Gate Boulevard to Immokalee Road, and Collier Boulevard from Golden Gate Boulevard to Pine Ridge Road are shown to experience a significant impact as a result of the added project traffic associated with the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan Amendment in accordance with the Collier County 2 % -2 % -3% Significance Test. Therefore, Level of Service analysis is only required on these roadway links as a result of the proposed development. In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table IA also includes a buildout consistency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. The Collier County TIS Guidelines require analysis of the adjacent roadway network based on the buildout of the project or the five (5) year planning window, whichever is longer. It is likely that this project will be constructed prior to the end of the year 2014 due to the need for commercial services in the Golden Gate Estates. Therefore, it was necessary to analyze the surrounding roadway network based on the 2015 traffic conditions. The total volume indicated within the 2010 Collier County Concurrency Spreadsheet reflects the current remaining capacity on the adjacent roadway network. The remaining capacity was subtracted from the 10 -month service volume on each roadway in order to determine the 2010 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume on the adjacent roadway network. The appropriate annual growth rate for these roadways was taken by Page 15 -- --- Page 137 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. comparing information from the 2006 Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR) to data in the 2010 AMR. An example of the calculations to determine the annual growth rates can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. These annual growth rates were then used to factor the 2010 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume to 2015 peak season, peak hour, peak direction background traffic conditions. The resultant 2015 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume was subtracted from the Level of Service Standard in order to determine the remaining capacity in the year 2015. The project generated traffic was then subtracted from the remaining capacity in order to determine the remaining 2015 capacity after the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic is added to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 5 indicates the results of the capacity analysis along Collier Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, and Wilson Boulevard. VII. PROJECTED CONSISTENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS Based upon the information contained within Table IA and Figure 5, a Level of Service deficiency is projected on Golden Gate Boulevard cast of Wilson Boulevard based upon the 2014 traffic conditions both with and without the proposed development traffic. Several road improvements are shown in either the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (C1P) or the 2030 Long Range "Transportation Plan in this area of Golden Gate Estates that will specifically address this deficiency. Golden Gate Boulevard is shown on the 2030 Needs Plan as a 4 lane roadway from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard. A parallel facility is planned (the Vanderbilt Beach Road extension) but funding for the segment between Collier Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard has not been identified. The Developer has committed to provide the right -of -way along the project frontage to accommodate the future widening of Golden Gate Boulevard, should it be necessary in the future. In addition, the Developer has also committed to provide the necessary right- of -way to develop intersection improvements at the Golden Gate Boulevard /Wilson Boulevard intersection, which will improve the capacity of the link due to the added P1ge 16 • Page 138 of 218 IMMOKALEE ROAD 5% 532 (521) [495] 4.0% VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 0 Q w O m w w GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD J J O U 94 (72) 378 378 378 [20] (345) (334) (306) PINE RIDGE ROAD 3.0% [267] [230] [115] 4.7% 6.3% 11.2% 1.5% 0.7% 532 (510) [458] 8.0% 532 (497) [412] 13.0% L 186 ( -219) [ -297] 892 11.0% (881) [855] 4.0% LEGEND OIL WELL ROAD -186 -202) -2411 5.5% 000 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY (000) 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [000] 2015 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 0.0% PROJECT IMPACT PERCENTAGE 1.6% 0.7% 1.6% TRANSPORTATION 2015 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 5 Page 139 of 218 ' f I TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. • capacity created at the intersection. The impacts to the Lung Range Transportation Plan as a result of this amendment would be minimal since the parallel corridor of' Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension is included in that plan and will accommodate a large volume of east /west commuter traffic in the Estates area. Additionally, the Developer has also committed to provide the necessary right -of -way at no cost to the County for the future widening of Wilson Boulevard along the frontage of the project site. The proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development is the first commercial development of its kind proposed within the Golden Gate Estates area. Therefore, it is likely that the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development will have a positive impact on the traffic conditions in the area. The Developer has committed, through the Text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment, to include a Grocery Store in the first 100,000 square feet of development that is constructed on the site. "Fire nearest grocery shopping opportunity for residents of Golden Gate Estates is along Collier Boulevard to the north and south of Golden Gate Boulevard. a distance of approximately six (6) miles. The addition of a grocery store and other neighborhood commercial uses in this area would significantly shorten trip lengths that are related to this purpose as well as potentially reduce traffic volumes on Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard due to the fact that the retail trip would be intercepted prior to reaching these roadways. In addition, further analysis of the future traffic conditions in this area will be required at the re- zoning and SDP phase for the proposed development. Intersection analysis was performed as a result of the added Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic. Based on the methodology meeting, intersection analysis was required on Golden Gate Boulevard at its intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3" Street NW, the site access, 1" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as at the intersections of Wilson Boulevard with the site access and hurnokalcc Road. It should he noted that the intersection analysis was completed based on the assumption that the existing through lane capacity currently in place on Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard would remain (four lanes on Golden Gate Parkway and two lanes on Wilson Boulevard). Page 18 Page 140 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. in order to perform the required intersection analysis, it was necessary to determine the 2014 background peak hour turning movements at these intersections. Therefore, the background turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 2B were factored by the appropriate annual growth rates over a seven (7) year period. The calculation to determine the background turning movements is indicated below: 2014 Turning Movement = 2007 Turning Movement) *(1 +AGR)(2014 -2007) 2014 Turning Movement = 1,112 veh)* (1 + 0.0242)(') 2014 Turning Movement= 1,112 veh)* 1.182) 2014 Turning Movement =1,372 vehicles The above illustrated calculation was applied to all of the turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 2B in order to determine the 2014 background turning movements. It should be noted again that the access to the subject site assumed as part of this analysis is conceptual and has not yet been approved by the Collier County Department of Transportation or the Board of County Commissioners. the Growth Management Plan Amendment process does not specifically identify turning movements permitted at site access drives to projects within the Sub - district. This will be further analyzed and access determined in the re- zoning and SDPprocess The resultant 2014 background turning movements are illustrated within Figures 6A and 6B. The site traffic indicated within Figures 4A and 4B was then added to the 2014 background turning movements in order to determine the 2014 buildout turning movements at the area intersections. The resultant 2014 buildout turning movements are indicated within Figures 7A and 7B. It is important to note that the pass -by traffic assignment contained within the Appendix of this report was subtracted from the volumes within Figure 4B prior to adding those volumes to the 2014 background turning movements at the Collier Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard /lmmokalee Road intersections. This was done in an effort to back out the pass -by traffic at the external intersections because the pass -by traffic is already Page 19 O Page 141 of 218 ��5(10) 11,372 oo z M���k51(56) (1,257) 439♦ M F- Z (1,038) 301 ♦ < w (0) 0 (20) 5N 5 (15) 4-1,382 1,114 w 5 (5) w Lij W H W J it K lil m D f- Z ccn N O U) m >J Z m co O _J ��5(10) 11,372 oo "M M���k51(56) (1,257) 439♦ M (1,089) o o I*- 0 (0) (1,038) 301 ♦ A-1,367(1,097) (26) 10N (0) 0 (20) 5N 5 (15) 4-1,382 1,114 o 5 (5) (0) 0 M w w H W O N vW 4J lil m CE Z ccn N ��5(10) 11,372 oo k5(10) M���k51(56) (1,257) 439♦ M (1,089) o o I*- 0 (0) (1,038) 301 ♦ A-1,367(1,097) (26) 10N 4-864(781) (20) 5N 5 (15) 4-1,382 1,114 J 5 (5) 5 (10) w w H W GOLDEN GATE 4J lil m (21) 101 / (0)0-" BOULEVARD (15) 51 (197) 1741 'r I (1,257) 439♦ ° (1,276) 469♦ (1,241) 459♦ N (1,038) 301 ♦ ° (26) 10N o (20) 5N (21) 5N J LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 2014 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 6A Page 142 of 218 I 1, 0 Z LL] Z J 0 w w H W O 4J lil m CE Z ccn O F-- >J LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 2014 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 6A Page 142 of 218 I 1, VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD Q) M m O N N k463 (170) 1,021(441) NM Q V � > W c r O m w W J J U IMMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD i� W EE N T.S, (78) 18N o ff ^ v v(0 LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Cr Q W J O m Z O J 10) ) RANDALL BOULEVARD 2014 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 6B Page 143 of 218 k17 (2 ♦1 45E lM ♦ `, x245 (59) 101 (1,033)302♦ (78) 18N o ff ^ v v(0 LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC Cr Q W J O m Z O J 10) ) RANDALL BOULEVARD 2014 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 6B Page 143 of 218 � � o Z M tJ Ol �58 (90) z Q W w W LLJ LLJ J (24 5 5 ;FYI 5(1001) w F w GOLDEN GATE LLl W m Elf o � Z 0 U) (71) 15 (60) 15� � N N N 10 20 (1,287) M O I� M tJ Ol �58 (90) ♦1 407 N oM lk 1 (1 252) li5(15) +i 2(1 1)184 4%._4 (, ) J (24 5 5 ;FYI 5(1001) w F w GOLDEN GATE LLl W m Elf (51) 201 1 (115)35.01 BOULEVARD (75) 21 ! r (237) 1791 T (1,432)490♦ ° (1,336)485 -► (1,444)489♦ N (1,160)321♦ �° D (26) 10 a (2 0) 5 (62) 10 N LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ZU 14 IOUILU -UU I TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7A Page 144 of 218 w Z Z J Lu w F w 0 O LLl W m Elf ~ � Z 0 o U) Lnj LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ZU 14 IOUILU -UU I TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7A Page 144 of 218 ►•cv101 :4V 3rs BEACH ROAD rnm Q7 M N N M N k469(207) 1, r 1,032 (515) `►�1* Lu� V � Q :D W O OJ w W J O U IMMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I Z O J 9- N.T.S. 10) RANDALL BOULEVARD LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD -OUT TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7B Page 145 of 218 ♦1.4: �0) / 1 r ♦ 1, x251 (59) 10 J F (1,033)302♦ (94)24-% Z O J 9- N.T.S. 10) RANDALL BOULEVARD LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD -OUT TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7B Page 145 of 218 { TRANSPORTATION 8A CONSULTANTS, INC. accounted lot within the 2014 background conditions. however, the intersections surroun(hug the site wcro analyzed as if no pass -by traffic reductions were taken. The appropriate lane arrangements and the turning movements indicated within Figures 7A and 7B were inputted into the HCS+ software in order to perform the necessary intersection analysis at the previously mentioned intersections. The lane arrangements utilized in this analysis can be found in graphical format in the Appendix. It should be noted that no truck factors were applied to turning movements into and out of the subject development at the site access intersections. The results of the intersection capacity analyses can be found within Table 5 below. Table 5 Intersection Analysis Results Estates Shouuine Center Subdistrict Page 24 Page 146 of 218 $1-x14 RM i A f. InteSsegtagnGAps t�k� tek Hour4 P1VI Aeak Hour £Iti!}k1af, ,Bluldout ackgeounll $uildont,,,; x Collier Blvd (N Golden Gate Blvd Los C LOS C LOS B LOS C _ (21 7 see) _ _ _ LOS B 21 7 sec ) (19.7 sect (21 5 see EB Left LOS B LOS B LOS B 12.9 see) (13,5 sec) (112 sec) (13.1sec) LOS B I,OS B WB I oft LOS A L OS A Golden Gate Blvd _ (a 3 see) _ (s s scc) (12 3 sc, 13 7 ti cc @ 3'a St NW NB Approach LOS 1 I OS it LOS B LOS C (9 9 e) - i 10 1 sec) 14 4 _ sc 1 (15 a sw)_ SB Approach Los, C I OS C LOS B LOS C. (15.7 sec) (I6 2-sec)- (13.1 sec)_ (153 sec') Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Access _ LOS 13 LOS B (with Si ual (14.8 sew _ LOS B (ISbse�_- LOS B EB Left LOS B LOS B (128 sec) 13.7 sec) (11 .2 sec) (13.S see _ LOS A LOS A LOS B LOS B Golden Gate Blvd WB Left (8.4 sec) (s.5 sec) (12 0sec) (13.5 sea) NB Approach LOS A LOS A LOS B LOS C Is ' St NW (9 9 sco) _ _(10.0 sec)_ (14.1 sea) (I 5.8 seems LOST LOS 13 LOS C SB Approach LOS C (15.1 sec), (10.0 sec) (13.11 =ec)_ (16.0 sec Golden (late Blvd (4; Wilson Blvd _ LOS C I OS C _ LOS C LOS C (26,0"C (208 see) (22.9 sec) LOS A LOS A Wilson Blvd if N13 Left _ (a.7so:) __ (8.5sec) EB Approach LOS B _ LOS C Site Access (14.3 sec) (to 4sec) Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Blvd LOS B LOS B LOS C LOS C (18.0 sec) (18.1 sec) (23.2 see) (23.4 sec) Page 24 Page 146 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 8 A Based on the results of the intersection analysis listed above, all intersections and turning movements at the subject intersections are shown to operate acceptably. Based on the conceptual access plan analyzed as part of this report, the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard was analyzed both with and without a traffic signal. The analysis of this intersection without a traffic signal showed Level of Service deficiencies on the site access approach to Golden Gate Boulevard during only the PM peak hour, but no Level of Service deficiencies on the public roadway. Regardless, this intersection is shown to function acceptably after the addition of a traffic signal, which is approved, would be installed at the sole expense of the Developer. Therefore, beyond the potential additional traffic control improvements to the site access intersection to Golden Gate Boulevard, no additional intersection improvements will be required as a result of the proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan Amendment. However, as previously noted, the Developer has agreed to stipulations as part of the text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment that state the following. Development within this Sub - district shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of- -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days ofa written requestfrom the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certtficate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery stare must be the first C. 0, obtained. Page 25 Page 147 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. Specific site related turn lanes and improvements to the Golden Gate Boulevard /Wilson BOntevard intersection will be analyzed further at the re- zoning and SDP phase of the project. VIII. CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development is not anticipated to create any Level of Service deficiencies in the vicinity of the subject site. However, Golden Gate Boulevard east of Wilson Boulevard is projected to operate below acceptable Level of Service conditions in 2015 both with and without the trips from the proposed development. Collier County has plans to widen Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard but funding for this improvement is not currently identified in the 5 -year work program. The Developer has agreed to provide right -of -way along the project frontage and commit to proportionate fair share payments for intersection improvements at the Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard intersection in order to mitigate any Level of Service deficiencies. Additionally, the Developer of the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has agreed to phase the project until specific improvements have been completed. Furthermore, with the addition of a commercial development such as the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict in this area, significant impacts to trip lengths will occur based on the fact that residents in the area will travel much shorter distances to obtain the same goods and services that are now only available on Collier Boulevard or along Immokalee Road. Therefore, the proposed development will provide a significant benefit to the public within the Golden Gate Estates area. Page 26 Page 148 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. Based on a conceptual access plan for the project, intersection analysis was performed as a part of this report at the Golden Gate Boulevard intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3`a Street NW, the proposed site access, I" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard along with the Wilson Boulevard intersections with the site access and Immokalee Road. These intersections and approaches are shown to operate acceptably after the addition of the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development related traffic after the addition of a traffic signal at the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard. Turn lane analysis will be performed in depth at the SDP phase for the proposed development. Page 27 M Page 149 of 218 APPENDIX 8 A q## Page 150 of 218 TABLE 1A & 2A M • j Page 151 of 218 Page 152 of 218 m " z w rc � LIJ L g o w m y m � � Q w m o ' U w w ° = U Q ❑ W ° a £ Q I a m m in ii a � o z > r w z u U � U N K = p U LL 'o F y Q l I I I I m m m ry I I N m N %• J _ rr a e a Z z a rc u rc N N ry w w ry yQ LL w F z a U U z a F q+ U LL V O d = N O >= N T) W N w y N� N O Z O Z O Z WN `Wn w w O = O O 2 w a 2 Y >> ) T Y Y _ m � n K z W U LU o 0 0 maw J U K � Q a� 3 ry �o o R Q a ry m m ry m w 0. U u a a � N M O O m Q c O a N Y a 3 w � o v z z a o v o o g o f e d o ry ry ry �� ry ry ry � ry ry o rc u � ° r z x a a � U _U p N a a co rn V Q N ry v w 'o 'o a x m i vi v; ui 3 a` ui 3 w 3 w 0 0 x x a o � IY m p Page 152 of 218 O T O N W Cm G W U W ❑ W Q ❑ a _ f- u ~ Ln G W Z = a (4)y W C V, ti L F N Q Z L W U W F 00 U. Q Q Z. 2 ~' EL- C a W T i �fA< 0 U) W W IL F W L 9, Page 153 of 218 p rn W O J o c+i h Ir Q M cp o 0 o r of o Q N o 0 0 0 co, H J O z > U W O 0 O F o `° � W Q 2 0 � w J O p W Q� V N r Ol O t0 N � O q O (O N O t0 N N U = a LL z 7 w J O F W p � W 0 J O OJ O V O r O W O O O N M (O O N O O O O a0 O N r O O N r N O N O a x o � O W � 0 > 0 0 Z mm z — z Z w m m o 0 0 z 0 z 3 < < w < w w < w w w a� 0 cn 0 0 z 0 m 3 N e- Z CN") Z z U W W a QLLQ K ~ U w o (Y LL� U n y Q w_ 2 O 0 N 0 N Or 0 OM O M Q O O OM o O M r 0 N N N N °u\j N O O O O N 0 O � y t Z O z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J z z W E aI p N o � ry � r^ r � � �2 Q v > > a .n m m ii W a m () W of s ~ w > m :7 C V (9 > m C 9 0 -o 'O N n- m N U N > Q N C O v m C y m> N a 9 m m C y m C N d Y O N C 2 a m C O v m C U C7 v m C 9 (9 K O K o (7 0 0 z 0 0 `o vi o ui o o- w 3 w 3 ui vi z a vi z vi < = x Y w Q- J O O Y w a a J F O Y 3 p K j ° m U a > (7 y U m d °� O E a > >m 0 m° O j m w -moo _m O > W 9, Page 153 of 218 SUPPORTING INFORMATION GRAPHICS Page 154 of 218 • 2014 LANE ARRANGEME TRANSPORTATION AT ANALYZED INTERSEC' CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTERS ONS BDISTRICT Page 155 of 218 �O 1 2014 LANE ARRANGEMENTS �j TRANSPORTATION AT ANALYZED INTERSECTIONS CONSULTANTS, INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 156 of 218 VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD o�; k4(19) `► 9 (37) 0 orn � om w v� OlJ OJ W J J U IMMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD N RN �L.E S 000 X0(0) �0/0 l0 ♦0(0) r ♦ *,r2 (10) RANDALL (0) 0 % *% + 1* BOULEVARD (0)0 -► N ON (10)'2` aEE u u i LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC TRANSPORTATION PASS -BY SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 157 of 218 TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT RESULTS Page 158 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 1, 2007 8 A DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM -9:00 AM Page 159 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTUOUND COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SECTION LEFT THRU 0.1GHT 15 MIN TOTAL COLLIER BOULEVARD r � GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY L COLLIER BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 0 NORTHBOUND BEGIN SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 0 WESTBOUND EASTBOUND SECTION WESTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THIRD RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 79 107 186 BS 0 112 0 0 0 0 372 0 105 47B 776 7:15 AM 0 86 121 207 69 0 r34 76 0 0 0 0 212 0 109 321 604 7:30 AM 0 93 105 198 35 0 69 0 0 0 0 157 0 96 253 520 7:45 AM 0 95 93 188 38 0 48 0 0 0 0 123 0 81 204 440 8:D0 AM 0 107 88 195 41 0 64 0 0 0 0 96 0 76 172 431 8:15 AM 0 75 94 160 fit 0 86 0 0 0 0 133 0 104 237 492 8:30 AM 0 124 93 217 27 61 0 88 0 0 0 0 120 0 67 187 492 8:45 AM 0 101 82 1 183 L 23 49 0 72 D 0 0 0 1 99 0 69 168 423 TOTALJI 0 760 783 1 1,543 175 440 0 615 0 0 D 0 1,312 0 708 2,020 4 178 Page 159 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTUOUND COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SECTION LEFT THRU 0.1GHT HOUR TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 7:00 PM 0 INTER - BEGIN 305 NORTHBOUND 0 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEfT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 353 426 779 77 228 0 305 0 0 0 0 864 D 392 2,340 7:15AM 0 381 407 78B 74 183 0 257 0 0 0 0 1,256 588 7:30AM 0 370 300 750 92 175 0 267 0 0 0 0 509 0 0 362 357 950 866 1895 7:45 AM 0 401 368 769 85 201 0 2B6 0 0 0 0 472 D 328 800 1,883 1,855 8:00 AM 0 407 357 ]64 98 212 0 310 0 p 0 0 448 0 316 764 L83B Page 159 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTUOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU 0.1GHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL OTA TOTAL 7:00 PM 0 353 426 779 77 225 0 305 _ 0 0 0 0 864 0 392 2,340 Page 159 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 0 o% o y 0 0 Note'. Percents (%) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersection ratio COLLIER BOULEVARD 1,050 45% I 305 745 1 1 228 77 8A DATE: March 1, 2907 1 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 7:09 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR'. 100 AM - 8:00 AM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD 8 GOLDEN GATE 0 PARKWAY 426 COLLIER BOULEVARD 1,050 45% I 305 745 1 1 228 77 1 4 0 353 426 1 t 1,092 I 779 1,871 80% tw 392 /im 0 864 1,256 1,759 mill 75% 503 Page 160 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM Page 161 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN ATE PARKWAY INTER - DEGIN SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS j4COLOURLY 5:00 PM COLLIERB ULEVARD COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 0 373 0 144 INTER 2831 NORTHBOUND COLLIER BOULEVARD I GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY SECTION INTER - 15 MIN RIGHT NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU TOTAL SOUTHBOUND LEFT THRU I EASTBOUND TOTAL WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN 1,164 1,669 f03 260 0 383 0 0 0 0 368 TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 90 309 0 399 LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT ITOTAL 511 1,310 1,821 67 234 0 301 0 0 LLL 342 400 PM 0 137 243 380 37 66 0 103 0 0 0 0 64 0 57 121 604 4:15 PM 0 98 307 405 23 75 0 9B 0 0 0 0 116 0 80 176 579 4:30 PM 0 148 299 447 23 93 0 116 0 0 0 0 119 0 26 145 708 4:45 PM 0 122 315 437 20 46 0 66 0 0 0 0 69 0 42 111 614 500 PM 0 118 313 431 24 95 0 119 0 0 0 0 109 0 24 133 683 5:15 PM 0 123 383 506 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 37 82 588 530 PM 0 151 368 519 43 51 0 94 0 0 0 0 92 0 41 133 746 5:45 PM 0 147 372 519 70 56 0 126 0 0 0 0 127 0 42 169 614 TOTAL: 0 1044 2600 3,644 240 462 0 722 0 0 0 0 741 0 329 1,070 5, 436 Page 161 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN ATE PARKWAY INTER - DEGIN SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY LIER j4COLOURLY 5:00 PM COLLIERB ULEVARD GOLDENGATEPARKWAY 0 373 0 144 INTER 2831 NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU I RIGHT TOTAL 505 1,164 1,669 f03 260 0 383 0 0 0 0 368 185 553 486 1,234 1,720 90 309 0 399 413 D 152 565 ITOTAL 511 1,310 1,821 67 234 0 301 0 0 LLL 342 0 129 471 574 1,379 1,893 8] 792 0 2]9 0 0 315 0 144 459 539 1,436 1975 137 202 0 339_ 0 0 373 0 144 51 7 Page 161 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR jjj COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN ATE PARKWAY INTER - DEGIN SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION 5:00 PM i 975 137 202 0 339 0 0 0 0 373 0 144 517 2831 Page 161 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 0 0% s► y o l i We Percents I%) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersecllon traffic 2002 137 1 94 A 1 DAZE: COLLIER BOULEVARD DAY: 1,022 COUNT TIME: 36 I 339 683 ! t 2002 137 1 94 A 1 DAZE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR. 5:00 PM -G:O) PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY *1 t r 0 539 1,436 1 t 575 1.975 I 2,550 90 L144 4111111111 0 41111111111 /r 373 517 2,090 74 1,573 Page 162 of 218 DATE: March 13, 20�,, TRANSPORTATION DAY: TUESDAY A CONSULTANTS, INC. COUNT TIME: 7:OOAM- 9:O'OAAM 17 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 163 of 218 �- PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 3RD STREET HOUR � �L GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD J R- 1 MIN SECTION NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT SOUTHBOUND STREET - - GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - EASTBOUND TOTAL NORTHBOUND WESTBOUND SOUTHBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 2 0 20 22 7 375 6 388 2 1,023 2 1,027 1,467 28 0 6 3 99 2 104 1 319 2 322 439 700A 3 0 0 3 1 0 9 10 _ 0 1 24 1 1 14 7 303 16 326 1 699 2 702 1,066 7:15 AM 4 0 2 6 1 0 6 7 1 87 4 92 0 287 0 207 392 7:30 AM 5 0 4 9 0 0 3 3 2 103 0 105 0 241 0 241 358 7 2 106 0 108 1 255 1 267 389 745A 6 0 1 7 1 0 6 8:00 AM 8 0 0 8 0 0 5 5 2 79 2 83 1 230 1 232 320 6:16 AM 9 0 1 10 0 0 6 6 2 72 3 77 0 135 0 135 228 8:30 AM 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 65 7 73 0 174 0 174 252 Page 163 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR � ]RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD - SOUTHBOUND EASTe0UN0 WEST80UND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT 3RD STREET - - GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL NORTHBOUND 7:00 AM SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 0 24 SECTION 8 395 6 LEFT 18 THRU 0 RIGHT 7 TOTAL 25 _LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 3 0 24 27 LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU 6 395 6 409 2 1,112 RIGHT 3 TOTAL 1,117 TOTAL 7,578 r7:15 23 0 7 30 2 0 20 22 7 375 6 388 2 1,023 2 1,027 1,467 28 0 6 34 1 0 20 21 6 360 5 373 2 871 2 875 1, 25 0 2 21 2 1 10 21 7 322 12 341 2 804 2 808 1,197 _ 23 _ 0 1 24 1 1 14 7 303 16 326 1 699 2 702 1,066 Page 163 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR � ]RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND - SOUTHBOUND EASTe0UN0 WEST80UND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 18 0 7 25 3 0 24 27 8 395 6 409 2 1112 3 1,117 1.578 Page 163 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1,, 54 4m ;' 8 J 99% 395 y 409 B 1 Nctm _ Percents I%) represent movement volumes dwi0ea by Ne total lntersectlon balfic kA Ff March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 0:00 AM IN tERSE0110N'. 3RD STREET R GOLDEN GATE { 0 BOULEVARD AM 3 3RD STREET t 38 ♦ 2 2% I 27 „ 1 t { 0 3 1 4 AM 3 h t f' ♦ 2 X117 1,522 1 96 t 405 6 25 33 2V, AM 3 4iim ,.,12 ♦ 2 X117 1,522 96 405 Page 164 of 2 18 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE. March 13, 2007, DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM ! PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 3RD STREET HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I WESTBOUND SECTION ...I RIGH T TO TAL LEFT 3RD 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE GOLDEN GATE _ INTER - HOUR 15 MIN NORTHBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SOUTHBOUND STBOUND BEGIN WESTBOUND THRU SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL U RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 3 0 1 4 0 0 5 5 4 260 1 27C 1 272 541 4:15 PM 1 0 1 2 2 0 4 6 1 10 287 3 2]2 2 277 572 430 PM 5 0 3 8 0 0 1 1 6 294 6 183 0 189 492 4:45 PM 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 2 LTHRU 2 26] 0 152 4 156 427 5:00 PM 1 0 2 3 0 0 3 3 3 326 2 117 2 121 453 5:15 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 4 1 352 3 104 1 108 463 5:30 PM 0 0 1 1 D 0 1 1 1 6 448 1 135 1 137 587 5:45 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 4 4 374 1 134 0 135 512 10 24 3 0 17 20 7 35 2,608 17 1,367 11 1.395 4,047 ! PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 3RD STREET HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD I WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT RIGH T TO TAL LEFT 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD _ INTER - HOUR 9 NORTHBOUND 1 16 3 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 1106 10 87T T SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT _THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 9 0 7 16 3 0 11 14 18 1,066 22 1,108 10 877 7 694 2.032 4:90 PM 4:15PM 7 0 8 15 3 6 9 12 17 1.136 21 1.174 11 724 8 743 1,944 4 3O PM 8 0 7 15 1 0 6 7 18 1,209 12 1,239 1'1 556 7 574 1,835 4'.45 PM 3 0 5 6 1 0 6 7 17 1,364 12 1,393 6 500 8 522 1.930 5:00 PM 5 0 3 8 0 D 6 6 17 1,469 14 1,500 7 490 4 501 2,015 ! PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 3RD STREET - GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND I WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT RIGH T TO TAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 400PM 9 _THRU 0 7 1 16 3 0 11 14 18 1,068 22 1106 10 87T T 894 11 2032 Page 165 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 897 `_, 18 1 2,005 99% 1,068 1,108 22 WV Note'. Percents (N) represent movoment volumes divided by the tolat Intersection traffic 3RD SIKEE1 39 2% I 1 32 I 48 2,0 9 DATE: 14 DAY: TUESDAY 1 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 0 3 3RD STREET 8 GOLDEN GATL BOULEVARD 1 32 I 48 2,0 9 DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM 5:00 PN1 INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET 8 GOLDEN GATL BOULEVARD 25 t I f 10 7 ■ 16 �S 7 877 10 894 1,972 —, 97 1,078 Page 166 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:OD AM Page 167 of 218 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR 1ST STREET 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SECTION BEGIN NORTHBOUND GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - TOTAL LEFT 1ST STREET 1 S STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 15MIN INTER - HOUR NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND BEGIN ND TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU _RIGHT TOTAL _LEFT THRU BEGIN TOTAL TOTAL LEFT THRD HT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL LEFT 5 THRU 0 RIGHT 1 TOTAL 6 3 0 100 0 90 0 100 90 1 i 314 282 3 D 316 283 427 376 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 2 0 0 2 3 3 0 0 106 1 107 1 235 0 236 350 7:30 AM 5 0 1 6 1017 MSOUTHBOUND 1 1 108 0 108 1 261 0 262 376 7:45 AM 4 0 0 4 2 2 D 0 78 1 79 1 227 0 228 312 8:00AM 1 0 0 1 4 4 73 1 130 1 132 211 8:15 AM 4 0 1 5 1 1 0 73 0 0 64 2 66 1 167 1 169 244 8:30 AM 4 0 2 6 3 3 0 85 2 67 1 160 D 161 250 B 45 AM 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 704 6 710 8 1,776 5 1,789 2548 - TOTAL: 25 0 6 31 0 0 18 18 Page 167 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - HOUR 1ST STREET 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SECTION BEGIN NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL LEFT 1ST STREET 0 404 1 4D5 4 1,092 0 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - HOUR NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU _RIGHT TOTAL _LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL LEFT THRD 1 1,009 3 326 3 19 7 19 0_ 300_ 5 305 4 B45 2 690 1017 8:00 AM 0 13 0 _ 0 _9 _ Page 167 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - HOUR 1ST STREET SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGNT TOTAL 0 404 1 4D5 4 1,092 0 1 1,531 Page 167 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. ,.117 .. -► J 1.522 0 99% _' 404 y 405 1 mot Nola Percents I% represent movemenl volumes divided by the tolai intersection traffic 1ST STREET 12 1% I 9 0 0 1 L4 3 t DATE March 13, 2007 �' A DAY: TUESDAY VVV 6 COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 1 PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM 5 INTERSECTION: 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GAIL BOULEVARD L3 1.092 1� r4 1,505 406 Page 168 of 218 a1 1 i' 6 0 2 1 t 5 18 I 23 2% L3 1.092 1� r4 1,505 406 Page 168 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CATEc DAY: Mn,ch 13, 2007 TUESDAY HOU:77 /J N CONSULTANTS, INC. 1ST STREET COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM INTER - HOUR SECTION NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL B91 1,993 STREET II _- GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 4:15 PM INTEft- 0 0 NORTHBOUND 6 0 7_- 13 _. SOUTHBOUND 3 B EASTBOUND 4.30 PM WESTBOUND 0 7 SECTION q00PMiST LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4 500 7 519 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 5 247 1 253 1 269 2 272 528 4:15 PM 1 0 0 1 2 0 5 7 1 267 5 274 0 271 1 272 554 4:30 PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 279 9 289 2 186 2 190 484 4:45 PM 0 0 6 6 1 0 1 2 2 259 1 262 1 155 1 157 427 5:00 PM 4 0 1 5 1 0 0 1 7 312 3 322 0 117 4 121 449 5:15 PM 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 4 338 2 344 2 103 2 107 456 5:30 PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 4 5 436 1 442 1 133 0 134 582 5:45 PM 4 0 1 5 2 0 0 2 1 360 3 364 0 131 2 133 504 TOTAL: 17 0 8 25 10 0 13 23 26 2498 26 2,550 ] 1365 14 1,386 34984 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOU:77 1ST STREET 1ST STREET L GOLDEN G ATE BOULEVARD IF INTER - HOUR SECTION NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL B91 1,993 11 1.052 029 740 4:15 PM 7 0 0 44 6 0 7_- 13 17 19 1047 3 B 1,914 4.30 PM 9 0 7 16 4 C 4 0 14 1,188 15 1,217 5 561 9 575 1,016 4 45 PM 9 0 7 16 4 0 5 9 18 1,345 7 1.370 4 500 7 519 1,914 500 PM 13 0 2 15 5 0 4 9 W 1,446 9 1,472 — 3 484 0 495 1,991 Page 169 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOU:77 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL_ LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 400 P 6 10 5 0 9 _ 14 9 1,052 17 1,078 4 881 6 B91 1,993 Page 169 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 4111- 894 4mi 9 J 1,972 99% y 1,052 y 1,076 17 Ill Nole. Percents ( %I represent movement volumes divided by the total ANersectlon traffic 1ST STREET 29 1% I 14 1 0 5 A 4 15 1 Lb H 881 4iiiim 4r 4 891 4111111111111111, 1,954 —, 98% 1,063 Page 170 of 218 0 8 A UATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME'. 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM NTERSECHON: 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Lb H 881 4iiiim 4r 4 891 4111111111111111, 1,954 —, 98% 1,063 Page 170 of 218 ti t r 4 6 10 ■ 21 10 I 31 2/ Lb H 881 4iiiim 4r 4 891 4111111111111111, 1,954 —, 98% 1,063 Page 170 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 8 A DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM Page 171 of 218 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS PEAK HOUR SUMMARY WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD C- LEFT 19 WILSON BOULEVARD WESTBOUND SECTION IN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND BEG BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL HOUR BEGIN 7:0DAM 6 3 106 115 32 68 1 101 0 206 8 214 436 TOOAM 6 0 0 6 0 92 95 33 55 2 90 0 183 17 200 397 7:15 AM 8 2 2 12 3 73 89 36 70 1 107 1 159 11 171 373 7:30 AM 4 0 2 6 13 3 95 96 46 62 0 108 0 166 6 172 377 7:45 AM 1 0 0 1 1 0 87 98 18 59 1 78 2 137 12 151 331 8:O0AM 4 0 0 4 4 7 19 27 6 65 1 74 0 110 15 125 234 815 AM 3 3 2 8 6 2 56 60 5 60 1 66 1 111 16 128 256 8:3O AM 11 2 0 0 2 4 0 76 24 fit 0 86 1 93 17 105 270 8:45AM 1 2 0 3 7 2 67 595 656 202 501 7 770 5 1165 96 1 ?66 2,671 TOTAL: 29 7 6 42 44 17 HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD JLEFT WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION THIRD RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 2 4 25 23 6 366 395 147 255 4 406 i ]id 42 ]5] 1583 46 691 1,4]8 4 23 21 10 347 378 133 246 4 383 3 645 2 274 310 106 256 3 367 3 572 44 619 1,315 3 4 19 24 12 257 281 11 246 3 326 3 524 49 576 1,198 3 2 15 15 9 261 55 246 3 304 4 451 54 509 1 091 5 2 17 21 11 229 - Page 171 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY LEFT 19 NORTHBOUND THRU RIGHT 2 4 WILSON BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND TOTAL LEFT TNRU ftIGH7 TOTAL 25 23 6 366 395 LEFT 147 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD EASTBOUND WESTBOUND TNRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 255 d 406 1 714 42 757 INTER - SECTION TOTAL HOUR BEGIN 7:0DAM 1,583 Page 171 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. x,099 ~, 147 .T 95% 255 406 4 MV Note Percents (%) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersection traffic WILSON BOULEVARD 586 37 I 191 DATE DAY: COUNT TIME: 'FAY,HOUP- INIFRSECllO 395 h 1 1 366 6 23 «j 1 `► 191 DATE DAY: COUNT TIME: 'FAY,HOUP- INIFRSECllO March 13, 2007 H 8 A TUESDAY V 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 7:00 AM - 0:00 AM L WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDFN GAT[ 50111. EVAFn 42 714 «f0 57 10111111110 66% 282 Page 172 of 218 h 1 r' 19 4 12 ■ I 25 36 2% March 13, 2007 H 8 A TUESDAY V 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM 7:00 AM - 0:00 AM L WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDFN GAT[ 50111. EVAFn 42 714 «f0 57 10111111110 66% 282 Page 172 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER 15MIN BEGIN -- '—" NORTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL SOUTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL EASTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TDTAL WESTBOUND. LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL SECTION TOTAL 4:00 PM 2 1 1 4 13 3 91 107 43 199 5 247 1-179 11 191 549 4:15PM 3 0 1 4 9 4 75 88 44 222 3 269 2 194 23 219 580 4:30 PM 1 0 i 2 12 0 37 49 49 228 4 281 2 152 4 158 490 445 PM 2 0 1 3 6 0 35 41 31 229 6 266 0 120 8 128 438 5:00 PM 4 0 0 4 4 0 32 36 63 248 3 314 0 85 4 89 443 5:15 PM 0 1 2 3 13 1 53 67 73 262 3 336 1 54 3 58 466 5:30 PM 1 0 1 2 12 1 43 56 131 304 3 438 1 90 4 95 591 SAS PM 1 1 0 2 8 2 51 61 109 253 _ 1 363 0 81 2 83 509 TOTAL: 14 3 7 1 24 77 11 417 505 543 194528 2,516 1 7 955 59 1021 4066 Page 173 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER BEGIN NORTHBCI IND SECTION LEFT WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD TOTAL LEFT THRUHB RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRUTB RIIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRUESTRIGHTO TOTAL WILSON BOULEVARD 1 4 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 167 878 1B 1,063 INTER - HOUR HOUR BEGI LEFT NORTHBOUND THRU RIGHT TOTAL SOUTHBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 40 7 238 285 — 31 4 179 214 35 1 157 193 35 2 163 200 37 4 179 220 EASTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL 167 878 18 1,063 187 927 16 1,130 216 967 16 1,199 298 1,043 15 1,356 376 1,061 10 1,453 _ WESTBOUND LEFT THRU 5 645 4 551 3 411 2 349 2 310 RIGHT 46 39 19 19 13 TOTAL 696 594 433 370 325 SECTION TOTAL 2A57 1,951 1,837 1,836 2,009 4:00 PM 4:15PM 4.30PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 6 1 1 13 10 0 3 13 1 1 4 12 7 1 4 12 6 2 3 11 Page 173 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER BEGIN NORTHBCI IND SECTION LEFT TOTAL LEFT THRUHB RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRUTB RIIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRUESTRIGHTO TOTAL 4:00 PM 8 1 4 13 40 7 238 285 167 878 1B 1,063 5 645 4fi 696 2,057 Page 173 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. "- 891 ~' 167 J 95% 878 1,063 18 Note: Percents I %) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersection tragic WILSON BOULEVARD 499 24% I 285 1 8 7 40 1 t► 1 30 I 43 2,0 2114 ■ a1 t 8 7 13 DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:06 PM - 6:06 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:06 PM - 5:00 PM INT ERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD p 4 L46 4M 645 - 5 696 41111111111111111/ 1.618 79% 922 Total Intersection Traffic 2,057 Page 174 of 218 TRANSPORTATION I ( CONSULTANTS, INC. Page 175 of 218 8 A DATE: Fonrualy 28, 20017 WILSON BOULEVARD DAY: WEDNESDAY INTER - BEGIN COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD EASTBOUND Page 175 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD _ IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT WILSON BOULEVARD WILSON BOULEVARD ROAD IMMOI(ALEE ROAD LEFT THRU RIGHT TER - INTER- 15 NORTHBOUND NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND 179 38 14 70 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND SECTION WESTBOUND LEFT SECTION BEGIN BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 20 1 65 86 12 4 20 36 1 65 6 72 82 273 4 359 553 7:15 AM 6 0 15 23 3 2 22 27 2 60 2 64 23 294 3 320 434 7:30 AM 4 0 35 39 11 3 9 23 2 66 3 71 46 324 2 372 505 7:45 AM 3 0 28 31 10 5 19 34 1 46 3 50 41 250 4 295 410 800 AM 9 1 38 48 11 1 B 20 2 39. 4 45 31 260 8 299 412 815 AM 2 0 21 23 6 4 6 16 2 34 3 39 25 235 5 266 344 8:30 AM 4 0 20 24 4 6 12 22 5 51 8 64 21 196 7 224 334 8:45 AM 2 0 24 26 3 2 12 17 1 54 4 59 37 178 6 221 323 TOTAL: 52 2 246 300 R W 27 106 1 195 R 16 415 33 464 306 2,010 40 2,356 3,315 Page 175 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD _ IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT WILSON BOULEVARD IMMOKALEE ROAD LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TER - HOUR TOTAL NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 179 38 14 70 WESTBOUND 6 237 14 SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 700 AM 35 1 143 179 36 14 70 120 8 231 14 257 192 1,141 13 1,346 1,902 7.15 AM 24 1 116 141 35 11 58 104 7 211 12 230 141 1,126 17 1,286 1,761 7:30 AM 16 1 122 141 38 IIf 42 93 7 165 13 205 143 1,069 20 1,232 1,671 7:45 AM 16 1 lD7 92 8:00 AM 17 1 103 126 24 13 30 5 10 176 _ 19 208 114 869 27 1,010 1,413 Page 175 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD _ IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEF7 THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 700 AM 35 1 143 179 38 14 70 120 6 237 14 257 192 1 141 13 1,346 1 B02 Page 175 of 218 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1,246 - .0► 6 J 1,503 79% 111111111111, 237 257 14 01 Note: Percents ( %) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersection IM Mc WILSON BOULEVARD 140 7% 1 120 1 14 36 1 1► 1 220 1 399 21% 41 35 20 1 ■ ■ 179 143 L13 1 8A DATE: February 28, 2007 1,762 93 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM -9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 8'.00 AM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD S IMMOKALEE ROAD 143 L13 4M 1,141 192 a 1,346 «-�► 1,762 93 416 Page 176 of 218 Page 177 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS DATE.: February 28, 2007 � 8 y TRANSPORTATION IMMOKALEE WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND DAY: WEDNESDAY IMMOKALEE ROAD CONSULTANTS, INC. THRU RIGHT INTER - HOUR COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL WESTBOUND 30 SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE TOTAL ROAD 400P 26 — WILSON BOULEVARD 7 9 20 36 -- — IMMOKALEE ROAD 866 INTER 15 MIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 313 352 EASTBOUND 47 656 47 750 261 WESTBOUND 20 SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 6 1 29 36 0 3 2 5 11 51 4 66 57 150 7 214 321 4:15 PM B 4 77 89 2 1 9 12 10 111 9 130 54 149 6 209 440 4:30 PM 6 4 85 96 1 4 5 10 12 163 9 184 69 158 4 231 521 445 PM 6 5 86 97 4 1 4 9 13 189 21 223 66 140 6 212 541 5:00 PM 2 4 64 '- 70 6 3 7 16 12 193 8 213 72 140 4 216 515 5:15 PM 7 3 28 38 7 1 5 13 B 202 10 220 34 141 6 181 452 530 PM 15 1 96 112 4 5 5 14 13 226 22 261 53 136 7 196 583 Page 177 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD IMMOKALEE WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WILSON BO LEVARD IMMOKALEE ROAD LEFT THRU RIGHT INTER - HOUR LEFT NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL WESTBOUND 30 SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTALII LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHTT TOTAL TOTAL 400P 26 14 278 318 7 9 20 36 46 514 43 603 246 597 23 866 1,823 4:15 PM 22 17 313 352 13 9 25 47 47 656 47 750 261 587 20 86B 2,017 4:30 PM 21 16 264 301 1 10 9 21 48 45 747 43 640 241 579 20 840 2,029 445 PM 30 13 274 317 21 10 21 52 46 810 61 917 225 557 23 .005 2,091 5'. DO PM 29 10 268 307 19 12 18 49 41 797 67 905 187 546 22 755 2.016 Page 177 of 218 PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD IMMOKALEE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL _LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:45 PM 30 13 274 317 21 10 27 52 46 810 61 917 225 557 23 1 605 2,091 Page 177 of 218 �j TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS. INC. 608 ~, 46 J 73% y 810 wo 917 61 1 Note: Percents ( %) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersection lralfic DATE: February 28, 2007 4M 557 A DAY: WEDNESDAY �f 1,910 COUNT TIME: 4.00 PM -6!00 PM 1,105 PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM - 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: WILSON UOULEVARD & IMfdOKALEE ROAD 23 WILSON BOULEVARD 4M 557 ,_. j 225 805 �y 134 1,910 91% 1,105 6% I 52 82 1 1 10 21 1 `► 30 13 274 1 t 296 I 317 613 29, 23 4M 557 ,_. j 225 805 �y 1,910 91% 1,105 Page 178 of 218 2006 FDOT TRAFFIC INFORMATION CD - PEAK SEASON FACTORS Page 179 of 218 N q, I P. N CI. L a a, u v a N a W >.o u F br w F N r1 tJ O N U U P. Y W U M W r1 O c cJ 0 rn N O N O m m x N T rV O+ o w Im a <i m w U U Op wIi mi N m n x N To r mNmm rJO rnr woM���omo m - oNNNrim - r r io ,n �nT N.Im for rr inMo ri N N O O O m OI Ol Oi 01 al Ol O O O O O N .� N ri N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rl ry i-1 '{ r-I r-1 .y i-1 oom �mom�mvlw mrm�m TmmoN w mmm - . NNrr MriMMO1N N r-low Ino T m rnrnm mmm mm mmmc -- �oopotiNN. ..l . NN�Ia oop 00000m V JO t0 l0 lD r0 l0 16 t0 1p l0 r0 JO l0 m N l0 rD r0 LL � rO t0 r0 D r0 l0 lD UJ O ID l0 t0 'J 1p l0 r0 t0 tO l0 lO JO rO O lD t0 O. V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O P O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p P O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O p O O O O O O p p N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N w v' N m rll d' N m rl1 N m VJ N Dl �➢ !/i O r l+l O f\ ri m Vr N m\ N T 10 N O rD frl O r v' T N m 1 N 4 O N r T U V V O NNN O .-I N N O N N N O O\ N N O\ N NU N N N O O N N `I O N rl N O O N N fll O N N N O\\ N O O rl N T N m V O N O N NO N m m m N M M M f `t P o m T T Y 1 N o O b I O l O t O C � w m O t Ol O r Ol O t O O O O -1 ry N r-1 N N NNN N O O O Op00000 00000 OOOtJp OOg000O0000pNNri .I rINNNNr -INNNN mmmm mmmmmmJO JO mJOmwmmmJOm mmmwmmmm lammmmmmmm a mmJO JOm mlom mm opOOOppp000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 op00000000Opp0000000000p000g0000000000000000000000000 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ m rl1 N T Vl N O� l� rJl N Ol Ip N m \O M O r T N m T N m r/t N O IO M O JO ('1 O r M O r T m V1 N O YJ N OJ lD M O r V N O O N N N O N N N O rl rl (V O O N N M O N N N O N N N O O N N M N N N O N N N O O e-i N N O N ry NON N N M vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvyvvv` �� vvvv`�v�vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv \� -1 rI �INNNN I I l'1 M1'1 d' TNJI r(1 ✓)10 r0 IP t" IIIII., O O O O O N NNrIryNNNN T T r r O O O O O o O O O o o O O O O O O O O O O O O O p i7 O O c'> II O O O m g O O O o N N ri '-I N N N r-1 N M T��o rwmo.iN �'m ror Nm..� rn m o, O, uwJOr moNNM Trnmrmm o.yNM ..NNN c� r,N .1 N<JN umrJm 11 aJmmmm � d � T T T a TT Trn rn min O m� w W VI O � N N N w b x a Page 180 of 218 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS Page 181 of 218 AGR (Colller Blvd.) = 4.38% WE ANNUAL ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS GROWTH GROWTH BASED ON AUIR HISTORICAL DATA RATE 4.38% 2006 2010 2.00% -7.68% CURRENT AUIR AUIR YRS OF ROADWAY SEGMENT ID# VOLUME VOLUME GROWTH Collier Boulevard S. of Vanderbilt Beach Rd 30.2 2012 , 2,388 4 -3.01% S. of Golden Gate Blvd 31.1 2,938 2,134 4 2.00% S. of Pine Ridge 32.1 2,400 2,170 4 Immokalee Road E. of Colller Blvd 44 2,027 2,094 4 E. of Wilson Blvd 45 1,773 1,947 4 Golden Gate Blvd E. of Collier Blvd. 17 2,018 1,786 4 W. of 3rd Ave 17 2018 , 1,786 4 Project Frontage 17 2,018 1,786 4 E. of Wilson Blvd 123 1,480 1,083 4 W. of Everglades Blvd. 123 1,480 1.083 4 4 Wilson Blvd S. of Immokalee Rd. 4 N. of Site 118 Project Frontage 3'4 118 S. of Golden Gate Blvd 2 118 • All traffic volumes were taken from the 2006 & 2010 Annual Upoate Inventory Report (AUIR) •• In instances where the historical data indicates a reduction in traffic or insufficient data was available to calculate a growth rate due to construction, a minimum annual growth rate of 2.0% was assumed. A 2% growth rate was assumed for Wdson Blvd- due to the lack of data In Ine AUIR report SAMPLE GROWTH RATE CALCULATION 2010 AUIR ^(Vvrs of Growth) Annual Growth Rate (AGR) _ 1 -1 2006 AUIR 2,388 ^ivn� AGR (Collier Blvd.) _ -1 2,012 AGR (Colller Blvd.) = 4.38% WE ANNUAL ACTUAL GROWTH GROWTH RATE RATE 4.38% 4.380v 2.00% -7.68% 2.00% -2.49% 2.00% 0.82% 2.37% 2.37% 2.00% -3.01% 2.00% -3.01% 2.00% - 3.01% 2.00% -751% 2.00% - 7.51°/ 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00% Page 182 of 218 HCS+ INTERSECTION ANALYSIS • Page 183 of 218 COLLIER BOULEVARD @ GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD MA1 • Page 184 of 218 Short Report Page I of I SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP .Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants ate Performed 412,312008 lime Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvdc_�Colliei Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction CollicrCounty Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume(vph) 1021 463 442 533 114 337 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95. 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 1 120 1 12.0 1 12.0 1 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 'hasinq WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 65.0 JG= G= G= G= 10.0 G= 25,0 G= G= Y= 7 1Y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 1Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0_ Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1075 414 465 561 120 355 Lane Group Capacity 1862 857 1057 2266 286 1734 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.48 0.44 0.25 0.42 0.20 Green Ratio 0.54 0.54 0.21 0.81 0.08 0.34 Uniform Delay d1 18.3 17.1 41.4 2.8 52.2 28.0 Delay Factor k 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.0 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 18.8 17.5 41.7 2.8 53.2 28.0 Lane Group LOS B B D A D C Approach Delay 18.4 20.4 34.4 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Delay 21.7 Intersection LOS C .;opyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSJ11 Version 5.21 fileWC:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k20E.tmp Generated: 4/2412008 9:02 AM 4/24/2008 Page 185 of 218 Short Repotl rake 1 o) i SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Anaiysl RLF' Agency or Co. 7R Transportation Consultants Date 1 erfotmed 4123,12008 Time Period AM Peak I lour Volume and Timinr Input Intersection ,.�frier �a(e BIvdLDCollier Blvd Area Type All other areas Ju rlF rilCPOn r'41wi Colully Analysis Year 2014 Buildoul G= 10.0 F WB NB S IT TH RT CI TH RT LT TH RT LT TH Number of Lanes NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 2 1 1086 3 2 2 3 Lane Group 132 355 L R 1 R L T Volume (vph) 2266 286 1734 1032 v/c Ratio 469 442 555 125 337 % Heavy Vehicles 0.44 0.26 0.46 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.21 0.81 0.95 0,34 0.95 Uniform Delay d1 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) 17.2 41.4 A 52.4 A A A A A Startup Lost Time 1 0.11 2.0 041 2.0 0.11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 0.5 0.4 2.0 0.3 2.0 1.2 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 1.000 3 3 1.000 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 18.9 3.0 17.6 3.0 41.7 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 1 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Approach Delay 18.5 12.0 1 35.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 1 0 N N 0 N N 0 Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3,2 J 32 1Aro ( -I- I m 1 I rid I SR Only I Thru & RT 1 07 71 u G= 65.0 G= G= G= G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= 1G= Timing Y= 7 1y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 Y IY= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 I Cycle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1086 420 465 584 132 355 Lane Group Capacity 1862 857 1057 2266 286 1734 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.49 0.44 0.26 0.46 0.20 Green Ratio 0.54 054 0.21 0.81 0.08 0,34 Uniform Delay d1 18.4 17.2 41.4 2.8 52.4 28.0 Delay Factor k 0.17 1 0.11 0.11 041 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 18.9 17.6 41.7 2.8 53.6 128.0 Lane Group LOS 8 B D A D C Approach Delay 18.5 20.1 35.0 Approach LOS B I C C Intersection Delay 21 7 Intersection LOS Copyright* 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS, W Version 5 21 Ste: / /C:ADo(;utnents and Settings \r1pALoca1 SettingsV'l'emp \s2k21F.tmp I U Generated: 4124)2008 902 AM 4/24/2008 Page 186 of 218 31101L KCporL . -I- . .. SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants ate Performed 4/23/2008 ,me Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Collier Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB NJB NB SB LT TH R1 LT Ill RT LT TH R "I LT l H RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 441 170 675 1798 203 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 1 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 12 hasing WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only Thru & RT 07 08 Timing G= 44.0 1 G JG= G- 11.0 1G = 45.0 G= G= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 Y= 1Y= Duration of I I Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB S8 Adjusted Flow Rate 464 153 711 1883 214 315 Lane Group Capacity 1260 580 1903 2242 315 2622 v/c Ratio 0.37 0.26 0.37 0.84 0.68 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay d1 27.8 26.6 27.3 7.4 52.8 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.38 0.25 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 02 012 0.1 5.8 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 #3. 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.0 Et 274 58.6 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C B E B Approach Delay 27.7 15.1 32.6 Approach LOS C 8 C Intersection Delay 19.7 Intersection LOS 8 ipyright C 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +1M Version 5.21 file:HC:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k230.tmp Generated: 4/24/2008 9:02 AM 4/24/2008 Page 187 of 218 Short Keport u6, a v, , SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Rtf Agency or Co TH Transportation Consultants Duto Peronwr d 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour hi �tir;n Golden Gate Blvd @Collier BIvg1 Area Type All other areas Jun ii :Ion Collier County Aruly iaYear 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 515 207 675 1663 236 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 095 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Onl 02 03 04 S8 Only Thru & RT 07 08 G= 44.0 G= G= G= G= 11.0 G= 45.0 G= G= Timing Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 Cycle Length C = 1200 . Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 542 192 711 1861 248 315 Lane Group Capacity 1260 580 1903 2242 315 2622 Win Ratio 0.43 0.33 0.37 0,87 0.79 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay dt 1 28.6 1 274 27.3 8.0 53,4 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.33 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.3 0.1 4.2 12.5 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.8 27.7 27.4 12.2 65.9 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C C B E B Approach Delay 28.5 16.2 37.4 Approach LOS C B D Intersection Delay 21.5 Intersection LOS C copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All nights Reserved HGS,rM Version 5.21 file:HC:ADocuments and Settings \rtp \Local SettingsV "IempAs2k24 Lhnp Generated: 424/2008 0:02 n,., 4/24/2008 Page 188 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 3rd STREET NW WE Page 189 of 218 Two -Way Stop Control .ur"r -. Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSJT Version 5.21 Generated: 4/242008 9:L file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2kIP5.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 190 of 218 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information RLP - -- Intersection Golden Ga e NW NW 3rd St nal st encvlCo TR l ransport itur Corr_ farms 11' ri�,l anon CDllier County Date Performed 41231'200L vas[ sls Year 2014 Back round ml /sis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Sho Lin,q Center Subdistact East /West Street Golden Gate Boulevard North /South Street: 3rd Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East- West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 L Eastbound 2 T 3 R 4 L Westbound 5 1 T 6 R Volume veh/h) Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 10 0.95 439 0.95 10 0.95 5 0.95 1372 0.95 5 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR vehlh 10 462 10 5 1444 5 vy Vehicles 2 Raised curb zed 0 0 =Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 L T R L T R nal 0 — — -- — 0 Northbound 8 9 10 Southbound 11 12 T R L T R PHFI t;7 30 32 tor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 te, HFR 0 31 0 0 33 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade 1 %) 0 0 F lared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound R Northbound Southbound R Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 10 5 31 33 C (m) (ve463 1086 771 369 Vic 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.09 95% queue a(s/veh) 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.29 Control D12.9 8.3 9.9 15.7 LOS B A A C pproach 9.9 15.7 ,Approach LOS A C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSJT Version 5.21 Generated: 4/242008 9:L file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2kIP5.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 190 of 218 Two -Way Stop Control —I— . ­ . Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS *' "' Version 5.2t file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F8.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 191 of 218 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information — — – - -- RLP _ —.__ - Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ NW 3rd SI �al st enc /Co. TR Trans o lotion Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County ..ate Performed 4123/2008 nal sls Year 2014 Buildout nalysis Time Period M Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shoppin2 Center Subdistrict East/West Street. Golden Gate Boulevard I NorthlSourn Street. 3rd Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs) 025 Vehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments Eastbound Westbound Ma'or Street 3 4 5 6 Movement 1 2 T R L T R L Volume vehlh 20 490 10 0.95 5 0.95 1407 0.95 10 0.95 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 21 515 10 5 1481 10 veh /h 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -. Raised curb Median Type 0 RT Channelized 0 1 Lanes 1 2 1 1 L 2 T R Configuration L T R 0 U stream Signal 0 Northbound Southbound Minor Street 8 9 10 11 1 12 Movement 7 L T R L T R 30 37 /olume veh /h) eak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 31 0 0 38 veh /h 0 2 0 0 p Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 0 RT Channelized 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 R Conti uration R Dole Queue Len th, and Level of Service , pproach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Movement R Lane Configuration L L R v (veh /h) 21 5 31 38 C (m) (vehlh) 446 1038 741 359 Vic 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.11 95% queue length 0.15 0.01 0.13 0.35 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.5 8.5 10.1 162 LOS B A g C Approach Delay (s /veh) — 10.1 16.2 LOS B C Approach ron nnna onr ek Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS *' "' Version 5.2t file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F8.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 191 of 218 Two -Way Stop Contiol -'O- - -- - Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All R ights Reserved HCS -1m Version 5.21 oenerareu. 4i24;2 NE 9.6. file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings\Temp \u2k1 FB.tinp 41241200E Page 192 of 218 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information RLP Intersection Golden Gate Btvd (a NW 3rd St t ^ /Co. TRTransportationConsultants 77didial Collier County erformed r 4 /23/2008 nal vsls Year 2014 Backcround is Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates sho my Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North /South Street: 3rd Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West StUdy Period (hrs) 0,25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movement 1 L Eastbound 2 T 3 R 4 L Westbound 5 T 6 R olume veh /h Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 21 0.95 1257 0.95 26 0.95 15 0.95 1089 0.95 10 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 22 1323 27 15 1146 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 1 2 Median Tye RT Channelized Raised curb 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration Upstream Signal L T 0 R L 1 T 0 R Minor Street Movement 7 Northbound 8 9 10 Southbound 11 12 t T R L T R Volume veh/h Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 19 0.95 0.95 0.95 17 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR vehlh) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 20 2 1 0 0 0 0 I 17 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 1 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 Configuration I Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound 1 R Northbound 0 0 Southbound 1 R ent 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 nfiguration L L R R ) 22 15 20 17 eh /h) 600 0.04 506 0.03 404 0.05 463 004 eue length 0.11 0.09 0.16 0.11 Delay (s eh) 11.2 12.3 14.4 13.1 B B B B ch Delay (s /veh) 14.4 13.1 ch LOS _ B B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All R ights Reserved HCS -1m Version 5.21 oenerareu. 4i24;2 NE 9.6. file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings\Temp \u2k1 FB.tinp 41241200E Page 192 of 218 iwu - yv ay owp wiuwr TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information 0 All -- - - - - - -- -- Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 3rd St NW -- -____- nal st — RLP -iency /Co. TR Transportation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County de Performed 412312008 Analysis Yeal 2014 Buildout LAnalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour_ - _ Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard INorthISouth Street: 3rd Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period hrs 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 51 1432 26 15 1287 20 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 53 1507 27 15 1354 21 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Median Tye Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration t_ T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h 19 42 yak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 sourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 20 0 0 44 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound I Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh /h) 53 15 20 44 C (m) (veh /h) 495 430 352 395 Vic 0.11 0.03 0.06 0.11 95% queue length 0.36 0.11 0.18 0.37 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.1 13.7 15.8 15.3 LOS B B C C Approach Delay (s /veh) 15.8 15.3 pproach LOS C C )pyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HGS-TM Version 5.21 file: / /C:Allocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2klFE.tmp Generated: 4124/2008 9:02 AM 4/24/2008 Page 193 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ SITE ACCESS • 1 Page 194 of 218 Short Keport i ar" a vi i SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Consuliant Agency or Co. to Performed 412312008 I , Ime Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Access Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Yeal_ 2014 Buildoul Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 2 1 1 1 L2ne6roup L T T R L R Volume (vph) 35 485 1397 52 30 25 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 120 12.0 12.0 Parking /GradelParking N 0 Al N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 _ 3.2 hasing I EB Only EW Perm 1 03 04 SB Only 06 07 08 G= 8.0 JG= 72.0 1 G= G= G= G= Timing Y= 6.5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Lan th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 37 511 1471 34 32 11 Lane Group Capacity 242 2557 2128 869 301 269 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.20 0.69 0.04 0.11 0.04 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 0.60 0.60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay d1 10.7 5.5 16.4 9.6 42.4 42.0 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11.0 5.5 17.4 9.8 42.6 42.0 Lane Group LOS B A 8 A D D Approach Delay 5.9 17.2 1 42.4 Approach LOS A R D Intersection Delay 14.8 Intersection LOS B .opyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +T/^ Version 5.21 fileWCADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \s2k252.tmp Generated: 4/24/2008 9:03 AM 4/24/2008 Page 195 of 218 J11U11 f�U(JUIL SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Consultant Agency or Co. Date Performed 412312008 lime Period PM Peak Hour lion Golden Gate Blvd @ Sfte Access w Area Type Al) other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Nolysis Yeal 20 i 4 t3mkl d Volume and Timinc In Jut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TI RT T TH R1 LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 2 1 Lane Group L T T R L R Volume (vph) 115 1336 1184 145 203 138 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 ]210 .0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour W32 Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 Phasinq EB Onl 8.0 EW Perm G-_ 72.0 03 G= 04 G= SB Onlv G= 20.0 06 G= 07 G= OB G= aofG= Y= 6.5 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Del ay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 121 1406 1246 32 214 129 Lane Group Capacity 304 2557 2128 969 301 269 vlc Ratio 0.40 0.55 0.59 0.14 0.71 0.48 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 0.60 0.60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay dt 9.2 17.7 14.8 10.5 47.3 45.3 Delay Factor k 10.11 10,15 0.18 0.11 0.27 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.1 7.6 1.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 10.1 8.0 15.2 10.5 54.9 46.6 Lane Group LOS B A B B D D Approach Delay 8.2 14.8 51.8 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Delay 15.6 Intersection LOS B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved 11C, +JM Version 5.21 Generated: arevi<wa 9.0. frle: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp\Local Settings \T en1p\s2k263.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 196 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 1st STREET NW ME Page 197 of 218 two - way )TOP I_011001 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY N General Information Site Information ' l RLP Intelsec[i011 Golden Gate Blvd NW @1S, St nal st A envy /Co ITR Trat�sfjortation Cons dtants Junsdlchon CotlierCounty Date Performed 141231200B anal sls Year 2014 Back round na;vsis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shop inq Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North /South Street 1st Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West Stud Period Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh /h 5 459 5 5 1367 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h) 5 483 5 5 1438 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — 2 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes —1-2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 B 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh /h) 21 15 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h) 0 0 22 0 0 15 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 Configuration R R [Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 B 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh /h) 5 5 22 15 C (m)(vehlh) 466 1071 759 371 V/c 0.01 0 00 0.03 0.04 95% queue length 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.13 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.8 8.4 9.9 15.1 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (slveh) 9.9 15.1 Approach LOS — _ A C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, Alt Rights Reserved HCS jM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9A, tile: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2kIE9.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 198 of 218 two - way stop uontrof General Information 4Analyst iency /Co. to Performed Description F0801.31 -10- lest Street: Golden Gate Bof ction Orientation: East -Wes :le Volumes and Adjust Street T 1 -1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1s( St NW Jurisdiction lCollier County Analysis Yea 12014 Buildout I Configuration 1st Street Movement 1 2 1 3 4 5 b Configuration L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 21 489 5 5 1424 20 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 095 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 22 514 5 5 1498 21 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 R v(veh /h) 2 5 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 26 0 435 1043 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0.16 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 16.0 L T R L T R olume (veh /h C 21 — 25 :ak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 22 0 0 26 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration I R R Delay, Queue Len th and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement. 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 22 5 22 26 C (m) (veh /h) 435 1043 742 354 v/c 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.07 95% queue length 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.24 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.7 8.5 10.0 16.0 LOS 8 A A C Approach Delay (s /veh) — 10.0 16.0 Approach LOS A C rpyright ® 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS. M Version 5.21 fflel /C:U3locuments and Settings \r1p \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1EC.tmp Generated: 4124/2008 9:00 AM 4/24/2008 Page 199 of 218 two -way �_UUUUI TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY t General Information Site Information l St RLP nlersection -- - - -� Golden Gato Q vd @ 1sr St NW nc /Co, VDatp TR Transportation Consultants Jurisdiction —' CollrerCounty Performcd 4/23/2008 nal s's Year 2014 Back round l sis,Time Period -- PM Peak Hou- — Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shopping Cun(er Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North/South Street 1st Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation. East -West Strom Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh /h 15 1241 20 5 1097 10 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 15 1306 21 5 1154 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — 2 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 15 17 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 095 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 15 0 0 17 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Dela , Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (vehlh) 15 5 15 17 C (m) (veh /h) 596 516 410 460 VIC 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 95% queue length 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.11 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.2 12.0 14.1 13.1 LOS B B B B Approach Delay (s /veh) 14.1 13.1 Approach LOS — 8 B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +IM Version 5.21 Generated: 42412008 9.0t file:YC:ADocuments and Settings \dpALocal Settings \Temp \u2k1 LF.tmp 4/24/200 Page 200 of 218 Iwo -Way Stop Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY G I I f ation Site Information N M"oi ntersection n enera orm Jurisdiction naI It nal sis Year RLP jenc /Co. Intersection TR Transin ,ate Performed 412312008 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments nalysis Time Period PM Peak h N M"oi ntersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St NW Jurisdiction Collier Count nal sis Year 2014 Buildout Intersection Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North /South Street: 1st Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West jqtudy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 75 1444 20 5 1252 74 Peak -Hour Factor, PFIF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 78 1520 21 5 1317 77 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 Median Tye Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h ) 15 77 leak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h 0 0 15 0 0 81 Percent Heav Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh /h) 78 5 15 81 C (m) (veh /h) 487 427 349 407 vlc 0.16 0.01 0.04 0.20 95% queue length 0.57 0.04 0.13 0.73 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.8 13.5 15.8 16.0 LOS B 8 F C C pproach Delay (s /veh) 15.8 16.0 Approach LOS C C Copyright ® 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS♦TM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/2412008 9:01 At file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \u2kIP2.tmp 4/24/200; Page 201 of 218 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ WILSON BOULEVARD Page 202 of 218 4hnrt Renort . -5- . -1 . SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information IV Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson i Analyst RLP nterseclior Blvd TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Area Type All other areas to Performed 412312008 Jurisdiction Collier County Ime Period AM Peak Hour Anaiysls Year 2014 Background - Volume and Timing In ut SB NB EB VV LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 174 301 5 5 864 51 20 5 5 31 10 493 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 10.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 120 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 'hasing Excl. Left EB Onl EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 8.0 G= 24.0 G= 42.0 G= G= 26.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1183 131 7 0 5 909 48 31 44 440 Lane Group Capacity 662 19 51 871 483 1241 554 325 319 937 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.73 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.47 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.59 Uniform Delay dt 9.9 13.3 12.1 20.5 34.1 26.1 37.6 38.0 13.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 PF Factor Control Delay 10.1 13.4 12.1 20.5 36.4 26.2 37.7 38.1 14.2 Lane Group LOS B B B C D C D D B Approach Delay 12.2 35.8 37.7 16.4 Approach LOS B D D B Intersection Delay 25.1 Intersection LOS C pion noon °.ne ei �opydghl0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSJ version 5.27 °" °' °• fileWCADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \s2k27A.tmp 4124/200 Page 203 of 218 Snort xeport SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co - H Transportation Consultants Date Performed 4 12312008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Golden Gate Blvd P Wilso elsech''Ir Blvd Area Type All other areas jurisdlchon Collier County Anaiysis Yea: 2014 Euildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 179 321 10 5 904 58 32 9 5 41 15 513 °7o Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 095 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A I A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N el 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EB ON EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 8.0 G= 24.0 G- 42.0 G= G= 26.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 JY= 7 Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Grou Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 188 338 5 5 952 56 48 59 1461 Lane Group Capacity 649 1851 871 476 1241 554 310 311 937 v/c Ratio 0.29 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.77 0.10 0.15 1 0.19 0.49 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 10.22 1 012 0.59 Uniform Delay of 10.7 13.4 12.2 20.5 34.7 26.3 38.1 38.4 14.1 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 of 0.2 0.3 0.4 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1 000 1.000 jimo 1.000 Control Delay 11.0 135 12.2 20.5 37.6 26.4 38.3 38.7 14.5 Lane Group LOS B B B C D C D D B Approach Delay 12.6 369 38.3 17.3 Approach LOS B D D B Intersection Delay 26.0 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSatM Version 5.21 eeeneratea. gr<aveuun elf fite:HC:ADOGUruents and Settings \rip \Local Settings \TempAs2k28B.tnlp 4/24/200F Page 204 of 218 �nnrt Kenort SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Tiensportation Agency or Co. Consultants de Performed 412312008 ..me Period PM Peak I lour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Cother County Analysis Year 2014 B_ckground r Volume and Timing In Lit FB WB NB SQ LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 197 1038 21 10 781 56 10 5 5 54 10 321 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 10 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12,0 120 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 'hasing Excl. Left G= 5.0 EB F25. JEW G= Perm G= 45.0 04 G= NS Perm G= 06 07 08 Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 1Y= 1Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 I C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Ca acity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 207 1093 17 11 822 54 21 68 264 Lane Group Capacity 682 2069 923 257 1330 594 328 289 897 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.53 0.02 0.04 0.62 0.09 0.06 0.24 0.29 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 738 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.57 Uniform Delay d1 8.3 15.1 1015 20.5 30.5 24.3 38.1 39.5 13.5 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 8.5 15.3 10.5 20.6 31.4 24.3 1 138.2 1 40.0 13.7 Lane Group LOS A 8 B C C C D D B Approach Delay 14.2 1 30.8 38.2 19.1 Approach LOS 8 C D B Intersection Delay 20.8 Intersection LOS C 'opyright O 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + " Version 5.21 file: / /C: \Docmnents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k29C.tmp oeneiareu. +avcvvo 9.04 rav 4/24/2008 Page 205 of 218 anon lceporf SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TH iransportabon Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 4 12312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd e Area Type All other areas JUFS0;cdon Collier County Ana'ysis Year 2014 Guildout Volume and Timing In put EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT Tll RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L .1 R L T R L7R LT R Volume (vph) 237 1160 62 10 901 90 49 17 5 99 25 381 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 20 20 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 120 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3 2 1 3.2 J 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EB Only EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 5.0 G= 25.0 G= 45,0 G= G= 250 G= G= G- Timing Y= 6 1Y= 0 iy= 7 Y JY= 7 Y= 1Y= IY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 1 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WD NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 249 1221 60 11 948 89 75 130 327 Lane Group Capacity 641 2069 923 235 1330 594 222 282 897 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.59 0.07 0.05 0.71 0.15 0.34 0.46 0.36 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.57 Uniform Delay d1 11.1 15.9 10.8 20.5 32.0 24.8 40.5 41.6 14.2 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.28 0.11 0.11 041 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.8 0.1 0.9 1.2 0.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11.5 163 10.9 20.6 33.8 25.0 41.4 42.8 14.5 Lane Group LOS B B B C C C D D B Approach Delay i5.3 329 41.4 22.5 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Delay 22.9 Intersection LOS C Copyright 02005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSt'M WTSInn 5.21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlpALocal SettingsV'hempAs2k2Al).tmp Generated 4/24/2008 9:04. 4/24/2008 Page 206 of 218 L� WILSON BOULEVARD @ SITE ACCESS Page 207 of 218 w TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information — -- – nal st - RLF – uriusection Wison BNd fil Site Access enc /Co. TRTransporta_tionConsrdtants Jurisdiction lCoffier County Date Performed 412312008 12014 Buddout nal sis Time Period AM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Sho pwq Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Site Access North /South Street. Wilson Boulevard Intersection Orientation: North -South - --IStudy Period hrs : 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 11 235 554 11 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 11 247 0 0 583 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 — Median Tye Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration L T T R U stream Si nal 0 Eastbound 0 Minor Street Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 I_ T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 15 15 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 795 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 15 0 15 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 t 0 0 0 Configuration L R _ Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh /h) 11 15 15 C (m) (veh /h) 992 329 516 v/c 0.01 0.05 0.03 95% queue length 0.03 0.14 0.09 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.7 16.5 12.2 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s /veh) 14.3 Approach LOS _ B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS,"' Version 5.21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlpUmeal SettingsV"I'emp \u2k2F5Anip Generated: 4/24/2008 9:05 "' 4/24/2008 Page 208 of 218 J Wu - wny awP �.ourwt TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information n st RLP Intersection Wilson Blvd @ Site Access enc lCo. TR Transportation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County In Performed 4123/2008 ysis Year 2014 Buildout nal sls Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict EastlWest Street: Site Access North /South Street Wilson Boulevard Intersection Orientation: North -South IStudy Period hrs :0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 46 298 445 43 Peak -Hour Factor PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR (veh /h) 48 313 0 0 468 45 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume veh /h 71 60 peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 095 0.95 0.95 Curly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 74 0 63 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh /h) 48 74 63 C (m) (veh /h) 1063 307 599 vlc 0.05 0.24 0.11 95% queue length 0.14 0.92 0.35 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.5 20.4 11.7 LOS A C B Approach Delay (s /veh) 16.4 Approach LOS C .. Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings\Temp \u2k2P8.tmp Generated: 4/2412008 9:05 AM 4/24/2008 Page 209 of 218 WILSON BOULEVARD @ IMMOKALEE ROAD M M �. Page 210 of 218 3110I1. RCpUR i arc r Ui i SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants ate Performed 412312008 nme Period AM Peak Hour Imnokalee Rd @ Wilson Intersection Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Ye_:r 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB VJB NB SB LT TH RT LT 111 1 RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L i R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 10 302 18 245 1456 17 47 5 193 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 0 2.0 1 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 1 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 hasing I Excl. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 7.0 G= 37.0 G= 38.0 G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 JY= 0 Y= 7 1Y= JY= 7 Y= Y= 1Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 14 258 1533 13 54 166 41 86 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 202 243 Vic Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.03 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.28 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay d1 53.5 29.9 28.3 22.1 12 1 8.5 45.3 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.5 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 54.0 30.0 28.3 22.1 12.2 8.5 46.1 9.5 45.2 467 Lane Group LOS D C C C B A D A D D Approach Delay 30.7 13.6 18.5 1 46.2 Approach LOS C B a D Intersection Delay 18.0 Intersection LOS B ipyrighl0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2IQBE.tmp Generated: 02412008 9:04 AM 4/24/2008 Page 211 of 218 Ouinr 1 -.-. SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst HIP Agency or Cu. /R Transportation Consultants Dale Performed 4123.12008 lime PerioJ AM f eak Hour Immokalee Rd 0 Wilson !Irfersed'or. JIvd Area Type All other areas JurisdlcCion Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WD NB SB L1 TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT Number of I anes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L 7- R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 10 302 24 251 1456 17 50 5 196 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A I A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 20 20 2.0 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 30 3.0 30 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left VV OnI Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 7.0 G= 37.0 G= 38.0 G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 JY= Y= 7 Y= Y= ly = Duration of Anal sis firs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 20 264 1533 13 58 169 41 86 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 201 243 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.04 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.30 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0 15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay d1 53.5 29.9 28.4 22.1 12.1 8.5 45.4 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 54.0 30.0 284 22.2 12.2 8.5 46.3 9.5 45.2 46.7 Lane Group LOS D C C C B A D A D D Approach Delay 30.6 . -13.6 18.9 46.2 Approach LOS C B B D Intersection Delay 18.1 Intersection LOS B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2000 9:05 h... file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlpALocal SettingsV'TempAs2k2CN.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 212 of 218 Short 1 -eport SHORT REPURI General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Intersection mmokalee Rd @ Wilson TR Tra nsporta ttoo Blvd Agency or Co. Consultants Area Type All other areas to Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County i .,me Period PM Peak Hour _ Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timin In ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L. T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 78 287 710 29 40 18 369 23 15 23 Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 10.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ion 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 TOR Volume p3 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 120 de /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N ur Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 hasin Excl. Left I WB Only Thru 8 RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 OB G= 9.0 G= 24.0 G= 48.0 G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 JY= 7 1Y= IY= 7 ly= ly= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 1 Cycle Len th I Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 72 302 747 25 61 336 24 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 228 857 212 271 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.11 0.27 0.25 0.03 0.27 0.39 0.11 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.16 0.54 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.6 30.0 11.3 9.8 44.4 16.0 43.3 43.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 55.8 27.8 22.7 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.0 16.3 43.5 43.6 Lane Group LOS E C C C 8 A D B D D Approach Delay 28.9 16.6 20.7 43.6 Approach LOS C B C D Intersection Delay 23.2 Intersection LOS C ;opyright ® 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS +l m Version 5.21 uenerarea nrw<wa n:w rn fileWC:ADoeuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \TempAs2k2E0.tmp 4/24/2001 Page 213 of 218 J1101 r�cpuu SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RIP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performea 412312008 I ime Period PM Peak Hour Imrnnkalee Rd @ *s Blvd Area -type All other areas Jurisd!c'ion C UA; [County Analysis fear 2014 BwOut,i Volume and Timing Input EB VVB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LS I TH I RT IT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L 7- R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 94 303 710 29 59 18 388 23 1.5 23 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 1\1 N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 9.0 G= 24.0 G= 48.0 G= G= 19.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 ly= JY= 7 Y= JY= IY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 88 319 747 25 81 356 24 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 222 857 208 271 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.14 0.29 0.25 0.03 0.36 0.42 0.12 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 032 0.60 0.60 0.16 0.54 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.9 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.1 16.3 43.3 43.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0111 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.3 0.2 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 55.8 278 23.0 30.3 11.3 9.8 46.1 16.6 43.5 43.5 Lane Group LOS E C C C B A D B D D Approach Delay 26.8 1 16.8 22.1 43.6 Approach LOS C B C D Intersection Delay 23.4 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS.TM Version 5.21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \dpALocal Settings \TempAs2k2Ff.tmp Generated 4/24/2008 9:05. 4/24/2008 Page 214 of 218 COLLIER COUNTY 2030 FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 215 of 218 7rc. Fpo: Jtir a Jahn I� 2030 !'onttrnined F�in,unoaiM %enTiMc Nlnn `.'ormne- to-C': ±paci[� ftz1;e 20]0 LRTP Minor Uedem t3 -11 Adopted June 0, Im Page 216 o1318 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS bmiffAl Page 217 of 218 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ► 8A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 7`h EDITION Laud Use Weekday AM Peak Huw j Weekday PM Peak hour 7F7777 Weekday Shopping Center Ln (q') = 0.60 Ln (X) + 2,29 Ln (T) = 0.66 Ln (X) + 3.40 Ln (T) = 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 VC 820) _�61 %In/39 %Out). (48 %In/52 °/a Out) _ _ "f = Trips,_ X — 1,000's of square feet of GLA TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 8 1 EDITION Land Use Weekda � AM Peak Hour — Weekda y PM Peak Hour ___ -- Weekday Shopping Center Ln (I') — 0.59 Ln (X) i- 2.32 ! Ln (T) = 0.67 Ln (X) +3.37 1n (T) — 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 (LUC820 ) (61`%1il39 %Out)_____ (49 %IIdSL %Out _ T — Trips, X — 1,000's of square feet of GLA Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Trip Generation Based on 7r1' Edition of ITE Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Trip Generation Based on 8 °i Edition of ITE '} r .. `45q,.mFh} A � »�ll`II�u(t�•44 r1!'�'",��8 � = Ltn�ga� P,M P11i>RBIr Datly. w aY) {�q�� 7`�� ZII.a T( TgtBI` Shopping Center 155 100 i 255 513 1,070 11,504 _— (225,000 s __ t.) —... -. -- 11,504 (225,000 sq. ft.) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Trip Generation Based on 8 °i Edition of ITE '} r .. `45q,.mFh} A � »�ll`II�u(t�•44 r1!'�'",��8 � = Ltn�ga� P,M P11i>RBIr Datly. w aY) {�q�� 7`�� ZII.a T( TgtBI` .wQ M.I:. f,J/ Shopping Center 152 97 249 537 El 1,095 11,504 (225,000 sq. ft.) (225,000 sq. n ) _ t — — Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Chanee in Trip Generation from 7ei Edition to 8`1' Edition of ITE Lan—d' , Ae Ap QRn P,M P11i>RBIr Datly. w aY) ZII.a T( TgtBI` .2 Shopping Center _3 3 6 +24 125 0 (225,000 sq. n ) _ t — — — Shaded Box indicates peak direction utilized for LOS calculations Page 218 of 218 • ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT CP- 2008 -1 BCC Transmittal Hearing January 19, 2010 jmb transportation engineering, inc. traffic-lb unsportation engineering & planning Commissioncr Jim Coletta, District S January 14, 2010 Board of Collier County Commissioners 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, Fl- 34112 RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Dear Commissioner Coletta: As you may recall, Mr. Rich Yovanovich, Mr. Tim Wallen and 1 met with you and Mr. Nick Casalanguida to discuss the above referenced plan amendment. Mr. Wallen and I attended on behalf of the I" & 3`' Group and Mr. Yovanovich attended on behalf of the Petitioner. As we discussed, the 1"& 3'c Group reached an agreement with the Petitioner regarding numerous development standards and safeguards that would be incorporated into the PUD in order to minimize the project's impact. To everyone's satisfaction, you said that if the BOC approved CP 2008 -1 then you would request that the Board recognize our agreement as a condition of the plan amendment. In addition, Mr. Yovanovich committed to revise the PUD consistent with the terms and conditions of the agreement and have it run concurrent with the plan amendment. At the time, we thought the revised PUD would be submitted prior to the January 19`h transmittal hearing, but that will not occur Mr. Yovanovich reassured the Group that the revised PUD will be submitted prior to the Board's final plan approval. I am pleased to inform you that the l" & 3 "1 Group and the Petitioner have finalized an agreement which has been attached for the Board's consideration. If the Board of County Commissioners approves CP 2008 -1, then the I" & 3`a Group and the Petitioner request that the 1" & 3"' Group /Petitioner's Agreement, dated January 14, 2010 be included as a condition of Plan Amendment. ']'hank you for your acceptance of this letter and attachments into the record, and as always, feel free to call upon me should you wish to discuss this matter in further detail. Sincerely, JMB Transportation Engineering, inc. .lames M. Banks, P.E. Enclosure: 1" & 3" Group/ Petitioner's Agreement, revised January 14, 2010 Copy: Rich Yovanovich, Tim Wallen, Nick Casalinguida 76121" street niv, naples. Florida 34120 phone: 239- 919 -2767 4 8A EYhibit A 1" & 3 "' Group /Petitioner's Agreement for Estates Shopping Center PUD & Como Plan Amendment 2008 -1 January 14, 2010 Estates Shopping Center PUD Turnis S Conditions I _ The'U[ }) sto include I Y4+ -fAP.* that-details tile uses, landscape bLif eHug- detail,; all I ehicula bodie�of watereu eserve a eas. The PUD will be consistent with the conceptual site plan dated Novemher .4 2009, except for access to 3" Street NW which will be consistent with Concept _A Lsce the attached Conceptual Site Plan & Concept A Access flan)_ Ilowevei,orientation of the rg ocety store and other structures are subia_t to_chanLc_ 2. Two story structures will he located in the southern half of the property. No two story structures on the north, northeast of northwest areas of the property. 3. The PUD will nwiutain a minimum building setback of 120 feet from north property line and 150 feel from the west property line for the retail and office uses. The building(s) housing tirc sewage neatment and /or water treatment plants shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet. 4. PUD's first C.O. will be for a grouriy store being no less than 27,000 s.f. in size. 5. PhD's Building AI'clntecnlre: All buildings shall be designed in a unified architectural style which shall he stylistic Of Key West, Olde Florida or Bermuda architecture. All suuctuics wall have a maximum zoned building height restriction of35 feet and actual hinichi g height of45 feet PUD will establish reasonable hours of operation Of husnicases within the commercial center. Hours of Operation: a. Grocery and restaurant uses: 6 atn to I 1 pin b. Other retail and office uses: 6 am to 9 pm C. Gas /convenience uses: 24 hour operation 6. Delivery trucks will be restricted fioin 6 am to I l pm. Gas -n- convenience to be located only on the south central portion of the site. No caiwash will be permitted. Gas -n- convenience will not receive a certificate of occupancy until after fanualy I, 2015. Sewage tica0ncut system will be designed tmd located in a manner that shall protect residents from odor and noise. The conunercial center will be served by a central sewage treatment center that is housed in a building being no more than 25 feet in height. Restaurants will have. a sewage interceptor system to remove grease and fat from waste prior to disehargc to ccnhal sewage treatment. Individual septic systems may be provided ou an interim basis. LOOF 9. Water will be provided by a central water distribution system. The water system will be designed and located in a manner that shall protect residcnts from odor and noise. 10. Dnmpsters will be located in a manner that will minimize noise and odor impact on residents. 11. The PUD will prohibit "do -it yoursclfcrs" from repairing /servicing automobiles anywhere ou -site. Any auto service /repair will be done by authorized personnel associated with an auto service center (e.g., Tuffy's, Midas, Goodyear, etc.). 12. A twenty -Five foot wide enhanced landscape buffers shall be provided along the project frontage for both 3rd Street N.W. and I st Street N.W. The enhanced buffers must be installed concurrent with the first phase of development on the site. 13. A twenty -five foot wide type "B" buffer will be required along the north property line, except where the preserve area is maintained. 14. The seventy-five foot wide vegetative preserve /buffer identified and located along the northern property boundary shall retain existing native vegetation. Where little or no native vegetation exists, the owner or successors in heir shall replant and supplement native vegetation at all three strata. Plant materials must be native species similar to those presently existing within the preserve area. These supplemental plantings must occur concurrent with the first phase of development on the site. 15. Buffers are to be constructed after land clearing stage. 16. PUD supports the residents' desire to maintain a full or at a minimum a directional left median opening at 3 d StreetNW /GGB. 17. NEr- vekiEa;,.�. � ,. r, ,. StFept to the nt rr will he all,... Rd P-ede-sti: H/bieyele access fior 4,d et_eetStreetNIX ..:" b..:n ,.- permitted. IfGourdy ,,llw laF int..feel,.. 'detrlptNrurt�, o., it will he ,�o.,;,..,,.a in a requires estto 3 a I. alt del+ et 'k ae4- witdt4he PUD- Access to 3� Sheet NW shall be consistent with Concept k 18. 1" & 3 " Group supports PUD having a full access on Golden Gate Boulevard which would be centrally located to the site, as well as signalization of the full access if allowed by Collier County. 1 "& 3r1 Group supports the PUD's request to obtain additional right -in /out access points along GGB at a minimum spacing of'330'- 19. If authorized by the Collier County School District, the PUD shall install or make payment in lieu of construction for two school bus stop shelters, which shall be installed at or near the intersection of I" Street N.W. and Golden Gate Boulevard and 3m Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard. The shelter size and location shall be coordinated with the Collicr County School District. Installation of the shelters shall be concurrent with issuance of the first building certificate of occupancy. If authorized by the Collier County School District, the PUD will construct covered school bus stop shelters consistent with the shelter located at 27 "' Avenue SW (a, White Boulevard. 20- The PUD's lighting will be designed by an engineer oi qualified professional in a manner to eliminate any off -site "spillover" lighting on residential properly and to W8A maintain (within reason) dark sky conditions, All lighting shall be architecturally designed. Parking lot lighting shall be limited to 25 feet in height and shall utilize low pressure sodium on similar bulbs, which will be shielded from neighboring residential land uses. I III log, en lighting shall be prohibited. 21. The Developer /Owner will take the necessary measures (as defined by the Collier County Sherriff's Deparhnent) which will give the residents the authority to report any trespassing or criminal activities that may occur oo the subject properly. "phe residents will be authorized to report such activities in order that the Sheniffs department will be obligated to respond to the report in a timely manner without receiving direct approval fiont the property owner to proceed. The Developer /Owner will take whatever measures are necessary for this to be enforced while the property is vacant, under construction, and fully developed. 22. PUD to reference outdoor acoustic prohibition criteria. Live music allowed only at the southern most portion of the site (except SW corner), but no later than 10 PM. Special permit required for open an concert (similar to Mercado). PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the tollowing: A. Principal Uses: Amusement and recreation Groups79I I - Dance studios, schools and halls, excluding discotheques 7991 - Physical fitness facilities 7993 - Coin- operated amusement devises 7999 Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified, including only day camps, gymnastics instruction, judo/karate insnuction, sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NFIC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales) Groups561 I - Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 - Women's clothing stores 5632- Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 - Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 - Family clothing stores 5661 - Shoe stores 5699 - Miscellaneous appatul and accessory stores Automotive dealers anti gasoline service stations Groups553I - Auto and horne supply stores 5541 - Gasoline service stations, without repair Automotive repair, services and parking (no outdoor repair /service. All repairs /services to be performed by authorized automotive technician.) Groups7514 —Passengerr car rental 7534 Tire retreading and repair shops, including only lire repair 7539 -- Automotive Repair Shops, Not Elsewhere Classified, including only minor service, lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 —( uwa lasr iss ozeir to Building materials, hardware, garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups523 I — Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 hardware stores 5261 — Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores 6. Business services Groups7334 -- Photocopying and duplicating services 7335 - Commercial photography 7336 — Commercial art and graphic design 7338 - Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 -- Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 — Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 -- liquipuaent rental and leasing, not elsewhere classified 7371 -- Computer programming services 7372 — prepackaged software. 7373 -- Computer integrated systems design 7374 Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7379 Computer related services, not elsewhere classified 7382 — Security systems services 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories 7189— Business services, not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 —Cable and other pay television services 9. Construction special trade contractors (office use only, no on -site equipment storage) Groups 1711 — Plumbing, healing and air- conditioning 1721 - Painting and paper hanging industry 1731 -- Electrical work industry M' 20 1741 - Masonry, stone setting, and other stone. work 1742- Plasterinla, drywall, acoustical, and insulation work 1743 Terra//o, tile, marble, and mosaic work industry 1751 Caipentry work 1752 - Floor laying and other floor work, not elsewhere classified industry 1701 Roofing, siding, and sheet metal work industry 1771 - Concrete work industry 1781 - Wafer well drilling industry 1791 - Stnicnual steel erection 1793 - Glass and glazing work 1794- Excavation work 1795-- Wrecking and demolition work 1796 - Installation or erection of building equipment, not elsewhere 1799 - Special trade contractors, not elsewhere classified Depository histit Groups6021 6022 6029 6035 6036 6061 6062 utions - National commercial banks - State commercial banks - Commercial banks, not elsewhere classified - Savings institutions, federally chartered - Savings Institutions, not federally chartered Credit unions, federally chartered Credit unions, not federally chartered 6091 - Non- deposit trust facilities 6099 - Functions related to depository banking, not elsewhere classified 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812, including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use, no outdoor amplified music or televisions) 12. Engineering, accounting, research, management, and iclatcd services Groups8711 - Engineering service's 8712 - Architectural services 8713 - Surveying services 8721 Accounting, auditing, and bookkeeping services 8741 - Management services 8742 - Management consulting services 8743 - Public relations services 8748 - Business consulting services, not elsewhere classified 13. ExCCUtiVe, legislative, and general government, except finance G'oups9l 11 - Executive offices 9121 - Legislative hodies 9131 ftxcculive and legislative offices combined 9199 - General government, not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores Groups5411 - Grocery stores (minimum 27,000 square feet) 5421 - Meat and fish (seafood) markets, including freezer provisioners 5431 -Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 - Candy, nut, and confectionery stores 5451 - Dairy products stores 5461 - Retail bakeries 5499 - Miscellaneous food stores, including convenience stores with Inel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 53 I I - Department stores 5331 -- Variety stores 5399 - Miscellaneous general merchandise stores }b t# kd ng 1 c Fher ^,ffi Ees of bank hol4ing eoffl s, \. }zE2Sflf�H3laTn�cc,'rRpai]iern oteelse he F rs eelass r�. ed _..� ']' 1�n\ A. ii. 3g(;1i36nt-}nJcicmoini- t�}E2:i; i)pCn-ERd ... %7-2-E Ih— vi�rc- arrcr.r, ner}i -t� face m aunt ^ rtifi Bte offiees, and E iA50d- 2Hd- tHanil$2m0f'r�rrz'r'd� -,n� r"r.c nt-F3f f�FEO}7 _ P4 trusts -- 67333 - Trusts, exceptedusabien etigieus slrarHable —6702 Oil royalty om.,- •,ceis, 694 Patent ,rot "Irani lessors --79R ,t^ _ent trusts �1- a.votc^„Tnct elsewhere class fled 17. Home furniture, furnishings, and equipment stores Groups5712 - Furniture stores 5713 - Floor covering stores 5714- Drapery, curtain, and upholstery stores 5719 - Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 - Household appliance stores 5731 - Radio, television, and consumer electronics stores 5734 - Computer and computer software stores 5735 - Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) 5736- Musical instrument stores 18. Insurance carriers Groups63I I Life insurance 6321 - Accident and health insurance 6324 - Hospital and medical service plans 6331 -- Fire, marine, and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 —Title insurance 6371 -. Pension, health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified 641.1. _Insurance amts 19. Justice, public order and safety Groups922I Police protection 9222 - Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 20. Meeting and banquet rooms 21. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales) Groups5912 —Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle strops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 5945 — Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 'tobacco stores and stands 5994 —News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores 5999 Miscellaneous retail stores, not elsewhere classified (excluding gravestone, tombstones, auction rooms, monuments, swimming pools, and sales barns) 22. Non - depository credit institutions Groups6l 1 I — Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies 6141 — Personal credit institutions 6153 — Short -term business credit institutions, except agricultural 6159 -- Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 -- Mortgage hankers and loan correspondents 016" - Loan brokers 23. Offices and clinics Ofdcntist (Group 02 1) 24. Personal services Groups7212 — Garment pressing, and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 — Photographic studios, portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barbershops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified, excluding massage parlors, Turkish baths and escort services 25. Public finance, taxation, and monetary policy (Group 931 1) 26. Real Estate Groups6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 -- Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home. sites 6517 -- Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 —Title abstract offices 6552 — Land subdividers and developers, except cemeteries 27. Schools and educational services, not elsewhere classified (Group 8299) 28. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges, and services Groups6211 — Security brokers, dealers, and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified 29. Social services Groups8322 — Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 30. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 31. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 32. Video tape rental (Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals) 8 • 33 United states postal service (Group 43) I, excluding major disu'ibuli6n ceulers) Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the linegoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (" BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to a. Utility buildings b. Essential service facilities c. Gazebos, statuary and other architectural teatures PROHIBITED USES: I. Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classilicd (Group 7999, NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste nmnagemenl ((;coup 951 1 3. Business Services Groups7313 Radio television, Mud publislrcrs' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertising services 4. Correctional htstitntions (Group 9223) 5. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 58 13) 6. Fducational services Groups8211 — Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges, universities, and prot'essional schools 8222 Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 -- Libraries 7. Ilealth services iroupsS062 - General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 Psychiatric hospitals 8069 - Specialty hospitals, except psychiatric S. Miscellaneous (retail • Groups5921 — Liquor stores 5961 — Catalog and mail -order houses 5962 - Automatic merchandising machine operators 9. Personal services Groups721 I — Power Laundries, family and commercial 7261 — Funcral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups8322 -- Individual and family social services, excluding adult day care centers 8361 — Residential care, including soup kitchens and homeless shelters r� 1111 , t S �.� 1 •s gl1r) 141111'r, or L41 din _ O HAIM } SF1�by���'�,- I'�? a L ♦ li 0 a w a M� �w c��8A wA rya c� w r � i3. � l adyMin.or _:. Us'11 i�pintt eland Yuneyim 1'launcn, land•<alx atlrians A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PACKAGE PREPARED BY: COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH AND KOES I LR, Y.A. 4001 F amairni Frail North. Suite 300, Naples, Florida 34103 239.435.3535 239.435.1218 fix and Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES. P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Spring, Florida 34134 239.947.1144 239 947.0375 Fax GROWTI-I MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 zoog Q. GRADY MINOR &ASSOCIATES, P.A. 8 A Civil Engineers ■ Land Surveyors ■ Planners n I andscape Architects MARK W. MINOR, P i_ D. WAYNE ARNOLD, A.LCE'_ JOSHUA R. EVANS, RE KEI I A. 5ITPHENSON, P.S.M. MICHAEL T. HERRERA, P. E. JUAN A. ARAQUE, P.S.M. DAVID W. SCHMM, P.E. HEIDI K. WILLIAMS, A.I.CP. MICHAEL J. DELATF, P . D. KF.Nr CARLYI E, R.L.A. ELIZABErli A. FOUNI'A1N, P.H. KENNTETH W. PAH UrSKE P.S.M. ANDRES F. CORREA, P.E- April 24, 2008 PAMELA hl. HYYLI Ms. Michele Mosca, A1CP RECEIVED Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Department APR 2 5 2 008 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPt,RTf,.7NT Re: Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment Application; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict of the Golden Gate Area blaster Plan. Dear Ms. Mosca: Enclosed, please find five copies of the completed Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment Application along with its supporting data and analysis. As you are aware, an amendment for the subject property was filed in 2006 as Petition CP- 2006 -2, and at the applicant's request, Petition CP- 2006 -2 was deferred to the 2008 Growth Management Plan amendment cycle. We have also included a check for $16,700.00 the amendment as directed at our pre - application meeting held on April 7, 2008. The proposed amendment includes the 41 1 /- acre parcel, Located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The applicant has not modified the project boundaries tcom the prior submittal; however, we have made several revisions to the text of the proposed amendment and to the supporting commercial needs analysis, which we believe address many of the comments previously provided by staff for Petition CP- 2006 -2. You will note that the applicant has included in the proposed amended text of the Subdistrict, a list of both permitted and prohibited uses. The prior amendment application proposed all uses permitted in the C -4, General Commercial Zoning District. The amended application has limited the proposed uses within the Subdistrict to those which we believe are consistent with uses commonly found in neighborhood to community scale shopping centers, compatible with the needs of the residents of central Golden Gate Estates and supported by residents surveyed within our market area. A copy of the survey and the results to date have been included in the supporting documents. The full range of general commercial land uses would not be permitted within the proposed Subdistrict. (239) 947 -1144 ■ FAx (239) 947 -0375 ■ Web Site: www.gradyminor.com 3800 Via Del Rcy • Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 -7569 Eli 0005151 ■ LB 0005151 • LC 26000266 ApJI242008 Appliwlinn S;LNnittal Lt: RCG!v1PA Ms. Michele Moses, AICP Re: Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict April 24, 2008 Page 2 of 2 The proposed Subdistrict also includes a phasing schedule, which is related to required roadway improvements in the vicinity of the subject property. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial development is permitted initially, with a restriction that a grocery store use must be the first use to obtain a certificate of occupancy within the Subdistrict. The balance of the authorized commercial square footage cannot occur until transportation improvements at the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are substantially complete. Please also note that Fishkind & Associates has updated the Commercial Needs Analysis supporting data and analysis document to reflect a 10- minute drive time market surrounding the proposed Subdistrict. This revised document demonstrates demand for additional retail commercial land uses in the market area and at this location. We look forward to reviewing the revised Growth Management Plan amendment application with you at your convenience. If you have any questions or comments, please contact either Richard Yovanovich at (239) 435 -3535 or me. Sipcerely, 4` / —71 �L V � . Wayne Arnold, AICP C: Kenneth Johnson, Trustee Richard Yovanovich April 24 2008 Application Subtnittel Llr RCGMPA DATE q- 7 -vF TOPIC OF MEETINGS /. MEETING NOTES COLLIER COUNTY 8 A * * ** DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT * * ** TIME ��' )O ?—. _ NOTES BY ATTEND iCE(print name clearly) R iC4 ® var, vf- LA I.✓iy „gyp ,4�,�( _�T U(ShOTI /V )./ «Her ).✓r�lSrin CGY%� - LN'n hby KEY POINTS /UNDERSTANDINGS /CONCLUSIONS c)>_pf 4„i fe, u- atw�fzpvtslG� �%Ft1 /NGI✓oFt dI'�a -y'� b /Ge J lo-Nl;Yl4f�Qv S ,� Er. �/k� �- G' �fn. -ff `f� jDl /`ct i= h �oN ic. `�uf erg F7n- �n;nw�aT ��ll as a;n:r+� : fy B�, yntK i..�?,•,�L? -.� �J ofl tos Sob f i ✓�� /erw�7jJ i fe i �im� S 6H %9�/ Y/' 6L� I'm tt.�;r�. -I. ,✓� y"bn Sdki...4. /n S R .��� `�- `roviti.. ;! %ecf' ha e>�.. Yefv�f y/ P7l y. a o�rn/3�5 tir. , n�4v Hole ez.4 4 iVgM �A, /s • APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PETITION NUMBER C13- 2008 -1 DATE RECEIVED PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE DATE SUFFICIENT PLANNER ASSIGNED: COMMISSION DISTRICT: [ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. Phone: (239) 403 -2300; Fax: (239) 643 6869. The application trust be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified, in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97 -431 (attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239 - 403 -2300. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Name of Applicant(s) Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee Company Coleman, Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. Mailing Address 4001 N. Tamiami'frail, Suite 300 City Naples State FL _ Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239 - 435 -3535 Fax Number 239- 435 -1218 B. Name of Agent* D. Wayne Arnold, AICP - IHISWILI. HF tHI_ PI'RSON('ONIM III)FORAI1I SINIfSSRI. LAIID 10 "IIH PI':H HON_ Company /Finn O. Grady Minor and Associates P.A. Mailing Address 3800 Via Del Rev City Bonita Springs State FL _ Zip Code 34134 -- Phone Number 239-947-1144 Fax Number 239 - 947 -0375 Email Address warnold(c0kradyminor.coin CP 2008 -1 1 09/2009 11. And C D. Name of Agent Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. C'ompany/Fimi Coleman, Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. Mailing Address 4001 Tauiiami "frail North, Suite 300 City Naples _ State Fl, /if) Code 34103 Phone Number 239- 435 -3535 Fax Number 239- 947 -0375 Email Address ryovonovich(a ecilaw.cont I . Name of Owner(s) of Record Please see Exhibit LC Mailing Address C/O Coleman. Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. / Kenneth Johnson 4100 N. Tamiami Trail, Suite 300 City Naples State /.ip Code 34103 Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Exhibit LD DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each, and provide one copy of the Articles of Incorporation, or other documentation, to verify the signer of this petition has the authority to do so. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock N/A C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee Golden Gate Boulevard West Trust Robert A and Barbara A Crown 10017 Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee Robert A and Barbara A Crown I 00111 CP 2008 -1 2 09/2009 WE D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contact purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners, and provide one copy of the executed contract. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership F. If any contingency clause or contract ternis involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership or trust. G. Date subject property acquired (X) ** leased O: Terms of lease yrs /mos. * *Please see Exhibit LC If Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates:—, or anticipated closing date H. NOTE: Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the dale of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. CP 2008 -1 3 09/2009 • Ill. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. Legal Description Please see Exhibit IILA 13. Section: 04 Township: 49 South Range: 27 East C. Tax I.D. Number (Folio #) Please see Exhibit LC D. General Location Northwest center of Golden Gate Blvd & Wilson Blvd. E. Planning Community 8 Rural Estates F.TAZ 215 G. Size in Acres 40.62± acres If. Zoning E, Estates I. Present Future Land Use Map Designation (s) Estates (Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict and Neighborhood Center Subdistrict.) IV. TYPE OF REQUEST A. Growth Management Plan Element(s) OR Sub- Element(s) to be amended: Future Land Use In mokalee Area Muster Plan Transportation Coastal & Conservation _Intergovernmental Coord. _Sanitary Sewcr Drainage ✓ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Capital Improvement ___Flousing _ Recreation & Open Space Potable Water Solid Waste Natural Groundwater Aquifer B. Amend Page(s) 27 and 38 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element As Follows: (Use Cross throughs to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: See Exhibit IV.B C. Amend Future Land Use Map(s) designation, FROM: Estates Mixed Use District. Residential Estates Subdistrict and Neighborhood Center Subdistrict District, Subdistrict TO: Estates Commercial District, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict District, Subdistrict [If new District and /or Sub- district proposed, include Future Land Use Map with legend depicting it]. D. Amend other Map(s) and Exhibits as Tollowa: (Name & Page 4) Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map Exhibit I V.Da Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers Map - Exhibit IV.Db Wilson Boulevard / Golden Gate Boulevard Center Ma - Exhibit IV.Dc Proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Map Exhibit IV.Dd Describe additional changes requested: GGAMP Policy 1. 1.2 B and list ollneps CP 2008 -1 4 09/2009 V. REQUIRED INFORMATION b18 A Note: All Aerials must be at a scale of no smaller than 1" = 400'. At least one copy reduced to 81/2 x l l shall be provided of all aerials and /or maps. A. LAND USE 1. Exhibit V.A.la Provide general location map showing surrounding Exhibit V.A.Ib developments (PUD, DRI'S, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. 2. Exhibit V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. 3. Exhibit V.A.3a Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and Exhibit V.A.3b zoning within a radius of 500 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION I. Exhibit V.B Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. Exhibit V.C. I a Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of Exhibit V.C.Ib native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT - FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. 2. Exhibit V.C.2 Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service)and State (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) 3. Exhibit V.C.3 Identify historic and /or archaeological sites on the subject property. Provide copy of County's Historical /Archaeological Probability Map and correspondence from Florida Department of State. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J- 11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). INSER"1"`Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: 1. NO Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern'? (Reference 9J -1 L006(1)(a)7.a,F.A.C.) If so, identify area located in ACSC. 2. NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S."? CP 2008 -1 5 09/2009 E. • 3. NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1)(c), P.S.? (Reference 9J- 11.006(l)(a)Tb, F.A.C) 4. NO Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County wide population by more than 5'%, of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. 5. YES- Exhibit V.D.5 Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density Exhibit V.D.6 and /or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use Exhibit V.D.7 designation and district /subdistrict identified (commercial, Exhibit V.D.8 industrial, ctc.), or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district /subdistrict? (Reference Rule 9J- 5.006(5)F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and compatibility of use with surrounding land uses, and as it concerns protection of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J- 1.007, F.A.C.). PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Exhibit V.E. I Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS, and document the impact the proposed change will have on that Standard, for each of the following public facilities: a) Ex. V.E.Ia Potable Water b) Ex. V.E.Ib Sanitary Sewer c) Ex. V.E.1 c Arterial & Collector Roads: Name of specific road and LOS Golden Gate Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 1" Street NW ai Street NW d) Lx. V.E.1 Drainage e) Ex. V.E.1 Solid Waste t) Ex. V.E.I Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and /or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital hnprovement Element Policv 1.1.2 and 1.1.5). 2. Exhibit V.E.2 provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools, and emergency medical services. CP 2008 -1 6 09/2009 3. Exhibit V.E.3 Document proposed services and public facilities, iden ' tify 8A provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: 1. Exhibit V.F.I Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM) 2. Exhibit V.F.2 Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). 3. N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable. 4. N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable. 5. N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1. Yes $16,700.00 non - refundable filing fee, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. 1 N/A $9,000.00 non- refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. 3. TBD Plus Legal Advertisement Costs (Your portion determined by number of petitions and divided accordingly. 4. Exhibit GA Proof of ownership (Copy of deed). 5. Exhibit G.5 Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (see attached form). 6. Yes I Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments, including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 15 copies of the complete application will be required. Additional copies may be required. * Maps, aerials, sketches shall include: North arrow; name and location of principal roadways; shall be at scale of 1" = 400' or at a scale as determined during the pre - application meeting; identification of the subject site; legend or key, if applicable. All oversized documents and attachments must be folded so as to fit into a legal -size folder. For all oversized exhibits, at least one copy must be submitted at 8 -'h x 1 l inches. All exhibits and attachments to the petition must include a title and exhibit # or letter, and must be referenced in the petition. CP 2008 -1 7 09/2009 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT 8A AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT LC NAME OF OWNERS OF RECORD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 gp , , Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict EXHIBIT LC Name of Owners oT Record ID Folio No. Address Owner Name O R. Bk - Pg Closing Date Net Acreage A 37119840001 No site address Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee 3912 — 2758 10/2005 5.15 B 37119880003 No site address Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee 3912 — 2758 10/ 13/05 5.46 C 37119800009 110 1 St NW Kenneth R. Johnson as'I'rustce 4007 1531 3/29;06 _ _ 2.51 D 37117120008 121 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee Golden Gate Boulevard West Trust 4026 1313 4,2006 2.81 E 37117160000 141 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as'fntstee _ 3946 201 I2i9io5 2.34 F 37117040007 165 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustec 3990 289 2,2806 2.34 G 37117080009 171 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as "Trustee _ _- 3990 208 221'06 1.17 H 37117000005 181 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee 4014 2946 41006 1.64 1 371 17280003 No site address Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee 3949 12, 12/05 2_73 J 371 16720001 410 3 "' St NW Kenneth R. Johnson as Trustee _1405 3999- 2240 3 %1506 2.73 K 371 16961006 221 GG Blvd W Kenneth R Johnson as Trustee 3962 2201 1; 9/06 234 L 37116960007 241 GG Blvd W Kenneth R. Johnson as trustee 3990 3499 228x06 2.s 1 M 37116920005 -- 265 GG Blvd W -- - - -- kcnneth_It Johnson_ as "I rustee kumeth R Johnson as I tustee Kenneth R Johnson is Trustee rustee Kenneth R Johnson as 'l tustce -- 3914 3601 1990 267 4107 12? 1 4,161 =447 — 10 17 05_ -2 28 06 11 7 07 6,11 09 2.4 L 17 _ 1.64 1.14 N O P 37116840004 37116880006 37117200009 No site address 903 St NW 131 1" St NW Total Net Acres (Act cagic mcludin_�platted ROW) 40.62 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT I.D LIST OF CONSULTANTS AND QUALIFICATIONS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 gq I i Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict EXH113IT L Project "beam List of Consultants and Sub - consultants Planning /Project Management: 0. Grady Minor and Associmes, P.A. D. Wayne Arnold. AK P 3800 Via Del Ret Rom(i i Springs. 1 1. 3411.1 (239)947 -1144 (_1,9) 047 -0375 fax Goodleae. Coleman- Johnson. Yovanovich and Koester. P.A. R Mimi d D. Yovant,% ch. I sq. 4001 1 ammim I rail NeiIh. Suite 300 NAplc, -FI. ,410, (219) 415 -3535 (],0) 43i -1218 tax Market Analysis: Fishkind & Associates G. Russell Waver, Senior Associate 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 248 Naples, Florida 34109 (2,9)254 -8585 ('19) 28?- 3?511a� Fishkind & Associates. Inc. Michael J. Timmerman. (CRI1 SRA. Senior Associate 1415 Panther Lane. Ste 146 -347 Naple,. PI. 31109 I cl: Cy)- 254 -8585 It 219- 591 -6601 Transportation: T 12llansportet 1011 ('onsu hunts. Inc led 11 11Cesh. President 11881 Plontation Read Same I I Foil MYc'i'S. Il. ;3912 -4;39 I'll, 239 -278 -3,090 PAX: 21'9-278 -1906 P.- snail: [bl(rtiniancncl Environmental: Collier 1= mironmcntal Consultants Marco I Spinal 1880 listev Avenue Naples. I`kinda 14104 (239) ' -6, -2687 (?',Q) tax Surveyor. 0 Grady Minor and Associates. P.A. Juan AIAqLie. P.S.M. 3800 Via Del Reg nonim Springs. FL 34114 (239) 947 -1144 (219) 947 -0175 lax CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT ID Page 1 of 10 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Principal, Director of Planning Education • Master of Urban Planning, University of Kansas, Lawrence • Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning /Geography, Missouri State University Professional Registrations/ Affiliations • American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) • American Planning Association (APA) • Leadership Collier, Class of 2000 • Bonita Springs Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee • Collier Building Industry Association, Board of Directors • Collier County Jr. Deputy League, Inc., Board of Directors �8A GrodyMillor Mr. Arnold is a Principal and co -owner of the firm and serves as the Secretary/Treasurer and Director of Planning. As Director of Planning, Mr. Arnold is responsible for and oversees services related to plan amendments, property rezonings, expert witness testimony, ROW Acquisition, public participation facilitation, and project management. Mr. Arnold previously served as the Planning Services Director at Collier County, where he oversaw the County's zoning, comprehensive planning, engineering, platting and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) functions. Mr. Arnold also has prior Florida planning experience with Palm Beach County Government and the South Florida Water Management District. Mr. Arnold has been accepted as an expert in land planning matters in local and state proceedings. Relevant Projects • Collier County Growth Management Plan • Marco Island Master Plan • Immokalee Area Master Plan • Collier County Land Development Code • Logan Boulevard Right -of -Way Acquisition Planning Analysis • U.S. 41 Right -of -Way Expansion Planning Analysis • Copeland Zoning Overlay • Collier County Government Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) • Winding Cypress DRI • Pine Ridge/Goodlette Road Commercial Infill District • Lely Lakes PUD Rezoning • Henderson Creek Planned Development /Growth Management Plan Amendment • Orangetree (Settlement Area) Growth Management Plan Amendment • Mercato Mixed Use Planned Development • North Point DRI /MPD • Vomado RPUD • Orange Blossom Ranch MPD • Palermo Cove RPD Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers • Surveyors • Land Planners • Landscape Architects CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT I.D Page 2 of 10 � f George Russell (Russ) Weyer, MBA Senior Associate Professional Qualifications Education Areas of Expertise 1993 Master of Basiness Administration (MBA) University of Miami Real Estate and Finance 1977 Bachelor of At (BA) Michigan State liniversm ('0111 in Lill i cat i oil s Employment Record Period JED of Southwest Florida. Inc. Mar. 2003 July 2004 Vier PI cwdenl o/ /)('I clopnnvil GRW Management- Inc, Sept. 2001 —I eb. 2003 PICsid"ni I_ondon Bay Homes, Inc - Romania, Inc Sept. 2000 - Sept. 2001 President Lake Las Vegas„ Joint Venture NON. 1999 - Sept. 2000 Vi, e President of Resn t opt ration' Cavalezr Corporation Jan. 1997 - Nov. 1999 Presidenl and C k-0 Westinghouse ('ommunities, Inc. Mar. 1984 Oct. 1996 Director of Col) nirr'rial Sa /r,a and 1mcnifI I m ago)w)It Areas of Expertise • Residential Development Management and Analysis • Commercial Development. Management and Analysis • RPM Estate Antonity Management and Analysis • Residential Market Analysis Commercial Maiden Analysis • Real Kstato AmetioN Market Analysis • Real Estate Fiscal Analv?is • Litigation Support Selected Client List Professional Synopsis Fishkind and Associates Resume CP- 2008 -1 I XHIBIT U) Page 3 of 10 84 If Asa former commercial and residential real estate developer in Florida, Ohio and Nevada, Mr. Weyer brings an extensive and distinct development point of view to Fish kind and Associates. Ile has aver 20 years of real estate development experience with large corporations and family -owned companies that focused on commercial off-ice, retail, industrial, hospitality, amenity, and residential development. Mr. Weyer has on -point senior management experience with the entire development process from acquisition identification, due diligence, purchase negotiations, planning and securing entitlements, horizontal and vertical construction, sales (leasing) and marketing, to property management, condominium turnover and disposition. CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT 1.1) Page 4 of 10 Professional Synopsis As a Senior Manager of Fishkind and Associates, Michael Timmerman manages consulting assignments throughout the Southeast United States and in particular Florida. In October of 2007 Mr. Timmerman was awarded the CRE (Counselor of Real Estate) Designation by the Counselors of Real Estate, an international group of high profile real estate practitioners who provide expert advisory services to clients on complex real property and land related matters. In 1989 Mr. Timmerman received his SRA designation from the Appraisal Institute. Mr. Timmerman has over 25 years of experience in the industry including the consulting, valuation and geo- spatial analysis of a broad spectrum of residential and commercial properties. He also created community and product lifestyle classifications to generally categorizing the consumer's preferences during their life stage and how they relate to their purchase of residential real estate. Selected Client List He has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, Fortune Magazine, Worth Magazine, Builder Magazine and many other State and Local newspapers and magazines. Barron Collier Companies PGT Windows Collier Enterprises Bank of Florida County Governments iVichael J. Timmerman, CRE, SRA, Tishkind & Associates, lac. Florida Power and Light Cameratta Properties Core Communities US Government CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT LID Page 5 of 10 Resume *8A Michael J. Timmerman, CRE, SRA Senior Associate Professional Qualifications Education Areas of Expertise 1983 Bachelor of Science Northland College, Ashland, WI Economics and Finance Professional Memberships Designations 2007 The Counselors of Real Estate CRE 1989 The Appraisal Institute SRA Employment Record Period Fishkind & Associates, Inc. February 2008- Present Hanley Wood Market Intelligence, Inc. March 2005 — October 2007 Feasinomics, Inc. May 1991 — March 2005 Collier Residential Appraisal, Inc. January 1988 — December 1991 Armalvage & LaCroix January 1987 — December 1987 Landmark Appraisal August 1983 — December 1986 Professional Synopsis As a Senior Manager of Fishkind and Associates, Michael Timmerman manages consulting assignments throughout the Southeast United States and in particular Florida. In October of 2007 Mr. Timmerman was awarded the CRE (Counselor of Real Estate) Designation by the Counselors of Real Estate, an international group of high profile real estate practitioners who provide expert advisory services to clients on complex real property and land related matters. In 1989 Mr. Timmerman received his SRA designation from the Appraisal Institute. Mr. Timmerman has over 25 years of experience in the industry including the consulting, valuation and geo- spatial analysis of a broad spectrum of residential and commercial properties. He also created community and product lifestyle classifications to generally categorizing the consumer's preferences during their life stage and how they relate to their purchase of residential real estate. Selected Client List He has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, Fortune Magazine, Worth Magazine, Builder Magazine and many other State and Local newspapers and magazines. Barron Collier Companies PGT Windows Collier Enterprises Bank of Florida County Governments iVichael J. Timmerman, CRE, SRA, Tishkind & Associates, lac. Florida Power and Light Cameratta Properties Core Communities US Government CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT LID Page 5 of 10 Resume TRANSPORTATION RESUME+ A CONSULTANTS, INC. TED B. TREESH President EXPERIENCE Relative Experience: Mr. Treesh has over IS years experience in the area of transportation engineering and transportation planning. Specifically, he has expertise in the areas of traffic impact studies, corridor planning studies, traffic signal justifications studies and traffic signal systems analysis. Mr. Treesh has served as Project Manager on numerous transportation planning studies. He has performed capacity evaluations of signalized and unsignalized intersections, evaluated development plans in terms of traffic circulation and safety, making recommendations for improvements to parking areas and on -site design to accommodate development traffic. Traffic Impact Analysis: Managed and conducted traffic impact studies of numerous land uses ranging in size from 1,400 acres to less than 1 acre. Land uses analyzed include shopping centers, mixed use developments, medical office buildings, residential developments, industrial developments, and office buildings. Conducted capacity analyses of critical intersections, utilizing the Highway Capacity Software (HCS), and recommended appropriate geometric improvements to accommodate development, as well as, non - development traffic. Evaluated development plans in terms of traffic circulation and safely, making recommendations for improvements to parking and on -site design to accommodate development traffic. Accepted as an expert witness in transportation and testified before Planning Commissions, Zoning Boards, Village Boards, and City Councils, as well as, neighborhood and local organizations. Studies completed in the metropolitan Chicago area, southeast Wisconsin, St, Louis metropolitan area, Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana. Traffic Signal Justification Studies: traffic signal justification Performed studies for private developments, as well as, for public streets on both stale and local roadways. Traffic Signal Systems: Assisted in the analysis and development of a coordinated traffic signal system to alleviate congestion and reduce vehicle emissions, Analysis of existing traffic volumes, flow patterns, and signal spacing was completed utilizing the progression programs SYNCHRO and PASSER II -90 to develop an optimum signal progression program. Transportation Planning: Project Manager on the Oantels Parkway corridor study for the Lee County Department of Transportation. Also served as project consultant on Strategic Regional Arterial (SRA) corridor projects conducted by the Illinois Department of Transportation and the Chicago Area Transportation Study. These projects involved analyses and recommendations of proposed roadway geometries, right -of- way requirements, cost estimates and access management alternatives for future planning_ Parking: Analyzed and designed parking configuration for neighborhood shopping center and various small retail developments. Also analyzed existing parking facilities identified internal deficiencies and made recommendations for improvement. Performed numerous parking studies including downtown areas to determine peak parking demand and characteristics. Trip Generation Research: Involved in research to better quantify the trip generation of various land uses in the Chicago land area. These land uses include gas stations with car washes, small retail centers anchored by a convenience store, and residential developments. Involvement includes methodology, data collection, and analysis of statistical data. PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. President May 2006 — Present Metro Transportation Group, Inc. Fort Myers Office Principal /Regional Manager June 2001 — April 2006 Senior Transportation Consultant 1999 — May 2001 Woolpert, LLP Dayton, Ohio Project Manager 1997 -1999 Metro Transportation Group, Inc. Senior Transportation Consultant 1990 - 1997 EDUCATION Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana Bachelor of Science - Civil Engineering AFFILIATIONS Institute of Transportation Engineers Transportation Research Board Urban Land Institute CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT I Page 6 of 10 Marco A. Espinar 3880 Estey Avenue Naples, FI 34104 Cardinal Mooney High School Sarasota, Florida Manatee Junior College Bradenton, Florida University of South Florida Tampa, Florida RESUME Bilingual English & Spanish Office: 239- 263 -2687 EDUCATION Diploma 1980 AA Degree 1982 Biology BS Degree 1990 Biology Completed USF Cooperative Education Program April 1988 USF Undergraduate Research - USF 1985 Apalachicola Archaeological Expedition & Research - Lab Coordinator of Fauna Identification from Archeological Sites - Studies of Seagrass Beds (Thalassic wstudinum) in Upper Tampa Bay, Florida - Growth Rates of Marine Algae ( Grocilm is tikr,ahiae, G. rerrucosa, G. dehlis ) Port Manatee, Florida EMPLOYMENT HISTORY & EXPERIENCE Collier Environmental Consultants Inc. Naples, Florida 2/96 - Present Environmental Permitting, Planning Vegetation Inventory Mitigation & Monitoring Plans Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Gopher Tortoise Permitting, Tcsting, Relocation Turrell & Associates, Inc. Naples, Florida 2/94- 12/95 Environmental Permitting, Planning Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Environmental Impact Statements Owner & Environmental Planner Exotic Plant Removal / Poisoning Mitigation Plantings Jurisdictional Determination Environmental Impact Statements Red Cockaded Woodpecker Survey Senior Environmental Planner Supervision ol' StalT Review Staff Reports CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT I Page 7 of 10 South Florida Water Management District Fort Myers, Florida 2/93 - 8/93 Dredge & Fill Permit Review Surface Water Permit Review Collier County Government, Development Services Naples, Florida 10 /90 -2/93 Site Development Plan Compliance Planned Unit Development Compliance Site Drainage Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District Tampa, Florida 9/87 - 10/90 As -Built Inspections- Engineering, Survey Surface and Ground Water Permit Compliance Well Construction & Abandonment Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District Brooksville, Florida 1/86-9/87 Wetland Vegetation Studies At Major Well Fields Water Quality Sampling & Testing • Environmental Analyst Environmental Specialist II Landscape Inspections Environmental Enforcement Field Services Technician (CO -OP) Environmental Scientists I PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Florida Association of Environmental Professionals, Member Southwest Florida Association of Environmental Professionals, Member Elected to Governing Board for 2 terns, served on Bylaws Committee Exotic Pest Plant Council, Member Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on the Collier County Environmental Advisory Board Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Currently Serving on the Development Services Advisory Committee Currently Serving on the Land Development Code Sub - Committee CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT ID Page 8 of 10 ME, Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee 6 years Served as Chainnan of the Conservation Collier Lands Evaluation and Management Sub - Committee, Award for Five (5) years of VOluntary Service to Collier County By the Board of County Commissioners Gopher Tortoise Management and Mitigation Professional "Raining Program Successful Completion 9/01 REFERENCES UPON REQUEST CP- 2008 -1 FXHIBIT I.D Page 9 of 10 e I Juan A. Araque, PSM Surveyor Education • Bachelor of Science Land Surveying University of Costa Rica, Professional Registrations/ Affiliations • Florida Surveying and Mapping Society ® Grady Nlinor Mr. Araque has been a Project Manager for Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. since 2005. He has been responsible for the coordination of' Field crews for project stakeout of single family and multi - family development projects and, transportation and utility engineering projects. Mr. Araque's 8 years of Land Surveying experience include Platting, Topographic and Construction work. He has extensive computer experience in Land Development Desktop, Carlson Civil /Survey and Civil /Survey SoftDesk within AutoCAD design. Relevant Projects Public Sector • Boundary and Topographic Survey Services for the North Water Treatment Plant Marco Island The Marco Island City Hall Fire Control District, City of Marco Island, Florida Private Sector • Platting, Surveying and Construction Layout for various residential subdivisions in Collier County, Florida, including: Laurel Lakes Phase l; Black Bear Ridge, Ph 1; Orange Blossom Ranch Phase 1B o Artesia Naples Manchester Square. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers • Surveyors • Land Planners • Landscape Architects CP- 2008 -1 EXHIBIT I.D Page 10 of 10 'a ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT III.A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SKETCH OF LEGAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT' SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 C13-2008-1 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit III.A o u } m its z m 3 X off= ,° _ n `.3W �I o0 0 ou�ua W1 �O�^ h - YS tOtyy Cl Wq- h "n �� 8 2 Oyio to, 8:6, U Q- Z SRI! o Wo oo po cost W VQ �� V �tR m W o \Q go W4mQw' Oh° O.,i 40° Vn W QF.�6" a u ^ °. VI W4.fa A O l A T f U11 R O y`hnm �W•�q0 HO tl O> It- ^ J 32 4 ti `2 4 4 4 ON Tl ssm O>K Zm G'� d Fg O V V 'sff as 4 3y O W ox ? s in wit v no Om VW is oo Xi Us �O °= q�¢ 4 °h ,n < N ,;� `�� v< cl °3L ht6 • °h{� Lu 4 4� 4�Y qid 4^Z 4�\\ hW X70 Wy ^4 40� av°jko W`,R l} O V pj Q z-' 0�2 p [ Q W 6�ti q yQ li yy WO°W O � .�4 O ^4 °�Y OTI� o^ 6Gh° _. �1 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit III.A m Q 2 m a yy m m m 2 Q �W G o $a ¢ ZW ` I✓ _ O Of (t ap 'WS W WO = �2k bi Wyi_i ? n W Lu � Wa KK W a � : $ U n W3h $ ti 2.T� v�ry� Yv r^ 1Zi42pWp. � y Wn�n �w W'qo gU �.f3pb b n ¢a <=m p m EE U iWECo��B�Qo �o Q�a ni 3 > K nW 4 ° - 8 Q ; Z zSs tla �i Con - 4 ����� ��n.. � Wn W i$,,, n W'• t3 a �8� Ull v, ¢i om zw m Page 2 of 3 • � /! ho Exhibit III.A Page 3 of 3 ME Exhibit III.A J i�z 2 W W ' � �, (AYM- A- 1IUk'30M Wli O u � y D W m ° g 0A78 NOS 1w 00099M Oi,&XO S w _ Q 2w J O 2 ly O `IC 't Lu 2,p OO I �ti "z LI! /JYlII m U ~ p w aoer tyros U I 4 Q LU ci W T I o I � QQn2W (AYM -A- /lab JCIM .09) LW MN133H1S1S11/3 I C4 y � � I �- e of O •'0 o 0 _ h o I~uoei�. -- tyros -- owo - -�� I ofy<wo h �Frc��� N 0 i- L y 1 C, 21 144Zti ab CC LQ L 4 I �q• -� I I = to --- -�- m,�3 w v_s- I-- - -r �� O_ U�2' I 22 0 Co � 2 LU W K I 'Xl1 IJYXI �• '• to I- ^ -901 IOVYI 0_ - -- - - — — — — — — -� - -� U m IN I -- - -� - - - -F— —� _� - - - - -- - 00'0993.01,61,00 N 3 W W a (AYM- A-llgk/ 301Y .09/ 1 C i O L MN133H1S @7 /HI u° W Page 3 of 3 ME Exhibit III.A '� ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT IV.B AMENDED LANGUAGE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT' SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 C P- 2008 -1 Exhibit IV.13 Proposed Growth Management Plan Text a. Estates — Commercial District (VIII)1) Residential Estates Subdistrict — Single- family residential development may be allowed within the Estates — Commercial District at a maximum density of one unit per 2114 gross acres unless the lot is considered a legal non - conforming lot of record. 2) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates, the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. the southern 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates, totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopping, personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents assist in minimizing the road network required, and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and Recreation (Groups 7911, 7991 7993 and 7999 including only day camps, gvmnastics instruction, iudo /karate instruction sporting goods rental and yoga instruction) 2. Apparel and Accessory Stores (Groups 5611 -5699) 3. Auto and Home Supply Stores (Groups 5531 5541 including gasoline service stations without repair) 4. Automotive Repair and Services (Groups 7514, 7534 including only tire repair, 7539, including only minor service lubricating and diagnostic service) and 7542) 5. Business Services (Groups 7334 -7342 7371 -7376 7379 7382 7383 7384, and 7389) 6. Child Day Care Services (Group 8351) 7. Communications (Groups 4812. 4841) Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B 8. Depository and Non - Depository Institutions (Groups 6021 -6062. 6091, 408A 6099, 6111 -6163, including drive through facilities) 9. Eating Places (Group 5812, including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use. 10. Educational Services (Group 8299) 11. Engineering, Accounting, Research and Management (Groups 8711 -8721, 8741 -8743, 8748) 12. Food Stores (Groups 5411 -5499, including convenience stores with gas) 13. General Merchandise Stores (Groups 5311, 5331, and 5399) 14. Government Administration Offices (Groups 9111 -9199) 15. Hardware Garden Supply and Paint/Wallpaper Stores (Groups 5231 5251, and 5261) 16. Holding and Other Investment (Groups 6712 -6799) 17. Home Furniture /Furnishings (Groups 5712 -5736) 18. Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311 -6361) 19. Justice, Public Order and Safety (Groups 9221, 9222, 9229, and 9311) 20. Meeting and Banquet Rooms 21. Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912, 5921 (accessory to grocery or Pharmacy only) 5932, 5941 -5949, 5992 -5995, and 5999) 22. Personal Services (Groups 7211, 7212, 7215 7221 -7251, 7291 -7299) 23. Real Estate (Groups 6512 -6552) 24. Security and Commodity Brokers (Groups 6211 -6289) 25. Transportation Services (Group 4724) 26. Video Rental (Group 7841) 27. U.S. Post Office (Group 4311, excluding major distribution centers) 28. Any other similar use as may be approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals The following uses shall be prohibited within the Subdistrict: b. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Drinkina Places (5813) and Stand Alone Liauor Stores (5921 2. Mail Order Houses (5961) 3. Merchandizing Machine Operators (5962) 4. Power Laundries (7211) 5. Crematories (7261) 6. Radio TV Representatives (7313) and Direct Mail Advertising Services 7( 331) 7. NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc. (7999) 8. General Hospitals (8062) Psychiatric Hospitals (8063) and Specialty Hospitals (8069) 9. Elementary and Secondary Schools (8211). Colleaes (8221). Junior Colleges (8222) 10. Libraries (8231) 11. Correctional Institutions (9223 12. Waste Management (9511) Page 2 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B 13. Homeless Shelters and Soup Kitchens c. Development intensity shall be limited to 225,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. d. The grocery use will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet, with the exception of the grocery use, no individual user may exceed 30,000 square feet of building area. e. Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. f. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual plan which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. g. Development standards including permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: (1) A minimum twenty -five (25) feet wide landscape buffer must be provided adjacent to external rights -of -way. Page 3 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B (2) No commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern or western property boundary of this subdistict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106 which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: (4) There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. (5)lf the proiect requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District, the proiect shall provide a letter or official document from the -- District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. (6)If the proiect is reviewed by Collier County the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. a. Estates — Mixed Use District (VI)2— Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. (VI) a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. (III)(V)(VI) b) Locations Page 4 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B ME Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed A ` within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all faur three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The NW qUadFaRt ef the Center -is approximately 4.98 acres in size and GORSAEMS of Tract 14 4, I_i it 11 of Golden r Estates. The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. Also revise as follows: TABLE OF CONTENTS, LIST OF MAPS [Page 1] Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add name of this inset map in FLUE where maps are listed. Policy 1.1.2: [Page 5] The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: 1. ESTATES — MIXED USE DISTRICT a. Residential Estates Subdistrict b. Neighborhood Center Subdistirct C. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict d. Conditional Uses Subdistrict Page 5 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B ' 1 2. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT a. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add the new Subdistrict in FLUE policy 1.1.2.2 that lists all Desig nations /Districts /Subdistricts. Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT IV.B a w F z w U z H a al 0 x c, O 0 N II cn E 1 G a v u V A O N c "a m p o y �w V `7 G N v� s a F v L G 'O V v V L O '= u .c m y v 3 p o 3 _ v a u v V u V Q u or, ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBITS IV.Da IV.Db IV.Dc IV.Dd AMENDED MAPS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 N ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT IV.D.a GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP RON3 m N "m WYORNEL r RROJ TiocnnoN SUBJECT SITE' �..RR.3 SNST rmoE�iu ESTATES (MIXED USE CAM ROAD - ESTATES SUBDISTRII • 30.825 ACRES III CACOk 'aalcwn 17 L3- ESTATES (MIXED USE celE NEIGHBORHOOD CEP n 10.005 ACRES ✓2 O.G Rtry. a. Ep3 WRRSt.h_r. OsNR BOUILYARp SR. H l� _ A Am b�nRI1Yf.Rbl ____ O _ r.�n+., SCALE �b R 0 1 .1 2 MI. 3 .1 . ML l .1. .. �MM1 Rv¢VS.. .O gvppp..t fpvim «rn1A R 20E R27 E R29E DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL T) DISTRICT, TER SUBDISTRICT) _ LEGEND uRiYl Rmu nrlm 0l9W.Lax bealvRaMNr rcau,...uo„ ■�,..`,,. rR. Ilal=CIIIII&A, ❑ W=Wi" s_ .i -imr-- GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP RON3 m N "m WYORNEL r RROJ TiocnnoN SUBJECT SITE' �..RR.3 SNST rmoE�iu ESTATES (MIXED USE CAM ROAD - ESTATES SUBDISTRII • 30.825 ACRES III CACOk 'aalcwn 17 L3- ESTATES (MIXED USE celE NEIGHBORHOOD CEP n 10.005 ACRES ✓2 O.G Rtry. a. Ep3 WRRSt.h_r. OsNR BOUILYARp SR. H l� _ A Am b�nRI1Yf.Rbl ____ O _ r.�n+., SCALE �b R 0 1 .1 2 MI. 3 .1 . ML l .1. .. �MM1 Rv¢VS.. .O gvppp..t fpvim «rn1A R 20E R27 E R29E DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL T) DISTRICT, TER SUBDISTRICT) _ ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT IV.Db GOLDEN GATE ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS Collier County. Florida IMMOKALEE ROAD I 1 OIL IMMOKALEE ROAD Eil V!Wt�E R.VA J m INTVOVTATf — AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 10. 2003 Ord. No. 2003 -44 AMENDED - OCTOBER 26. 2004 Ord No. 2004 -71 AMENDED - JANUARY 25. 2007 Ord. No. 2007 -19 PREPARED BY, GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPNENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION FILE G&P1` -47- 2407 -2.DVG DATE- 2/2007 oaacx wrz EerArzs x[wxealsww ¢xrzxs LEGEND _ xFJWB011n00D O NrzRG 0 MI 2 MI 0 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT M EXHIBIT IV.Dc: X\s5mss ii, FAR A F AN F ACRES GOLDEN CATE SETTLEMENT ESTATES AREA ESTATES SHOPPING NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER CENTER SUBDISTRICT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT IV.Dd ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Collier County, Florida IMMOKALEE ADOPTED — SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 (Ord. No. 2003 -44) ADOPTED — JANUARY 25, 2007 (Ord. No. 2007 —T 9) 0 112 N1. t M1. PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SGPPI CDNIBNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL FILE! G3IIP -43- 2007 -2.DVG DATE. 22007 LEGEND GOLDEN GATE SETTLEMENT ESTATES AREA k'8q ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBITS V.A.1 a V.A.1 b V.A.2 V.A.3a V.A.3b LAND USE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 C P- 2008 -1 RR F m ESTATE SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT p A EXHIBIT V.A.la Q HI GENERAL LOCATION MAP ) i •C t - 7C Tr �•r yr �r sr -gar- �r • -ar SUBJECT PROPERTY 1p 40.6t ACRES 1 j _ y a G n .. x O O PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING Co er County SiAPP WORHNVAP n f `_L E G E N U •••••• GEflT1IZFD R)NING ❑ vLAUUED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Q IUD 60VMERCIAI PuD INDUSTRIAL . INDUSTRIAL ■ COMMERCIAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES ❑ GOLDEN GATE Oil INCORPORATED (S) INDICATES PUG HAS 'UNSETTLED (r) sauna wLw® nn m ra J-1 � 4 — _ s if E � m L.r .- R 26 E T INAHA PARK i i 6 W W m mar -sr V O ip O Is of IIRz . —s JTA E ) • -ar SUBJECT PROPERTY 1p 40.6t ACRES 1 j _ y a G n .. x O O PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING Co er County SiAPP WORHNVAP n f `_L E G E N U •••••• GEflT1IZFD R)NING ❑ vLAUUED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Q IUD 60VMERCIAI PuD INDUSTRIAL . INDUSTRIAL ■ COMMERCIAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES ❑ GOLDEN GATE Oil INCORPORATED (S) INDICATES PUG HAS 'UNSETTLED (r) sauna wLw® nn m ra J-1 � 4 — _ s if E � m L.r .- R 26 E T INAHA PARK i i G n .. x O O PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING Co er County SiAPP WORHNVAP n f `_L E G E N U •••••• GEflT1IZFD R)NING ❑ vLAUUED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Q IUD 60VMERCIAI PuD INDUSTRIAL . INDUSTRIAL ■ COMMERCIAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES ❑ GOLDEN GATE Oil INCORPORATED (S) INDICATES PUG HAS 'UNSETTLED (r) sauna wLw® nn m ra J-1 � 4 — _ s if E � m L.r .- R 26 E T INAHA PARK i i MKN SAW ESTATES W1 E f m u1E ESTATES WT 6 E0L0[II OAR MAW N iS ESTATE SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT /� EXHIBIT V.A.7b 8 A GENERAL LOCATION MAP - ENLARGEMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY 40.6± ACRES EOL9FH an MAUS C m Gx EVAUS WT I WT 10' OOLNi W1S ESTATES WT E 901LG19ATE "TAM WY M wAnnE. 9nm"us LEGEND GENERALIZED ZONING ❑ PLANNED UNIT DEVEI.OPMENT Q PUD COMMERCIAL . PUD INDD STRIA, INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES GOLDEN GATE CITY INCORPORATED (S)INDICATES PUD HAS SUNSETTED (P) INDIU US PROPOSED PUD 1 W 3 4l O SC.LE ZONED — E (ESTATES) PANDALL BWLEVARD I6R -wt � 0piffi(Si is 60WOI mm ®TAl9 90E0P19AE Slum . 9bEVA 963E 1lY:. yw Iwlk i 0019M 9ATC 69986 E4TARS WT ffi Wt YS OM461M,ETA;9 YWIg6" 'aa9a m9E E6RN�. wAnnE. 9nm"us LEGEND GENERALIZED ZONING ❑ PLANNED UNIT DEVEI.OPMENT Q PUD COMMERCIAL . PUD INDD STRIA, INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES GOLDEN GATE CITY INCORPORATED (S)INDICATES PUD HAS SUNSETTED (P) INDIU US PROPOSED PUD 1 W 3 4l O SC.LE ZONED — E (ESTATES) ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.A.2 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH F] SUBJECT SITE NORTH AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE AERIAL DATE: JANUARY 2008 b, lk, 3V 600' ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.A.3a ZONING MAP 1440 77 1 104 i 113 E I e6 97 Be ! es 122 1 123 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 40.61 ACRES EXISTING ZONING: E(ESTATES) EXISTING USE: VACANT AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NORTH ZONING: E(ESTATES) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH ZONING: E (ESTATES), C -3 (COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE) AND CPUD (SNOWY EGRET PLAZA AND WILSON BOULEVARD CENTER) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL COMMERCIAL CENTERS EAST ZONING: E (ESTATES) AND C -2 (COMMERCIAL CONVENIENCE) USE: SINGLE FAMIILY RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL CENTER WEST ZONING: E(ESTATES) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ff G►3[no 1 =� ® SUBJECT SITE 500' RADIUS � t vo- 6' 2bO' 400' COLUER COUNTY ZONING MAP GGE05E AND GGE058 OL ._e wr�i�r�rw�ea� w•�a Fri e I e6 97 Be ! es 122 1 123 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 40.61 ACRES EXISTING ZONING: E(ESTATES) EXISTING USE: VACANT AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NORTH ZONING: E(ESTATES) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SOUTH ZONING: E (ESTATES), C -3 (COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE) AND CPUD (SNOWY EGRET PLAZA AND WILSON BOULEVARD CENTER) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL COMMERCIAL CENTERS EAST ZONING: E (ESTATES) AND C -2 (COMMERCIAL CONVENIENCE) USE: SINGLE FAMIILY RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL CENTER WEST ZONING: E(ESTATES) USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ff G►3[no 1 =� ® SUBJECT SITE 500' RADIUS � t vo- 6' 2bO' 400' COLUER COUNTY ZONING MAP GGE05E AND GGE058 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Exhibit V.A.3b Summary Table of Land Use & Zoning (within 500 feet) UNIT # TRACT # LAND USE ZONED APPROXIMATE ACREAGE 11 73 USFR (Undeveloped Single Family Residential) E 1.06 73 DSFR (Developed Single Family Residential E 2.12 74 DSFR E 4.66 75 DSFR E 5.00 76 USFR E 2.27 76 DSFR F 2.73 77 DSFR F. 2.50 104 DSFR F 2.50 105 DSFR E 5.01 106 DSFR E 2.28 I I I USFR E 1.14 112 DSFR E 5.00 113 DSFR E 2.73 140 DSFR E 2.81 141 DSFR E 5.51 142 DSFR E 2.34 14 5 USFR E 2.81 4 DSFR E 5.51 3 DSFR E 1.17 3 USFR E 3.98 2 USFR E 2.12 2 DSFR E 1.06 t UC (Undeveloped Comtercial) E 141 I DC (Developed Commercial) C2 1.93 13 18 USFR E 2.03 17 DC CPUD 8.04 12 125 UC CPUD 5.46 124 USFR E 4.58 123 DSFR E 4.68 122 DSFR E 2.08 122 USFR E 2.50 89 DSFR E 5.15 88 USFR F. 2.08 88 DSFR E 2.50 87 Undeveloped Government E 2.48 87 DSFR E 208 86 DSFR E 4.58 TOTAL, Fxhibit V.A.3h Land Use Summaiy.doe R('GMPA 118.89 Estates Shopping Center /[ Exhibit V.A.3b # Summary Table of Land Use & Zoning (within 500 feet) Page 2 of 2 LAND USE APPROXIMATE ACREAGE USER (Undeveloped Single Family Residential) 24.57 DSFR (Developed Single Family Residential 74.00 UC (Undeveloped Commercial) 7.87 DC (Developed Commercial) 9.97 Undeveloped Government 2.48 TOTAL 118.89 APPROXIMATE ACREAGE E, ESTATES 103.46 C2 1.93 CPUD (Commercial Planned Development) 13.50 TOTAL 118.89 Exhibit V.A.31b [.and Use Summary.doc RCGMPA b8A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.B FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED .APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.B !"8A DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL T) DISTRICT, rER SUBDISTRICT( a LEGEND unx rcaoulo EJURS omounor .osoArwAar nsw.na °�° °° err_• r'r" o -_- °a° smr GOLDEN GATE AREA r'r�' rt.ves FUTURE LAND USE MAP �B6'a.�ia�r"�' ®rrrrrr rte, s.e our r.ur rw., �'r" m. ra.• RYIXAIEE ROnO ❑Yri0ai :r q TE UL YfIL ROM RwORAIFC ROb t PROJECT LOCAOOw § RS�OIti t0o1leY0 SUBJECT SITE: :�Ea�ws�IO�I• ■ p.. vArpFRgEr ESTATES (MIXED USE KAOI ROQ ESTATES SUBDISTRIC 4 .30.62t ACRES M amm M1[ ESTATES (MIXED USE onE Ro NEIGHBORHOOD CEN' IL wR LJO. 10.00t ACRES GG. PRNT. ■ MrERSCJrt Ey] -Jp SR. M _..._..._._.- .ORr r• - at�r - RN LL RN _ .gar 610Y Ir. M• _ _.. __..__.__ .vr wvr - R�w•rA .m. _....� __ •vr _ wai.1O ulna SCALE wOPr Il• Orar I 1W 2MI. JM. rK JXl wrr - •or�o m ur.w rn.n r¢rra maarr aaonn w aa.mora m.ua x.ne. rR. war ru. rmo-s.e -uw R 26E R77 E R20E !"8A DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL T) DISTRICT, rER SUBDISTRICT( a ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBITS V.C.Ia V.C.1 b FLUCFS AND SOILS MAPS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.C.la $ fi FLUCFCS MAP I I hLU(:GS LINE FLUCCS CODE FLUCCS DESIGNATION ACREAGE % 121 SINGLE FAMILY HOME 9.00 22.16 321 PALMETTO 2.40 5.91 411 PINE FLATWOODS 5.80 14.28 428 CABBAGE PALM 3.0 7.39 621 CYPRESS CANOPY WITH BRAZILIAN PEPPER 0.66 1.62 624D PINE, CYPRESS, CABAGE PALM - DRAINED 18.86 46.43 814 ROADS AND HIGHWAYS 0.81 1.99 8335 PUMP STATION 0.09 0.22 TOTAL 40.62 100.00 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE AERIAL DATE: JANUARY 2008 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.C.1 b 8 A io SOILS MAP SUBJECT SITE SOILS LINE 0 ~00' 400' DESCRIPTION ACREAGE PERCENTAGE BOCA FINE SAND (21) 6.57± 16% PINEDA FINESAND. LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM (14) 34.03± 84% TOTAL 40.6t 100% AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH COPYRIGHT EXHIBIT V.C.1B Page 1 of 5 COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE AERIAL DATE: JANUARY 2008 r OS (21) Boca Fine Sand- This nearly level, poorly drained soil is on the flatwoods. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape and range from 20 to 350 acres. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the surface layer is very dark gray fine sand about 4 inches thick. The subsurface layer is fine sand to a depth of about 26 inches; the upper part is light gray and the lower part is brown. The subsoil is dark grayish brown fine sandy loam to a depth of about 30 inches. Limestone bedrock is at a depth of about 30 inches. In 95 percent of areas mapped as this soil, Boca and similar soils make up 79 to 93 percent of the map unit. The characteristics of Hallendale soil are similar. Soils of dissimilar characteristics included in this map unit are small areas of Pineda and Riviera, limestone substratum soils in slough landscape positions. These soils make up about 7 to 21 percent of the unit. The permeability of this soil is moderate. The available water capacity is very low. In most years, under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is between 6 to 18 inches of the surface of 1 to 6 months. In other months, the water table is below 18 inches and recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. Rarely is it above the surface. Natural vegetation consists mostly of south Florida slash pine, cabbage palm, sawpalmetto, waxmyrtle, chalky bluestem and pineland threeawn. This soil is poorly suited to-cultivated crops because of wetness and droughtiness. The number of adapted crops is limited unless very intensive management practices are followed. with good water control and soil improving measures, the soil can be made suitable form many fruit and vegetable crops. A water control system is needed to remove excess water in wet season and provide water through subsurface irrigation in dry seasons. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Seedbed preparation should include bedding of the rows_ Fertilizer and lime should be added according to the need of the crops. With proper water control, the soil is well suited to citrus. Water control systems that maintain good drainage to an effective depth are needed. Bedding the soil prior to planting provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. A good grass cover crop between the rrees heaps to gmtect the soil from blowing when the trees are young. With good water control management, this soil is well suited to pasture. A water control system is needed to remove excess water during the wet season_ It is well suited to pangolagrass, EXHIBIT V.CTB Page 2 of 5 A bahiagrass and clover. Excellent pastures of grass or grass - clover mixtures can be grown with good management. Regular applications of fertilizers and controlled grazing are needed for highest yields. This soil is moderately suited for desirable range plant production. The dominant forage is creeping bluestem, lopsided indiangrass, pineland threeawn and chalky bluestem. Management practices should include deferred grazing and brush control. This Boca soil is in the South Florida Flatwood range site_ This soil has severe limitations for most urban uses because of wetness. If this soil is used as septic tank absorption fields, it should be mounded to maintain the system well above the seasonal high water table. For recreational uses, this soil also has severe limitations because of wetness, but with proper drainage to remove excess surface water during wet periods, many of these limitations can be overcome_ This Boca soil is in capability subclass IIIw. EXHIBIT V.C.1 B • Page 3 of 5 `W In 95 percent of the areas mapped as Hallandale fine sand, Hallandale and similar soils make up 83 to 98 percent of the map unit. In the remaining areas, the Hallandale soil makes up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. The characteristics of Boca and Jupiter soils are similar to those of the Hallandale soil. The dissimilar soils in this map unit are small areas of Pineda and Riviera, limestone substratum, soils in sloughs These soils make up about 17 percent or less of the unit. The permeability of this soil is rapid. The available water capacity is very low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is between a depth of 6 to 18 inches for 1 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 18 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. The natural vegetation consists of South Florida slash pine, saw palmetto, creeping bluestem, chalky bluestem, and pineland threeawn. This soil is poorly suited to cultivated crops because of the wetness and droughtiness. The number of adapted crops is limited unless very intensive management practices are used. With good water - control and soil - improving measures, this soil is suitable for many fruit and vegetable crops. A water - control system is needed to remove excess water during wet seasons and to provide water through subsurface irrigation during dry seasons. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Seedbed preparation should include bedding of the rows Applications of fertilizer and lime should be based on the needs of the crops. With proper water - control measures, the soil is well suited to citrus. A water - control system that maintains good drainage to an effective depth is needed. Planting on raised beds provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. Planting a good grass cover crop between the trees helps to protect the soil from blowing when the trees are younger. With good water - control management, this soil is well suited to pasture. A water - control system is needed to remove excess water during the wet season. This soil is well suited to pangoiagrass, bahiagrass, and clover. Excellent pastures of grass or a grass - clover mixture can be grown with good management. Regular applications of fertilizer and controlled grazing are needed for the highest possible yields. This soil is moderately suited to range. The dominant forage consists of creeping bluestem, lopsided indiangrass, pineland threeawn, and chalky bluestem. Management practices should include deferred grazing A Soil Survey and brush control. This Hallandale soil is in the South Florida Flatwoods range site. This soil has severe limitations for most urban uses because of the shallow depth to bedrock and the wetness. It has severe limitations for septic tank absorption fields because of the depth to bedrock, wetness, and poor filtration. If this soil is used as a septic tank absorption field, it should be mounded to maintain the system well above the seasonal high water table. For recreational uses, this soil has severe limitations because of wetness, the sandy texture, and the shallow depth to bedrock, however, with proper drainage to remove excess surface water during wet periods, some of these limitations can be overcome This Hallandale soil is in capability subclass IVw. 14— Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum This nearly level, poorly drained soil is in sloughs and poorly defined drainageways. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape, and they range from 20 to 300 acres in size. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the surface layer is dark grayish brown fine sand about 4 inches thick. The subsurface layer is light brownish gray fine sand to a depth of about 12 inches. The subsoil extends to a depth of about 55 inches. The upper part of the subsoil is brownish yellow and very pale brown fine sand, the next part is grayish brown sandy clay loam, and the lower part is light brownish gray and dark grayish brown fine sandy loam. Limestone bedrock is at a depth of about 55 inches. In 95 percent of the areas mapped as Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum, Pineda and similar soils make up 79 to 98 percent of the map unit. In the remaining areas, the Pineda soil makes up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. The characteristics of Holopaw and Riviera, limestone substratum, soils are similar to those of the Pineda soil. The dissimilar soils in this map unit are small areas of Boca, Hallandale, and Malabar soils in landscape positions similar to those of the Pineda soil. These soils make up about 11 percent of less of the unit. The permeability of this soil is slow. The available water capacity is low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within a depth of 12 inches for 3 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 12 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods During periods of high rainfall, the soil is covered by shallow, slowly moving water for about 7 days. The natural vegetation consists of South Florida slash pine, waxmyrtle, chalky bluestem, blue maidencane, and gulf muhly. Page 4 of 5 ;j EXHIBIT V.C.113 Collier County Area, Florida This soil is poorly suited to cultivated crops because of the wetness and droughtiness. With good water - control and soil - improving measures, this soil is suitable for many fruit and vegetable crops. A water - control system is needed to remove excess water during wet seasons and to provide water through subsurface irrigation during dry seasons. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Seedbed preparation should include bedding of the rows. Applications of fertilizer and lime should be based on the needs of the crops. With proper water - control measures, the soil is moderately suited to citrus. A water - control system that maintains good drainage to an effective depth is needed. Planting on raised beds provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. Planting a good grass cover crop between the trees helps to protect the soil from blowing when the trees are younger. With good water - control management, this soil is well suited to pasture. A water - control system is needed to remove excess water during the wet season. This soil is well suited to pangolagrass, bahiagrass, and clover. Excellent pastures of grass or a grass - clover mixture can be grown with good management. Regular applications of fertilizer and controlled grazing are needed for the highest possible yields. This soil is well suited to range. The dominant forage consists of blue maidencane, chalky bluestem, and bluejoint panicum. Management practices should include deferred grazing. This soil is in the Slough range site. This soil has severe limitations for most urban uses because of the high water table. It has severe (imitations for septic tank absorption fields because of the wetness, slow percolation, and poor filtration. Building sites and septic tank absorption fields should be mounded to overcome these limitations. This soil also has severe limitations for recreational development because of wetness and the sandy texture. The problems associated with wetness can be corrected by providing adequate drainage and drainage outlets to control the high water table. The sandy texture can be overcome by adding suitable topsoil or by resurfacing the area. This Pineda soil is in capability subclass IIIw. 15— Pomello fine sand This nearly level, moderately well drained soil is on low ridges on flatwoods. Individual areas are elongated and irregular in shape, and they range from 5 to 100 acres in size. The slope is 0 to 2 percent. Typically, the surface layer is gray fine sand about 4 inches thick. The subsurface layer is fine sand to a depth Of about 35 inches. The upper part of the subsurface layer is light gray, and the lower part is white. The subsoil is fine • • 1 23 sand to a depth of about 60 inches. The upper part of the subsoil is black, the next part is dark brown, and the lower part is brown. The substratum is light yellowish brown to brown fine sand to a depth of about 80 inches. In 95 percent of the areas mapped as Pomello fine sand, Pomello and similar soils make up 85 to 98 percent of the map unit. In the remaining areas, the Pomello soil makes up either a higher or lower percentage of the mapped areas. The permeability of this soil is moderately rapid. The available water capacity is low. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is at a depth of 24 to 42 inches for 1 to 5 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 40 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 80 inches during extended dry periods. The natural vegetation consists mostly of oak, South Florida slash pine, saw palmetto, cactus, chalky bluestem, creeping bluestem, and pineland threeawn. This soil is poorly suited to cultivated crops because of the droughtiness. The number of adapted crops is limited unless very intensive management practices are used. With irrigation and soil- improving measures, this soil is suitable for many fruit and vegetable crops. Row crops should be rotated with cover crops. Applications of fertilizer and lime should be based on the needs of the crops. With proper water - control measures, the soil is well suited to citrus. A water - control system that maintains good drainage to an effective depth is needed. Planting on raised beds provides good surface and internal drainage and elevates the trees above the seasonal high water table. Planting a good grass cover crop between the trees helps to protect the soil from blowing when the trees are younger This soil is moderately suited to pasture. Pangolagrass and bahiagrass are adapted species, but they produce fair yields with good management. Regular applications of fertilizer and controlled grazing are needed for the highest possible yields. This soil is poorly suited to range. The dominant forage consists of creeping bluestem, lopsided indiangrass, pineland threeawn, and chalky bluestem. The dense growth of scrubby oaks, saw palmetto, and other shrubs dominates the desirable forage. Management practices should include deferred grazing and brush control. Livestock usually do not use this range site, except for protection and as dry bedding ground during the wet seasons. This Pomello soil is in the Sand Pine Scrub Range site. This soil has moderate limitations for most urban uses because of the wetness and droughtiness. It has severe limitations for septic tank absorption fields because of wetness and the poor filtration. If this soil is used as a EXHIBIT V.C.1B Page 5 of 5 • • ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.C.2 LISTED SPECIES GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 M � 1 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT (Previously known as'rhe Village Common of Golden Gate Estates) Collier County, Florida OCTOBER 2006 Prepared 13y: Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3880 Estcy Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 (239) 263 - 2687 EXHIBIT V.G.2 Page 1 of 22 • l Introduction / Purpose This report is an account of a Listed Species Survey recently performed on an acre tract. The parcel is located in Golden Gate Estates Collier County, Florida. Its purpose is to identify and describe key habitats and report any listed species using the site that would be at risk due to possible future development actions on the site. This survey and report are based on fieldwork performed during September 2006. II Site Description The site consists of approximately 33.51 acres and is located in Section 9, Township 49, Range 27; Collier County, Florida. The name of the project is The Village Common of Golden Gate Estates. The site consists of two separate parcels. See Exhibit # 1 - Location Map The dominant forest types on these parcels are Pine / Cypress / Cabbage palm (624 D) and Palmetto (321). The availability of good functional, habitat has been restricted. The parcels are located within a platted subdivision and at a very busy intersection. In addition, the parcels have some exotics and the natural hydrological regime has been disrupted. This Threatened and Endangered Species Survey placed an emphasis on surveying the pine flatwoods, this habitat offers some of the best quality foraging and nesting areas onsite. It has been noted that pine flatwoods are a prime habitat for the Red - Cockaded Woodpeckers and Big Cypress Fox Squirrels. However, no RCW's were sighted or active cavity trees found. In total the site consists of approximately 33.51 acres. The following is how the acreage figures breakdown. FLUCCS CODE 0.91 acres Cypress with Brazilian pepper 621 /422 14.63 acres Single family home 121 2.37 acres Palmetto 321 13.97 acres Slash pine, Cypress, Cabbage palm 624(D) 1.63 acres Disturbed / Cabbage palms 740/428 See Exhibit 42 - FLUCCS Map EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 2 of 22 • a III Threatened and Endangered Species Survey The required survey for a Threatened and Lndangercd Species Survey calls for a survey covering 100 % of the site, at prescribed transect distances per site acreage. Such a survey was conducted in September 2006. Established transects were oriented north - south and east - west and superimposed on an aerial map of the site. These transects were ground - located and walked by compass bearing. Early morning (0730 - 1000 ), mid -day (1100 - 1500) and late -day (1500 - 1800) time periods were chosen to survey these transects. This survey was conducted daily for approximately 20 hours. All possible species of plants and animals listed by state and federal agencies were noted. IV Results & Discussions Listed Flora Several species of plants that are listed by government agencies were found on this property during the transect surveys mid none of the onsite plants are considered as being rare. Several species of Tillandsia were found. These plants are listed by the FDA as endangered, primarily due to their commercial value. Refer to Exhibit # 3 Cumulative Plant List Listed Fauna Refer to Exhibit # 4 - Wildlife Species Observed Key Species Discussion : Red Cockaded Woodpeckers Red- Cockaded woodpeckers are known to inhabit Pine Flatwoods. Observations were keyed to searching for signs or calls of these animals. All mature pines were checked along the transect routes. Particular attention was paid to the south and west faces of the trees, as that seems to be the predominant location of cavity openings. No individuals or cavity trees were identified daring this survey. Gopher Tortoise This site does not offer suitable habitat for Gopher tortoise. Searches were keyed in the best areas such as the pine - palmetto areas. However, no signs or burrows were identified on the subject parcels. EXHIBIT V C.2 Page 3 of 22 7 Big Cypress Fox Squirrels 1 Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are known to use similar habitat as Red - Cockaded Woodpeckers. Observations were keyed to searching for signs or calls of these animals, such as leaf nests in canopy trees or the distinctive chattering of territorial squirrels. Several chewed pinecones were found on site. However, only gray squirrels were observed actively foraging. No Fox squirrels were identified on site during this survey. Fox squirrels are known to inhabit Golden Gate Estates and surrounding areas. Florida Panther Several individuals have been identified several miles to the east of the project site No individuals have been documented utilizing this project site or identified during this survey. Ibis species also has a large home range and is known to inhabit Golden Gate Estates and surrounding areas. See Exhibit # 5 Florida Black Bear No individuals were observed during this survey even though Black bears are known to inhabit the general area. Special attention was for given for signs such as scraps, tracks and seat. This mammal has a large home range and is known to inhabit Golden Gate Estates and surrounding areas. Conclusions Our survey found no listed species on this site. In fact, very little wildlife was noted during the survey conducted over several days. Trsects were walked on straight compass bearings along a grid spaced at approximately 20 yards apart for the entire parcel. Other transects were primarily meandering transects through areas of prime habitat. All transects were walked at varying times from post -dawn & mid -day to pre - sunset hours. The pine, palmetto areas still have enough recognizable character to support foraging by common small mammals and birds. Signs of small mammals such as rabbits, raccoons were readily visible in these areas. Several species of songbirds were seen passing through the transect areas during this survey. Several factors have contributed to the decline of this site. The site has relic plant communities. The pine flatwoods and the pine/ cypress/ cabbage palm areas give hints of a greater past ability to support major populations of mammals and birds. The main factor contributing to the decline of quality habitat is the surrounding developments. Several single family homes are within the study area. In addition, the hydrological regime of this site has also been severely altered. This study area is also located at a very busy intersection. The high traffic patterns and the single family homes has affected the natural EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 4 of 22 ? movement of mammals. 1 suspect that any small, medium and /or large mammal movements would be at night. During this survey no threatened and /or endangered species were identified vertebrates. The only plant species identified was Tillandsia spp. EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 5 of 22 Threatened Endangered and Species of Special Concern Species Black bear Florida panther Everglades mink Big Cypress Fox squirrel Indigo snake American alligator Gopher tortoise Gopher Frog Present Absent x X x X x x x x Southeastern American kestrel x Red - Cockaded woodpecker x Florida Scrub Jay x Wood stork x Snail kite x Bald eagle x Limpkin x Osprey x White ibis x "Tricolored heron x Snowy egret x Reddish egret x Little blue heron x EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 6 of 22 -S LOCATION MAPS EXH1131T # 1 EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 7 of 22 :i -=- I ls-- T- L= -' e = -- as 5 e __ r ^ aaaa= s MIX aggx ea saa§ ?_- R 3 swa 2 - R I 1 I P. ^ 9 S _ SIR �E ^ .Ig ^_F _ "e,__ ° - -�� FTM- =- :a - a8 S °l=( ., - "I - Vidal- ° I1Fi=f __ - ° 3'1 3 .q _9 8 - a 4 SHRL °f °l A. R_a_ ° °I °I 5 R kaa °iilF R ' ° - E Ek �L1�1�7- ° R-Ti _ - - - ak8a: . a 1= - - TI_I_IA1-1I1 A - _ - ' .. - - °I 3' A H4 °ov^ a -3N -° u a S a i 6" a S k S A Y' 3 k tl a E S SIR 4° a R R R Tit 11 Ra _ aaa a^ N1 ..X _ R - -----_- --- - any° 1 n A _ _ - n'':u _ k R A a _ _ _ _ _ R A _ A A _ - a R _ _ a: _ a R R a _ a _ - a a _ _ _ R_ S_ 'y - k n R a a a a R 8 ,", A° - a N - - - a a _ °_s Ya sx " =asaass:iiE�aaas _ k -- aaeE =as- ' SS a : $ 1Nl eY:a S S R 8S RA Aila - £- BR.� 8� ' - 9 } V Y:; 89 uq IS is =o 9;'aaaa89 11 3 2 R eaan aRR - 29 5 NIT RYRR Ana a a as 11 S !I.FT l As [ - �1 e o ':Y k aaaik x 8 - '•;� "R -9kea = ot9 aaaaasaiia�saa �sRFCR k k a _ ^C R°- __ __ A8ak µ M •1 __ 4$ aaikL 5 a I k i - e -_ r _ _- ^ 8 ° S 8 _ a 5_ a s e8 it k =ii A B a S a a S S 8° R F F a k S a k: M 8 F F - - A S a7 E89a ° E a S9 as S as YIla i ,^,Xa R:: aka 9 9 M 9 9 S' S 9 Y H S A A 0.R a R$ 9 9 M 9 9 3 : t C Y R ° - a A k R A a a R 9 R :• C a a R .^. 8 A :. _ ^x a C a a A a _ -- - - 2 A aaa �aS as SBS:o ^ _ _ -? =- - a8 - Raag -a - __ _a BR - -11 p T'8a @$a_ �jv ?sa8,_ 2t _. -i as as ECE a Ya aaa8< as as X 8R &:kaa^ S�.R IT 9121m z n 94112 6T =31 M t N S R °kaS kAaYe •1tl YSaaS R BaY: ° �'Aa a ?� M t a IS ' I - 4RA A R k ^aAR a RJ X a RRR K- -� .12 8 8 a 8 oaass:asRa - - a aYkaa - Rai - '1- Z A E 1 33 °- _a -�- a s Simi a a 8 N B S R R - x �. :9 9:79 l9 R A Ir_ —lI L °^ 0.Z A:. ac �• 9 RGX X 99 �N= I L11 �i� r 1 P a' —N -1'�1 iR FLUCCS CODE MAP EXHIBIT # 2 ' f EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 10 of 22 Z`t. d,N •Y2 e MsJf i �� N4 M I IT a' �dq_ j�gr'{j� ice; Yi i:GSIGNA;ION mkti Uazifian - 'app3r Midslory (potentially jurisdictional) ,I '_...11. .;>. e... n. I - u.r palm (drasned), nmrjur!sdlct!onal Oi.dgrbedlCebhen ; r P- I!ne; - ' EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 11 of 22 LOM CUMULATIVE PLANT LIST EXHIBIT # 3 EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 12 of 22 • FLUCCS CODE. AND VEGETATION INVLNTORY Fi.I1CCS CODE (Description) Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status 121 Single Family Homes 14.63 acres 624 1) Slash pine, Cypress, Cabbage palm 13.97 acres Upland I'his is the largest natural habitat within this project. The species composition consists of both wetland and upland plant species. The area does not meet the criteria as I uri sdi cti oval . Slash pine pines Clioiii FACW Cp,D Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC M,C Cypress Taxoditnn spp. OBL Cp,O palmetto Serona repens PACIJ G,C Laurel oak Quercus lourifolia PACW Cp,O Strangler fig Vicus aurea FAC M,O Myrsine Myrsine lloridana PAC M,C / G,C Bcauly hush Callicarpa Americana 1 TI, M,O Snowherry Chiococca alba UPI, G,D Dahoon holly llex cassine 0I31, M,O Brazilian pepper Schinus rerehinthifolius Exotic M,C wax nryrtle Nlvrica cerlfera FAC+ M,O Broom sedge Andropogon virginicus FAC- G,O Caesar weed 1 /renu lobwa FACT G,O Virginia creeper Ampelopsis rluinguefolia FAC G.O Cat -briar Srnilux spp. FAC G,C Poison ivV Toxicodendron radicans PAC G,O Grape vine Viiis rotundifidia PAC G,D Whitehead broom Spermacoce verlieillam PAC G,C Florida Trema Trema spp. PAC M,O Chocolate weed Meloehia corchorifolia FAC G,C 621 /422 Cypress -- Brazilian pepper 0.91 acres 'rransitional This area may be consideredjurisdictional wetlands. 'Fins area is located in Unit 111. The area has been impacted by the lowering of the ground water table and by the neighboring development. This is evident by the heavy coverage of Brazilian pepper and vines. The area is vegetated with such species as: Cypress Taxodium spp. OBL Cp,D EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 13 of 22 • Cabbage Palm Sabal palmetto FAC M,O Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic M,D Swamp fern Blechnum serrulatum FACW+ GC Grape vine Vitis rohmdifolia FAC G,O Poison ivy Toxicodendron radians FAC G,O Smilax Smilax spp. FAC GO 321 Palmetto 2.37 acres Uplands UPI. M,O This area consists of a sparse Slash pine canopy with a palmetto Umderstory. This habitat is located in Unit 110. The area would be considered upland. The area is vegetated with a variety of species. The following species were identified within this habitat. Slash pine Pinus elliotti FACW Cp,D Cabbage palm Sabal palmetto FAC M,C Dahoon holly Ilex cassine OBL M,O Palmetto Serona repens FACU G,C Melaleuca Melaleuca quinquenervia Exotic Cp,D Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic M,D Winged Sumac Rhus copallina UPI. M,O Myrsine Myrsine iloridana FAC M,C Penny royal Piloblephis rigida UPL G,O fetterbush Lyonia lucida FACW M,O Gallberry ilex glabra FACW M,C buckthorn Bumelia recbnata FAC M,O Florida trema Trema spp. FAC M,O Dewberries Rebus spp. FAC G,C Broom sedge Andropogon virginicus FAC G,O Beggers ticks Bidens alba FACW G,O Ragweed Ambrosia artemissiifolia FACU G,C Grape vine Vitis rotundifolia FAC G,D Poison ivy Toxicodendron radians FAC G,O Smilax Smilax spp. FAC G,C snowberry Chiococca parvifolia UPL 0,0 740/428 Disturbed/ Cabbage palms 1.63 acres Upland This area is in Unit 1 10. The area has a dense carpet of Grape vine. This area would be considered upland. Cabbage palm Brazilian pepper Winged Sumac Saba] palmetto FAC M,C Schinus terebinthifolius Exotic M,D Rhus copal]ina UPL M,O EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 14 of 22 Mvrsine Myrsinr (Jnridana PAC KC, Crape Vine Vitis rothuldifblia FAC G,l) Poison ivy Toxicodendron radians PAC G,O Smilax Smilax spp. FAC G,C ABREVIATIONS— Canopy (Cp), Nlidsto y (M), Ground Cover (G) Dominant (1)), Common (C), Occasional (0) INDICATOR STA'T'US - Obligate (0131), Facultative wet plants (FACW), Facultative plants (FAC), Upland (UPL) EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 15 of 22 WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED EXHIBIT # 4 EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 16 of 22 • WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED Common Name s eeies Status Amphibian & Reptiles: Six- lined racerunner Cnemidopjiorus sexlineatus Brown anole Anolis saarei Black racer Columber constrictor Florida Box turtle fcrrepene carp ina baun Birds: Dove- ground Colmnbina passerina Dove- mourning Z.enaida macroura Copper I lawk Acci ip ter cooverii Vulture, turkey Cathartes aura Vulture, Black Coragyps atratus Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus in•leatus Northern flicker CColaotes auratus Crow, American Corvus beach rl>�nchos Boat - tailed Grackle Quiscalus major Common grackle I tuiscalus ouisrula Bluejay C;} anocuta cristat_i Carolina wren Tl�thorus ludovieianus Northern mockingbird Ntimus of lottos Cardinal Richmondena cardinalis Chuck - will's widow (:lprimulgus carplinensis Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor Mammals: Gray squirrel Sciunis carolinensis Raccoon Proc oar Hispid cotton rat Sigmodon lvspidus Nine - banded armadillo Dasvpus novemcinctu Eastern cottontail Sylviarlagus floridanus Feral cat Felis domestica EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 17 of 22 Suspected Listed Species per FLUCCS CODI1 These species are known to be found within these FLUCCS codes. It should be noted that there were none directly observed. However, they are suspected and potentially can inhabit these biological communities. 411 Eastern Indigo Gopher tortoise Gopher frog Red -rat snake Florida pine snake Southeastern kestrel Red cockaded woodpecker Fox squirrel Black bear Panther Fakahatchee burmannia Stain leaf Paw -paw Florida coontie 624,621 Black bear Panther Tri -color heron Snowy egret Little blue heron Limpkin Wild Pines- Tillandsia spp. Stiff --leaved Recurved wired - leaved Butterfly orchid EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 18 of 22 w .l_ PANTHER HABITAT MAP EXHIBIT # 5 EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 19 of 22 Exclmtno Kula! Lmlds 8A 1. Utility -or screw Swamp 1MF'.OKALrFRDJ-= CR 858 NI 11,11' RIDGE,lb FXT I Florida Panther NWR LI 7-' FalkahatcheL Strand State Preserva zi y IN, I *& W �46 T., On- Th. 0111 S."m cwla, Cmty Crested 8) TpW8nHCPNsA�-J 2.5 5 10 milesi M ��111.16V.Olcpl�lflplj OMEMMe EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 20 of 22 ADDENDUM m On September 2006 a listed Species Survey was conducted at a 33.51 -acre site called fhe Villages Common of Golden Gate Estates. The site is located in Section 9, Township 49 Range 27. The site is located on the north side of Golden Gate Blvd and west of Wilson Blvd. Since the original Listed Species survey was conducted two additional single - family parcels were added. "I'he total acreage site is now 40.62 acres. As requested by Collier County Environmental staff on May 2, 4 and 5, 2009 a brief assessment for listed species was conducted on the additional acreage. The following outlines our findings: On May 2, 4 and 5 of 2009 Collier Environmental Consultants examined the addition acreage. The additional acreage consists of two platted single - family Golden Gate Estate lots. Both lots have single- family residences on site. One site parallels 3 "1 Street NW and the other is peipendicular to 1" Street N`<V and Golden Gate Blvd The parcel along 1" Street NW has been partially cleared and has a high privacy fence along the entire perimeter of the parcel. This fence limited this survey and limits movement of any large mammals on this subject parcel. '['he parcel along 3`1 St NW still has some native habitat in fi-ont and behind the single- famihr structure. This habitat is also contiguous to other native habitat. During this survey there was a lot of high traffic noise and human disturbance. Both corners are a high traffic area. The heavy traffic patterns and associate noise has a limiting factor on this parcel as suitable habitat. ht is our conclusion that any mammal ntovcutcnt within these parcels probably occurs ai night. The main vertebrates encountered were birds traversing the subject parcel. Our survey found no listed vertebrate species on site. Our survey did find a few Tillandsia's on site. Amphibian & Reptiles: Brown anole Anolis saarei Birds: Dove - ground Cohrnbina passerina Dove - mourning Lenaida macroura Ringed Futile DOVC SItZ O_lelia rrsorla mockingbird Mimus poly loitos Northern flicker Colaptes auratus Crow, American Corvus brachyrhynchos Common grackle Quisealus quiscula Bluejay Cvanocitta cristata Gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis Cardinal Richntondena cardinalis EXHIBIT V.C.2 Page 21 of 22 h x. . k It 1 a -: f •� dvt �• � Ae a fr�"•;'p gym. + ,� t ����7r Y. L y. Y R'. x ME ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.C.3 HISTORICAL / ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 Pale I of I • • Sharon Umpenhour From: Marco Espinar [marcoe @prodigy.net] Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:00 AM To: Bailey Erin Cc: Sharon Umpenhour Subject: Historical /Archaelogical Search Good Morning Erin, I need an archaelogical / historical search for Section 4. Township 49, Range 27 in Collier County. I have a project 41 ac +/- in the south cast corner of the section. Can you please send me a letter and map of your records. Thank You Marco Espinar Collier Environmental Consultants Inc. CP- 2008 -1 8/6/2009 Page 1 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 • O a This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850 - 245 -6333 for project review information. August 6, 2009 "Florida Master Marco Espinar Site ^ Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. File 3880 Estey Ave. Naples, FL 34104 Email marcoc(.)prodigy.net In response to your inquiry of August 6, 2009 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: T49S, R27E, Section 4 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850- 245 -6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Erin Michelle Bailey Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File 500 South 13ronough Street • "f allahassee, FL 32399 -0250 www. tllieritage .coin/preservation /sitefile 950 -245 -6440 ph I 850- 245 -6439 tax SiteFile(Qdos.state.fl.us CP- 2008 -1 Page 2 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 4 8A RECEIVED AUG 12 2009 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Q. Grady Minor Kurt S. Browning g Associates PA Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES August 7, 2009 Mr. Marco Espinar Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3880 Estey Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 Re: Cultural Resource Assessment Request for Estate Shopping Center Proposed Amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan 44 Acres in Section 04, T49S -R27E, Collier County DHR Project File No. 2009 -4448; 2006 -1916 Dear Mr. Espinar: According to this agency's responsibilities under Sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, Florida Statutes, Chapter 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, and any appropriate local ordinances, we reviewed the proposed potential comprehensive plan amendment. This agency reviewed a slightly smaller version of this proposed project in 2006. At that time, we were concerned that while there were no recorded sites within the project parcel, nor was the parcel within the Collier County archaeological high probability area, if any hardwood hammocks were present or had been present, there would be a good probability for unrecorded archaeological resources. Because of the potential for archaeological resources, we suggested that the property be subjected to a cultural resource assessment survey. After our comments bad been sent to the applicant of record, we received additional information that there were no hardwood hammocks on the property, and that the property had been subjected to "impacts from ...continued use by the homeless and recreational vehicle riders." Buried resources should not be greatly disturbed by homeless people or recreational vehicle riders, but if there are no hammocks, the likelihood of significant archaeological resources being present is low. Based on the additional information received that there are no hammock areas on this property, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed project will have no effect on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, or otherwise of historical or archaeological value. 500 S. Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399 -0250 • http: /Iwww.flheritage.com O Director's Office ❑ Archaeological Research ✓ Historic Preservation (850) 245 -6300 • FAX: 245 -6436 (850) 245 -6444 • FAX: 245 -6452 (850) 2456333 • FAX: 245 -6437 CP- 2008 -1 Page 3 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 4 Mr. Espinar August 7, 2009 Page 2 If you have any questions concerning our comments, please do not hesitate to contact Susan Harp at (850) 245 - 6367. Thank you for your interest in protecting Florida's historic resources. Sincerely, Laura A. Kammerer Historic Preservationist Supervisor Compliance Review Section Bureau of Historic Preservation CP- 2008 -1 Page 4 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.C.3 HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY MAP RNG 271 RNG 28 ® PREVIOUSLY SURVEYED AREA BELLE 4EADE NE QUADRANGLE - INDICATES AREAS OF HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY AM3 OF REa'mRCALARCHILEOLnG1CAL PROAARII- T'I'C' * INDICATES HISTORIC STRUCTURE INOT TO SCALE) O W � INDICATES aRCHaEDLOGICAI. SITE NOT TO SCALE) CP- 2008 -1 Page 5 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 D b8 A USGS BELLE MEADE NE: DATA SHEET General Description: This quadrangle is situated in the Flatwoods Zone in the central portion of Collier County. The land can be described as predominantly freshwater marshland with occasional areas of pine flatwoods. Curry Island and Big Corkscrew Island lie in the extreme northern portion of the quadrangle. SR 84 (Everglades Parkway /Alligator Alley) runs east -west through the southern half of the map area. The southeastern comer of the quadrangle is contained within the Golden Gate State Forest. The eastern and northern thuds of the quadrangle are part of the Golden Gate Estates development with Golden Gate Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard serving as the main avenues. These areas have been ditched and drained and access roads built in a grid pattern. It should be noted that a majority of this quadrangle is not divided into Sections within Township 49 South, Range 27 and 28 East. Thus, locational data, particularly soil type distribution, is not easy to evaluate. Previous Work: Several professional historical/archaeological survey have been undertaken within this quadrangle. One was performed for the Ford Vehicle Evaluation Facility (#4414 - ACI 1995), and no sites were discovered. In addition, the 1991 AHC survey targeted and investigated selected locales within this quadrangle and recorded one site (8CR729). In 1994, Weisman and Newman ( #4013) conducted a reconnaissance of the Golden Gate State Forest, but recorded no sites. The other recorded sites within this quadrangle were reported by John Beriault and other local archaeologists (FSF). Previously Recorded/Reported Sites: There are seven reported archaeological sites within this quadrangle. They are all black dirt middens; however, 8CR741 may have also been a Seminole campsite. The location of each site is depicted on the Probability Maps. Discussion/Recommendations: In general, much of the area is a broad, level expanse of wetlands. Potential site locations (probability zones) identified by the predictive model are shaded. These conform to the margins of Curry Island (Beriault, personal communication) or slightly elevated areas of hammock or pine vegetation with rapid internal drainage. All shaded areas on the Probability Map are recommended for professional archaeological survey. In addition, all previously recorded archaeological sites should be relocated and assessed as per their condition and significance. CP- 2008 -1 Page 6 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 USGS BELLE MEADE NE: Site No. Site Name SITE INVENTORY SHEET Type(s) Comments CR00183 Conch A CR00184 Deer Leg A CR00185 Lily A CR00693 Trema A CR00729 Lone Fallen Oak A CR00741 Garden Grove Al CR00780 Kyle A CP- 2008 -1 Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT V.C.3 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.D.5 COMMERCIAL NEEDS ANALYSIS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEP'T'EMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 • 1 • Estates Shopping Center Sub district Commercial Needs Analysis April 15, 2008 Revised and Updated 8 -25 -09 Prepared for Mr. Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Mr. Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. Prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane, Suites 346/347 Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 254 -8585 Page 1 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 M, Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary ...................................................................................... ............................... 3 (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) .......................................................... ............................... 7 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................... ............................... 8 1.1 Purpose ........................................................................................ ..............................8 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis ........................................................ ............................... 8 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population.. ............ ................................... 9 1.4 Analysis Process ....................................................................... ............................... 13 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space .................................................... ............................... 14 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market ......................... ............................... 14 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands . ............................... 16 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site ............................................ ............................... 17 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites ..................................... ............................... 18 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM .. ............................... 19 3.1 Overview ................................................................................... ............................... 19 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio .......................... ............................... 19 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment .................. ............................... 23 4.0 Commercial -Office Uses.. ................................................................................................ 24 5.0 Conclusions ..................................................................................... ............................... 27 APPENDIX1 ............................................................................................... ............................... 28 APPENDIX2 .........................................................................................._... ............................... 36 APPENDIX3 ............................................................................................... ............................... 37 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 2 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 6 Executive Summary o Crown Management Services, Inc. ( "Client') is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). The proposal is for mixed use development including a commercial office and retail component on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ( "Project') in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ( "County "). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ( "Consultant") to prepare commercial needs analysis. o In the context of amending the adopted Plan, the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. Typically, this takes the form of a comparison of: • The supply of existing, vacant, and potential land /square footage planned for various commercial uses, • The demand for commercial land /square footage based on projected households in the market o Based on the current character of the region and proposed commercial development, the Consultant has analyzed the need for additional neighborhood and community retail development within a custom 10- minute drive time market surrounding the Project. This trade area will be referred to throughout this report as the Custom Trade Area. o The metric utilized for the comparison of supply -to- demand is the allocation ratio. • The allocation ratio (supply /demand) measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to directly utilized acreage. The additional acreage is required in order to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints must be accounted for. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. The Consultant believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the Plan, this area should have a commercial allocation ratio of approximately 2.0 for the short-term. o Summary results of the retail needs analysis are shown in Table E1 below. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 3 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 3 IM, Table E1. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. 0.62 0.55 General Commercial 2008 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 119,100 131,190 174,964 200,340 Existing Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.92 0.83 0.62 0.55 FLUM Potential Supply 70,699 70,699 70,699 70,699 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 179,906 179,906 179,906 179,906 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential 1.51 1.37 1.03 0.90 o Table E1 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is substantially below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to drop to 0.90, which supports good planning and economic policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market area can expect to increasingly experience: • Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; • Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County -wide; • Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply; • Downward pressure on residential land prices due to a lack of support facilities. o Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this market. Any ratio less than 2.0 justifies the addition of land to the inventory of the market. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 4 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 M Table E2. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. with Inclusion of Project General Commercial 2008 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 119,100 131,190 174,964 200,340 Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail isq.ft) 0 225,000 225,000 225,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.92 2.55 1.91 1.67 FLUM Potential Supply 70,699 70,699 70,699 70,699 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 179.906 404,906 404,906 404,906 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential 1.51 3.09 2.31 2.02 o In 2010, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.37 to 3.09. An allocation ratio of 3.09 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the Future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. o Based on this analysis, there are insufficient lands designated for commercial uses in the market or the lands are not expected to be developed within the planning horizon of 2030. The under - allocation of suitable commercial land supports the need for the additional retail acreage proposed by the applicant. o Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provides for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. o Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries. i.e. Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 5 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 5 M cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. o The Consultant has analyzed the demand for new office space in the County, on a per capita basis, as well as the implied need for additional office acreage within the custom trade area surrounding the Project site. o Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. c Also using updated records from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 14.7 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. o Table E3 below shows the Consultant's population forecast for the market surrounding the Project. Additionally, Table E3 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table E3. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area o According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the custom trade area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0..61. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. o Based on the map located in Appendix 2, we can see the central and southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates would not be served at all would it not be for this project. It is our opinion there is sufficient current need for additional retail and office uses and the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 6 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 R Without the Proposed Amendment Per Capita Total Office Allocation Year Population Office Need Office Need Sqft Supplied Ratio Population (1990) 2,539 14.7 37,384 156,940 4.20 Population (2000) 8,224 14.7 121,090 156,940 1.30 Population (2008) 12,415 14.7 182,798 156,940 0.86 Population (2013) 15,173 14.7 223,406 156,940 0.70 Population (2020) 16,499 14.7 242,936 156,940 0.65 Population (2030) 17,379 14.7 255,887 156,940 0.61 o According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the custom trade area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0..61. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. o Based on the map located in Appendix 2, we can see the central and southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates would not be served at all would it not be for this project. It is our opinion there is sufficient current need for additional retail and office uses and the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 6 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 R k 6 demand will continue to grow at a rate higher than supply due to the affordability and availability of land in this area. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 7 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 7 REVISED AND UPDATED Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Project Commercial Needs Analysis (August 25, 2009) 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to present a commercial needs analysis for the proposed change to Collier County's Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). Crown Management Services, Inc. ( "Client ") is proposing an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan ( "Plan "). The proposal is for mixed use development including a commercial office and retail component on a 41 +/- acre site located at the Northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard ( "Project ") in the Golden Gate Estates Area of Collier County ("County"). The Client has engaged Fishkind and Associates, Inc. ( "Consultant ") to prepare commercial needs analysis. 1.2 Overview of Needs Analysis In the context of amending the adopted Plan the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. Typically, this takes the form of a comparison of: o The supply of existing land /square footage currently planned for various commercial uses o The demand for land /square footage based on projected population in the market Historically, these comparisons have focused their studies County -wide. This analysis studies the market for commercial retail demand around the project and portions of the County within a custom trade area based on driving distances from the site and adjacent areas unserved by retail uses. There are two related reasons for this type of analysis. First, consumers are assumed to maximize benefit over all goods and services consumed subject to their income. This type of analysis requires that travel costs are either explicitly or implicitly accounted for during the consideration of the consumers' income constraint. This analysis requires the Consultant to narrow the scope of the analysis from the county level down to a local market level. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 8 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 0 Second, the Consultant considers whether the choice of location is a Pareto improvement for consumers. ( Pareto improvement means that no consumers are made worse off, and at least one is made better off.) That is, the Consultant asks the question whether additional retail space makes at least one local market better off, without reducing the welfare of all others. An analysis of commercial retail space over the whole of a county may lead to the wrong conclusion of where to develop new space. That is, the county as a whole may appear to need more retail space to support the aggregate level of demand generated by its residents. With many County -wide choices of commercially -zoned lands available, the development of one site over another may lead to an over supply in one location and an under supply in another. This is precisely the outcome the County wants to avoid. Therefore: o By narrowing the focus of this study to the local market, the Consultant determines if this market has a need for additional retail space; o The Consultant can replicate a competitive outcome, and ensure that the welfare of all other local markets is improved or unchanged. 1.3 Definition of the Market Area and Target Population According to the Urban Land Institute', "A neighborhood center's typical size is about 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 30,000 to 100,000 or more square feet." Neighborhood centers sell convenience goods, groceries and personal services to the immediate neighborhood community. The typical market area for a neighborhood center is a 10- minute drive time. "A community center's typical size is about 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice, it may range from 100,000 to 500,000 or more square feet. Centers that fit the general profile of a community center but contain more than 250,000 square feet are classified as super community centers." Community centers sell a wider range of products that includes apparel, hardware and appliances. The typical market area for a community retail center is a 20- minute drive time. Bayard, Michael D., W. Paul O'Mana. ri ❑I. Shopping Center Development Handbook. Third Edition. Washington, D.C.: ULI -the Urban Land Institute, 1999. p.l 1 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 9 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 w O Utilizing the above information as a guide, the proposed retail component of the Project is classified as a hybrid combination of both neighborhood and community serving. Community and Neighborhood centers which are grocery anchored are most common as they provide goods and services to support a general trade area. Since the grocery use is the main catalyst and attraction to the center, grocery tenants pay significantly less in annual rent. In order for a developer to make the project financially and economically feasible, local tenant rents provide for the majority of the income to the owner therefore allowing sufficient cash flow for development financing. Based on the economics of typical grocery anchored centers, it is not financially feasible to assume a grocery store can be a self sufficient facility on the site. As evidenced by the closure of several stand alone groceries, ie Albertsons on the Northeast Corner of Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and the Albertsons in Ft Myers. Considering the lack of standalone stores, and the fact they are not being developed more readily due to high land cost, it is unreasonable to assume this area can financially and economically support a standalone grocer. Also due to the limited services in the area, a grocery cannot provide all the goods and services needed nor would the market expect one provider, they would expect a choice. The project is proposed for 225,000 square feet of commercial retail space of which some of the ancillary supportive uses will be office in nature. These office uses desire a retail exposure, however do not impact the parking as heavily as more traditional retail uses might. These uses may include offices for real estate, insurance and mortgage companies, banks, governmental offices, federal, state and local, securities firms, etc. The inclusion of some office uses in this area will help to further support the area. The Consultant concurs with County Staff's assessment that analysis of a 10- minute drive time market area surrounding the Project would be instructive in terms of determining the need for additional retail development. This is because the region surrounding the Project is generally rural in nature with a limited transportation network. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 10 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 10 Located below, is a map showing the 10- minute drive time with the addition of those sections of Golden Gate Estates located south of Golden Gate Blvd, hereafter called the "Custom Trade Area ". The map also illustrates 3 -mile trade area buffers surrounding the existing center at Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Blvd to the west, and the planned centers at Immokalee Road and Orange Blossom and at Big Cypress, to the north and north east respectively. As we can see from this map, the Estates Shopping Center Sub District serves the Central and southeastern units of Golden Gate Estates which cannot be effectively served by any other areas. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 11 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 11 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT 0 1i � F / x � IFNI PLANNED UNIT W m v F W 0 DEVELOPMENTS. . W COMMEWCALAND i_- INOUSTRNL i .• . ZONING Legend i PLANNED UNIT W m v F W 0 DEVELOPMENTS. COMMEWCALAND i_- INOUSTRNL i .• . ZONING Legend i _ —� PUD _ W ® PUD COMMERCIAL Lib - PUD INDUSTRIAL�'� - INDUSTRIAL '4x l _ • nvo. -COMMERCIAL Ovea -_�r.r { _ U• t s. . Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 12 of 71 12 EXHIBIT V.D.5 � I f 8A Although the Project is classified as a community center with a 20- minute drive time market area per the ULI guidelines above, the "Custom Trade Area" will be utilized for this analysis due to the rural nature and limited roadway network of Golden Gate Estates. This Custom Trade Area consists of a 10- minute drive time surrounding the site and the addition of the units of Golden Gate Estates located along Everglades Blvd south of Golden Gate Blvd. The proposed center falls within the threshold of community serving centers and will sell a wider range of goods than a neighborhood center, therefore the Consultant has accounted for a portion of the trade area's community center expenditures in addition to neighborhood expenditures. Therefore, the need for additional retail development is based on an analysis of: o A 10- minute drive -time with the additional southeast GGE units market surrounding the Project; "Custom Trade Area" o The "Custom Trade Areas" need for additional neighborhood goods and services and a portion of community goods and services . Estimates of existing and projected housing units and households for the Custom Trade Area are provided for years 2008, 2010, 2020 and 2030 in Table 3. These figures were estimated using parcel data from the Property Appraiser and occupancy rates for the trade area from I -Site, Census -based Demographics package. 1.4 Analysis Process The process of determining the need for additional retail land is a four -step process, as outlined below. o Inventory existing supply of commercial space in the market area; o Inventory vacant commercial space and parcels designated as having the potential for commercial space by the Future Land Use Map (FLUM); o Project future housing units / /households to determine future commercial land needs and compare against commercial land allocation ratios; o Determine impact of the Project's proposed commercial land on land allocation ratio within the market area. s See Appendix Al, 'Index of Sales by Center Type' for details Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 13 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 13 2.0 The Supply of Commercial Space 2.1 Estates Shopping Center Sub district's Market The analysis begins with the supply of existing, vacant, and potential commercial square feet in the market area. The site is located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard in the Golden Gate Estates area of the County. The Custom Trade Area, or market serving the Estates Shopping Center Sub district, is an aggregation of a 10- minute drive time radius surrounding the site and the addition of those units of Golden Gate Estates located east and south of the drive time radius surrounding the subject site (map in Appendix 2). Table 1 provides the current inventory of commercial space based on the Property Appraiser's ('PA ") data, as well as data provided by the Comprehensive Planning Department ( "CPD "). These data provide an estimate of 279,824 (rounded) square feet of existing, vacant, and potential commercial - retail space. Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial - Retail Space in Mixed Use Project's Custom Trade Area 'Assumed 6.100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SOFT/ 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 14 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 14 ME vacant Commercial Folio Acres Sqft' Description 37280040002 2.41 14.701 N. of E's Country Store Potential Commercial Folio Acres Sqft' Description 37745120001 4.01 24,461 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 37280080004 2.12 12,932 E. of E's Country Store MiviiIpl ®498 i Ce Center d3�,'S46 11.59 170,617 Existing Cornmercial Folio Acres Sqft Description 37221120101 5.00 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 37169520009 4.19 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 37280040109 2.65 11,224 E's Country Store 37744040001 2.53 21,926 Randall Blvd 37745180009 1.14 4,356 Randall Blvd 15.51 94,506 Total Inventory 29.51 279,824 'Assumed 6.100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SOFT/ 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 14 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 14 ME 8 A ►_'J A The potential commercial includes the four separate corners that make up the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd center. These parcels fall in the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict designation of the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. This neighborhood designation states the following, "The neighborhood center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning ", The fact these parcels of land are located the furthest from the existing concentration of households, and are not of similar functional utility to the subject project, suggest the probability of commercial development is very limited before the end of the planning horizon used in this report. The inclusion of these sites increases the potential commercial supply by 47 percent, which is a substantial amount considering their inferior location and functional utility. Based on these factors, it is the Consultant's opinion these parcels be given 25% weighting or one parcel's development potential in the supply calculation to account for potential development which may occur within the planning horizon. Given the current limited population surrounding the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center, the probability of commercial approval is low as this area is sparsely populated. The reasoning for including the demand of existing households in this area is to account for limited population which currently resides there. Future households are anticipated to be located closer to the employment centers of Collier County, which supports the increase in demand calculated in this report. Located below we have recalculated the allocation ratio assuming that one parcel within the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center parcel is included. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 15 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 15 Table 2. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial - Retail Space INCLUDING ONE PARCEL IN THE EVERGLADES BLVD /GOLDEN GATE BLVD CENTER in Mixed Use Project's Custom Trade Area 'Assumed 6,100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SOFT/ 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 The exclusion of three of the four parcels located in the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center reduces the total inventory by 100,000 sqft. The remaining inventory of 179,906 sqft of commercial inventory is considered reasonable within the planning horizon of 2030. 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands County Staff has indicated two Rural Villages ranging in size from 300 to 1,500 acres are permitted in the Receiving Lands to the north and south of the Project. Portions of these Receiving Lands are within the periphery of the Custom Trade Area market surrounding the Project. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, these Rural Villages must include a Village Center and several Neighborhood Centers which would yield additional commercial development in the region. To date, landowners in these Receiving Lands have not given indication of any action or intent on initiating the lengthy permitting and review process necessary for development. However, the Consultant has not included potential commercial development within these Receiving Lands as supply for two additional related reasons: Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 16 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 16 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Acres SgfY Description 140002 2.41 14,701 N. of E's Country Store tial Commercial Acres Sqft" Description 120001 4.01 24,461 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. )80004 2.12 12,932 E. of E's Country Store X10001 5.46 33,306 Everglades )04000 5.46 33,306 Bbd /Golden 760001 - 5.46 33,306 Gate Blvd 720009 6:46 33,306 center 11.5 na Commercial Acres Sqft Description 120101 5.00 42,000 Wilson Blvd Center 520009 4.19 15,000 Walgreen's (SW Quadrant) 340109 2.65 11,224 E's Country Store 340001 2.53 21,926 Randall Blvd 180009 1.14 4,356 Randall Blvd 15.51 94,506 'Assumed 6,100 Square feet per Acre (94,506 SOFT/ 15.51) = 6,093, Rounded to 6,100 The exclusion of three of the four parcels located in the Everglades Blvd /Golden Gate Blvd Center reduces the total inventory by 100,000 sqft. The remaining inventory of 179,906 sqft of commercial inventory is considered reasonable within the planning horizon of 2030. 2.2 Additions to Supply from the Development of Receiving Lands County Staff has indicated two Rural Villages ranging in size from 300 to 1,500 acres are permitted in the Receiving Lands to the north and south of the Project. Portions of these Receiving Lands are within the periphery of the Custom Trade Area market surrounding the Project. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, these Rural Villages must include a Village Center and several Neighborhood Centers which would yield additional commercial development in the region. To date, landowners in these Receiving Lands have not given indication of any action or intent on initiating the lengthy permitting and review process necessary for development. However, the Consultant has not included potential commercial development within these Receiving Lands as supply for two additional related reasons: Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 16 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 16 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • t o First, commercial development within Rural Villages is intended to be self - sustainable and serve the residents of the Village. According to the Collier County Future Land Use Element, "Rural Villages may be approved.....to reduce the need of residents of the District and surrounding lands to travel to the County's Urban area. .....Village Centers shall be designed to serve the retail, office, civic, government uses and service needs of the residents of the village." o Second, development of Rural Villages in the Receiving Lands will generate a substantial increase in the number of households in the region. This information indicates the region's demand for commercial space would also substantially increase. Therefore, commercial development within the Rural Village would likely accommodate the incremental increase in demand generated by new, internal households and have a net neutral effect to the surrounding markets. 2.3 Functional Utility of the Project site Functional Utility is defined as; The ability of a property or building to be useful and to perform the function for which it is intended according to the current market tastes and standards; the efficiency of a building's use in terms of architectural style, design and layout, traffic patterns and the size and type of rooms. The Estates Neighborhood Centers were established as a means to direct new commercial development to areas where traffic impacts could be readily accommodated. The Project is located at the Northwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. The Plan designates 4.98 acres for commercial development at this quadrant. The size of this parcel is not of adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area for three reasons: o Buffering /Setback Requirements — In order to preserve the rural character of the region, a buffer of 75 feet is required for projects abutting residential property which is consistent with the typical lot frontage of sites in this area. By minimizing developable area, this stipulation significantly reduces the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; o Utilities — There are no sewer /water connections available on the NW quadrant of the Neighborhood Center. New development must utilize a package plant system to provide utilities. This requirement minimizes developable area, thus even further reducing the ability of the 4.98 acre quadrant to accommodate commercial need in a meaningful fashion; 3 The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition © 2002, Appraisal Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 17 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 17 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 o Financial Feasibility — A grocery store is proposed as part of the Project. It is not financially feasible for a tenant of this type, or any anchor tenant, to locate at this site without supporting periphery uses. The 4.98 acre size of the NW Neighborhood Center quadrant, coupled with the buffering and utility implications, does not provide adequate functional utility for a grocery store or other anchor tenant to be financially feasible. The Project is situated at the most optimum location for access at two arterial roadways in the center of Golden Gate Estates. The site's proposed 41 +/- acre size provides for adequate functional utility to develop a shopping center that fulfills a diverse set of commercial needs for the immediate area. 2.4 Functional Utility of the competing sites A review of sites within the Custom Trade Area reveals that no parcels are over 20 acres in size, which in the consultant's opinion, offers adequate physical and functional utility to accommodate a grocery anchored center, adequate buffers between residential uses, and additional land to accommodate central utilities. Access to the site is also considered, as no other sites offer similar ease of access from heavily traveled roadways. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 18 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 `G i s 3.0 Analysis of the Need for the Proposed Amendments to the FLUM 3.1 Overview As noted above, the need for amendments to the adopted FLUM revolves around whether or not the FLUM contains a sufficient degree of flexibility to satisfy the future projected level of demand for land. The applicant must demonstrate that the amount of land allocated in the FLUM to neighborhood and community retail uses is insufficient to accommodate future demand while providing for a reasonable degree of market flexibility. For this study, the supply of land with existing commercial - retail development, vacant commercial designated land and the supply of lands having the potential for commercial as designated by the FLUM were compared to the demand for commercial - retail land as generated by the projected households growth of the market area. The discussion below provides this analysis. 3.2 Commercial Demand and the Allocation Ratio Table 3 provides Fishkind & Associates, Inc's housing unit projection for the Custom Trade Area. Parcel data from the Collier County Property Appraiser formed the basis for the forecast. Table 3. Housing Unit Projection for Project's Custom Trade Area Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I -Site Census -based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9 %. The household projection is shown in Table 4. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 19 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 19 Housing Housing Unit Year Units Growth GrowthNear 2008 3,711 2010 4,020 309 155 2020 4,932 912 91 2030 5,195 263 26 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser, I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. Occupied household growth data was used as the basis of projecting demand for commercial land. The housing unit projection above was used to project occupied households. According to I -Site Census -based Demographics Package, the occupancy rate within the Custom Trade Area is 94.9 %. The household projection is shown in Table 4. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 19 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 19 Table 4. Housing Unit and Household Projections Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser: I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 5 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the site's currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the Custom Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 70,699 square feet. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases slightly to 1.51 from 0.92. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 20 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Housing Year Units Households Household Growth Growth/Year 2007 3,711 3,522 2010 4,020 3,815 293 98 2020 4,932 4,681 865 87 2030 5,195 4,930 250 25 Sources: Collier County Property Appraiser: I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. This new information indicates that the market's demand for commercial space will also increase. The Consultant has developed a retail demand model to project the demand for retail space based on the number of households and their income and demographic characteristics in the relevant market area. The documentation for the model along with the model projections is rather voluminous. This information is reproduced here as Appendix Al. Table 5 provides the projected retail demand and compares demand to the supply of commercial space and land available to accommodate commercial demand in the future. The comparison of retail demand to current retail supply and available supply converts all vacant and potential acres and assumes full development within the market. For purposes of analysis, we have delineated the existing supply and the site's currently zoned commercial to determine the total supply of commercial square footage which is expected to be developed within the Custom Trade Area. Based on this demand, the current allocation ratio is near a one -to -one allocation. Below that analysis, we isolated the FLUM Potential Supply which is estimated at 70,699 square feet. With this added to the supply above, the supply -to- demand ratio increases slightly to 1.51 from 0.92. It is the Consultant's opinion this FLUM potential be separately analyzed in order to illustrate its percentage of the total supply. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 20 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.92 0.83 0.62 0.55 FLUM Potential Supply 70,699 70,699 70,699 70,699 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 179,906 179,906 179,906 179,906 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential 1.51 1.37 1.03 0.90 Source. Fishkind & Associates, Inc. As noted in Table 1, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 5, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 119,100, 131,190; 174,964, and 200,340 square feet of commercial space in the Custom Trade Area for the years 2008, 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 5, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, the supply increases to 179,906. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.92, 0.83, 0.62, 0.55 and with the FLUM lands is 1.51, 1.37, 1.03, 0.90 for the years 2008, 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short-term. As the time Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 21 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S 21 BA Table 5. Demand for Commercial Sq. Ft. General Commercial 2008 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 119,100 131,190 174,964 200,340 Existing Supply Net GLA (sq.ft) 94,506 94,506 94,506 94,506 Vacant Commerical 14,701 14,701 14,701 14,701 Total Supply 109,207 109,207 109,207 109,207 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.92 0.83 0.62 0.55 FLUM Potential Supply 70,699 70,699 70,699 70,699 Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 179,906 179,906 179,906 179,906 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential 1.51 1.37 1.03 0.90 Source. Fishkind & Associates, Inc. As noted in Table 1, the supply of existing commercial space totals 94,506 square feet. As shown by Table 5, based on the demand projection estimates there is sufficient demand for 119,100, 131,190; 174,964, and 200,340 square feet of commercial space in the Custom Trade Area for the years 2008, 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. Also shown in Table 5, there are 109,207 square feet of total commercial square footage in existing and commercially approved projects. With the addition of the FLUM potential, the supply increases to 179,906. Therefore, the ratio of the total supply of land designated for commercial use, excluding the FLUM lands is 0.92, 0.83, 0.62, 0.55 and with the FLUM lands is 1.51, 1.37, 1.03, 0.90 for the years 2008, 2010, 2020, and 2030 respectively. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for development during the forecast horizon, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Growth management practices suggest that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the commercial allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market. It is the Consultant's opinion that to ensure proper flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan of an area like that of the Project, a commercial allocation ratio of a minimum of 2.0 is necessary in the short-term. As the time Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 21 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S 21 8A horizon increases, the allocation ratio must increase as well. (Please refer to Appendix #3 for a detailed memo on the use of Allocation Ratios) Table 5 above indicates that currently the retail allocation is sufficiently below the minimum desired level of 2.0. By 2030, the allocation ratio is expected to drop to 0.90. As the situation currently stands, the lack of available retail choices creates a substantial impediment to proper market functioning. This market can expect to increasingly experience: • Significantly higher than average travel costs for residents; ■ Impacted roadway networks needing higher than average operating and capital improvements; of which the burden of financing is apportioned County -wide; • Upward pressure on commercial land prices due to artificial restriction of supply ■ Downward pressure on residential land prices due to the lack of access to support facilities. Figure 1 illustrates the trend of decreasing commercial allocation ratios. Figure 1. Commercial Allocation Ratio for Golden Gate Estates Mixed Use Project JVUII:C. FIJI INJI IV IX MJ JVJ.10LCJ, 111�� Based on this analysis, there is a clear and compelling case for adding additional land with neighborhood and community commercial use to this Custom Trade Area market. As noted here, this market's commercial ratio will decrease to 0.90 by 2030. It is just Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 22 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 22 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 these types of situations that make it good planning policy to have a sufficiently high ratio to accommodate the expected demand in a meaningful fashion. 3.3 Impact of the Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment As noted above, the proposal for the Project would add a maximum of 225,000 square feet of commercial - retail land to the market. The following Table 6 displays the impacts of adding this additional land to the inventory. In 2010, the additional land increases the allocation ratio from 1.37 to 3.09. An allocation ratio of 3.09 provides a sufficient degree of flexibility for this market to meet future demand. It also would provide for sufficient supply as to limit the future applications for similar centers in the central Golden Gate Area, thus reducing the potential for commercial sprawl. The allocation ratios are more than reasonable with the inclusion of the Project in the FLUM. This is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2. Allocation Ratios with the Inclusion of the Proposed Additional Commercial Acreage for Golden Gate Estates Mixed Use Project Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 23 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 23 LOOF Table 6. Analysis of Adding the Mixed Use Project's Proposed Land Use Plan Change to the Inventory of Commercial Space General Commercial 2008 2010 2020 2030 Market Retail Demand (sq.ft) 119,100 131,190 174,964 200,340 Supply Net GLA ( sq.ft) 109,207 109,207 109,207 109,207 Proposed Project Max Retail (sq.ft) 0 225,000 225,000 225,000 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand 0.92 2.55 1.91 1.67 FLUM Potential Supply Total Supply w /FLUM Potential 70,699 70,699 70,699 70,699 179,906 404,906 404,906 404,906 Allocation Ratio Supply /Demand w /FLUM Potential 1.51 3.09 2.31 2.02 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 4.0 Commercial -Office Uses The commercial office analysis utilized the same Custom Trade Area as the retail analysis because the office uses proposed cater to a wide market and are convenience oriented in nature. These office uses would include Real Estate, Insurance, etc, which accommodate the growing population of this affordable, lower density part of our community. Using records provided by the Collier County Property Appraiser's office and information from the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department and County Clerk's Office the Consultant has determined: o There are two planned unit developments within the custom trade area surrounding the Project. 1) The Wilson Blvd PUD on the Southeast Quadrant of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard has been approved to consist of 42,000 square feet of retail and /or office uses. To date, a 39,000 sqft retail strip center is complete. The bank is approximately 3,000 square feet and will compete with the Project in terms of office space. 2) The Snowy Egret Plaza CPUD is located at the southwest quadrant of the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center. This CPUD consists of a single parcel owned by Walgreen Co. and is designated to comprise of 15,000 square feet of commercial Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 24 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 24 A development on 4.19 gross acres — presumably a Walgreen's Store. It is unlikely this parcel will consist of office space. o There is one vacant commercial parcel on the Northeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards, folio 37280040002. This parcel is 2.41 acres in size located adjacent and to the north of E's Country Store and is under the same ownership. o There are three parcels totaling 6.92 acres on the Southeast quadrant of 1s` SW and Golden Gate Boulevard approved to consist of approximately 60,000 square feet of office space. The folio numbers for these parcels are: 37169480000, 37169440008, and 37169560108. Utilizing a County -wide average density of 11,000 square feet of office space per acre as determined by Property Appraiser Records, there are 156,940 potential square feet of office space within the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Located below is a Table showing the parcels and their potential or approved sqft. Table 7. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial -Office Space in Mixed Use Project's Market Vacant Commercial Folio Acres Sqft* Description 37280040002 2.41 26,510 N. of E's Country Store 37221120208 2.08 3,000 Liberty Gold LLC Potential Commercial Folio Acres Sqft* Description 37745120001 4.01 44,110 Randall Blvd Comm. Subdst. 37280080004 2.12 23,320 E. of E's Country Store 37169440008 2.34 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169480000 2.81 20,000 CP 2005 -2 ** 37169560108 2.34 20.000 CP 2005 -2 ** Total Office Supply 156,940 County Office Acreage 435 4,900,920 County Office Coverage Area 11,266 *Roundedto 11,000 ** Ordinance Number 08-44 is approved for 60,000 sqft of commerical office uses. When determining the demand for office uses, the Consultant utilized the Collier County Property Appraiser's database to determine the total square footage of all existing office uses as of 2008. This includes the total square footage of all office space irregardless of its current occupancy. This total was then divided by the 2008 Collier County total permanent population as determined by the Bureau of Economic Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 25 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 25 !08 A and Business Research (BEBR) to arrive at an implied per capita office need. Total square footage of office space was utilized in the per capita calculation because the comparison of supply -to- demand is done utilizing the total supply of office space — assuming full occupancy. Table 8, indicates the total office development in Collier County, corresponding population, and per capita office need. Table 8. Collier County Per Capita Office Need Office Tvpe 2008 Bldg Saft 2008 Collier Pop. Per Capita One -Story Professional 802,460 Class A 3,666,971 Medical and Professional 431,489 Total 4,900,920 332,854 14.7 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. & Collier County Property Appraiser; BEBR Population Studies Through our analysis, the Consultant has determined that, on average, the County needs 14.7 Sq. Ft. of office space per person. This per capita estimate accounts for all office space currently existing in the county, including occupied and vacant space. In our opinion, the trade area analysis prepared below best illustrates need for office space in this area of limited support facilities. Within the Custom Trade Area the Consultant has determined that by the year 2030, the permanent population will reach approximately 17,379 persons. The Consultant's population forecast for the Custom Trade Area is shown in Table 9. Additionally, Table 9 indicates the office needs associated with these historic and forecast population levels. Table 9. Historic & Forecast Population for Custom Trade Area Without the Year Population (1990) Population (2000) Population (2008) Population (2013) Population (2020) Population (2030) Population 2,539 8,224 12,415 15,173 16,499 17,379 Per Capita Total Office Need Office Need 14.7 37,384 14.7 121,090 14.7 182,798 Sclft Supplied Ratio 156,940 4.20 156,940 1.30 156,940 0.86 14.7 223,406 156,940 0.70 14.7 242,936 156,940 0.65 14.7 255,887 156,940 0.61 Collier Countv Property Aooraiser's Office. Collier Count Comprehensive Planning; Collier County Clerk's Office Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 26 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 26 of 71 W00.IIF3111111l 7 8 A According to the Consultant's analysis there is an immediate need for office uses in the Custom Trade Area surrounding the Project. Unless the proposed amendment is added to the FLUM, by 2030 the allocation ratio for office land is expected to drop to 0.61. There is insufficient land within this market designated for office use or potentially available for office use, which reduces the amount of sufficient choices for a developer to accommodate the demand. 5.0 Conclusions Taking into account all developed, vacant and FLUM designated commercial land in the market; there is currently an insufficient degree of flexibility in the market's ability to accommodate future demand. The 2030 retail allocation ratio of 0.90 indicates a very tight relationship between the demand for, and the supply of, retail space in the future. The 2030 office allocation ratio also indicates a tight relationship between the demand for, and supply of, office space. The commercial retail and commercial office components of this Project are designed to serve the community and neighborhood demand for commercial space. The location provides the access and visibility that are required for this type of development. The size and functional utility of the site offers the development of sufficient retail offerings which will limit future sprawl. The under - allocation of suitable commercial property supports the need for the additional commercial acreage. Based on the map located earlier in the report, we can see the central Golden Gate Estates area would not be served at all would it not be for this project. There is current demand for retail uses and the demand will continue to grow at a rate higher than supply, which is why this project fulfills sufficient commercial need. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 27 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 27 • . APPENDIX 1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRCT MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS RETAIL DEMAND METHODOLOGY 1.0 Methodology The methodology employed in the analysis of the demand for retail space at this site is based on a consumer expenditures model. This model can estimate the aggregate market demand for retail space, the demand for retail space at a specific location, and the effective supply of competing retailers in the area. The net demand for retail space at the location being studied is determined as the difference between the site demand and the effective supply of competition. 2.0 Aggregate Market - Retail Demand Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ( "Fishkind ") has developed an in -house model to determine retail demand. This model estimates retail demand by square footage, shopping center type and store type. The model incorporates multiple data sources. These sources are census based (1- Site") local area households, local area household income data, and local area consumer expenditure profiles from the U.S. Department of Labor, Department of Revenue Gross Sales data, and Urban Land Institute shopping center tenant profiles, square footage requirements and average sales per square foot by store type from the publication Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The model operates by first determining retail household expenditures for market area households. Expenditures are determined through application of the results of the 2000 Consumer Expenditure Survey, conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor. This survey of over 30,000 households nationwide provides detailed information on average dollar expenditure amounts and the expenditure percent of household income, for all household expenditures. The income expenditure percentage is determined for the specific market area and then applied to the average local area household income and multiplied by the number of households to determine market area spending potential for retail store goods. Next, the historic Department of Revenue (DOR) Sales data (for the county in question) is indexed by tenant classification 4, from the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers. The expected expenditures on retail goods are then applied to this county specific (DOR) index to determine an estimate of spending by major store type (tenant classification). The determination of sales by retail center (neighborhood, community, regional, super - regional) is determined through the construction of an index of surveyed sales by center type (also located in the Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers). Supportable square feet of a retail center is determined by applying the average sales per square foot of GLA, found in Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, to the expected sales by store type (tenant classification). In addition to determining the supportable square feet of retail 4 Tenant Classification are: general merchandise, food, food service, clothing and accessories, shoes, home furnishings, home appliances /music, building materials and hardware, automotive, hobby /special interest, gifts /specialty, jewelry, liquor, drugs, other retail, personal services, entertain men t/community. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 28 Commercial Needs Analysis Page 28 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 space, Fishkind & Associates has determined the expected sales by DOR retail classification, which is a subset of the individual store types (tenant classifications). Provided below are income and expenditure data utilized in the analysis. Custom Trade Area - Households & Incomes Year HHs Median HH Income Total Income 2008 3,522 $60,627 $213,529,499 2010 3,815 $61,648 $235,204,435 2020 4,681 $67,017 $313,685,292 2030 4,930 $72,853 $359,181,467 Source: Collier County PA, I -Site Census -based Demographics Package Note: HH Income figures are inflation adjusted; not nominal Note: Calculations in figure reflect rounding Income Expenditure Percentages INCOME EXPENDITURE % ON RETAIL 3183% Source: I -Site, Census -based Demographics Package For Project's Custom Trade Area Retail Expenditures and Sauare Foot Suaoortability Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 29 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 0 2008 2010 2020 2030 2008 2&M 2020 2030 GENERAL MERCHANDISE $1,010,301 $1.112,855 51,484,182 S1.699,444 7,114 7,837 10,451 11,967 FOOD $7,932,478 $8]37.688 $11.653.199 313343,351 23,091 25,435 33,922 38,842 FOOD SERVICE $3.409,799 $3,755,921 $5009.162 S5.735,679 13,257 14,602 19,475 22,299 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES $479,013 $527.637 S703.694 5805.756 2,492 2,745 3,661 4,191 SHOES $39,019 $42,980 $57.321 $65635 202 223 297 340 HOME FURNISHINGS $1,860.375 $2,049218 $2.732.983 $3,129,368 9,560 10,531 14,045 16,082 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC $671]35 $739.921 $986811 $1,129,936 2,897 3,191 4,256 4,873 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE $2,544,327 $;'302,597 $3,737741 $4,279.855 15,722 17,318 23,096 26,446 AUTOMOTIVE $8.184,852 $9.015,680 $12.02.3,949 $13.767,874 30,666 33,779 45,050 51,584 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIT FISPECIAI TY WITH GIFTISPECIALTY GIFT /SPECIALTY $364,514 $401,515 $535,489 $613,155 2,340 2,578 3,438 3,936 JEWLERY $54,728 $60,283 $80,398 392.059 133 147 196 224 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS $395,400 $435 536 $580,862 $665,109 1,006 1,109 1,478 1,693 OTHER RETAIL $390.147 S429,750 $573,145 $656,272 1,923 2,118 2,825 3,234 PERSONAL SERVICERS $230,652 S254,065 $338,840 $387,984 1,626 1,791 2,389 2,736 ENTERTAINMENT 618258 681016 908252 $1 ,039,982 7.069 7.787 10,385 11,891 TOTAL $28,185,600 $31 046.662 $41 406,027 $47,411,460 119,100 131,190 174,964 200,340 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 29 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 0 Distribution by Store Type DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE NEIGHBORHOOD `COMMUNITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE 14.48% FOOD 15.27% FOOD SERVICE 10.73% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 4.48% SHOES 0.37% HOME FURNISHINGS CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 11.73% AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH HOBBY /SPECIAL GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% JEWLERY 0.56% LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% OTHER RETAIL 1.44% PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc, Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute Index of Sales by Center Type INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD `COMMUNITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.0804% 17.7493% FOOD 50.1268 % 47.9941% _ FOOD SERVICE 16.2423% 58.1773% CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.7763% 26.9659% SHOES 2.1635% 25.4356% HOME FURNISHINGS 4.8325% 65.0722% HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 4.5826% 43.0018% BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 8.3074% 45.2640% AUTOMOTIVE 0.0000% 100.0000% HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST With Gifts and Specialty GIFT /SPECIALTY 7.06% 4.1.68% JEWLERY -- 2.0271% 11.8288% LIQUOR 34.2238% 65.7762% DRUGS 36.8476% 56.2922% OTHER RETAIL 11.3333°G� 54.8145% PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.9793°6 49.1430% ENTERTAINMENT 8.7526% 34.4114% Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute -- 'Note: Consultant has utilized only 50% of Community Center Sales Shown Above to Account for Projects Outside of the Trade Area that Will Capture a Portion of Retail Spending from Households within the Periphery of the Market. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 30 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 0 Median Sales per Square Foot of GLA Dollars & Cents of Shooping Certers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis MIW Page 31 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 31 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY MED /SF MED /SF GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 FOOD 347.1 336.3 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 -- SHOES HOME FURNISHINGS — _ — 165.39 — 14TM —1N.66 204.32 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 137.85 271.31 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 143.3 n/a 16115 169.9 AUTOMOTIVE — - - - -- HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST 266.9 -- 201.46 GIFT /SPECIALTY 186.32 147.58 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 LIQUOR DRUGS 254.1 408 -4 321.25 374.26 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 PERSONAL SERVICERS_ 127.73_ 158.14 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 88 Dollars & Cents of Shooping Certers - Urban Land Institute Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis MIW Page 31 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 31 Retail Demand Calculation Guide • Calculated figures are highlighted in yellow. Please note, this guide reflects calculations for year 2008 retail demand only. Repeat the same steps below for each year covered in the analysis. Figure 1 Source: I -Site Census -based uemograpnlcs F'aCKage & t-snKina & Associates, Inc. Please note not all Ilgures auuve ale wnule numbers, and as such may yield slightly different results if hand - calculated. Figure 1 above: Column 'C' (Total Market Income) = Column 'A' (x) Column 'B' Figure 1 above: Column 'E' (Income Available for Retail) = Column 'C' (x) Column 'D' Figure 2 A B DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE ALL CENTER TYPES 1 D 1 E (% 1 Allocation Expenditures ISl Total Market Income Exp. Income Avail. for Year H. AVG HH Income Income % Retail 2008 3,522 $60,627 $213,529,499 32.8315% $70,104,926 Source: I -Site Census -based uemograpnlcs F'aCKage & t-snKina & Associates, Inc. Please note not all Ilgures auuve ale wnule numbers, and as such may yield slightly different results if hand - calculated. Figure 1 above: Column 'C' (Total Market Income) = Column 'A' (x) Column 'B' Figure 1 above: Column 'E' (Income Available for Retail) = Column 'C' (x) Column 'D' Figure 2 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 32 of 71 32 EXHIBIT V.D.5 A B DISTRIBUTIONS BY STORE TYPE ALL CENTER TYPES (% 1 Allocation Expenditures ISl GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1448% $10,151,193 FOOD 15.27% $10,705,022 FOOD SERVICE 10.73% $7,522,259 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 448% $3,140,701 SHOES 0.37% $259,388 HOME FURNISHINGS 7.10% $4,977,450 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 3.67% $2,572,851 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 11.73% $8,223,308 AUTOMOTIVE 23.35% $16,369,500 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIFTS /SPECIALTY GIFT /SPECIALTY 1.86% $1,303,952 JEWLERY 0.56% $392,588 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 0.87% $609,913 OTHER RETAIL 1.44% $1,009,511 PERSONAL SERVICERS 0.69% $483,724 ENTERTAINMENT 3.40% $2.383.567 Total 100.00% $70,104,926 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute; Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 32 of 71 32 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Figure, 2 above: Column 'B' (Expenditures by Store Tenant Classification) = a Column 'E' from Figure 1 allocated along the distribution in column 'A' Figure 2. Figure 3 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS A B C D E INDEX OF SALES BY CENTER Neighborhood Center Community Center Neighborhood Center Community Center $391,090 PERSONAL SERVICERS Allocation l %1 Allocation 1%1 Expenditures ($1 Expenditures ($1 TOTAL GENERAL MERCHANDISE 1.08% 17.75% $109,673 $900,883 $1,010,556 FOOD 50.13% 47.99% $5,366,085 $2,568,890 $7,934,975 FOOD SERVICE 16.24% 58.18% $1,221,788 $2,188,123 $3,409,911 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 1.78% 26.97% $55,788 $423,459 $479,247 SHOES 2.16% 1 25.44% $5,612 $32,988 $38,600 HOME FURNISHINGS 4.83% 65.07% $240,535 $1,619,468 $1,860,003 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 4.58% 43.00% $117,903 $553,186 $671,090 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 8.31% 45.26% $683,143 $1,861,099 $2,544,242 AUTOMOTIVE 0.00% 100.00% $0 $8,184,750 $8,184,750 iOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST WITH GIFTS /SPECIALTY WITH GIFTS /SPECIALTY GIFT /SPECIALTY 7.06% I 41.68% $92,059 I $271,744 I $363,803 JEWLERY I 2.03% I 11.83% $7,958 $23,219 $31,177 LIQUOR WITH FOOD SERVICE WITH FOOD SERVICE DRUGS 36.85% 56.29% $224,738 1 $171,667 $396,405 OTHER RETAIL 11.33% 54.81% $114,411 $276,679 $391,090 PERSONAL SERVICERS 22.98% 49.14% $111,156 $118,858 $230,015 ENTERTAINMENT 875% 34.41% $208.624 $410,109 7 4 TOTAL 58,559,475 $19,605,123 $28,164,598 Hellects only bU % of total community center expenditures Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc: Florida Department of Revenue, Dollars & Cents of Shopping Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 3 above: Columns 'C' & 'D' (Expenditures by Store Center Type) = Expenditures by each tenant classification (each row item in Figure 2, Column 'B') allocated across the distributions in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 3. Please note Column 'D' in Figure 3 above reflects a reduction of 50% of the calculated total for community center expenditures (see full report for further information). Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 33 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 33 Figure 4 t Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shobbino Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 4 above: Columns 'C' &'D' (Square Feet Supportability) = Expenditures by center type (each row item in Figure 3, Column 'C' and Column 'D') divided by the respective median sales /sqft in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 4. Figure 4 above: Columns 'E' (Total Site Square Feet Supportability) _ Figure 4, Column 'C' plus column 'D.' 3.0 Determination of Expected Location Sales & Impacts to Competition The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.2. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base -line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is then applied to the estimate of existing store space to determine a total "base- line" sales Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 34 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 34 J A B c D E NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY TOTAL SITE MED /SF MED $/ SF SOFT SUPPORTABILITY SOFT SUPPORTABILITY SOFT SUPPORTABILITY GENERAL MERCHANDISE $103.01 $148.87 1,065 6,051 7,116 FOOD 347.1 336.3 15,460 7,639 23,098 FOOD SERVICE 224.28 280.19 5,448 7,809 13,257 CLOTHING & ACCESSORIES 167.96 195.97 332 2,161 2,493 SHOES 165.39 198.66 34 166 200 HOME FURNISHINGS 147.35 1 204.32 1,632 7,926 9,559 HOME APPLIANCES /MUSIC 137.85 271.31 855 2,039 2,894 BUILDING MATERIALS /HARDWARE 143.3 169.9 4,761 10,954 15,721 AUTOMOTIVE n/a 266.9 - -- 30,666 30,666 HOBBY /SPECIAL INTEREST 163.15 201.46 - -- - -- 0 GIFT /SPECIALTY 186.32 147.58 494 1,841 2,335 JEWLERY 280.09 445.74 28 52 81 LIQUOR 254.1 321.25 - -- --- 0 DRUGS 408.4 374.26 550 459 1,009 OTHER RETAIL 159.18 228.9 719 1,209 1,927 PERSONAL SERVICERS 127.73 158.14 870 752 1,822 ENTERTAINMENT 86.41 88 2414 4.660 7 75 TOTAL 34,669 84,384 119,054 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc; Florida Department of Revenue; Dollars & Cents of Shobbino Centers - Urban Land Institute. In some instances figures may not match exactly due to rounding. Figure 4 above: Columns 'C' &'D' (Square Feet Supportability) = Expenditures by center type (each row item in Figure 3, Column 'C' and Column 'D') divided by the respective median sales /sqft in both Columns 'A' and 'B' in Figure 4. Figure 4 above: Columns 'E' (Total Site Square Feet Supportability) _ Figure 4, Column 'C' plus column 'D.' 3.0 Determination of Expected Location Sales & Impacts to Competition The determination of sales is a multi part process. Sales to be made at the location of a proposed retail project are based on the constant sales per square foot measure used in the determination of the demand for retail space, and an estimate of excess spending at the existing and proposed retailers. Potential location specific expenditures are determined in accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.2. From the potential expenditures and demanded space, a determination of "base -line" spending per square foot can be made for each store type. Spending per square feet of store space is then applied to the estimate of existing store space to determine a total "base- line" sales Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 34 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 34 J • estimate. This "base -line' estimate will be less than the total potential expenditures. Therefore, an estimate of excess spending can be made from the difference between the estimated total expenditures and the "base -line' estimate. After the determination of "base- line" sales per square foot and excess sales per square foot, the proposed project needs to be added to the supply of retail space. At this point adjusted total sales can be determined from the "base- line" sales per square foot and the adjusted supply of retail space (existing plus proposed). The adjusted excess spending, as a result of the proposed retail project, is determined by the difference between the (adjusted) "base -line' expected spending and the estimate of total expenditures. An estimation of the expected sales for the proposed project is determined by the size of the project and the total estimated spending per square foot. which is the "base -line' sales per square foot plus the adjusted excess spending per square foot as a result of the project. The final impact to sales per square foot of competing retailers in the market surrounding the proposed project is calculated as the difference between the excess sales per square foot, with and without the proposed project. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 35 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 35 APPENDIX 2 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 36 of 71 • 36 EXHIBIT V.D.5 KID C y F «r RIM v ^ i PLANNED 4 UNIT ma DEVELOPMENTS, ' �� LI ap INDUSTRIAL .. • ZONING -'1- Legend _.SPUD r `'�••�" PUD COMMERCIAL l9•+W W - PUD INDUSTRIAL i'e• �'� • � F - INDUSTRIAL ___ d ". • "O[CO Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 36 of 71 • 36 EXHIBIT V.D.5 y RIM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, ' COUIYERICALAND LI INDUSTRIAL .. . ZONING -'1- Legend _.SPUD r `'�••�" PUD COMMERCIAL l9•+W W - PUD INDUSTRIAL i'e• �'� • � F - INDUSTRIAL ___ d ". • "O[CO - COMMERCIAL i Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 36 of 71 • 36 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • APPENDIX 3 Letter to Mr. Mark Strain, Chairman of the Collier County Planning Commission explaining the 2.0 allocation ratio methodology. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Page 37 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 37 FISHKIND & ASSOCIATES 8 e soon n 01M on a MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Explanation of 2.0 allocation ratio DATE: October 2, 2008 VIA: E -Mail At your request, the following is an explanation of the 2.0 allocation ratio used in the data and analysis reports we provide to the County during Comprehensive Plan land use changes. The explanation begins with the data and analysis requirements in Rule 9J -5 (2). The rule states the following (with our emphasis added): "(2) Data and Analyses Requirements. (a) All goals, objectives, policies, standards, findings and conclusions within the comprehensive plan and its support documents, and within plan amendments and their support documents, shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and the analyses applicable to each element. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. Data or summaries thereof shall not be subject to the compliance review process. However, the Department will review each comprehensive plan for the purpose of determining whether the plan is based on the data and analyses described in this chapter and whether the data were collected and applied in a professionally acceptable manner. All tables, charts, graphs, maps, figures and data sources, and their limitations, shall be clearly described where such data occur in the above documents. Local governments are encouraged to use graphics and other techniques for making support information more readily useable by the public. Page 38 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 (b) This chapter shall not be construed to require original data collection by local government; however, local governments are encouraged to utilize any original data necessary to update or refine the local government comprehensive plan data base so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. (c) Data are to be taken from professionally accepted existing sources, such as the United States Census, State Data Center, State University System of Florida, regional planning councils, water management districts, or existing technical studies. The data used shall be the best available existing data, unless the local government desires original data or special studies. Where data augmentation, updates, or special studies or surveys are deemed necessary by local government, appropriate methodologies shall be clearly described or referenced and shall meet professionally accepted standards for such methodologies. Among the sources available to local governments are those identified in "The Guide to Local Comprehensive Planning Data Sources" published by the Department in 1989. Among the sources of data for preliminary identification of wetland locations are the National Wetland Inventory Maps prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (d) Primary data sources such as United States Census reports, other government data documents, local computerized data, and original map sheets used to compile required maps need not be printed in their entirety within either the support documents or the comprehensive plan. Summaries of support documents shall be submitted to the Department along with the comprehensive plan at the time of compliance review to aid in the Department's determination of compliance and consistency. As a local alternative to providing data and analyses summaries, complete data and analyses sufficient to support the comprehensive plan may be submitted to the Department at the time of compliance review. The Department may require submission of the complete or more detailed data or analyses during its compliance review if, in the opinion of the Department, the summaries are insufficient to determine compliance or consistency of the plan. (e) The comprehensive plan shall be based on resident and seasonal population estimates and projections. Resident and seasonal population estimates and projections shall be either those provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, those provided by the Executive Office of the Governor, or shall be generated by the local government. If the local government chooses to base its plan on the figures provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, medium range projections should be utilized. If the local government chooses to base its plan on either low or high range projections provided by the University of Florida or the Executive Office of the Governor, a detailed description of the rationale for such a choice shall be included with such projections." A variety of studies are used when we undertake a needs analysis within the State of Florida. They are basically broken down into three categories depending on the type of land use being studied. They are residential needs analysis, commercial needs analysis and a peculiar needs analysis that economically does not fit the standard residential and commercial models. Our analysis has evolved over time with input primarily coming from County Staff with regard to the analysis at hand. In looking at comprehensive plan changes, we first must collect the data that goes into the analysis. That data includes population estimates, existing inventory, approved inventory and potential inventory. I Page 39 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 ME With regard to population estimates, we generally try to use the population data that is used by the County when and where it is available. Our second source is the population data from the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) at the University of Florida. Our third source is I -Site, Site Selection Software, produced by GeoVue, Inc. These estimates and projections are compiled by Applied Geographic Solutions, Inc. AGS uses historic Census data from 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000; USPS and commercial source ZIP +4 level delivery statistics; Census Bureau population estimates and projections at varying levels of geographic detail; Internal Revenue Service statistics on tax filers and year -to -year migration; as well as the Census Bureaus Current Population Survey. The next required data set pertains to the particular land use we are analyzing. We primarily utilize the Collier County Property Appraiser data to determine the existing inventory of that particular land use, the approved inventory of that land use and finally all of the lands on the Future Land Use Map that have potential for that particular land use. We have also used data sources provided by Collier County staff such as the commercial inventory list and the planned unit development list. We then use a variety of models from retail demand gravity models to office employment demand models to determine the current and future demand for the land use type in the designated market area. The future demand generally looks out to the Comprehensive Plan's horizon year, which is currently either 2030 or 2035 depending on the jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and growth management plan horizon year requirements. It is at this point of the analysis that has caused an anomaly in determining a true economic supply and demand result. On the supply side, it is relatively easy to determine the amount of existing and approved supply from the property appraiser data. The difficulty lies in the vacant non - approved potential lands. The staff has required us to take all of those lands that have a commercial or residential overlay on them and include them as supply by putting a floor area ratio figure to the acreage. The issue becomes apparent when all of the lands that are not in the existing or approved category are included in the particular land use analysis. By putting all of the potential lands in the supply category, the assumption is that all of that land would be developed as that particular land use and nothing else. For example in the case of the Airport- Corradi parcel, there were 117 potential commercial parcels totaling 270.68 acres in the 20 minute drive time market (Table 1 on the next page). Those parcels represent a potential of 1,469,723 square feet of office space. 3 Page 40 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • s Table 1. Current Supply of Vacant, Potential, and Existing Commercial -Office Space in Project's Market # of Parcels 340 Acres 457.97 Square Feet 2,549,138 Vacant _ - -- - - # of Parcels 523 Acres 1092.59 Square -Feet 6,075,006 # of Parcels 117 Acres _270._68 Square Feet* 1,469,723 Total — ----- --- --- # of Parcels 980 Acres 1821.24 Source. Collier County Property Appraiser 'Assumed 5,430 square feet per acre based on market average There are a number of flaws in the representation of total capacity (supply) which suggest a greater number of acres be designated in the Comprehensive Plan than would be indicated simply by an analysis of forecast demand. First, all of those vacant approved parcels and parcels designated by the Future Land Use Map ( "FLUM ") as having the potential to be developed as office, in reality, also have the potential to be retail space or some other commercial use. The same parcels are also counted as competing supply when a commercial needs analysis is performed for another commercial use. To include these lands in both retail and office analyses would be double counting the supply. These lands will actually be developed as the market demand dictates, with some lands used for office and the remainder for retail and other permissible uses. A general economic principal states that all markets are efficient and that supply for the most part is generated as demand dictates. It is a rare situation where supply generates demand. Second, though the lands in question are designated with a FLUM category, this does not mean that 100% of these lands are developable. Within these lands there may be wetland areas, conservation areas, water bodies, incompatible adjacent uses, policy setback requirements, drainage and road requirements and infrastructure or access constraints. As a result of these and other myriad conditions, the maximum density /intensity of lands designated through the FLUM does not represent the holding capacity of these lands. Typically, development thresholds are found to be from 50% to 75% of maximum allowable density due to the physical characteristics of the land. Page 41 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Third, while lands are designated with a FLUM land use, there is no requirement they be used at all over the planning horizon. Many properties are held in land bank trusts, held by absentee owners, held in estate transfer litigation or held in family ownership with no intent or desire to use or sell the land. Florida and Collier County in particular have very large tracts of land held in long term family trusts where lands are not developed or are purposefully held off the market. In these and other similar instances, a land use designation on the FLUM does not assure the capacity allocated to these lands will be available to accommodate future growth within the planning horizon of the Comprehensive Plan. Fourth, even if all the lands designated were developable and available it would be inappropriate to limit supply to exactly the level of forecast demand, represented by a ratio of 1:1 where there is one acre of land supply allocated for every acre of land demand identified. Doing so would limit choices, limit market flexibility and constrain the market. Constraining supply will drive prices artificially high and decrease the attractiveness of the market due to price. For example in choosing a new home one does not typically look at only one house in the selection process. The selection process may involve multiple properties, perhaps a dozen or more. So too for commercial land investments, choice and flexibility are required in the selection process. Fifth, the supply of land is determined and allocated such that it will accommodate the forecast demand. The forecast demand is most often based on population forecasts provided by the University of Florida Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BEBR). Research has shown the BEBR forecasts to be highly accurate in locations where the local economic structure does not change substantially over time. In locations where structural change does occur, the error rate for BEBR medium forecasts can be from 30% to more than 100% too low in terms of forecasting population levels over a 25 year forecast period. Rapidly growing locations, locations which benefit from major highway or interstate expansions, locations which benefit from enhanced airport facilities and locations which benefit from major employer locations are all examples of conditions which represent structural change and tend to result in faster population growth than is forecast in the BEBR projections. Collier County is subject to these structural change forces, and as such, it can be expected that BEBR forecasts will have a comparatively higher degree of error than in other locations across the State. This supports the need for additional flexibility in the allocation of developable land to accommodate a higher probability of population forecast error. Table 2 on the next page documents the analysis of forecast error findings. 5 Page 42 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • Table 2. Comparison of Long -Term Population Projections. Source: Projections of Florida Population Bulletin 33, June 1975, U. FL and US Census 2000 These conditions have been well documented and supported in administrative hearings. In the course of the evolution of Florida's comprehensive planning process, allocation of land in the FLUM often exceeds the 1:1 ratio. In general, the allocation ratio of between 2.0 and 2.5 has been determined to be a reasonable level, has been supported in administrative legal hearings and has been implicitly adopted in comprehensive plans across the State. To account for the conditions described above, comprehensive plan FLUMs typically represent an allocation of acres for land use by category in excess of a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage over the course of development in the jurisdiction to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. For the reasons discussed, the additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing, to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, and that the property will develop at historic average densities, not maximum allowable densities, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. As a result of these discussions, analyses and rulings, growth management practices have evolved such that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market as shown in the discussion regarding population forecasts and structural change. Fishkind believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 2.0 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the multiple sets of conditions which might otherwise restrict land usage. 6 Page 43 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S 1975 BEBR Year 2000 projections for 2000 Actual Variance Counties Flagler 21,700 49,832 - 129.6% with St. Johns 71,000 123,135 -73.4% Structural Lake 143,300 210,527 -46.9% Shift Marion 191,000 258,916 -35.6% St. Lucie 149,800 192,695 -28.6% Counties Desoto 36,700 32,209 12.2% without Highlands 81,400 87,366 -7.3% Structural Polk 471,300 483,924 -2.7% Shift Pasco 343,600 344,768 -0.3% Counties with Shift Total 576,800 835,105 -44.8% Counties without Shift Total 933,000 948,267 -1.6% Source: Projections of Florida Population Bulletin 33, June 1975, U. FL and US Census 2000 These conditions have been well documented and supported in administrative hearings. In the course of the evolution of Florida's comprehensive planning process, allocation of land in the FLUM often exceeds the 1:1 ratio. In general, the allocation ratio of between 2.0 and 2.5 has been determined to be a reasonable level, has been supported in administrative legal hearings and has been implicitly adopted in comprehensive plans across the State. To account for the conditions described above, comprehensive plan FLUMs typically represent an allocation of acres for land use by category in excess of a 1:1 allocation ratio. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage over the course of development in the jurisdiction to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. For the reasons discussed, the additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing, to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon, and that the property will develop at historic average densities, not maximum allowable densities, or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. As a result of these discussions, analyses and rulings, growth management practices have evolved such that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area's general exposure to growth trends in the market as shown in the discussion regarding population forecasts and structural change. Fishkind believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 2.0 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the multiple sets of conditions which might otherwise restrict land usage. 6 Page 43 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S • Although the allocation ratio figure has fluctuated over time depending on who is reviewing the amendment at the state level, Fishkind's recent experience with the Florida Department of Community Affairs indicates that the DCA has seen and approved allocation ratios in the 1.8 to 2.4 range and in some cases even larger allocation ratios for longer forecast horizons. Otherwise, if allocation ratios are not used in the analysis, the likely outcome is the Comprehensive Plan will fail to adequately accommodate growth resulting in higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and a less efficient pattern of growth which results from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. 7 Page 44 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 FISHKIND 8 A & ASSOCIATES i & &a M MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Mark Strain Chairman Collier County Planning Commission FROM: G. Russell Weyer Senior Associate SUBJECT: Examples of 2.0 Allocation Ratio Acceptance DATE: October 2, 2008 VIA: E -Mail Mark, You have asked for specific examples where the Allocation Ratio measurement has been used elsewhere. Here is one example of a legal case and two other examples in Florida where is has been approved and accepted by both the local jurisdiction and in some cases the Department of Community Affairs. Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. versus Department of Community Affairs In the matter Panhandle Citizens Coalition Inc. (PCC) vs. Department of Community Affairs (DCA), a petition was filed by PCC to challenge DCA's finding that the West Bay Detailed Specific Area Plan (WB DSAP) was in compliance as an amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan. The findings of fact in this case include item #92 which reads: "In addition to projecting population growth and assessing capacity to accommodate growth an allocation needs ratio (or multiplier) is necessary to ensure housing affordability and variety in the market; otherwise, the supply and demand relationship is too tight, which may cause a rapid escalation of housing prices. Because the farther in time a local government projects growth, the less accurate those projections tend to be, actual need is multiplied by an allocation needs ratio to produce an additional increment of residential land to accommodate this potential error." 1 Page 45 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 ME Finding #93 states: "Small Counties that experience above - normal growth rates may use allocation ratios as high as three more in order to realistically allocate sufficient buildable land for future growth. The County's allocation ratio of 2.2 before the WB DSAP and FLUM amendments was low from a long term forecasting perspective. When the WB DSAP amendments are factored into the allocation ratio, such growth would raise the allocation ratio to 2.3, which is still relatively low." Further, in finding #94 it is stated: "A land use plan should allow for sufficient inventory to accommodate demand and to provide some choice in order to react to economic factors." The Administrative Law Judge found the proposed land use amendments in compliance with section 163.3184 (1) (b) in part because the demonstration of need with respect to the allocation ratio indicated the allocation ratio of 2.3 was too low to properly accommodate projected future growth over the planning horizon. Acceptance of 2.0 Allocation Ratio in the case of Newberry Village Retail in Alachua County Newberry Village is a development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. A comprehensive plan change was required to allow for this use in the County. The applicant performed a commercial needs analysis as a requirement for their data and analysis portion of their application. The analysis is attached as Exhibit A. The Florida Department of Community Affairs found the plan amendment compliant with no requests for further data analysis. We have attached the notification of compliance as Exhibit B. City of Leesburg, Florida implicit Allocation Ratio The City of Leesburg, Florida has an adopted comprehensive plan where the implicit residential allocation ratio of 2.5 is embedded in the plan. The estimated land requirement projections are found in the approved 2003 Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan on page III -17. The Housing Element of the Leesburg Comprehensive Plan indicates an allocation ratio of 2.5 in the following passage: "Based on figures provided by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, a total of 8,295 dwelling units will be needed to serve the household population of the City by year 2010...... the City will be able to accommodate approximately 13,292 additional units, for a total of 21,031 residential units by 2010." Page 46 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 bf Given the 2010 demand for 8,295 units and 21,031 unit capacity, the a piricalA allocation ratio found is 2.5 in the current and approved 2003 Leesburg Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. Allocation Ratios of other Florida Counties with updated Comprehensive Plans Allocation ratios are not only used in analyzing commercial comprehensive plan amendment changes. The ratios are also used in analyzing residential comprehensive plan amendment changes as noted here and in the City of Leesburg, Florida above. In reviewing a number of needs analysis reports submitted for residential comprehensive plan amendment changes around the state, Fishkind has discovered that there are number of counties across the state that have substantial allocation ratios that are embedded in their comprehensive plans. Fishkind has analyzed allocation ratios in counties across the state with recently updated comprehensive plans that have been approved by the Department of Community Affairs. As shown in Table 5.6.1, the future land use maps of these counties contain allocation ratios that are consistent with those suggested by Fishkind. Table 5.6.1. Allocation Ratios in other Florida Counties County Allocation Ratio Forecast Horizon (years) Hendry 5.38 15 St. Johns 308 15 Nassau 4.54 15 Martin 3.92 15 Indian River 4.62 20 Source: Fishkind and Associates. Inc The counties noted above have incorporated significant allocation ratios into their comprehensive plans to adequately accommodate growth and limit higher than normal land prices, constrained economic development and less efficient patterns of growth which result from market inflexibility due to lack of investment choices. Page 47 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 EXHIBIT A Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis Page 48 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 . I Newberry Village Retail Needs Analysis Prepared For: NewUrban WORKS Development Prepared By: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 12501 Corporate Blvd. Orlando, Florida 32817 (407) 382 -3256 October 25, 2005 Page 49 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 � 1 Table Of Contents Section Title Page 1.0 Introduction ............................................ ............................... 1 2.0 Current market Conditions ..................... ............................... 2 3.0 Community -Type Retail Allocation Ratio . ............................... 3 4.0 Need for Additional Community -Type Retail Zoning ............... 3 5.0 Conclusion ............................................. ............................... 4 Appendix 1 — Existing Competitive Supply Appendix 2 — Vacant Future Supply Appendix 3 — 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics Page 50 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Newberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis 8A 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose This report analyzes the need to amend the Alachua County Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the proposed Newberry Village development. The development program calls for development of approximately 250,000 square feet of retail space in unincorporated Alachua County. 1.2 Overview of needs analysis In the context of amending the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Alachua County the applicant must demonstrate the need to amend the plan. Typically, this takes the form of a comparison of: • The supply of existing land currently planned for retail uses • The demand for retail lands based on market conditions The applicant must determine whether there is sufficient supply of retail land in the Plan to accommodate future retail space demand. The analysis was conducted based on a 20 minute drive time market area surrounding the project site, comparing demand and supply, both existing and future, within the project market area. The retail market study further considered both demand and supply for community -type retail space only. Figure 1 shows the 20 minute drive time market area ure l — 2u Minute Unve I Ime Market Page 1 of 8 Page 51 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 ` 8ANewberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis 2.0 Current Market Conditions 2.1 Existing Supply The community -type retail supply in the market was determined using the US Shopping Center directory, listing community type retail centers in Alachua County. Based on a gravity model of retail shopping patterns, calibrated for local market conditions, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. determined the effective competitive retail square footage surrounding the site, applicable to the subject location. Of 1.6 million square feet of community type retail space within 20 minutes of the site, Fishkind determined 1.3 million square feet of this existing supply directly competes with community type retail space at the subject site. Appendix 1 lists the existing competitive community -type shopping centers within 20 a minute drive time of the site, the square feet associated with each center, and its competitive characteristics based on the market conditions. 2.2 Future Supply To determine future supply, Fishkind & Associates, Inc. examined all vacant commercial parcels within the 20 minute market area. Vacant commercial parcels as designated by the Property Appraiser were then checked for current zoning. Parcels with current zoning of Business (BR), highway oriented business (BH), and Automotive (BA) were determined to represent competitive vacant supply. The analysis showed there are 38 vacant parcels meeting the criteria for future competitive supply. The criteria include, vacant parcels having the required zoning, and of sufficient size to accommodate community -type retail space, meaning parcels generally greater than 10 acres and less than 30 acres in size. Parcels with proper zoning in excess of 30 acres were excluded, as these more appropriately accommodate regional -type retail demand. Parcels with proper zoning under 10 acres were excluded as these more appropriately accommodate neighborhood -type retail demand. Numerous parcels under 10 acres were also included in the analysis as these are parcels with adjacency allowing combined parcel sizes of approximately 10 acres or greater. The sum total of competitive sites is 215 acres. An additional 57.7 acres were added to the supply based on further planning analysis of properties which appear to qualify for community type capacity. The vacant competitive supply is 272.7 acres. At .18 FAR this translates to potential future community -type retail supply of 2.1 million square feet, within the Newberry Village market area. The combined existing competitive supply plus future supply equals 3.4 million v�wcw Page 2 of 8 ii rrr rr Page 52 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • - Retail Needs square feet of Community -type retail space capacity in the Newberry Village market area, through year 2020. Appendix 2 shows the list of parcels designated for future community type supply. No representations are made as to the availability for sale or whether there is owner intention to develop the vacant lands at any time in the future. Because there is no assurance as to whether these lands will be developed, a market flexibility factor (allocation ratio) must be included to assure proper supply over the long term. 2.3 Community -Type Retail Space Demand The market analysis shows there are 76,090 households within the 20 minute drive time surrounding the site, as of 2005 (see appendix 3). Average household income is $45,260. This generates community -type retail demand of 1.6 million square feet of space as of year 2005. Household growth to year 2020 is expected to raise market area households to 96,208 households and 2.0 million square feet of demand by year 2020. 3.0 Community -Type Retail Allocation Ratio The community -type retail allocation ratio in the Newberry Village market area is 1.7. This is determined by dividing the 3.4 million square feet of supply /capacity by the 2.0 million square feet of demand, through the planning horizon year of 2020 The addition of 250,000 square feet of retail space through the proposed Newberry Village retail land use change results in a marginal increase in the overall Plan allocation ratio from 1.7 to 1.8. Fishkind & Associates believes an allocation ratio of under 2.0 leaves insufficient flexibility to accommodate long term retail space needs. Table 1 shows the supply /demand calculation and resulting allocation ratio. Table 1- 2020 Summary Community Retail Market Conditions Vacant Community Retail Acres 272.7 Future Community SO FT Supply 2,138,043 Existing Competitive Supply 1,266,947 TOTAL SUPPLY 3,404,990 Proposed Newberry Village 250,000 Total Demand 2,045,865 Community Commercial Allocation Ratio 1.8 ���i Page 3 of 8 rrr rr r Page 53 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Newberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis H 8A H I 4.0 Need for Additional Community -Type Retail Zoning With the revised allocation ratio so low in the Newberry Village market area, there is a need for additional retail capacity to be allocated for the long -term. 4.2 Acceptable Over - Allocation Ratio The Department of community Affairs has indicated an acceptable over - allocation rate for future land use planning purposes is 2.0. Many communities have considerably higher allocations for retail land uses. The Newberry Village market area has a current allocation ratio of 1.7. The addition of 250,000 square feet of community -type retail space in the proposed project will increase the allocation ratio to 1.8, leaving the market below 2.0 and only slightly above the original County allocation. 5.0 Conclusion Newberry Village has petitioned Alachua County to revise the Comprehensive Plan to allow the inclusion of 250,000 square feet of additional community -type retail space in the Newberry Village market area. The current analysis of available community -type retail lands indicates a need for additional retail acres in the market area by year 2020, in order to provide proper long range planning flexibility. This report concludes there is an under - allocation of available community -type retail lands in the Newberry Village market area. The conversion of lands to retail uses will still provide the ability of the remainder of the site to reach 80% of the maximum residential density allowed under the existing zoning and land use. However, by including the mixed use component, needed additional retail capacity is provided while still achieving a high proportion of the maximum residential capacity. Based on this finding, there is justification to include the Newberry Village lands in the Future Land Use Map as inventory of future retail lands. ctwciw Page 4 of 8 60" um an Page 54 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Newberry Village — Retail Needs Analysis ' 8A APPENDIX 1 - Existing Competitive Supply vm.M? bii� Page 5 of 8 rah u Page 55 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 SITE % CENTER NAME GLA DIST COMPETING SF COMPETING NEWBERRY SQUARE 180,524 0.63 98.01% 176,939 NEWBERRY CROSSING 111,010 137 95.68% 106,217 OAKS SQUARE 119,000 1.37 95.68% 113,862 OAKS MALL PLAZA 105,252 1.55 95.12% 100,111 TOWER CENTRE 165.000 1.92 9195% 155,018 CENTRAL PLAZA 132,000 10.00 68.97% 91,043 GAINESVILLE SHOPPING CENTER 186,173 10.08 6873% 127,959 GAINESVILLE MALL 289,850 11.02 65.92% 191,077 WAL -MART PLAZA 177,766 11.33 65.00% 115,552 WINN DIXIE MARKETPLACE PLAZA 139,337 1167 64.00% 89,171 TOTAL 1,605.912 1,266, 947 vm.M? bii� Page 5 of 8 rah u Page 55 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 illw Newberry Village - Retail Needs Analysis APPENDIX 2 - Future Vacant Supply OBJECTID_1 ZONEDISTRI ZONEDEFIN PIN CALCACRES SQFT 200 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06041 - 003 -001 21.8 0.00000 89 BP Business and Professional (BP) 06041- 002 -005 9.3 0.00000 135 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 002 -003 6.0 0.00000 142 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06800 - 028 -000 1.0 0.00000 277 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 005 -003 1.5 0.00000 278 BR Business. Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 005 -005 4.0 0.00000 117 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 005 -003 1.5 0.00000 118 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 009 -000 1.1 0.00000 119 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345- 003 -000 0.5 0.00000 120 BR Business, Retail Sales. and Services (BR) 04345- 004 -000 1.0 0.00000 121 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 -006 -000 6.2 0.00000 122 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345 -010 -000 0.5 0.00000 354 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 -001 -000 8.6 0.00000 355 BR Business. Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345- 006 -000 6.2 0.00000 313 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350 - 005 -000 9.0 0.00000 132 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06038 - 022 -000 10.5 0.00000 353 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04345- 006 -000 6.2 0.00000 59 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04344 - 001 -000 8.6 0.00000 205 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06233- 006 -001 1.3 0.00000 100 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331 -002 -003 6.0 0.00000 101 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331 -005 -000 2.9 0.00000 102 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 006 -000 1.0 0.00000 315 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350 -005 -000 9.0 0.00000 284 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04345- 006 -000 6.2 0.00000 124 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 -009 -000 1.1 0.00000 285 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04344 -001 -000 8.6 0.00000 286 BA Automotive Oriented Business (BA) 04345- 006 -000 6.2 0.00000 160 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 07251 -017 -000 1.2 0.00000 10 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 06655 - 002 -003 29.4 0.00000 116 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344 - 009 -000 1.1 0.00000 312 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04344- 009 -000 1.1 0.00000 314 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.00000 134 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06655- 015 -000 4.9 0.00000 263 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06656- 002 -008 3.4 0.00000 152 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 002 -003 6.0 0.00000 153 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 005 -000 2.9 0.00000 154 BH Highway Oriented Business (BH) 06331- 006 -000 1.0 0.00000 316 BR Business, Retail Sales, and Services (BR) 04350- 005 -000 9.0 0.00000 215.0 Page 6 of 8 rsHClra Dui rrr rr r Page 56 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 — Retail Needs WE Appendix 3 — Newberry Village 20 Minute Drive Time Demographics Lisa Page 7 of 8 ass as Z Page 57 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Site Location: Let: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. SITE NAME TRADE AREA SIZE: Traffic Settinas. Heavy. Travel Speeds. 30.50.&5,20,30,40 Household Trend Report Um Page A -1 10/25/05 Population Population (1990) 143,256 Population (2000) 172.121 Population (2005) 174,990 Population (2010) 177,778 Pct. Population Growth ('90'00) 20.15 Pct. Population Growth ('00205) 1.67 Pct. Population Growth ('0510) 1.59 Geographic Area Size 221.5974 Population Density (2005) 789.68 Daytime Marketplace (2005) Total Business Establishments 7,406 Total Daytime Employment 112,110 Households Households (1990) 57,054 Households (2000) 70,015 Households (2005) 76,090 Households (2010) 81,946 Married Couple Family With Children (2005) 11,417 15.0% Gender (2005) Male (2005) 85,523 48.9% Female (2005) 89,466 51.1% Race & Ethnicity (2005) Race: White (2005) 128,502 734% Race: Black (2005) 31,825 18.2% Race: Asian or Pacific Islander (2005) 7,914 4,5% Race: Other Race (2005) 3,122 1.8% Race: Two or More Races (2005) 3,627 2.1% Ethnicity: Hispanic (2005) 11,907 6.8% Age Distribution (2005) Age 0 -4 (2005) 9,448 5.4% Age 5 -9 (2005) 8,564 4.9% Age 10 -13 (2005) 7,049 4.0% Age 14-17 (2005) 8,516 4.9% Age 18 -24 (2005) 30,904 17.7% Age 25 -34 (2005) 40,035 22.9% Age 35 -44 (2005) 19,947 11.4° Age 45 -54 (2005) 19,857 11.3% Age 55 -64 (2005) 13,756 7.9% Age 65 -74 (2005) 8,384 4.8% Age 75 -84 (2005) 5,839 3.3% Age 85+ (2005) 2,288 1.3% Source: AGS neporc ureacea wit n mnc, vetmvn. Page 58 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S Site Location: Lat: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Household Trend Report A•2 10125/05 Source: AGS Report Created with SITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 59 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S SITE NAME tt a .X TRADE AREA SRE Traffic Settings: Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30,50,6520,30,40 Median Age Median Age (2005) 31.31 Median Household Income Median Household Income (1990) 24,711 Median Household Income (2000) 34,389 Median Household Income (2005) 37,442 Median Household Income (2010) 41,571 Per Capita Income Per Capita Income (1990) 12,221 Per Capita Income (2000) 17,795 Per Capita Income (2005) 20.389 Per Capita Income (20 10) 23,469 Average Household Income Average Household Income (1990) 30.686 Average Household Income (2000) 43.960 Average Household Income (2005) 45,268 Average Household Income (2010) 49,184 Median Disposable Income Median Disposable Income (2005) 32,082 Aggregate Income Aggregate Income ($MM) (2005) 3,567 -80 Income Distribution (2005) HH Inc S0- S15k(200E) 20.65727.1`.4 HH Inc. $15 -$25k (2005) 10,641 14.Y,,, HH Inc. $25 - $ 35k (2005) 8.865 11.79 HH Inc $35 -$50k (2005) 10.14313.3"" HH Inc. $50 - $ 751, (2005) 10.976 1449 HH Inc $75 -$100k 12005) 6.092 8.0% HH Inc. S100k - $150 (2005) 5.471 7 2r HH Inc- $150 - $2001, (20051 1.608 2.1% HH Inc. S200Kt (2005) 1,637 2 2% Employment By Industry (2000) Employment Status. Total Labor Force 90.720 52.7% Employment Status: Employed 83,786 48.7° Industry : Agriculture (2000) 505 0 -6% Industry: Mining (2000) 12 0 -0% Industry. Construction (2000) 3.550 4.2/ Industry : Manufacturing (2000) 2.804 3.3% Industry : Wholesale Trade (2000) 1.237 1.5% Industry: Retail Trade (2000) 9.348 112% Industry: Transport. and Warehousing (2000) 1,444 1.7% Industry. Utilities (2000) 714 0.9% Source: AGS Report Created with SITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 59 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.S Site Location: Lat: 29.661634 Lon: - 82.430144 Prepared By: FISHKIND AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Household Trend Report *8A Page A -3 10125105 SITE NAME TRADE AREA SIZE Traffic Settings, Heavy, Travel Speeds: 30,50,65,20,30 40 Employment By Industry (2000) Industry: Information Services (2000) 2,640 3.2% Industry: Finance and Insurance (2000) 3,076 3.7% Industry: Real Estate (2000) 1,635 2.0% Industry: Professional Services (2000) 4,721 5.6% Industry: Management (2000) 16 0.0% Industry: Admin. Services And Waste Mgmnt (2000) 2,296 2.7% Industry: Educational Services (2000) 18,924 22.6% Industry : Health Care and Social Assist. (2000) 13,505 16.1% Industry: Arts, Entertainment and Recreation (2000) 1,567 1.9% Industry: Food and Hospitality Services (2000) 7,821 9.3% Industry: Other Services, except public (2000) 3,815 4.6% Industry: Public Adminstration(2000) 4,156 5.0% Housing (2000) Housing Units (2000) 76,020 Housing Units, Occupied (2000) 70,015 92.1% Housing Units, Vacant (2000) 6,005 7.9% Housing Units, Owner Occupied (2000) 33,624 48.0% Housing Units, Renter- Occupied (2000) 36,391 52.0% Median Rent (2000) 441 Median Home Value (2000) 99,302 Consumer Expenditures (2005, $ /HH) Total Consumer Expenditures (2005) 40,661.64 Total Retail Expenditures (2005) 17,708.70 Educational Attainment (2000) Education: Less than 9th Grade (2000) 2,903 3.1% Education: Some High School (2000) 6.492 7.0% Education: High School Graduates (2000) 15,973 17.2% Education: Some College (2000) 17,634 19.0% Education: Associate's Degree (2000) 9,039 9.7% Education: Bachelor's Degree (2000) 20,404 22.0% Education: Graduate School (2000) 20,408 22.0% Population, Age 25+ (2000) 92,852 519% Source: AGS Report Created with iSITE, Version: 2005.01.16 Page 60 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 • EXHIBIT B Newberry Village Retail Comprehensive Plan Amendment Florida Department of Community Affairs Notice of Compliance Page 61 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 s— STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" CHARLIE CRIST Go•remcr Jul\ 22, -1008 The I lonorable Rodney J. Long Chairman. Board of County Commissioners Alachua County - P.O. Box 2877 Gainesville, FL 32602 -2877 RE: Alachua County Adopted Amendment 08 -RI Dear Chairman Long: THOMAS G. PELHAM Sec.euUy The Department has completed its review of the adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Ordinance Number 08 -10: DCA Amendment Numbers 06 -2 and 08 -RI) for Alachua County, as adopted on August 17, 2006 and June 10, 2008, and determined that it meets the requirements of Chapter 163, Part 11. Florida Statutes, for compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes. 'the Department is issuing a Cumulative Notice of Intent to find the plan amendment in compliance. 'the Cumulative Notice of Intent was sent to the Gainesville Sun for publication on July 23, 2008. The Department's cumulative notice of intent to find a plan amendment in compliance Shall be deemed to be a final order if no timely petition challenging the amendment is tiled. Any affected person may file a petition with the agency within 21 days after the publication of the notice of intent pursuant to Section 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes. No development orders. or permits for a development, dependent on the amendment may be issued or commence before the plan amendment takes effect. Please be advised that Section 163.3184(8)(c)2, Florida Statutes, requires a local government that has an internet site to post a copy of the Department's Notice of Intent on the site within 5 days after receipt ofthe mailed copy of the agency's notice of intent. Please note that a copy of the adopted County Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and the Notice of Intent must he available tix public inspection %londac through Friday. except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Alachua County Growth Management Office. 10 SAV ,P'1 \%cnuc. Third Floor. Gainesvillc. Florida, 32601 -6294. 2 5 5 5 S H U M A R D O A K B O U L E V A R D I TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 2 1 0 0 65148.3 3455 ip, ♦ 29] -927 -07th 0 Webs,te • COMMUNITY PLANNING .o. :a . HOUSING AND GOMMUNITI DEVELOPMENT F e ., Page 62 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 pi • The Honorable Rodney .I. Long Juh 23, 2008 Page If this in compliance determination is challenged by an affected person, you vtrill have the option of mediation pursuant to Subsection16_3).11890)(a). Florida Statutes. If Nou choose to attempt to resolve this matter through mediation, you must file the request for medimion with the administrative law judge assigned by the Division of kdministrati%re Hearings. Fhe choice of mediation will not affect the right of and party to an administrative hcarine. ICvou have any questions. please contact .-Ana Richmond, Planner, at (8�0) 9?? -1794. Sincere] N, Mike McDaniel Chief, Office of Comprehensive Planning MM.'ar Enclosure: Notice of Intent cc: Mr. Scott Koons. AICP, Executive Director, North Central Florida RPC Mr. Steven Lachnicht, AICP, Director ofGrowth Management Mr. C. David Coffcy Mr. Bradley Stith Page 63 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 �' w • STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS CUMULATIVE NOTICE OF INTENT TO FIND THE ALACHUA COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REMEDIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(S) IN COMPLIANCE DOCKETNO 08- RI -NOI- 0102- (A){I) The Department issues this cumulative notice of intent to find the Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment adopted by Ordinance No. 06 -26 on August 17, 2006 and the remedial amcndment(s) adopted by Ordinance No. 08 -10 on June 10, 2008 IN COMPLIANCE, pursuant to Sections 163 3184, 163.3187 and 163 3189, F S. The adopted Alachua County Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Department's Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report, (if any), are available for public inspection Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays, during normal business hours, at the Alachua County_ Growth Management, 10 S.W. 2"' Avenue, Third Floor, Gainesville, Florida 32601 -6294. Any affected person, as defined in Section 163.3184, F.S., has a right to petition for an administrative hearing to challenge the proposed agency determination that the Remedial Amendments are In Compliance, as defined in Subsection 163.3184(1), F.S. The petition must be filed within twenty -one (2l) days after publication of this notice, and must include all of the information and contents described in Uniform Rule 28- 106.201, F.A.C. The petition must be filed with the Agency Clerk, Department of Community Affairs, 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -2100 and a copy mailed or delivered to the local government. Failure to timely file a petition shall constitute a waiver of any right to request an administrative proceeding as a petitioner under Sections 120.569 and 120 57, F S. If a petition is file& the purpose of the administrative hearing will be to present evidence and testimony and forward a recommended order to the Department. If no petition is filed, this Notice of Intent shall become final agency action If a petition is filed, other affected persons may petition for leave to intervene in the proceeding. A petition for intervention must be filed at least twenty (20) days before the final hearing and must include all of the information and contents described in Uniform Rule 28- 106.205, F.A.C. A petition for leave to intervene shall be filed at the Division of Administrative Hearings, Department of Administration, 1230 Apalachee Parkway, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3060. Failure to petition to intervene within the allowed time frame constitutes a waiver of any right such a person has to request a hearing under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F S., or to participate in the administrative hearing. After an administrative hearing petition is timely filed, mediation is available pursuant to Subsection 1633189(3)(a), F S , to any affected person who is made a party to the proceeding by filing that request with the administrative lawjudge assigned by the Division of Administrative Hearings- The choice of mediation shall not affect a party's right to an administrative hearing. Mike McDaniel, Chief Division of Community Planning Department of Community, ,Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard falWi:Lssce, Flonda 32399 -2 100 Page 64 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 w 8A Q z 0 U) i CD N- Zv�w 06 zz� Q co (Y) Q0 JUZ J Q J = U Q Q J w r) 0n ~E 0 C 0 Q H W W J Ix CD D- o Lu Z f 0 Page 65 of 71 EXHIBIT V D.5 O c L L. L ._ = O L ta: > tt j : >, 4— L. 0 'a 4 d CD CD � 4— C 0 U) t + M Q, 3 cc L m L) a, L m = 0 Q Q .0 3:_ N m O •� O 0 A _ L 4' O_ 4- 4i (1) c c 0 .L 0 y 0 m �a�v+3> cc t6 c ~ W c Q -a 0 C U c L) c 0 4-0 Z O.cZ cC� -CL4a t 0 4Z Ri N cm 0 Q4. m-0 Z _ 0_'O 0__ CL 4-0 N + O 0.� fq tC + N 'V _ •0 .c Oftj 0 v LM ._ CL O 0 0 O N V L L Us c �pOpL �'-0 _ O � •CY) O +�+ O G) to v N C 0 O d N VR3 •. CC 0 O L C co Q� L W.0 V CL O N E L V E .5 v m Page 66 of 71 �� 8A L 4: 3 co c � � �a m 0 Q ro o ro L � V N- 3 v V ❑. cu — o w N 03ai o V i 3 0 �Q z CID 1 o v C d w ro N :3 L 0 co Q) co N Iz N tea) rower •� � l3 M =Z�- ca Q) 0 yE aroi � ayi 'C � Q -0 a o EXHIBIT V.D.5 Page 67 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 c3 ._ _ -0 (1) Qi L' CU cu 'a .(n E o8A N O E - ° N = N y O + i O O X W 4+ -0 4- == cu > O N 3 p �. O Q O .0 C = v O L O � O � � C -c E O _O O O ca CD._ C N 'a _ N O CD r c> > O CL O cC Q. cU -a O Q.N W N 3 i v O L v >'Q m >g m �'� _ E U 0.0 Q O O E 4, �� L Q O N Q O C L 4-- 0 U O tC si •N t V= O O ._ O 'a L 00 O i 'a ~' =O V O a ++ sL. O Q j N t4 +, L O O ��' � m m o c > m Q CG L � .- L ++ fQ = Q CU 0 m L O G1 CD O L 0 O y. N N� L OL C O O fn Q i-- o u.. Page 67 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 v— O CIO a) O Z a> L- ca ai L MO W U •Q m O 0 06 o � L Z cn O L a 0 V c .Q O 00 t 0 t N }Sr 0 c. u r. U O CL Z cl U 4 c� cat CO U d 0 im 3 L W U N c cC L .E U. •4+ a 0 LL LL 10, L 0 L 0 L a1 0 rn L 0 OR C m Al Q iz. a 0 O i 4+ CL O U CD 6. o in 0 c° a) a E L LL O U = ❑ o ❑ ❑ L cn .0 4— O ui 0 •_ a� 0 tC � a O m > U U ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Q iz. Page 68 of 71 U co Q) L t ,e, u rn L O 00 o � N 0 c� G L .0 M a) Al EXHIBIT V.D.5 cn 4+ CL O U CD 6. o in 0 c° a) a E L LL U U = ❑ o ❑ ❑ cn .0 4— O ui 0 •_ a� 0 tC L O a U m > ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Page 68 of 71 U co Q) L t ,e, u rn L O 00 o � N 0 c� G L .0 M a) Al EXHIBIT V.D.5 Apr 24. 08 01:32p Jay Bishop 354 -3353 p,2 110 8 A Page 69 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Apr 24 08 01:32p Jay Bishop 354 -3353 P•S H ROGERS W OOD HILL STARMAN & GUSTASON FaCF=110NAL!53D =1nTCN CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS ,wrrAViwi nnn,warx, smc>sv Nu�.n vlm s,¢�oDn w si�aMn.l c.r.A �xovs ncr,ALO n. eun.LmN. CIA ucx,uN:tsmnxcr aanrs� TIKwtAS C BLELIO.C> n. iJBLICA'(WNrnMi sxM[MA6El{11P0. C.PA MNDAIMVnN O'CSXVR INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED -UPON PROCEDURES weLlc ACCaMAMs wrrcEs NAiLFS lcyl(WI WRCDIELAND 151.At Development Properties, Inc. Naples, Florida We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by Development Properties (the Company), solely to assist the Company in the tabulation of surveys to determine if a shopping center is supported, and, if so, what type of tenants would be preferred. The Company was responsible for creating the survey and distributing the survey to Golden Gate residents. This agreed -upon procedures engagementwas conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility the Company. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. Our procedures and results are as follows: 1. We received in the mail from Golden Gate residents, surveys that had been distributed to them by Naples Primsource. 2. We tabulated all surveys received. We received 1632 surveys in the mail through March 24, 2008 with the following results: 1351 Yes 217 No 64 Did not vote 1632 Total Of the 217 respondents voting "No", there were 13 surveys listing prospective tenants they want included in the shopping center. Of the 64 respondents that "Did not vote', there were 60 voting for prospective tenants they want included in the shopping center. The prospective tenants and related votes for those tenants are as follows: s Fast Food Restaurant Bans Drug Store 832 Dry Cleaner 450 Major Grocer 1926 1071 Child Day Care 376 Post Office 1153 Coffee Shop 615 Clothing Store 425 Hardware Store 992 Ice Cream Shop 687 Convenience Store 677 687 Adult Day Care 224 Beauty Salon 401 GardenfPet Supply Video Store 482 Family Restaurant 1133 -I- Page 70 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 Apr 24 08 01:32p Jay Bishop Development Properties. Inc. Naples, Florida Other prospective tenants listed by survey respondents were as follows: 354 -3353 p.4 Medical offices 67, Bar 45, Auto parts store 42, Gym 25, Dollar store 23, Movie theater 21, Liquor store 19: Walmart/Target 15, Nail salon /spa 14, Hone improvement 13, Health food store 12, Ver 12, Bakery 7, CVS. Vaigretrm 7, Bait & Tackle 6, Hallmark 6, Chinese restaurant 6, Sporting goods store 6, Craft store 6, Fire /Police station 5, Barter shop 5, Flower shop 4, Church 4, Auto repair 4. Com.omer store 4, Park 4, Goodwill 3, Hospital 3, Pool supply 3, Electronics store 3, Book store 3, Gun store 3, Martial arm 3, Cuban restaurant 3, Shoe store 3, Children's activity center 3, Check cashing 2, Credit Union 2, UPS store 2, Fresh fish market 2, Butcher 2, Bowling alley 2, Coin laundry 2, Amphitheater 2. The following prospective tenants were listed on only one survey each: Wine shop, Car rental, Electrical supply.. Photo studio, Chefs warehouse, Casino, Tractor supply, Car dealer, H &R Block, Watersupplies, Equestrian store, Everglades National Park Info Center, Insurance agent, Tree farm, Tax collector, Fresh fruit market, Storage, Cell phone store, Dance studio, Italian restaurant, Carriage rides, Hooters, Office Max, Paint store, HorserATV trails, and 1 -75 Ramp. We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an audit, the objective of which would be to express an opinion on the results of the election. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. This report is intended for the information and use of the Company and its legal counsel. At your instruction, we are holding the ballots in our office until you notify as to dispose of them. Rogers Wood Hill Starman & Gustason, P.A. Certified Public Accountants April 10, 2008 -2- Page 71 of 71 EXHIBIT V.D.5 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.D.6 HB 697 CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2005 AMENDED .APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2005 -1 Estates Shopping Center Sub- District CP- 2008 -1 Exhibit V.D.6 liB 697 Consistency Analysis 'file Florida legislature approved in the 2008 session an amendment to Chapter 16.3177, F.S., which requires local government comprehensive plans to address energy efficient land use pattems and greenhouse gas reduction strategies. 'The pending Estates Shopping Center Sub- district amendment to the Golden Gate Estates Master Plan proposes to establish a grocery - anchored community shopping center within close proximity to several thousand households located within the Northern Golden (late Fstates subdivision. Approval of this plan amendment will provide convenient shopping and job opportunities for the central portion of Golden Gate Estates which will reduce vehicle trips and driving distances for many residents. By capturing these trips presently on the local roadway network, the amendment will assist in reducing future road network improvements and traffic impacts to other areas within the more urbanized area of Collier County. "I he reduction in vehicle miles traveled will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Golden Gate Estatcs is one of the largest subdivisions in the United States and encompasses approximately 175 square miles (1 12,000 acres), and is an example of urban sprawl. Almost all of the Golden Gate Estates area has been plaited into 1.25 acre or larger single - family home sites with very little commercial development planned to serve the residents of the area, requiring residents to travel by automobile into the more urbanized portions of Collier County for most of their daily shopping and service needs. While the area provides for a semi -rural lifestyle because ol' the large lots and zoning that permits the keeping of horses, fowl and other livestock, it has a population exceeding 36,000 in 2008 and is anticipated to continue to grow to a population approaching 45,000 by year 2020. Thcre is presently a large deficit of commercial land in Golden Gate Fstates; thereby, exacerbating the need to utilize the automobile for daily commercial needs and increasing the vehicle miles traveled for residents of this subdivision. It is documented that the automobile is the largest generator of green house gases for most communities. The proposed amendment provides conveniently located retail services, including a grocery store where none currently exists or can exist under the current comprehensive plan. The grocery store and other retails services will result in the reduction of vehicle trip lengths. (louse Bill 697 encourages energy efficient land use patterns. The proposed plan amendment is located at the intersection of two major roadway corridors serving the Northern Golden Gate Estates area is an efficient land use pattern. The proposed grocery- anchored shopping center located at this prominent intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard will capture numerous trips that otherwise would be passing through the intersection in route to the urban area for daily shopping needs. This location is also well - suited for a community sized shopping center due to its location along a current Collier Area Transit (CA7) route serving Golden Gate Lstates. Proximity to a transit route is an efficient land use pattern and is an example of smart growth by allowing residents to have an alternative to automobile use lbr shopping or employment. Locating goods and services in closer proximity to the residents will equate to reduced dependence on the automobile, reduced vehicle miles traveled and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. WE ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.D.7 CONSISTENCY WITH GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 •t Estates Shopping Center Sub- District C P- 2008 -1 Exhibit V.D.7 Consistency with Golden Gate Area Master Plan Goals 3 and 5 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) relate to commercial services and maintenance of rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Goal 3 states: Provide for basic commercial services for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate Estates Residents, shortening vehicular trips, and preserving_ rural character. Goal 5 states: Future growth and development within Golden Gate Estates will balance the desire by residents for urban amenities with the preservation of the area's rural character, as defined by wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops, wildlife activity, low- density residential development, and limitations on commercial and conditional uses. The applicant has conducted a series of professional surveys and resident interviews to establish the types of goods and services desired by area residents, and further, how they would like a shopping center to function /feel. A market demand analysis has also been prepared by a professional economist to analyze the current and future demand for additional commercial development. The analysis concludes that Golden Gate Estates is underserved by commercial development and additional commercial development can be supported. The applicant has also held numerous public meetings in the community to speak with residents about how the proposed shopping center could function while maintaining their community character. The application as proposed attempts to respond to feedback received to date. The application includes both uses that are permitted in the newly created Subdistrict and those uses that are specifically prohibited. Many of the area residents have indicated that a grocery store and other uses commonly found in urban area community sized shopping centers are needed for this area. The Subdistrict text requires that a grocery store is the first use that can obtain a certificate of occupancy for the site. At the present time, there are no full service grocery stores or shopping centers available within several miles of the site, thereby requiring additional vehicular trips on the road network within both Golden Gate Estates and the urban area of Collier County to obtain basic goods and services. The Subdistrict uses are compatible and consistent with the estates community. The Subdistrict intensity is approximately half the intensity Ibund in the urban area and is in keeping with the estates community. A conceptual plan CP- 2003 -1 Page I ot2 L'xhibit V.D.7 ME is included as part of the Subdistrict. The conceptual plan provides for appropriate setbacks from residential uses. The proposed amendment is located at the intersection of two of the major roadway corridors serving the Northern Golden Gate Estates area. Wilson Boulevard is being designed to be a 4 -lane road and Golden Gate Boulevard is under design to become a 6- lane road adjacent to the subject property. By providing for services at this located, vehicle miles traveled can be substantially reduced, which will have a positive transportation impact on both Golden Gate Estates and urban area roadway segments. The applicant intends to submit a Planned Unit Development rezoning application that can track concurrently with the comprehensive plan amendment application. The PUD will contain additional information relating to community character by specifying building setbacks, building heights, lighting standards, landscape buffer details, and conceptual architectural details. The level of commercial intensity proposed is far less than that typically found in the urban area of Collier County CP- 2008 -1 Page 2 of 2 Exhibit V.D.7 m ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.D.8 SURVEY AREA GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 C P -2008- I is ; is i E 1-- nalvj is. i2 - ip sillis -- . : L it ... .... ........... .... . ....... is is :txx is: v 1:: i s- - I , t z 7i Pill I ri t ... .... ...... ....... ..... ....... . . . A A ;tU it If it N u -2 i XN As is. its . EXHIBIT V.D.8 SURVEY AREA r� �l L Oj SUBJECT SITE Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT V.D.B .108 A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.E.I PUBLIC FACILITIES GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.E.I PUBLIC FACILITIES La. Potable Water Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a potable water well to be permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD and capacity will minimally meet the standards of the Florida Administrative Code. It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 148,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Water Demand: Office: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpd /sf= 9,000 gpd Retail: 148,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpd /sf. = 14,850 gpd Restaurant: 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpd /sf= 9,750 gpd Total = 33,600 gpd Assumed incidental use for irrigation near seating areas per health code requirements: 3,000 gpd New Subdistrict Generation = 36,600 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x 250 gpd /unit — 4,250 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (36,600 — 4,250) gpd = 32,350 gpd Data Source: Tables in Chapter 64E -6 F.A.C. l.b. Sanitary Sewer Public facilities are not available in the immediate area and therefore the development of the parcel will require installation of a private sector package sanitary sewer or septic system treatment system permitted consistent with the applicable provisions of the GMP, LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including FDEP and SFWMD. Revised August 2009 Page I CP- 2008 -1 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT V.E.1 �8A r It is likely that the site will be developed with approximately 60,000 square feet of office space, 148,500 square feet of retail space and 19,500 square feet of restaurants. In this scenario, the following water demand may be anticipated: Sewer Generation: Office: 60,000 sq. ft. x 0.15 gpd/sf = 9,000 gpd Retail: 148,500 sq. ft. x 0.10 gpd /sf. = 14,850 gpd Restaurant: 19,500 sq. ft. x 0.5 gpd /sf = 9,750 gpd New Subdistrict Generation = 33,600 gpd Existing Residential: 17 units x200 gpd /unit = 3,400 gpd Net Impact = (New Subdistrict — Existing Residential) _ (33,600 — 3,400) gpd = 30,200 gpd l.c. Arterial & Collector Roads Please refer to Exhibit V.E.Ic, the Traffic Impact Statement. Project Transportation Consultant, TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., has prepared a Transportation Analysis for the conceptualized development program for the subject property. The proposed subdistrict is expected to result in a significant capture rate from pass by traffic as well as mitigating (reverse) directional flows (opposite of the rush hour directional pattern). The result shall be a more efficient use of the roadway capacity. This shall be one result of the satisfaction of community commercial need in the Estates. Another result will be the shortening of the trip lengths taken on the roadway system which is presently necessitated by the lack of commercial availability and services in the Estates. The roadway link LOS for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard is not ideal under 2013 background conditions, but all intersections and turning movements are shown to operate acceptably. Additionally, the shorter trip lengths as a result of the added commercial development in the Estates will improve the LOS conditions on Collier Boulevard and Immokalee Road as well. 1. d. Drainage The proposed development will be designed to comply with the 25 year, 3 -day storm standards and other applicable standards of the LDC and other jurisdictional agencies including the SFWMD. August 2009 Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT V.E.1 • Le. Solid Waste The established Level of Service (LOS) for the solid waste facilities is two years of landfill disposal capacity at present fill rates and ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present till rates. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities from the proposed project of 225,000 square feet of commercial uses. Solid Waste Generation: Office: 60,000 sf x 0.01 lb/sf/day x I cy /250 Ibs = 630 cy /yr Retail: 148,500 sf x 0.025 lb/sf/day x I cy /180 lbs = 6,450 cy /yr Restaurant: 19,500 sf x 0.05 lb /sf /day x l cy /300 Ibs = 1,010 cy /yr New Subdistrict Generation =8,090 cy /yr Existing Residential: 17 units x 25 cy /unit /yr = 425 cy /yr Net Impact= (New Subdistrict— Existing Residential) _ (8,090 — 425) cy /yr = 7,665 cy /yr Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues ", Tchobangolous /Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation ", Salvato. 11 Parks: Community and Regional The proposed development will not significantly increase the population density and therefore will have no effect on the community and regional parks beyond those mitigated by the payment of associated impact fees. The site, as presently allowed by the hutnre Land Use Element, Density Rating System and the Land Development Code. may he developed with up to 17 dwelling units. Using the average County household occupancy rate of 2.39 people per unit, this could represent 40 -41 residents. Conversion to the proposed commercial subdistrict represents a slight reduction in the County population. The 2007 Annual Update and Inventory Report establishes two Level of Service Standards (LOSS) for Parks and Recreation. The Board of County Commissioners requires 1.2 acres of community park land per 1,000 residents and 2.9 acres of regional park land per 1,000 residents. If the subdistrict is approved, the County will be required to provide 0.05 acres less community park space and 0.12 acres less regional park land. In this case, the County would be required to account for an additional 0.22 acres of community park land and 0.53 acres of regional park land. In any event, these impacts are usually mitigated by the payment of impact fees during permitting. August 2009 Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT V.E.1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.E.lc TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. pa, of TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT- COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (PROJECT NO. 0801.31 -10) PREPARED AV: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. 13881 Plantation Road, Suite 11 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 -4339 Certificate of Authorization #27003 239- 278 -3091) REVISED August 24, 2009 Page 1 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c t TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IV. TRIP GENERATION V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION VI. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS VII. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS VIII. CONCLUSION A 8A a Page 2 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1. INTRODUCTION w TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact statement for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment submittal for the -/- 41 -acre Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site located along the north side of Uolden Gate Boulevard between its intersections with 3"1 Street NW and Wilson Boulevard in Collier County, Florida. This report has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking approval for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The site location is illustrated on Figure 1. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would modify the existing land use designation on the subject site to allow a total of 225,000 square feet of commercial floor area on the subject site. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. 'Trip generation and assignments to the area intersections will be completed and analysis conducted to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding intersections. An initial methodology meeting was held with Collier County Staff on February 21, 2007 to discuss the parameters required as a result of this analysis. No methodology notes were created in 2007 since none ii ere required at the lime of this tneering, however, this 'Traffic Impact Statement is consistent with the items discussed at that tneetdng such as trip generation, pass -hy trip reduction and Irip distribution. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site currently contains vacant land and some single family dwelling units. I" Street NW divides the subject site into two parcels. 7 he site is bordered to the north by vacant land and additional single family dwelling units. To the east ofthe subject site is Wilson Boulevard. Uolden Gate Boulevard borders the site to the south. To the west of the site is 3`d Street NW. pale 1 Page 3 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc ME Page 4 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. lo, 8A Golden Gate Boulevard is an east /west four -lane divided arterial roadway to the south of the subject site. The intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard allows full turning movements under signalized conditions. Currently, the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with 3" Street NW and I" Street NW allow fall turning movements under unsignalized conditions. Golden Gate Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 45 mph and is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. 'fire Level of Service Standard on this section of Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard is LOS " 1, or 2,350 vehicles. Wilson Boulevard is a north /south two -lane roadway that borders the subject site to the east. Wilson Boulevard's intersection with Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements operating under signalized conditions. Wilson Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Wilson Boulevard has a Level of Service Standard of LOS "E ", or 920 vehicles. Io Street NW is a north /south two -lane local roadway that divides the subject site into two parcels. The intersection of Vt Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. I" Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Concurreney is not currently measured on I" Street NW. 3`d Street NW is a north /south two -lane local roadway that borders the subject site to the west. The intersection of 3r1 Street NW and Golden Gate Boulevard currently provides full turning movements under unsignalized conditions. 3`1 Street NW is under the jurisdiction of Collier County. Concurrcncy is not currently measured on 3`d Street NW. In order to gain a better understanding of the traffic conditions in the vicinity of the subject site based on the methodology meeting held with County Staff, AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts were performed at the intersections of Golden Gate Boulevard with Collier Boulevard, 3`d Street NW, l" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as the Wilson Boulevard /Immokalee Road intersection. These turning movement Pagc 3 Page 5 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. !*8A i counts were performed during the peak season of the adjacent street in March based on the information contained within the 2006 FDOT Traffic Information CD, so no peak season adjustment was required. Figures 2A and 213 indicate the resultant 2007 peak season turning movements at the subject intersections. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict site will amend the current future land use designation on the subject site to allow commercial retail uses. The property owner has agreed to cap the maximum amount of retail uses at 225,000 square feet of floor area. Specifically, Table I summarizes the uses for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. Table I Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Pronosed Use Land Use Pro osed Uses Shopping Center 225,000 square feet At the map amendment stage, a detailed site plan has not been prepared. Therefore, it is difficult to asses the access that will be provided to the subject site. Preliminary discussions with the County were held regarding access. It is understood that access is not specifically approved at the Comprehensive Plan Amendment stage, but rather at the Planned Development stage and even as much at the Site Plan Approval stage. Therefore, a "conceptual" access plan was developed in order complete the traffic impact analysis. Access to the subject site must ultimately be approved by the Department of Transportation and the Board of County Commissioners. For this analysis, assumptions were made regarding the proposed access to the subject site. It was assumed access would be provided directly to Golden Gate Boulevard via a full access, to Wilson Boulevard via a full access and additional access drives on 3rd Page 4 Page 6 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c IoM 3(7) 1 NloM ♦1,112(877) 1 18) 8 i'14N + /► GOLDEN GATE B, 395♦ °'o" �2)6� or I! H w w H tt M J ?_ SoG k3(6) OJ M con Z z ♦1,092 (881) Z 4-714 (645) Z ; 1 w w w J w W D K (878)255♦ O (17) 1 H (18) 4 U) O N Z z M O IoM 3(7) 1 NloM ♦1,112(877) 1 18) 8 i'14N + /► GOLDEN GATE B, 395♦ °'o" �2)6� or I! H w w H tt M J ?_ SoG k3(6) OJ M con k42(46) rn o o ♦1,092 (881) M N 4-714 (645) 1 147 (9) 0 (167) (1,052)404♦ (878)255♦ °?N T (17) 1 d (18) 4 z w w F LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2A Page 7 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 6 N.T.S. TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2007 PEAK SEASON TURNING MOVEMENTS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 2B Page 8 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. Street NW and I" Street NW. 'fhe access points to 1" Street NW were shown to provide access to the subject site on both sides of the roadway. Again, this is a conceptual access plan that will be further developed as the project proceeds through the re- zoning and site plan approval process. IV. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation calculations were performed for the proposed uses as a part of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site. Upon approval of this Amendment, as conditioned, the Comprehensive Plan allocation on the subject site will allow a total of 225,000 square feet of various mixed commercial floor area. The site will be analyzed based upon the use that indicates the highest trip generation in order to perform a "worst case" analysis on the Comity Roadway network. The resultant trip generation for each use was determined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation, 7`' Edition. A comparison of the 8 °i Edition to the 7 °i Edition of the 1-1F report, included in the Appendix, indicates that the total weekday P.M. peak hour trip generation would increase by a total of 25 vehicles (in and out) and the peak direction would only increase by one (1) vehicle during this same time period. Iherefore, the trips generated for the project hased on the 7 °i Edition trip generation, as previously utilized in the studies submitted to Collier County in January 2008, remained in this report as the resultant change to the 8's Edition would make no appreciable difference in the analysis conducted herein. Land Use Code 820 (Shopping Center) was utilized in order to perform the necessary trip generation on the subject parcel, According to the land use description for the shopping center use, "A shopping center is an integrated group oJcommercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned and managed as a unit. A shopping center's composition is related to its market area in terms of size. location and type of store. A shopping center also provides on -site parking facilities suljicient to serve its own parking demands. " 'the retail floor area proposed as a part of this development will function most similarly as a shopping center based on the ITE land use description. —Page 7 Page 9 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 8A Table 2 indicates the trip generation of the retail use proposed as a part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site. The trip generation equations utilized to calculate the trip generation can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 2 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Trin Generation Land Use A.M. Peak Hour P.M. P�Hourtal Daily Daily I n Out Total In Shopping Center 155 100 255 513 557 1,070 11,504 (225,000 so. ft.) ITE estimates that a shopping center use of comparable size may attract a significant amount of its traffic from vehicles already traveling the adjoining roadway system. This traffic, called "pass -by" traffic, reduces the development's overall impact on the surrounding roadway system but does not decrease the actual driveway volumes. Collier County allows a maximum "pass -by" traffic reduction of 25% for shopping centers. However, as a part of the methodology meeting held with County Staff, there was discussion on the fact that the site would primarily serve the Golden Gate Estates area, which is currently lacking in commercial goods and services. A retail center in this area would attract a higher percentage of "pass -by" trips due to the fact that there are very few commercial services available to the residents within a live mile radius of the subject site. Therefore, a "pass -by" rate of 35% was approved for the site by Staff in the methodology meeting. In addition, a greater pass -by reduction is reasonable (beyond the 25 %) for the subject site due to the significant amount of commuter traffic experienced during the peak hours of the adjacent street along Golden Gate Boulevard. For this analysis, the "pass -by" traffic was accounted for in order to determine the number of "new" trips the development will add to the surrounding roadways. Table 3 summarizes the pass -by reduction percentages utilized. Table 4 summarizes the -- development traffic and the breakdown between the total project trips and the net new Page 8 Page 10 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. • trips the development is anticipated to generate after the pass -by reduction is applied. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the "pass -by" reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. 'Fable 3 Pass -by Trip Reduction Factor Estates Shonninp Center Subdistrict 'fable 4 Trip Generation — New Trips Fstates Shonninp Center Subdistrict Land Use Percentage Trip LLand Use Reduction Shoff 1np g Center 35% 'fable 4 Trip Generation — New Trips Fstates Shonninp Center Subdistrict Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour llaily (2 -way) In Out Total In Out Total Tota Less Retail Pass -by (35% ass -by) 155 45 100255 45 90 513 187 557 1, 11,504 187 374 4,026 NewTraffic ('I atel_I rips— Pass -by'1 rn0 m) I10 55 6� L_ __ 326 696 7,478 The Level of Service analysis and the intersection analysis at Golden Gate Boulevard /Collier Boulevard and lnmokalce Road /Wilson Boulevard performed within this report is based solely on the nexv trips generated as a result of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site. The intersection analysis at the intersections surrounding the subject site was performed based on the total trips. Page 9 Page 11 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION k " n CONSULTANTS, INC. V. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The new trips based on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment indicated within Table 4 were then assigned to the surrounding roadway system based on the anticipated routes the drivers will utilize to approach the site. The resultant traffic distribution is indicated in Figure 3 as approved within the methodology meeting held with Staff. Based on the traffic distribution indicated within Figure 3, the new development traffic was distributed to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 4A and 411 indicates the site traffic assignment to the conceptual site access plan utilized in this analysis and previously described. The assignment was also carried to the external intersection beyond the site boundary and within the Study area. The new site related traffic was assigned to the significantly impacted roadway links as a part of the net new project trips graphic identified as Figure 4C. Furthermore, an assignment of the pass -by traffic generated as a result of the subject site can also be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. Page 10 Page 12 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc IMMOKALEE ROAD VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 11� Q 10% DROP OFF LU TO RESIDENTIAL w AREAS ♦30 %♦ m GOLDEN GATE 4-4C ■ir, 200% ♦ 5% ♦ 5% DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL E RIDGE ROAD AREAS 101 °io C7 OIL WELL ROAD ♦5 %♦ ♦ 5% 10/ 10% DROP OFF TO RESIDENTIAL AREAS 0 Q w J 0 O m z O J 9 El * 10 % THE PROJECT TRAFFIC WAS ASSUMED TO TERMINATE AND ORIGINATE BETWEEN COLLIER I BOULEVARD AND THE SITE ALONG GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE SITE ALONG WILSON BOULEVARD. LEGEND \ 4-20 %♦ PERCENT DISTRIBUTION J �j TRANSPORTATION PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION UPDATED 8124/09 �(CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 3 Page 13 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c f15% DROP OFF 200% TO RESIDENTIAL 4% I'" ___ • ♦30 %♦ AREAS 4-2%-11 ♦15 %—� + DROPOFF TO RESIDENTIAL 100% 41% AREAS it 0 Q w J 0 O m z O J 9 El * 10 % THE PROJECT TRAFFIC WAS ASSUMED TO TERMINATE AND ORIGINATE BETWEEN COLLIER I BOULEVARD AND THE SITE ALONG GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND BETWEEN IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE SITE ALONG WILSON BOULEVARD. LEGEND \ 4-20 %♦ PERCENT DISTRIBUTION J �j TRANSPORTATION PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION UPDATED 8124/09 �(CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 3 Page 13 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �*8A 31 Z Z W W W W W d' K co co M r Z Z W W W W d' K U) (71) 15 � co v N 00 M 0 0 5(10) --`✓ `-° 0 min 15(64) 7 34 ♦35 (198) N ° ��52 (145) ° -4-57(155) N,�,° 4-40(l 1 0(0)- ♦ 15 70 0 (0) 0 (0) (30) 101 GOLDEN GATE 1 1 (115) 35 (60) 16 (40) 5 (175) 51-11. ° (60)16-10. BOULEVARD (203)30♦ ° (122)20♦ (0)0N o ON o (41)5N mom° M Z Z LEGEND t- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC rQ TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 1 \ CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4A Page 14 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c W W W W d' K U) M � LEGEND t- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC rQ TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 1 \ CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4A Page 14 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC TQ TRANSPORTATION SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT \CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 4B Page 15 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c • N.T.S. LEGEND 4-000 AM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ♦(000) PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC NET NEW PROJECT TRAFFIC �jTRANSPORTATION ON SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED ROADWAYS Figure 4C CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 16 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 8A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. VI. FUTURF, TRAFFIC CONDITIONS In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table 1A, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2 %- 2 % -3°/. Significance Test. The new project related traffic from Table 4 was compared with the connected 10 -month Level of Service Standard for Peak Hour — peak Direction traffic conditions in order to determine the project impact percentage. Based on the information contained within Table IA, Golden Gate Boulevard from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard, Wilson Boulevard from south of Golden Gate Boulevard to hnmokalee Road, and Collier Boulevard from Golden Gate Boulevard to Pine Ridge Road are shown to experience a significant impact as a result of the added project traffic associated with the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plant Amendment in accordance with the Collier County 2 %- 2`% -3`% Significance Test. Therefore, Level of Service analysis is only required on these roadway links as a result of the proposed development. In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table IA also includes a buildout consistency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. fhe Collier County TIS Guidelines require analysis of the adjacent roadway network based on the buildout of the project or the five (5) year planning window, whichever is longer. It is likely that this project will be constructed prior to the end of the year 2013 due to the need for commercial services in the Golden Crate Estates. Therefore, it was necessary to analyze the surrounding roadway network based on (lie 2014 traffic conditions. The total volume indicated within the 2008 Collier County Concurrency Spreadsheet reflects the current remaining capacity on the adjacent roadway network. The remaining capacity was subtracted from the 10 -month service volume on each roadway in order to determine the 2008 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume on the adjacent Page 15 Page 17 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. #8A roadway network. The appropriate annual growth rate for these roadways was taken by comparing information from the 2006 AUIR report to data in the 2008 AUIR report. An example of the calculations to determine the annual growth rates can be found within the Appendix of this report for reference. These annual growth rates were then used to factor the 2008 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume to 2014 peak season, peak hour, peak direction background traffic conditions The resultant 2014 peak season, peak hour, peak direction traffic volume was subtracted from the Level of Service Standard in order to determine the remaining capacity in the year 2014. The project generated traffic was then subtracted from the remaining capacity in order to determine the remaining 2014 capacity after the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic is added to the surrounding roadway network. Figure 5 indicates the results of the capacity analyais along Collier Boulevard, Golden Gate Boulevard, and Wilson Boulevard. VII. PROJECTED CONSISTENCY AND IMPROVEMENTS Based upon the information contained within Table IA and Figure 5, several roadway deficiencies are expected un9er 2014 with the proposed development traffic. Several road improvements are shown in either the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) or the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan in this area of Golden Gate Estates that will specifically address these deficiencies. Golden Gate Boulevard is shown on the 2030 Needs Plan as a 4 lane roadway from Collier Boulevard to Everglades Boulevard. A parallel facility is planned (the Vanderbilt Beach Road extension) but funding for the segment between Collier Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard has not been identified. The funding for the design servizes for the widening of Wilson Boulevard to a four lane divided roadway is shown iri the Five Year CIP and funding for construction is in the 2030 Long Range Transporta' ion Plan. A small deficiency is noted on Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Collier Boulevard in 2014 with the project. Growth along this segment has been on the Page 16 Page 18 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c IMMOKALEE ROAD VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 0 w -lA% O m af w GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD J J O v 828 98 (87) [61 ] 4.0% (806) 1 106 106 J106 [754] _ (73) (62) _ (34) PINE RIDGE ROAD 2.2% [-51 /0 [ -420] [ -15701 4.7 6, 3 /0 11.2 /o 11% 0.7% 0 w 0 0 m Z O U) J a LEGEND elow OIL WELL ROAD 0.5% 98 (76) [241 -8.0% 98 (63) [-22] 13.0% L ( 1,036 1,003) [925] 892 4.7% (881) [855] 4.0% 0 m a 1,036 w 1,019) [980] m 24% co w 0 a J cr cr W W 000 2014 REMAINING CAPACITY (000) 2014 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [000] 2014 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 0.0% PROJECT IMPACT PERCENTAGE 1.6% 1 0.7% 1 1.6% 1 TRANSPORTATION 2014 TRAFFIC CONDITIONS UPDATED 8 /24/09 CONSULTANTS, INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 5 Page 19 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. decline over the past three (3) years, however the number of trips in the "trip bank" column have continued to increase (from 278 in 2006 to 300 in 2008). The Developer has committed to provide the right -of -way along the project frontage to accommodate the future widening of Golden Gate Boulevard, should it be necessary in the future. In addition, the Developer has also committed to provide the necessary right -of -way to develop intersection improvements at the Golden Gate Boulevard /Wilson Boulevard intersection, which will improve the capacity of the link due to the added capacity created at the intersection. The impacts to the Long Range Transportation Plan as a result of this amendment would be minimal since the parallel corridor of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension is included in that plan and will accommodate a large volume of east /west commuter traffic in the Estates area. The analysis included the additional capacity on Golden Gate Boulevard between Wilson Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard since this segment is programmed to be widened to four lanes in the year 2012, within the 5 -year planning window of this project. As a four lane roadway, this segment has sufficient capacity to accommodate this land use change. The Level of Service deficiency on Wilson Boulevard is only noted on the segment of Wilson Boulevard directly fronting the project site. North of the project site, Wilson Boulevard is shown to operate at an acceptable Level of Service with remaining trips available. The Developer has committed to provide the necessary right -of -way at no cost to the County for the future widening of Wilson Boulevard along the frontage of the project site. It should be noted that the remaining capacity shown in Figure 5 for Wilson Boulevard is based on the 2007 AUIR volumes. The 2008 AUIR report does not show a volume for Wilson Boulevard between Immokalee Road and Golden Gate Boulevard. Traffic volumes on other links in the area (Golden Gate Boulevard, Immokalee Road) have all shown a marked decrease in volumes between the 2007 and the 2008 AUIR report. There is no reason why Wilson Boulevard would not show the same decrease in volume. If that were the case, there would be sufficient capacity available on Wilson Boulevard adjacent to the site projected in 2014 with the proposed land use change Page 18 Page 20 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. The proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development is the first commercial development of its kind proposed within the Golden Gate Estates area. Therefore, it is likely that the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development will have a positive impact on the traffic conditions in the area. The Developer has committed, through the Text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment, to include a Grocery Store in the first 100,000 square feet of development that is constricted on the site. The nearest grocery shopping opportunity for residents of Golden Gate Estates is along Collier Boulevard to the north and south of Golden Gate Boulevard, a distance of approximately six (6) miles. The addition of a grocery store and other neighborhood commercial uses in this area would significantly shorten trip lengths that are related to this purpose as well as potentially reduce traffic volumes on Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard due to the fact that the retail trip would be intercepted prior to reaching these roadways. In addition, further analysis of the future traffic conditions in this area will be required at the re- zoning and SDP phase for the proposed development. Intersection analysis was performed as a result of the added Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict traffic. Based on the methodology meeting, intersection analysis was required on Golden Gate Boulevard at its intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3`d Street NW, the site access, I" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard as well as at the intersections of Wilson Boulevard with the site access and Immokalee Road. It should be noted that the intersection analysis was completed based on the assumption that the existing through lane capacity currently in place on Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard would remain (four lanes on Golden Gate Parkway and two lanes on Wilson Boulevard). In order to perform the required intersection analysis, it was necessary to determine the 2014 background peak hour turning movements at these intersections. Therefore, the background turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 2B were factored by the appropriate annual growth rates over a seven (7) year period. 'the calculation to determine the background turning movements is indicated below: Page 19 Page 21 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 2014 Turning Movement = 2007 Turning Movement) * (1 +AGR)12014 -'00) 2014 Turning Movement = (1,112 veh)*(1 +0.0242)1'1 2014 Turning Movement = 1,112 veh)* 1.182) 2014 Turning Movement =1,372 vehicles The above illustrated calculation was applied to all of the turning movements indicated within Figures 2A and 213 in order to determine the 2014 background turning movements. It should be noted again that the access to the subject site assumed as part of this analysis is conceptual and has not yet been approved by the Collier County Department of Transportation or the Board of County Commissioners. The Growth Management Plan Amendment process does not specifically identify turning movements permitted at site access drives to projects within the Sub - district. This will be further analyzed and access determined in the re- zoning and SDP process The resultant 2014 background turning movements are illustrated within Figures 6A and 6B. The site traffic indicated within Figures 4A and 4B was then added to the 2014 background turning movements in order to determine the 2014 buildout turning movements at the area intersections. The resultant 2014 buildout turning movements are indicated within Figures 7A and 713. It is important to note that the pass -by traffic assignment contained within the Appendix of this report was subtracted from the volumes within Figure 4B prior to adding those volumes to the 2014 background turning movements at the Collier Boulevard /Golden (late Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard /Immokalee Road intersections. This was done in an effort to back out the pass -by traffic at the external intersections because the pass -by traffic is already accounted for within the 2014 background conditions. However, the intersections surrounding the site were analyzed as if no pass -by traffic reductions were taken. Page 20 Page 22 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c z i v Q �.N O1N (o > >aPub (0)0� sN N N k15 (10) oo `5(10) �nou'�5156 M 4- 1,372 (1,089) (0) ♦1,367 (1,097) '1'2 ;; 4864 (781) 5(15) _...`J 4-1382.(1,1.14) r5(5) .� ±- `►r5(10) (21)10J GOLDEN GATE (0) 0 BOULEVARD( (15)5-f (1,257)439♦ ° (1,276)469♦ 1,241)459 -► N (26) 10� o, (20) 5, i w w F (*J F w w U) (197) 174 0 (21)5 ou'� Z F- W W J W 0 K O r m (n Z 0 J i v Q �.N O1N (o > >aPub (0)0� sN N N k15 (10) oo `5(10) �nou'�5156 M 4- 1,372 (1,089) (0) ♦1,367 (1,097) '1'2 ;; 4864 (781) 5(15) _...`J 4-1382.(1,1.14) r5(5) .� ±- `►r5(10) (21)10J GOLDEN GATE (0) 0 BOULEVARD( (15)5-f (1,257)439♦ ° (1,276)469♦ 1,241)459 -► N (26) 10� o, (20) 5, i w w F (*J F w w U) (197) 174 (1,038) 301 ♦ (21)5 ou'� 0 w O m z O N J a J LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BACKGROUND TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 6A Page 23 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD GM mo N N 463(170) 4x1,021 (441) ❑ NM W�� J r W �n O co IMMOKALEE ROAD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD i `✓� `� k17 (29) ♦1,456 (710) l ♦ x245 (287) RANDALL 3)10 J /� BOULEVARD 302♦ 1)18N v �-m M LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ♦(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC �j TRANSPORTATION T �� (( CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SI Q w W C1 4] Z O W J BDISTRICT Figure 6B Page 24 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c m. 1 3 3 � z z j (60)1511 = W W J w W 7 N N M M O ti k ^ I k58 M N 10(20) m c m M 1,424 (1 252) ♦ ♦904 ( 5 (15) � z N O m. 1 ♦1 397 (1,184 5 (5) 5 (1C (51) 20 (115) 35 GOLDEN GATE 1 BOULEVARD (7 5) 21 1 (237) (1,432)490♦ ° (1,336)485♦ (1,444) 489 -► N (1,160)321 321♦ (26)10 0, (20)5N (62)10-,V z z w w w w w F F M LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD -OUT TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7A Page 25 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c (71) 151 (60)1511 = = M N C m N N M M O ti k ^ I k58 M 10(20) m M 1,424 (1 252) ♦ ♦904 ( 5 (15) � z z w w w w w F F M LEGEND ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC J 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD -OUT TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7A Page 25 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c • N W E S N.T.S. 17(29) ♦1 456 (710) IMMOKALEE ROAD 4_1+ 251 (303) RAN DALL (59) 10.;* t' /0 BOULEVARD (1,033)302♦ (94)24 0 M VANDERBILT o BEACH ROAD LL N N 469(207) 1,032 (515) L..... 1 j GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD i, I Q v K w w J (O W W :D J 0 m 0 ED Z W 0 J � 0 LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC -4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 2014 BUILD -OUT TRANSPORTATION TURNING MOVEMENTS CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Figure 7B Page 26 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. The appropriate lane arrangements and the turning movements indicated within Figures 7A and 7B were inputted into the HCS+ software in order to perform the necessary intersection analysis at the previously mentioned intersections. The lane arrangements utilized in this analysis can be found in graphical format in the Appendix. It should be noted that no truck factors were applied to turning movements into and out of the subject development at the site access intersections. The results of the intersection capacity analyses can be found within Table 5 below. Table 5 Intersection Analysis Results Faro tnc Sh nnnina Venter .Cnhdictrict Based on the results of the intersection analysis listed above, all intersections and turning movements at the subject intersections are shown to operate acceptably. Based on the conceptual access plan analyzed as part of this report, the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard was analyzed both with and without a traffic signal. The analysis of this Page 25 Page 27 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 2014 LOS (Delay) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour. Intersection/Approach Background I Buildout Background Buildout Collier Blvd @ Golden Gate Blvd (217scc) LS O secc OS B 7seO LOS C (21.5sec) 1,01, B 135sec) LOS B (11.2sec) - LOS B (13.1 sec) EB Left LOS I3 sl29sec) j 1; A 38 5 sec) B r101 sey LOS B _ p23 sec) LOS (14,4sc) LOS B (13_7 sew LOS (15.9we ) _ WB Lett I OS A Golden Gate Blvd _ �. (4 3 ce) 3 "IStNW LOS A�LOS NR 1ppl oath V cc) LOS B (13.1 eec) LOS C (153 se )_ LOS B 15.6 see) SB .Approach _ __ Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Access (,,in, S" nl) _ 1.01 C I tl ".7 ses) I OS C (16,2 c() SOS B (118 sec)_ _ _ _ I OS B (I +Iscc) _ LOS B (I I2 se) LOS B (13.8 scc) CB 1 elt I OS B �Ir Bscc) W13 I ell Golden Gate Blvd 1 OS A rc) I OS A +8 5 v,c) I LOS B (10 sec) 2 LOS B (13.5 sec) LOS C (158sc3) @ 1" St N W NBApproath LOS A LOS ,A (loo LOS B Ualcc) _ I OS C (1l ) s) LOS B (13.1'cc) LOS C j_(160,,ec) SBApploach 104 <) I Iscc) 1 OS C (26_0 sec) LOS C _ (20.8 sec) LOS C (229 ,, ) Los A (8S sec)_ Golden Gate Blvd L Wilson Blvd Wilson Blvd (n' � NB I eft I OS C (2.1 sec) —. I OS A I l8 sect LOS 13 (Il3c.e) LOS C (1.64 sce) Site Acce s 1 1:13 Approach L.- PP _ II LnmokaIce Rd (J Wilson Blvd -- LOS B I I s 0 scy LOS B (18. 1 sec) _ LOS C (23? see) LOS C (2 3 A sec) Based on the results of the intersection analysis listed above, all intersections and turning movements at the subject intersections are shown to operate acceptably. Based on the conceptual access plan analyzed as part of this report, the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard was analyzed both with and without a traffic signal. The analysis of this Page 25 Page 27 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. intersection without a traffic signal showed Level of Service deficiencies on the site access approach to Golden Gate Boulevard during only the PM peak hour, but no Level of Service deficiencies on the public roadway. Regardless, this intersection is shown to function acceptably after the addition of a traffic signal, which is approved, would be installed at the sole expense of the Developer. Therefore, beyond the potential additional traffic control improvements to the site access intersection to Golden Gate Boulevard, no additional intersection improvements will be required as a result of the proposed Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan Amendment. however, as previously noted, the Developer has agreed to stipulations as part of the text of the Growth Management Plan Amendment that state the following: Development within this Sub - district shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1. Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will he donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. 2. The applicant will pay its fair share for the intersection improvements at Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard within 90 days of County request for reimbursement. 3. Until the intersection improvements at Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard are complete, the County shall not issue a Certificate(s) of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. Specific site related turn lanes and improvements to the Golden Gate Boulevard /Wilson Boulevard intersection will be analyzed further at the re- zoning and SDP phase of the project. Page 26 Page 28 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. VIII. CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development may result in minor roadway Level of Service issues in the immediate vicinity of the project site along Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. However, based on Developer commitments in the Text of the Growth Management Plan amendment, these impacts will be mitigated. The project will not be able to exceed 100,000 square feet of uses until certain improvements have been completed. Furthermore, with the addition of a commercial development such as the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict in this area, significant impacts to trip lengths will occur based on the fact that residents in the area will travel much shorter distances to obtain the same goods and services that are now only available on Collier Boulevard or along hnmokalee Road. Therefore, the proposed development will provide a significant benefit to the public within the Golden Gate Estates area. Based on a conceptual access plan for the project, intersection analysis was performed as a part of this report at the Golden Gate Boulevard intersections with Collier Boulevard, 3rd Street NW, the proposed site access, I" Street NW, and Wilson Boulevard along with the Wilson Boulevard intersections with the site access and lnnnokalee Road. "these intersections and approaches are shown to operate acceptably after the addition of the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict development related traffic after the addition of a traffic signal at the site access driveway to Golden Gate Boulevard. "Pura lane analysis will be performed in depth at the SDP phase fm the proposed development. Page 27 Page 29 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c LIM APPENDIX Page 30 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TABLE 1A & 2A Page 31 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c \ ) §)('!' )} \( =r; 0 ;;;§ �\} 2! § \ § \ \ {{ §z §(! ; El9 ;; 3334 3 ; - _\!_ !)!!If \\ & ;! /! \ \} 3 - � §} 0 ! j ME Page @am ewe 7mc F LL I^ V t y L y L N a k LL, J U. M UL F FL U� W L 0. F 8A 9 Page 33 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c N W> O J o O N K a U EL N g IL Q K O Z F N W oO O Q d U LL F N S� LL Q Q W F K O Z O O =u Z O O Z W W Q W ¢ N Q W N Q WW N a w N w 3 ~~ J O J O ~ 0 O ~ 0 O h 3 _ o N W [ Z � N W U d U w F F Z e- K O z W # N M M P m M I I d d W N J � �(I N �n m O O CL K W a o o 0 w 0° Q o W o w > m > °w m 0 E °—' 0 LL o 0 o o b v o > j O O W N o Z `0 o 0 N 0° LLI o d o° w `o w ° LLI w o Z 0 a 0 N `0 Z 0 f6 i S S - N 9 ° 0 o rc � � E E E 3 w Page 33 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c SUPPORTING INFORMATION GRAPHICS Page 34 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c w • l • 7 2014 LANE ARRANGEMENTS n TRANSPORTATION AT ANALYZED INTERSECTIONS CONSULTANTS, INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 35 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c t8A K CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 36 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc • LEGEND t 000 AM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ♦(000) PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC NET NEW PR TRANSPORTATION ON SIGNIFICANTLY I CONSULTANTS, INC. ESTATES SHOPPING APACTED ROADWAYS CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 37 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c i LEGEND 4- 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 4- (000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC �TRANSPORTATION PASS -BY SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CONSULTANTS,INc. ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT Page 38 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c T TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT RESULTS Page 39 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c i 4 Page 40 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION HOUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN DATE: NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGRT TOTAL HOUR TOTAL ]:00 AM THURSDAY HU R50AY COL IER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY CONSULTANTS, INC. 884 0 392 1 1,256 INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM -9:00 AM WESTBOUND 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS SECTIONI LEFT THRU COLLIER BOULEVARD LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 PFA COLLIER BOULEVARD 426 779 77 228 0 305 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 864 INTER - 15 MIN 1,256 2,340 ]:15 AM 0 381 407 768 74 103 D 251 0 U 0 0 580 0 362 BEGIN NORTHBOUND ]:30 AM SOUTHBOUND 370 380 EASTBOUND I 0 0 U 0 WE5TB0 UND 0 SECTION 366 LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 0 79 107 186 26 86 0 112 0 0 0 0 372 0 106 478 776 7:15 AM 0 86 121 2W 7 69 0 76 0 0 0 0 212 0 109 321 604 7.30 AM 0 93 105 198 34 35 0 69 0 0 0 0 157 0 96 253 520 745M 0 95 93 186 10 35 0 48 0 0 0 0 123 0 81 204 440 6:00 AM 0 107 88 195 23 41 0 64 0 0 0 0 86 0 76 172 431 6:15 AM 0 75 94 169 25 51 0 85 0 0 0 0 133 0 104 237 492 8:30 AM 0 124 93 217 27 51 0 88 0 0 0 0 120 0 W 187 492 6:45 AM 0 101 82 183 23 49 0 72 0 0 0 0 99 0 69 163 423 TOTAL 0 ]60 763 1,543 175 440 0 615 0 0 0 0 1,312 0 708 2,020 4,176 Page 40 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGRT TOTAL HOUR TOTAL ]:00 AM - COL IER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 0 884 0 392 1 1,256 INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTIONI LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRO RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 PFA 0 353 426 779 77 228 0 305 0 0 0 D 864 0 392 1,256 2,340 ]:15 AM 0 381 407 768 74 103 D 251 0 U 0 0 580 0 362 950 1,995 ]:30 AM 0 370 380 750 92 175 6 267 0 0 U 0 509 0 357 366 1,883 7:45 PM 0 401 368 769 85 201 0 286 0 0 0 0 472 0 328 800 1,855 800 AM 0 407 357 764 98 212 0 310 0 0 3 0 448 0 316 764 1 830 Page 40 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGRT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL ]:00 AM 0 353 426 ]79 ]] 226 0 JOS 0 0 0 0 884 0 392 1 1,256 2,340 Page 40 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. D 0% et 0 0 D COLLIER BOULEVARD 1,050 45% I 309 1 228 77 1 b NOW Percents h) represent movement volumes divided by the Ishii lnlemedlon traffic 1,092 � 1 DATE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM -8:00 AM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 745 1 ti 1 r 0 33553 426 ■ Y 1,871 SO`/o Page 41 of 99 AM 392 /r 864 1,256 �� i 1,759 75% 503 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM -6:00 PM LOT Page 42 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY OUR 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN _ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU - RIGNT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 339 0 0 0 INTER. 15 MIN HOUR NORTHBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 00 PM 0 137 243 80 0 303 37 66 0 103 0 0 0 0 64 0 57 121 604 4:15 PM 0 98 307 413 23 75 0 9B 0 0 0 0 116 0 60 176 619 430 PM 0 148 299 129 23 93 0 116 0 0 0 0 119 0 26 145 700 4:45 PM 0 122 315 2631 20 46 0 66 0 0 0 0 69 0 42 111 614 5:00 PM 0 118 313 ]447 24 95 0 119 0 0 0 0 109 0 24 133 683 515PM 0 123 383 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 3] 82 5115 530 PM 0 151 368 43 51 0 94 0 0 0 0 92 0 41 133 246 545 PM 0 14] 372 ]0 56 0 126 0 0 0 0 127 0 42 169 814 TOTAL: 0 1,044 2 600 240 482 0 ]22 0 0 0 0 741 0 329 1,0 a0 5.436 Page 42 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY OUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN _ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU - RIGNT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 500 PM COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY 339 0 0 0 0 INTER. HOUR 2,831 NORTHBOUND UTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL RU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 0 505 1,164 1,669 80 0 303 0 0 0 0 360 0 185 553 2,605 4:15 PM 0 486 1,234 1,]20 09 0 399 ff67234 0 0 0 0 413 0 152 555 2,684 4:30 PM 0 511 1,310 1,821 0 301 0 0 0 0 342 0 129 471 2,593 4:45 PM 0 514 1,3]9 1 893 92 0 279 0 0 0 0 315 0 144 459 2631 5:00 PM 0 539 1,436 1,9]5 02 0 339 0 0 0 0 373 0 144 517 2,831 Page 42 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY OUR COLLIER BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY INTER - BEGIN _ NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU - RIGNT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 500 PM 0 539 1,438 18]5 13] 202 0 339 0 0 0 0 3]3 0 144 517 2,831 Page 42 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION (� CONSULTANTS, INC. 0 '-0, D J 0% Mw* 0 y 0 0 Z Note. Perceols ( %) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersection lralfe 2 ®02 137 1 4 a i DATE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM -6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY h t r' 0 539 1,436 1 COLLIER BOULEVARD t 575 1,022 1,975 4r 373 36% I 339 2,550 683 1 90% t 2 ®02 137 1 4 a i DATE: March 1, 2007 DAY: THURSDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM -6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: COLLIER BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY h t r' 0 539 1,436 1 t 575 0 1,975 4r 373 517 4mm* 2.090 2,550 Ew* 74% 90% Page 43 of 99 L144 0 1011111111 4r 373 517 4mm* 2.090 Ew* 74% 1,573 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION jS CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM OI ! Page 44 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET TOTAL GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HOUR TOTAL INTER - 15 MIN BOUND NORTHBOUND 1 27 J1 SECTION SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND THRD WESTSOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THIRD RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7 00A 3 0 0 3 1 0 9 10 3 99 2 104 1 319 2 322 439 7:15 AM 4 0 2 6 1 0 6 7 1 87 4 92 0 287 0 287 392 7 30A 0 0 9 9 0 0 3 3 2 103 0 105 0 241 0 241 358 7:45 AM 6 0 1 7 1 0 6 7 2 106 0 108 1 265 1 267 389 8.00AM 8 0 0 8 0 0 5 5 2 79 2 83 1 230 1 232 320 815AM 9 0 1 10 0 0 6 6 2 72 3 77 0 135 0 135 220 8'30 AM 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 65 7 73 0 174 0 174 252 84S AM 4 0 0 4 D 0 0 0 2 87 4 93 0 160 1 161 258 TOTAL: 41 0 8 49 4 1 36 41 15 698 22 735 J 1.811 5 1,819 2644 Page 44 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL INTER. HOUR TOTAL NORTHBOUND D ] BOUND EASTSOUND WESTBOUND 1 27 J1 SECTION 409 11 LEFT THRD RIGHT RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU_ RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 18 0 7 24 27 8 395 6 409 2 L112 3 1,11] 1,5]8 23 0 ] 20 22 T24!!! ] 375 6 300 2 L023 2 1027 1,487 6 20 21 6 360 5 373 2 871 2 075 11303 28 25 0 0 2 18 21 7 322 12 341 2 804 2 BOB 1,197 23 0 1 12 14 7 303 16 326 1 699 2 l02 1,066 Page 44 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 18 D ] 25 11 3 0 24 1 27 J1 B 395 6 409 11 2 1,112 3 t 1,11] 1.578 Page 44 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION ((�( CONSULTANTS, INC. 3RD STREET 38 2% I 11 1, 154 18 4111-! J 24 6 99% 395 409 6 3RD STREET 38 2% I Nole'. Percenl5 mete resenlmovemeraffic mes tllvWeG by Nalotal Nlersecllon traffic 1 ft DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 0:00 AM INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD i1 h 11 r* 18 1 7 24 0 41 1 4 Nole'. Percenl5 mete resenlmovemeraffic mes tllvWeG by Nalotal Nlersecllon traffic 1 ft DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM - 0:00 AM INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD i1 h t r* 18 0 7 t 96% 405 I 3 Page 45 of 99 L3 4M ,,1,2 r 2 1.117 a-► 1,522 96% 405 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM -6:00 PM Page 46 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE 3RD STREET TOTAL GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL NORTHBOUND INTER - 15 MIN _ EASTBOUNO NORTHBOUND i6 SECTION SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND THRU WESTBOUND I TOTAL SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 2.032 4:15PM 7 0 8 15 3 0 9 12 U7 1,138 21 1,1]4 _LEFT 4 260 1 270 1 272 541 4X)0 PM 3 0 1 4 0 0 5 5 4 252 3 0 5 8 1 0 6 7 17 1,364 12 1393 4:15 PM 1 0 1 2 2 0 4 6 6 271 10 287 3 272 2 277 572 4:30 PM 5 0 3 6 0 0 1 1 2 286 6 294 6 183 0 189 492 4:45 PM 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 2 6 259 2 267 0 152 4 150 427 500 PM 1 0 2 3 0 D 3 3 3 320 3 326 2 111 2 121 453 5.15 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 ] 344 1 352 3 104 1 108 463 530 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 441 6 448 1 135 1 137 587 545 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 6 364 _ 4 374 1 134 0 135 512 TOTAL: 14 0 10 24 3 0 17 20 35 2,53] 3fi 2GOB 1] 1,36] 11 1 395 4,04] Page 46 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD THRU RIGHT TOTAL INTER. HOUR LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL NORTHBOUND TAL SOUTHBOUND _ EASTBOUNO WESTBOUND i6 SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTALl LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL 11 LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 9 0 7 16 3 0 11 14 18 1,068 22 1,106 10 B77 1 894 2.032 4:15PM 7 0 8 15 3 0 9 12 U7 1,138 21 1,1]4 11 724 8 743 1944 , 4:30 PM B 0 7 15 1 0 6 7 18 1.209 12 1.239 11 556 7 574 1,835 4:45 PM 3 0 5 8 1 0 6 7 17 1,364 12 1393 6 508 a 522 1,930 5:00 PM 5 0 3 B 0 0 6 6 17 1,469 14 1,500 7 490 4 501 2,015 Page 46 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 3RD STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUNf�OEECT-- ILEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU ftiGHT TAL 4:00 PM 9 0 7 i6 3 0 11 14 18 1060 22 1,108 10 877 7 032 Page 46 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION �� (( CONSULTANTS, INC. «- ti 897 r H 1 2,005 18 99% �♦ 1,068 y 1,108 22 MW Nole _ Percents I %) represent movement volumes dvided by the total Interseclloo traffic 3RD STREET 39 2% I 1 0 1 9► 25 t 8A4 DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM -5:00 PM INTERSECTION: 3RD STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 47 of 99 4MM 977 fm 10 894 ♦y 1,972 �j 97% 1,078 EXHIBIT V.E.1c ti 1 r 9 0 7 1 t 32 16 I 48 290 Page 47 of 99 4MM 977 fm 10 894 ♦y 1,972 �j 97% 1,078 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. i DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM Page 48 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR iSTSTREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER BEGIN 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD TOTAL LEFT THRV RIGHT ISTSTREET INTER - HOUR GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD HBOUND EASTBOUND INTER. 15 MIN SECTION REGIN LEFT THRU R RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 700 AM BEGIN 0 NORTHBOUND 9 9 0 404 1 405 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND 1,099 WESTBOUND 7:15AM SECTION 0 LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL TOTAL 7TOAM 5 0 1 5 0 0 3 3 0 100 0 100 1 314 3 0:00AM 427 71SAM 2 0 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 90 0 90 1 282 0 378 730AM 5 0 1 6 0 0 1 1 0 106 1 107 1 235 0 350 7.45 AM 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 2 0 108 0 108 1 261 0 376 8:00 AM 1 0 U 1 0 0 4 4 0 78 1 79 1 227 0 ]262 312 6:15 AM 4 0 1 5 0 0 1 1 0 73 0 73 1 130 1 211 8:30 AM 4 0 2 6 0 0 3 3 0 64 2 66 1 167 1 244 8:45 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 85 _ 2 87 1 160 0 250 TOTAL: 25 0 6 31 0 0 18 18 0_]04 _ 6 ]10 8 1,7]6 5 2546 Page 48 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR iSTSTREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER BEGIN 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD TOTAL LEFT THRV RIGHT I TOTAL 11 INTER - HOUR 1 16 NORTHBOT413 HBOUND EASTBOUND WES_TBOUNO 1 405 4 1092 3 SECTION REGIN LEFT THRU R RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 700 AM 16 0 9 9 0 404 1 405 4 1.092 3 1,099 1,531 7:15AM 12 0 10 10 fflo 0 3B2 2 384 4 1,005 0 1.009 1,416 7:30 AM 14 0 B 8 0 365 2 367 4 853 1 858 1.249 7:45 AM 13 0 10 10 0 323 3 326 4 785 2 791 1,143 0:00AM 9 0 9 9 0 300 5 305 4 6B4 2 690 1,0 17 Page 48 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR iSTSTREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRV RIGHT I TOTAL 11 TOTAL 700 AM 1 16 0 2 1 18 il 0 0 9 111 9 0 404 1 1 405 4 1092 3 1 1,099 1 1,531 Page 48 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1,117 4111111011111111, ,,522 0 1 99% 404 y 405 1 01 Note: Peroents ( %) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersection traffic 1ST STREET 12 1% I 9 0 0 t 0 8 A DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM -8:00 AM INTERSECTION: 1ST STREET 8 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 49 of 99 L3 1,092 ,,999 r 4 H 1,505 406 EXHIBIT V.E.1c '1 t p 16 0 2 1 t 5 ,B t ?3 21 Page 49 of 99 L3 1,092 ,,999 r 4 H 1,505 406 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM � d • MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD kOOPM15 1ST STREET _ GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - �THRURIGHT SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TURD RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 5 247 1 253 1 269 2 272 520 BEGIN 1 0 0 1 2 0 5 7 1 267 6 274 0 271 1 272 554 4:30PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 279 9 2B9 2 186 2 190 484 0 45 PM 0 0 6 6 1 0 1 2 2 259 1 262 1 155 1 157 427 5:00 PM 4 0 1 5 1 0 0 1 7 312 3 322 0 117 4 121 449 5:15 PM 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 4 338 2 344 2 103 2 1D7 456 5.30 PM 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 4 5 436 1 442 1 133 0 134 502 5:45 PM 4 0 1 5 2 0 0 2 1 360 3 364 0 131 2 133 504 TOTAL: 1] 0 e 25 10 0 13 23 26 2.490 26 2,550 7 _ 1,365 14 1 306 3.984 Page 50 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR 18T STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT 1ST STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL INTER HOUR TOTAL NORTHBOUND 4 0 8 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND 0 9 SEGTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TNRV RIGHT TOTAL LEFT HR RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 4 0 6 10 5 0 9 14 9 1.052 11 1.0]0 4 881 6 891 1.993 4.15PM 7 0 7 14 6 0 7 13 11 1,117 19 1,147 3 729 8 740 1.914 4:30 PM 9 0 7 1G 4 0 4 8 14 1,188 15 1,217 561 9 575 1.816 4:45 PM 9 0 7 16 4 0 5 9 18 1,345 7 1,370 4 50, J 519 1,914 5:00 PM 13 0 2 15 5 0 4 9 17 1,446 9 1.472 3 484 8 495 1991 Page 50 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR 18T STREET GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 4 0 8 10 5 0 9 14 9 1,052 17 1 076 4 801 6 891 1993 Page 50 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 894 «-+ 9 J 1,972 99% on* 1,052 1.078 17 01 Note. Percents I %) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersectlon traffic 1STSTREET 29 1% I 14 1 0 A `+ 75 ■ • e DATE: Mara, 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM INTERSECTION: 1ST STREET & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 51 of 99 L6 �1 881 891 r 4 «-► 1,954 98% 1,063 EXHIBIT V.E.1c ti t r► 4196 ■ 91 10 Y Page 51 of 99 L6 �1 881 891 r 4 «-► 1,954 98% 1,063 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM -9:00 AM 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Wri3 ARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - 15 MIN BEGIN NORTHBOUND LEFT TNRU RIGHT 'OUTHDOU ND TH0.0 RIGHT TOTAL EASTBOUND LEFT TNRU RIGHT TOTAL WESTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGH T TOTAL SECTION TOTAL _ 7:00 AM 6 WESTBOUND 3 106 115 32 68 1 101 0 206 8 214 436 7:15 AM 6 2 2 19 0 92 95 33 55 2 90 0 183 17 200 J97 7:30 AM 4 0 2 _ 73 89 36 70 1 107 1 159 11 171 373 745 AM 1 0 0 TOTAL 0 95 96 46 62 0 108 0 166 6 172 377 800 AM 4 0 0 42 7 87 98 10 59 1 78 2 137 12 151 331 8:15 AM 3 3 2 3 645 2 19 27 a 65 1 74 0 110 15 125 234 &30AM 2 0 0 108 256 3 367 0 56 60 5 60 1 66 1 111 16 128 256 8'.45 AM 1 2 0 15 9 257 281 2 67 7fi 24 fit _ 0 86 1 93 11 105 270 TOTAL 29 7 fi ti 595 656 202 501 _7 710 5 1.165 96 7266 2,674 Page 52 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TNRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD 19 2 4 25 23 6 366 INTER - td] 255 d HBOUND 1 ]id 42 757 SOUTHBOUND EAST80VN0 WESTBOUND SECTION THIRD RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THIRD RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THIRD RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL d 25 23 6 366 395 147 255 4 406 1 714 42 757 1,603 18.00M "06 4 23 21 10 347 378 133 245 4 383 3 645 46 694 1.478 19 24 12 274 310 108 256 3 367 3 572 44 619 1,315 4 15 15 9 257 281 79 246 3 326 3 524 49 S7fi 1,198 2 261 55 246 J 304 4 451 Sd 509 1.091 2 17 21 11 229 Page 52 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TNRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT TNRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 19 2 4 25 23 6 366 395 td] 255 d 406 1 ]id 42 757 1,503 Page 52 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION �P(( CONSULTANTS, INC. 1 099 ~' J 147 95% 255 11111* 406 4 Nate: Percents l %) represent mcse -ent volumes dwined ev the total intersection vatic WILSON BOULEVARD 586 37% I 395 1 6 6 23 1 4 1191 ■ 8A d.4 DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM -8:00 AM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 53 of 99 4M 714 ,0 r1 757 «-► 1,039 y 66% 282 EXHIBIT V.E.lc h 1 r' 19 2 4 11 25 5 I 35 2� /r Page 53 of 99 4M 714 ,0 r1 757 «-► 1,039 y 66% 282 EXHIBIT V.E.lc TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. Page 54 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c F 8A DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY INTER - COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM NORTHBOUND Page 54 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT WLSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD S 1 4 INTER - 15 MIN 187 878 18 NORTHBOUND 11 ,057 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND BEGIN SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4 00 PM 2 1 1 4 13 3 91 107 43 199 5 247 1 179 11 191 549 4:15 PM 3 0 1 4 9 4 75 88 44 222 3 269 2 194 23 219 580 4:J0 PM 1 0 1 2 12 0 37 49 49 228 4 281 7 152 4 150 490 4 95 PM 2 0 1 3 6 0 35 41 31 229 6 266 0 120 8 128 438 G00 PM 4 0 0 4 4 0 32 36 63 248 3 314 0 85 4 89 443 5:15 PM 0 1 2 3 13 1 53 67 73 262 3 338 1 54 3 58 466 5:30 PM 1 0 1 2 12 1 43 56 131 304 3 43B 1 90 4 95 591 5:d5 PM 1 1 0 2 B 2 51 61 109 253 _ 1 363 0 81 2 83 509 TOTAL: 14 3 ] 24 77 11 4P 505 54J 1,945 28 2,516 7 955 59 1,021 4066 Page 54 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT WILSON BOULEVARD TOTAL GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD S 1 4 INTER - HOUR 187 878 18 NORTHBOUND 11 ,057 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRN RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:OOPM B 1 4 13 40 7 238 285 167 878 16 1.063 5 645 46 696 2,057 4:15 PM 10 0 3 13 31 4 179 214 167 927 16 1.130 4 551 39 594 1,951 4'30 PM 7 1 4 12 35 1 157 iW 216 967 16 1199 3 411 19 433 1.837 4:45 PM ] 1 4 12 35 2 163 200 298 1,043 15 1,356 2 349 19 370 1,938 5:00 PM 6 2 3 11 37 4 179 220 376 1,067 10 1453 2 310 13 325 2,009 Page 54 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM S 1 4 13 40 7 238 285 187 878 18 1 TM 5 645 4fi 1 696 11 ,057 Page 54 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. 1� 891 ~' 167 J 95% y 878 1,063 1B Nino Pementa ( %) represent movement voWmes divided by the total intersec0on traffic WILSON BOULEVARD 499 24% t 285 1 8 7 40 1 4 214 t • DATE: March 13, 2007 DAY: TUESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:00 PM - 5:00 PM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD Page 55 of 99 645 696 r 5 ,..�► 1,618 y 79% 922 EXHIBIT V.E.1c '1 1 f 8 1 4 1 t 30 13 I 43 2% Page 55 of 99 645 696 r 5 ,..�► 1,618 y 79% 922 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: February 28, 2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM -9:00 AM im Page 56 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD MMUKALLE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTROUNO WESTBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 35 wlff0p WILSON BOULEVARD ROAD I 1 1,346 H IMMOKALEE ROAD HOUR INTER - 15 MIN BEGIN SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND I WESTBOUND SOUTHBOUND SECTION BEGIN EASTBOUND THRU RIGHT WESTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL SECTION LEFT LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 100 AM 20 1 65 86 12 4 20 36 1 65 6 72 02 273 4 359 553 T15 AM 8 0 15 23 3 2 22 27 2 60 2 64 23 294 3 320 434 ]:30 AM 4 0 15 39 11 3 9 23 2 GG 3 71 46 324 2 372 505 ]:45 AM 3 0 28 31 10 5 19 34 1 46 3 50 41 250 4 295 410 8:00 AM 9 1 3B 48 it 1 8 20 2 39. 4 45 31 260 B 299 412 8:15 AM 2 G 21 23 6 4 6 16 2 34 3 39 25 235 6 266 344 B30 AM 4 0 20 24 4 5 12 22 5 51 8 64 21 196 7 224 334 8:45 AM 2 0 24 26 3 2 12 17 1 54 4 59 37 178 6 221 323 TOTAL: 52 2 246 300 60 27 10B 195 16 415 33 1 464 306 2.010 40 2,356 3,315 Page 56 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD MMUKALLE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTROUNO WESTBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD ' THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 35 wlff0p BOULEVARD IMMOKALEE ROAD 257 192 1,141 13 1 1,346 H 1,902 INTER. HOUR NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND I WESTBOUND SECTION BEGIN LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT I TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 35 1 143 179 36 14 70 120 6 237 14 257 192 1,141 13 1,346 L902 7:15 AM 24 1 116 141 35 11 58 104 7 211 12 230 141 1,128 17 1.286 1,761 7:30 AM 1B 1 122 141 38 13 42 93 7 185 13 205 143 1,069 20 1.232 1,671 845 AM 18 1 107 126 31 16 45 92 10 170 16 198 118 941 26 1,004 1,500 600 AM A 1 103 121 24 13 38 75 10 178 19 207 114 869 27 1,010 1,413 Page 56 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOULEVARD MMUKALLE ROAD INTER - BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTROUNO WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 7:00 AM 35 1 143 179 36 16 70 120 fi 237 td 257 192 1,141 13 1 1,346 H 1,902 Page 56 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. a- 1 246 4111111111111111111. , 6 J 79% 237 y 257 14 Nate, Percents I %) represent movement volumes divided by the total intersection traffic WILSON BOULEVARD 140 7% I rm 1 14 3G 1 `► 20 t DATE: February 28, 2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM -8:00 AM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD 81MMOKALEE ROAD Page 57 of 99 L13 h t to 1,346 ~, 35 1 143 1 416 t 220 179 399 21% Page 57 of 99 L13 4. 1.141 4r 192 1,346 ~, 1,762 93% 416 EXHIBIT V.E.1c TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE: February 28, 2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TIME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM ME Page 58 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY 15 MINUTE SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOU E ARD MMOK E ROAD BEGIN NORTHBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD HOUR TOTAL LEFT T HRU RIGHT 15 MIN WILSON BOULEVARD TOTAL WILSON BOULEVARD _ INTER. IMMOKALEE ROAD NORTHBOUND 225 557 INTER - BEGIN WESTBOUND NORTHBOUND SECTION SOUTHBOUND THRU RIGHT EASTBOUND LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT WESTBOUND RIGHT SECTION TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 6 1 29 36 0 3 2 5 11 51 4 66 57 150 7 214 321 415 PM 8 4 77 89 2 1 0 12 10 111 9 130 54 149 6 209 440 430 PM 6 4 86 96 1 4 .i 10 12 163 9 184 59 158 4 231 521 4:45 PIA 6 5 86 97 4 1 4 9 13 109 21 223 56 140 6 212 541 5:00 PM 2 4 64 70 6 3 7 I6 12 193 8 213 72 140 4 216 515 5:15 PM 7 3 2B 38 7 1 5 13 8 202 10 220 34 141 6 181 452 5:30 PM 15 1 96 112 4 5 5 14 13 226 22 261 53 136 7 196 503 5:45 PM 5 2 80 87 2 3 1 B 11 _ 8 178 27 211 28 129 5 182 486 TOTAL: 55 2d 546 625 26 21 3B 05 8] 1,311 110 1,508 433 1,id3 45 1,621 3,839 Page 58 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOURLY SUMMARY OF INDIVIDUAL MOVEMENTS HOUR WILSON BOU E ARD MMOK E ROAD BEGIN NORTHBOUND WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD FAT BOUND WERIGHT HOUR TOTAL LEFT T HRU RIGHT TOTAL WILSON BOULEVARD TOTAL IMMOKAL E ROAD INTER. BEGIN BID 61 NORTHBOUND 225 557 SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND SECTION LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL TOTAL 4:00 PM 28 14 27B 31B 7 9 20 36 48 514 43 603 246 597 23 956 1,823 4:15 PM 22 17 313 352 13 9 25 47 47 656 47 750 281 587 20 868 2,017 4:30 PM 21 16 264 301 10 9 21 46 45 747 48 840 241 579 20 840 2,029 4:45 PM 30 13 274 317 21 10 21 52 48 B10 fit 917 225 557 23 805 2,091 5:00 PM 29 10 268 307 19 12 18 49 41 797 67 905 187 546 22 755 2,016 Page 58 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c PEAK HOUR SUMMARY HOUR WILSON BOU E ARD MMOK E ROAD BEGIN NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND FAT BOUND WERIGHT TOTAL LEFT T HRU RIGHT TOTAL LEFT THRU RIGHT TOTAL ��INTER- LEFT THRU BID 61 917 225 557 Page 58 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c �j TRANSPORTATION �� (( CONSULTANTS, INC. 4011111111 608 ~0. 46 J 73% ME* 810 917 61 We Percents I %) represent movement volumes divided by the total Intersection traffic WILSON BOULEVARD 134 6n I 52 1 10 21 1 4 82 1 • f DATE: February 28, 2007 DAY: WEDNESDAY COUNT TI ME: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:45 PM - 5:45 PM INTERSECTION: WILSON BOULEVARD & IMMOKALEE ROAD Page 59 of 99 L23 411111111, 557 ro 225 805 40m, 1,910 H 91% 1,105 EXHIBIT V.E.1c '1 1 30 13 274 1 t 296 317 I 619 29% Page 59 of 99 L23 411111111, 557 ro 225 805 40m, 1,910 H 91% 1,105 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 2006 FDOT TRAFFIC INFORMATION CD - PEAK SEASON FACTORS Page 60 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c v I a . H uII E JUI Om f: d 4 0 n, v a a� u 0 v m a �n [a >0 u 14 rn� w E a� 2 U 0 N O U OC UH O N O N Jo O NO m C Y ro o. 0 m b o v x O Y N N eQ N U 3 • d mr�o In �.ou - rY N N c N N N N N N N N .a rINONO0o000o N. yrl. irl.- I. �rI .,nN,y,y.yN.Y.r...4.i.4.4.,.i .4 ,4 'i ,4 rI ,4 Nf11.1 �1 .�,iNN� -1 MN. -.-i 000000000000000 1� 1� ..+..,�..,.�.,...,- �,- I...i,y N�o 000 00000000000 000 0000000 000 0000 00000000 ON ON ON ON Ory ON N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m Ylc nN Oi \ \ �Nm OMO OHNNOr4NN0 rIN00�4 ryNU '4NN �'�NOO NMO'iNN OONNMM \rINNNNN(�1 \ mOI OHO No N M 1.1 C1 ui uol ✓1 LL 10 N N N OUOOOOOOOO00000000 OOOOOOOOCO000000000r1.1 r'I �1 r-I rY �1 `i .i 'i `i '4 r1 r1 1 V I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 b�D N�➢ N[0 �D 1p �D �O Y�tOU NOD [O WHO tO �O `D NIO tO �O �D �O NlO �O Nt0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ON � ON ON O O ry O O ON O O O O NNN NNN NNNN C N N N N N \ C NOS iN HOMO cNmut OHO t1 aNM NNOiu MOrvN O ONNN 4N0 SIN MO O_.iN I,iN r r4 N,4 NN NNNMMf'1Ma vt U]tO IO �p \\ 1�1 ,-INNNN W 00000000000000000000G0 00 0 0000 000000000 .1 �1 .1 .1 `1 �I,I.i .�N.i .i .i .4 N O I o Y rY N I N M c ,n .O r m Oi O ay N [/1 N N p1 b• 1 .+NNNNNryNNNNMMMrl rim rtmMMmv�vcmvo v�valn Nln`n N Page 61 of 99 FZF.r.l 1kdkTAWM ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS Page 62 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c *8A ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS BASED ON AUIR HISTORICAL DATA 2006 2008 ANNUAL ACTUAL CURRENT AUIR AUIR YRS OF GROWTH GROWTH ROADWAY SEGMENT 10# VOLUME VOLUME GROWTH RATE RATE Collier Boulevard S. of Vanderbilt Beach Rd 30.2 2,012 2,414 2 9.54% 9.54% S. of Golden Gate Blvd 31 2,938 2,195 2 2.00% - 13.56% S. of Pine Ridge 32.1 2,400 1.997 2 2.00% -8.78% Immokalee Road E. of Collier Blvd 44 2,027 1,819 2 2.00% -5.27% E. of Wilson Blvd 45 1,773 1,909 2 176% 3.76% Golden Gate Blvd E. of Collier Blvd. 17 2,018 1,993 2 2.00% -0.62% W. of 3rd Ave 17 2018 , 1,993 2 2.00% -0.62% Project Frontage 17 2,018 1,993 2 2.00% -0.62% E. of Wilson Blvd 123 1,480 1,167 2 2.00% - 11.20% W. of Everglades Blvd. 123 1,480 1,167 2 2.00% - 11.20% Wilson Blvd S. of Immokalee Rd. 4 2.00% N. of Site 4 118 2.00`/0 Project Frontage 34 118 200% S. of Golden Gate Blvd 2 118 2.00% ' All traffic volumes were taken from the 2006 & 2008 Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR) " In Instances where the inisd lcal data Indleatee a redud on In dat6C or InsatSGent data was aVallahle t0 rill a growth rate due to romsOudion, a minimum almost grov.h rate of 20% was assumed. ' A 2 % growth rate was assumed for Wilson Blvd -due to Ihs lack of dram the AUIR report SAMPLE GROWTH RATE CALCULATION 2008 AUIR "(VYrs of Grown) Annual Growth Rate (AGR) = -1 2006 AUIR 2,414 AGR (Collier Blvd.) - -1 2,012 AGR (Collier Blvd .)= 9.54% Page 63 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c ME HCS+ INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Page 64 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c COLLIER BOULEVARD @ GOLDEN GA'L'E BOULEVARD Page 65 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report WE Page I of l SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Collier Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume(vph) 1021 463 442 533 114 337 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 SB OnI Thru & RT 07 OB G= 65.0 G= G= G= G= 10.0 G= 25.0 G= G= Timing Y= -7[Y= IY= IY= 1 Y= 6 IY= 7 1Y= IY= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 I Cycle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 1075 414 465 561 120 355 Lane Group Capacity 1862 857 1057 2266 286 1734 VIC Ratio 0.58 10AB 10.44 0.25 0.42 0.20 Green Ratio 0.54 10.54 0.21 0.81 0.08 0.34 Uniform Delay di 18.3 117.1 41.4 2.6 52.2 28.0 Delay Factor k 0.17 10.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.0 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 18.8 1715 41.7 2.8 53.2 28.0 Lane Group LOS B B D A D C Approach Delay 18.4 20.4 34.4 Approach LOS B C C Intersection Delay 21.7 Intersection LOS C Copyright ® 2005 University of Florida, All Rig his Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 412412008 9:02 AM file://CADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k20E.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 66 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report SHORT *i Page 1 of 1 Analyst RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Collier Agency or Co. TR Transportation Blvd Consultants Area Type All other areas Date Performed 4/23/2008 Jurisdiction Collier County Time Period AM Peak Hour Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input Phasing LT TH RT LT Number of Lanes TH 584 1 2 Lane Group Y= Y= Y= (- Volume (vph) Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS D T EB 1032 % Heavy Vehicles 0.26 469 0.20 2 PHF 125 337 0.81 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) 2 2 2 A Startup Lost Time 0.95 28.0 0.95 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 0.95 0.11 A 2.0 Arrival Type A A A 3 Unit Extension 0.1 2.0 2.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 1.000 2.0 1.000 0 Lane Width 2.0 2.0 2.8 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking 3 3 3 N ParkinglHour 3.0 C 3.0 3.0 Bus Stops /Hour 3.0 0 70 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 0 0 0 Phasing WB Only 02 03 RT Timing TH 584 1 G= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 _ Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS D T EB L Adjusted Flow Rate Lane Group Capacity v/c Ratio Green Ratio Uniform Delay d1 Delay Factor k Incremental Delay d2 PF Factor Control Delay Lane Group LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS Intersection Delay 21.7 1862 154 184 ).17 0.5 T 000 189 B TH RT LT _ TH RT LT I TH 584 1 355 3 2 2 3 2266 R 1734 T R L T 0.26 469 0.20 442 555 125 337 0.81 2 0.34 2 2 2 2 2.8 0.95 28.0 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.11 A 0.11 A A A A 0.1 2.0 0.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.000 2.0 1.000 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.8 3 28.0 3 3 3 3 A 3.0 C 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12,0 12.0 0 N N 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.2 3.2 1 3.2 SB Onl Thru & RT 07 G= 10.0 G= 25.0 JG= JG= Y= G IY= 7 ly= Y= Cycle Length C = 120.0 armination WB NB SB 420 465 584 132 355 857 1057 2266 286 1734 0.49 0.44 0.26 0.46 0.20 0.54 0.21 0.81 0.08 0.34 1Z2 41.4 2.8 52.4 28.0 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.4 0.3 0.1 1.2 0.1 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 17.6 41.7 2.8 53.6 28.0 B D A D C 18.5 20.1 35.0 B C C Intersection LOS C Copyright C 2005 University of Honda, All Rights Reserved HCS +� Version 5.21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \ripALocal Settings \Temp \s2k21 B.tmp N 4/24/2008 Page 67 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report Page l of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 4723/2008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Collier Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input ES WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume (vph) 441 170 675 1798 203 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasin WB Onl 02 03 04 SB Onl Thin & RT I 07 08 G= 44.0 G= G= G= G= 11.0 G= 45.0 G= G= Timing Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 Y IY= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 1 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 464 153 711 1893 214 315 Lane Group Capacity 1260 58G 1903 2242 315 2622 vie Ratio 0.37 0.26 0.37 0.84 0.68 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay d1 27.8 26.6 27.3 7.4 52.8 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 10.38 0.25 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.2 0.1 3.2 5.8 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.0 269 27.4 10.6 58.6 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C C B E B Approach Delay 27.7 15.1 32.6 Approach LOS C B C Intersection Defay 19.7 Intersection LOS 0 Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 412412008 9:02 A11 file: / /CADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k230.tmp 4/24/2006 Page 68 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report 8A Page 1 of I SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 4/23/2008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @Collier Blvd Area Type All otherareas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT J TH I RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 2 1 3 2 2 3 Lane Group L R T R L T Volume(vph) 515 207 675 1863 236 299 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A. A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 1 3.2 3.2 Phasing Onl WB Only 02 03 04 SB Only Thru 8 RT 07 08 G= G= G= G= G= 11.0 G= 45.0 G= G= Timing Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 7 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 C cle I nrtth C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SR Adjusted Flow Rate 542 192 711 1961 248 315 I Lane Group Capacity 1260 580 1903 2242 315 2622 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.33 0,37 0.87 0.79 0.12 Green Ratio 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.80 0.09 0.52 Uniform Delay d1 28.6 27.4 27.3 8.0 53.4 14.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.33 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.3 1 0.1 4.2 12.5 1 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 28.8 27.7 27.4 12.2 65.9 15.0 Lane Group LOS C C C B E 8 Approach Delay 28.5 16.2 37.4 Approach LOS C B D Intersection Delay 2i.5 Intersection LOS _ C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved hCS„rfn Version 5.21 Generated: 412412008 9'.02 AM file:HC:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k241.tmp 4124%2008 Page 69 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c i GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 3rd STREET NW Page 70 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Two -Way Stop Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISIte Information 8 A Page t of 1 Project Descri tion F0801.31 -10 - Estates Sliopphng Genter SuDOYstncr RLP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd (o? 3rd 5t NW Major Street nal st ene /Co. TR Trans ortation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier Count 3 Date Performed 4/23/2008 Analysis Year 2014 Back round L nalysis Time Period M Peak Hour L T R Volume veh/h) 10 439 10 5 Project Descri tion F0801.31 -10 - Estates Sliopphng Genter SuDOYstncr East/West Street Golden Gale Boulevard North /South Street: 3rd Street NW /SW Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 10 439 10 5 1372 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0195 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 10 462 10 5 1444 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- _ 2 -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 J 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h 30 32 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 31 0 0 33 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 COnfi uration R R Dela , Queue Len th, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(vehlh) 10 5 31 33 C (m) (veh /h) 463 1086 771 369 vlc 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.09 95% queue length 0.07 0.01 0.13 0.29 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.9 8.3 9.9 15.7 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (s /veh) — — 9.9 15.7 [Approach LOS - - -- - -- - - - - - - -- A -- _C Copyright's) 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+"" Version 5.21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F5.1mp Page 71 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Two -Wav Ston Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information st RLP Vnal enc /co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 412312008 nal sis Time Period M Peak Hour . scnpuon t-uoui.ar -iu- Street: Golden Gate Bot n Orientation: East -Wes Volumes and Adjust Gate 8A Page 1 o -' Copyright © 2005 University of rlonda, All rognts t eserveo -,w I �_..1 X11 . file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F8.tmp Page 72 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c L T R L T K Volume veh /h 490 10 5 1407 10 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR M0.95 515 10 5 1481 10 veh /h 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 31 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — -- 2 veh /h) Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 1 0 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 1 12 -' Copyright © 2005 University of rlonda, All rognts t eserveo -,w I �_..1 X11 . file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F8.tmp Page 72 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c L T R L T R Volume veh /h 30 37 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 31 0 0 38 veh /h) 2 0 0 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Conti uration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (vehlh) 21 5 31 38 C (m) (veh /h) 446 1038 741 359 v/c 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.11 95% queue length 0.15 11 0.01 0.13 0.35 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.5 8.5 10.1 1 16.2 LOS B A B C Approach Delay (slveh) 10.1 162 Approach LOS -- -- — 6 —.— C -' Copyright © 2005 University of rlonda, All rognts t eserveo -,w I �_..1 X11 . file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F8.tmp Page 72 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Two -Wav StoD Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Site Information nal st RLP enc /co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 1412312008 nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour 8A Page 1 of I Intersection Orientation: East -West ISwdy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Ad'ustments I Westbound Copyright 02005 Unlve I city of Flo rid a, All Rights Reserved nc,�+ "° version D.ci file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1FB.tmp Page 73 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c 7 R L R Volume 21 1257 26 15 1089 10 Peak -Ho 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly F 22 1323 27 15 1146 10 vehlh) =Vehicles2 Percent s 2 -- -Median Raised curb RT Cha0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume vehlh 19 17 Peak -Hour Factor PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 20 0 0 i7 veh /h 2 0 0 2 Percent H v Vehicles 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 C onfi oration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 22 15 20 17 C (m)(veh /h) 600 506 404 463 vlc 0.04 0.03 0.05 004 95% queue length 0.11 0.09 0.16 0.11 Control Delay (Sliver) 11.2 123 144 13'1 LOS B B B B pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 14.4 13.1 Approach LOS -- -- B 8 Copyright 02005 Unlve I city of Flo rid a, All Rights Reserved nc,�+ "° version D.ci file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1FB.tmp Page 73 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1 c m Page I of I Ma'or Street tasioounu 4 - - 5 6 Movement 1 2 3 R L T R clume veh /h L 51 T 1432 26 15 0.95 1287 0.95 20 0.95 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 53 1507 27 15 T354 21 vehlh Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -' Raised curb Median Type 0 RT Channelized 0 2 1 Lanes 1 2 1 R 1 L R Configuration L T Q U stream Si nal 0 Northbound Southbound Minor Street 9 10 11 12 Movement 7 8 L T R L T R 19 42 olume veh /h Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 20 0 0 44 vehih) 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 Percent Grade (°7e) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 1 Lanes 0 0 1 0 R Confi uration R Dela Queue Len th, and Level of Service Southbound pproach Eastbound I Westbound Northbound 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Movement R R Lane Configuration L L 44 v (vehlh) 53 15 20 395 C (m)(vehlh) 495 430 352 0.11 v/c 0.11 0.03 0.06 95% queue length 0.36 0.11 0.18 0.37 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.1 13.7 15.8 15.3 LOS 8 B C C 15 8 15.3 pproach Delay (s /veh) -- '- C C LOS — pproach anannns 902 AN Copyright ® 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS *' "' Version b.21 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1FE.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 74 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ SITE ACCESS Page 75 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report Page I of 1 A SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency Co. TR Transportation Consultant 9 y or Date Performed 412312008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Access Area Type All otherareas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T T R L R Volume (vph) 35 485 1397 52 30 25 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq I EB Onf EW Perm 1 03 04 SB Onl 06 07 08 G= 8.0 G= 72.0 G= G= G= 20.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6.5 IY= 1Y= 1Y= Duration of Anal sis hi = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 37 511 1471 34 32 11 Lane Group Capacity 242 2557 2128 969 301 269 v/c Ratio 0.15 0.20 10.69 0.04 0.11 0.04 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 10.60 0.60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay d1 10.7 5.5 116.4 9.6 42.4 42.0 Delay Factor k 0.11 10.11 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 1 0.1 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 Control Delay 11.0 5.5 17.4 9.8 42.6 42.0 Lane Group LOS B A B A D D Approach Delay 5.9 17.2 42.4 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Delay 14.8 Intersection LOS B Copyright 0 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated: 4/24/2008 9:03 AM file: //@\Documents and Settings \rlp\Local Settings \Temp \s2k252.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 76 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report 8A rage f of I SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultant Date Performed 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Site Access Area Iype All otherareas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildoul Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 1 Lane Group L T R L R Volume(vph) 115 E1336 1184 145 203 138 % Heavy Vehicles 0 2 0 0 0 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 15 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 111 3.2 J 1 1 3.2 1 3.2 Phasinq EB Only EW Perm 03 B Only 06 07 08 = .0 72. G G = = 77 YYTiming Y= YS= Y= Y= YGG = Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 121 1406 1246 132 214 129 Lane Group Capacity 304 2557 2128 969 301 269 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.55 0.59 0.14 0.71 0.48 Green Ratio 0.73 0.72 0,60 10,60 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay of 19.2 7.7 14.8 110,5 47.3 45.3 Delay Factor k 10.11 10,15 0.18 10.11 0.27 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.9 0.3 0.4 1 0.1 7.6 1.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 11,000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 10.1 8.0 15.2 10.5 54.9 46.6 Lane Group LOS B A B B D D Approach Delay 8.2 14.8 51.8 Approach LOS A B D Intersection Delay 15.6 Intersection LOS _ B Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 521 Generated 4124MUOU 9:03 AM file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlpALoeal Settings \Temp \s2k263.tmp 4/2412008 Page 77 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c m GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ 1st STREET NW Page 78 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Two -Way Stop Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information 11a08 UP Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St IVIN _ Jurisdiction Collier Count nal sis Year 2014 Background 6 Project Description F0801.31-10- Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict FnstlWest Street: Golden Gate Boulevard North /South Street: 1st Street NW /SW Vehicle Volumes and Ma'or Street Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 5 459 5 5 1367 5 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0195 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h) 5 483 5 5 1438 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h ) Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 21 0.95 0.95 0.95 15 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 22 0 0 15 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (vehlh) 5 5 22 15 C (m) (veh /h) 466 1071 759 371 vlc 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.04 95% queue length 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.13 Control Delay (slveh) 12.8 8.4 919 15.1 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (s /veh) — — 9.9 15.1 Approach LOS -- — A C Copyright 02005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCSt "" Version ort Fite: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rip \Local Settings \1'emp \u2k1E9.tmp Page 79 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.lc Two -Way Stop Control TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information nal st RLP enc 1Co. TR T-rans portatton Consultants Date Performed 4/23/2008 _ [Analysis Time Period M Peak Hour Page 1 of 1 Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ 1st St NW Jurisdiction Collier Count nal sis Year 2014 Buildout 6 Movement 1 2 - 3 4 5 1 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 21 489 5 5 1424 20 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 6.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 22 514 5 5 1498 21 Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — — 2 -- — Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 Configuration L T R L T R U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 21 25 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 0 0 22 0 0 26 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length. and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement. 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 22 5 22 26 C (m) (veh /h) 435 1043 742 354 v/c 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.07 95% queue length 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.24 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.7 8.5 10.0 16.0 LOS B A A C Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 10.0 16.0 Approach LOS -- -- __L_ A C Copyright ® 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS, - Version 5.11 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1EC.tmp Page 80 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 8A Two -Way Stop Control Page i of I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information nal st RLP [Aqency/Co. TR Trans ortation Consultants Date Performed 1412312006 nal sis Time Period PM Peak Hour ist ehicle Volumes and Adjustments 1st St Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R T R Volume vehlh 15 1241 20 5 1 1097 1 10 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 15 1306 21 5 1154 10 Percent Heavy Vehicles 1 2 — __ 2 Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 C onfiguration L T R L T R Upstream Signal 0 1 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 10 11 12 L T R olume (veh /h) Peak -Hour Factor, PH0.95 NfM 0.95 17 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR vehlh 0 0 17 Percent Heavy Vehicle0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration _ R R Dela , Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 15 5 15 17 C (m)(veh /h) 596 516 410 460 v/c 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.04 95% queue length 0.08 0.03 O.i1 0.11 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.2 12.0 144 1 13.1 LOS 6 6 6 pproach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 1411 13.1 PProach LOS _ ,_ -_ - B _ B -- ^ —^ Copyright 02005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ricot "' veisiun o e file: / /C:ADooume.nts and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1El.trnp Page 81 of 99 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 'rwn -Wnv Stnn Control 8A Yage t of t Copyright 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +°" Version 527 fileWCADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F2.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 82 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c ao io queue tenuui 1.11 -. -' 15.8 16.0 Control Delay (s /veh) 13.8 13.5 LOS B B C C Approach Delay (s /veh) — — 15.8 16.0 Approach LOS -- _ _ C _ C Copyright 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +°" Version 527 fileWCADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k1F2.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 82 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD @ WILSON BOULEVARD Page 83 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report SHORT REPORT General Information site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 4/23/2008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All othher er areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing In ut EB WB NB SE LT TH RT LT TH I PT4-1-Tl TH I RT I LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 174. 301 5 5 864 51 20 5 5 31 10 493 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 10.95 10.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time i_ 0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasmm I Excl. Left I EB Oniv G= 8.0 lG= 24.0 Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 I EW Perm 04 NS Perm 1 1 G= 42.0 1G= IG= 26.0 f Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 06 1 07 08 G= G= G= Y= Y= Y= C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Ca acity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 183 317 0 5 909 48 31 44 440 Lane Group Capacity 662 1951 871 483 1241 554 325 319 937 v/c Ratio 0.28 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.73 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.47 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.59 Uniform Delay d1 9.9 13.3 12.1 20.5 34.1 26.1 37.6 36.0 13.9 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 10.1 13.4 12.f 20.5 36.4 26.2 37.7 38.1 14.2 Lane Group LOS B B B C D C D D B Approach Delay 12.2 35.8 37.7 16.4 Approach LOS B D D 8 Intersection Delay 25.1 Intersection LOS C Copyright O 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSa'"' Version 5.21 Generated; " " " " "" " "' file: //C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settingsvremp \s2k27A.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 84 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report Page §, , SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP FR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 I 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume (vph) 179 321 10 5 904 58 32 9 5 41 15 513 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 75 Lane Width 12.0 12,0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 I 0 I 0 F 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 1 3.2 1 3.2 1 3.2 3.2 Phasin Excl. Left EB On lv I EW Perm 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= G= 26.0 G= G= G= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 188 338 1 5 5 1952 56 48 59 461 Lane Group Capacity 649 1951 871 476 1241 554 310 311 937 vie Ratio 0.29 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.77 0.10 0.15 0.19 0.49 Green Ratio 0.73 0.55 0.55 0.42 0.35 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.59 Uniform Delay d1 10.7 13.4 12.2 20.5 134.7 1263 38.1 38.4 14.1 Delay 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0,32 0.11 0.11 0, 11 0.11 Increm0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 04 PF Fac1.000 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 gk Contro 11.0 13.5 12.2 20.5 37.6 26,4 38.3 38.7 14.5 Lane G B B B C D C D D B Approa 12.6 36.9 38.3 17.3 Approach LOS B D D B Intersection Delay 26.0 Intersection LOS C copyright 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved I IGS +1M Version 5.21 Generated'. 41242008 9'.04 AM file:/ /C:ADocuments and Settings \rip \Local Settings \Temp \s2k28B.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 85 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report e A SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume(vph) 197 1038 21 10 781 56 10 5 5 54 10 321 %Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 k22. 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 1 1 01 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasinq I Excl. Left EB Only EW Perm 1 04 NS Perm 06 07 1 08 G= 5.0 1 G= 25.0 JG= 1G= 25.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 1 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Ca acit , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 207 1083 17 11 822 54 21 68 264 Lane Group Capacity 582 2069 923 257 1330 594 328 289 897 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.53 0.02 0.04 0.62 0.09 10.06 0.24 0.29 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.38 0.38 10.21 0.21 0.57 Uniform Delay d4 8.3 15.1 10.5 20.5 30.5 24.3 38.1 39.5 13.5 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 8.5 15.3 10.5 20.6 31.4 24.3 38.2 40.0 13.7 Lane Group LOS A 8 B C C C D D 8 Approach Delay 14.2 30.8 38.2 19.1 Approach LOS B C D B Intersection Delay 20.8 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +r^' Version 5.21 Generated'. 424/2008 9:04 AM file://CADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k29C.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 86 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Golden Gate Blvd @ Wilson Blvd Area hype All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year _ _ 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 Lane Group L T R L T R LTR LT R Volume(vph) 237 1160 62 10 901 90 49 17 5 99 25 381 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 70 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3,2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left EB Onl EW Perm 04 NS Perm 1 06 07 08 G= G= 25.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 Y= Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 249 1221 60 11 948 89 75 130 327 Lane Group Capacity 641 76'T923 235 1330 594 222 282 897 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.59 0.07 0.05 0.71 0.15 0.34 0.46 0.36 Green Ratio 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.38 0.38 0.21 0.21 0.57 uniform Delay d1 11.1 15.9 10.8 20.5 32.0 24.8 40.5 41.6 14.2 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.4 0.5 0.0 0.1 1.8 0.1 0.9 1.2 0.3 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 11.5 16.3 10.9 20.6 33.8 25.0 41.4 42.8 14.5 Lane Group LOS 8 B B C C C D D B Approach Delay 15.3 32.9 41.4 22.5 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Delay 22.9 _ _ _ Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved I 40S 1 ro Version 5.21 ueneratea: 41<41man 9 U Him file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \r1p \Local Settings \TempAs21c2AD.tmp 4/24/2005 Page 87 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c WILSON BOULEVARD @ SITE ACCESS Page 88 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c two -Way Stop l ontiol TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ISite Information 8A rdgc r ut i nal st RLP Intersection Wilson Blvd Site Access enc iCo. TR Trans ortation Consultants Jurisdiction Collier County Date Performed 1412312008 nal sis Year 2014 8uildout nal sis Time Period M Peak Hour L Project Description F0801.31 -10 - Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict East/West Street: Site Access North /South Street: Wilson Boulevard Intersection Orientation: Norlh -South _ Study Period (hrsp, 0.25 _ Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 11 235 554 11 'Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 11 247 0 0 583 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 0 — -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 1 0 0 1 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh/h) 15 15 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR veh /h 15 0 15 0 0 0 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R __ Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh /h) 11 15 15 C (m)(veh /h) 992 329 516 Vic 0.01 0.05 0.03 95% queue length 0.03 0.14 0.09 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.7 16.5 12.2 LOS A C t B Approach Delay (s /veh) — -- 14.3 Approach LOS -- -- B Copyright O 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCSiTM Version 5 21 file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rlp\Loca1 Settings \Temp \u2k2P5.tmp Page 89 of 99 Generated: 412412008 9'.05 AM 4/24/2008 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Two -Way Stop Control I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY rage i of i ...L.._.....4:.... - - I.Site Information I Senviar rn ormauvn _.__ ...- _______ or,,.rn cm a..acc -1 Copyright D 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS -"" Version 5.21 file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2F8.tmp 4/24/2008 Page 90 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c E =V:1 WILSON BOULEVARD @ IMMOKALEE ROAD Page 91 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report Page 1 of 1 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. FR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 4/23/2008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection lmrnokalee Rd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT I TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 10 302 18 245 1456 17 47 5 193 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 1 2.0 1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left WB Only Thru & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 7.0 G= 37.0 G= 38.0 G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 JY= 0 JY= 7 IY= JY= 7 IY= IY= 1Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 1 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 14 258 1533 13 54 166 41 86 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 202 243 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.03 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.28 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay dt 53.5 29.9 28.3 22.1 12.1 8.5 45.3 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 10.11 10.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1. 1 0.1 0.0 1 0.8 0.1 0.5 1 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 11.000 Control Delay 54.0 30.0 28.3 22.1 12.2 8.5 46.1 9.5 45.2 46.7 Lane Group LOS D C C C B A D A D D Approach Delay 30.7 13.6 18.5 46.2 Approach LOS C B B D Intersection Delay 18.0 Intersection LOS 8 Copyright m 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS.TM Version 5.21 Generated'. 4/24/2008 9:04 AM file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2BE.trnp 4/24/2008 Page 92 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Keport 8 A r -age 1 or t SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TR Transportation Consultants Date Performed 4/23/2008 Time Period AM Peak Hour Intersection Immokalee Rd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH I RT LT I TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume(vph) 10 302 24 251 1456 17 50 5 196 39 11 75 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 20 2.0 2,0 2.0 20 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 35 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 32 3.2 3,2 Phasing Excl. Left WB ON Thru & RT 04 _ NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 7.0 G= 37.0 G= 38.0 G= G= 18.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 IY= 0 IY= 7 IY= Y= ly= IY= I Y= Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 1 Cycle Length C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB W13 NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 11 318 20 264 1533 13 58 169 41 66 Lane Group Capacity 103 1607 501 1432 3171 989 191 989 201 243 v/c Ratio 0.11 0.20 0.04 0.18 0.48 0.01 0.30 0.17 0.20 0.35 Green Ratio 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.63 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15 0.15 Uniform Delay d1 53.5 29.9 28.4 22.1 12.1 8.5 45.4 9.4 44.7 45.8 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.9 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 54,0 30.0 28.4 22.2 12.2 8.5 46.3 9.5 45.2 46.7 Lane Group LOS D C C C B A D A D D Approach Delay 30.6 - -13.6 18.9 46.2 Approach LOS C 8 B D Intersection Delay 18.1 Intersection LOS B Copyright 02005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.21 Generated. 4/24/2008 9:05 AM file: //C:ADocuments and Settings \19pALocal Settings \Temp \s2k2CF.1mp 4/24/2008 Page 93 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Reuort `& 8A rage t of t SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP TR Transportation Agency or Co. Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Immokalee Rd @Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Background Volume and Timino Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 78 267 710 29 40 18 369 23 15 23 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 PretimedlActuated (PIA) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 20 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 1 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 1 0 1 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 =r 1 3.2 Phasin Excl. Left G= 9.0 WB Onl G= 24.0 Thru & RT G= 48.0 04 NS Perm 1 G= G= 19.0 06 G= 07 G= 1 08 G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 Y= 7 IY= IY= 7 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Anal sis hrs = 0.25 1 _ C cle Len th C = 120.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Dela , and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 72 302 747 25 61 336 24 1271 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 228 857 212 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.11 0.27 0.25 0.03 0.27 10.39 0.11 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.16 10,54 0.16 10.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.6 30.0 11.3 9.8 44.4 116.0 43.3 143.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 073 0.1 0.1 0.0 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 55.8 27.8 22.7 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.0 16.3 43.5 43.6 Lane Group LOS E C C C 8 A D B D D Approach Delay 28.9 16.6 20.7 43.6 Approach LOS C B C D Intersection Delay 23.2 Intersection LOS C Copyright O 2005 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS,I- Version 5.21 file: //C: \Documents and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2E0Amp 4/24/2008 Page 94 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c Short Report 8 p gage t 01 t SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst RLP Agency or Co. TRTranspottation Consultants Date Performed 412312008 Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection 6nmokalee Rd @ Wilson Blvd Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Collier County Analysis Year 2014 Buildout Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes 1 3 1 2 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L T R LT R L TR Volume (vph) 59 1033 94 303 710 29 59 18 388 23 15 23 % Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed /Actuated (P /A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Startup Lost Time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 Extension of Effective Green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2,0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped /Bike /RTOR Volume 0 0 10 0 1 0 5 0 0 50 0 0 5 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking /Grade /Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking /Hour Bus Stops /Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 J 0 0 0 Minimum Pedestrian Time 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left WB Onl Thrr & RT 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 9.0 9. G= 24.0 G= 48.0 G= G= 19.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 6 Y= 0 JY= 7 ly= JY= 7 Y= IY= lyz Duration of Analysis hrs = 0.25 1 Cycle Len th C Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB Adjusted Flow Rate 62 1087 88 319 747 25 81 356 24 35 Lane Group Capacity 133 2030 633 1117 3044 950 222 857 208 271 v/c Ratio 0.47 0.54 0.14 0.29 0.25 0.03 0.36 0.42 0.12 0.13 Green Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.32 0.60 0.60 0.16 0.54 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay d1 53.2 27.5 22.9 30.1 11.3 9.8 45.1 16.3 43.3 43.4 Delay Factor k 0.11 0.14 0.11 all 10.11 10,11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay d2 2.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 1 1.0 1 0.3 0.2 0.2 PF Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 lf.000 11.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control Delay 55.8 27.8 23.0 30.3 11.3 1 9.8 46.1 16.6 43.5 43.6 Lane Group LOS E C C C B A D B D D Approach Delay 28.8 16.8 22.1 43.6 Approach LOS C B C D Intersection Delay 23.4 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved FIGStrm Version 5.21 Generated'. 412412008 9'.05 AM file:8CADocuments and Settings \rlp \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2FLUnp 4/24/2008 Page 95 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c COLLIER COUNTY 2030 FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 96 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.lc • 2030 Long Range Transyc tation Plan 4'i<yure 12, 2030 Constrained Financially Feesible Pla_� l'olume- m- Capacity Rxtio N A (ALEE 1030 = Minor Update .?- In Adop[ed Inve B, 20f1 Page 97 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E1c TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS Page 98 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c 8A 4 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 7th EDITION TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT, 8" EDITION Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour I Weekday PM Peak [lour Weekda Shopping Center Ln (T) = 0.59 Ln (X) + 232 Ln (T) = 0.67 Ln (X) .i. 3.37 Ln (T) = 0.65 Ln (X) + 5.83 (LUC 820) (61 %In/39 %Out (49 %In/5I %Out) — 11,504 T = Trips, X= I,000's of square feet of GLA Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 'Triu Generation Based on T° Edition of TI'E Land Use ___A.M. Peak I3our P.M. Peak Hour Daily (2-Way) In Out Total In Out Total Shopping m Center I55 100 25S 513 1,070 11,504 (225,000 so ft ) 0 (225,000 sq. fl.) _ _ Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 'I' rip Generation Based on 8fh Edition of Land Use A.M. Peak Huur P.M. Pe . —� � I — Center 1 152 � 97 1 249 1 537 ® 1,095 1 11,504 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Chance in Trio Generation from 7 "' Edition to 8r" Edition of ITE Land Use A.M. Peak Hour P;M. Peak Hour Daily (27way) In Out Total In Out Total Shopping Center 3 3 (i24 +25 0 (225,000 sq. fl.) _ _ L -- -- - Shaded Box indicates peak direction utilized for LOS calculations Page 99 of 99 EXHIBIT V.E.1c • ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.E.2 PUBLIC FACILITIES MAP GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT 8 EXHIBIT V.E.2 PUBLIC FACILITIES LOCATION MAP VoLJ'MA^ a F� E NFPIF$ - IMMOKALC -E RD _ (C R. 906) '�' PNSCS F FIVE STET E � lEEiGL STET • SHtRWFM VA IIm 9YSMT)DIS o L�RMIIS Z A D VMTEE NElE1/fID1 STFACTINES s VAS�ATER TISAT RD 0 WAM TRFATIFNf R s i 0 O EoOe N� LEE CO. m COLLIER CO. m z 0 DREGNAL p . _ OIL WELL ROAD (C R. 858) NAPLES IMMOKALEE RD C.R. 846 RANDALL BOULEVARD ■ ■ 'IR COW QL- ypu.� EACLERS arx m� m xw ana G m m O Q N O U O m O C O m G � m VAN DERBILT BEA A D 0 0 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD F o Ry BRAly PINE RIDGE RD SUBJECT PROPERTY m 40.6t ACRES d J � m U SCALE a � m 0 imi. 2MI. a m RE ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT V.E.3 PUBLIC FACILITY PROVIDERS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT EXHIBIT V.E.3 PUBLIC FACILITIES Service Providers SERVICE PROVIDER Schools The District School Board of Collier County Fire Protection Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Police Protection Collier County Sheriff Emergency Medical Services Collier County Emergency Medical Services The proposed amendment is not expected to have a significant impact to the above service providers. Impacts are mitigated for schools, fire and emergency medical services through the payment of impact fees at the time of development. Public Schools: As currently designated on the Future Land Use Map, the subject property would allow 17 single- family dwelling units. Using the Collier County Public School Facilities Element Data and Analysis Report, the following number of students could be expected if the site remains as single - family residential development: Elementary School: 0.16 students /unit x 17 units = 2.72 students Middle School: 0.10 students /unit x 17 units = 1.70 students High School: 0.12 students /unit x 17 units = 2.04 students Total: 0.38 students /unit x 17 units = 6.46 students If the subdistrict is approved the number of students in the School District coming from this site will decrease. No students are generated by commercial development. Fire Service: The subject property is located within the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, which is an independent district. The County does not include a Level of Service Standard for this district in the AUIR. May 2009 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBITS V.F.1 V.F.2 ZONING AND WELLFIELD MAPS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 00, off P, Fy 34 it pf O . ' L > 4 -- - - - - - - - - - - — ------- ISVI LU L� z 0 N 0 X -i LU LL. LU F- us F- u w n I T Ll P, Fy 34 it pf O . ' L > 4 -- - - - - - - - - - - — ------- ISVI LU L� z 0 N 0 X -i LU LL. LU F- us F- u w n I ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT n EXHIBIT V.F.2 �f WELLFIELD LOCATION MAP COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs f PROPOSED NORTHEAST REGIONAL / WATER TREATMENT PLANT PHASE 1A WELLFIELD AREA CARICA ROAD AREAS OF INTEREST ASR CR 646 N n CITY OF NAPLES COASTAL RIDGE WELLFIELD O SCALE 0 SNI. AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 ON. Na 2003-" AMENDED - JMUMY 25, 2007 Ord N. 2007 -18 AMENDED - DECEMBER 4, 2007 Ord. ND. 2007 -82 CR 846 ORANGETREE WELLFIEI.D — IN OPERATION FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL UTILITY AUTHORITY GOLDEN GATE WATER TREATMENT PLANT WELLFIELD Q ED SOUTH HAWTHORN W U WELLFIELD EXTENSION 0 (UNDER CONSTRUCTION, g FALL OB COMPLE710N) CD WK GS W MANATEE 4� ROAD ASR EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD rn U ■SUBJECT PROPERTY ®RELIABILITY WELLS US S (BRACKISH OR FRESH WATER) WELLFIELD AREA iC ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY AVE MARIA / WELLFIELD CITY OF NAPLES EAST GOLDEN GATE WELLFIELD 1 7$ SUPADRT =mm MAL SERMCES "mm VOL MD PRENMIIW DEPT. I.DND IMMOKALEE WEL}TELD rn N K N R 8A ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT GA PROOF OF OWNERSHIP GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 This Instrument Prepared By: WILLIAM SCHWEIKHARDT Attorney at Law The Schweikhardt Law Firm, P.A. 900 Sixth Avenue South, Suite 203 Naples, FL 34102 Parcel Identifinrim Number: 37119840001 and 37119990003 Gmntees Tax Idwfir,.don Number. 3717806 OR: 3912 G.- 58 UCONID in OPEICIAL RSCOROS of COLLIER COUTT, it 10/11 /1005 at 08:45AX DWIGHT E. HROCK, CLERK cows 1500000.00 RIC 111 10.50 DOC•170 17500.00 Retn: GOODLITTI COLIUK ET AL {001 TAKIAK1 TR K 1300 RA1LIS TL 34103 A 0%% SPACE RESERVE➢ raft RECOMM a5E SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED made the , day of October, A.D., 2005, by WILLIAM SCH WEIKHARDT, Individually and as Trustee, whose post office address is: 900 Sixth Avenue South, Suite 203, Naples, FL 34102, hereinafter called the "Grantor ", to KENNETH R. JOHNSON, as Trustee arthe 850.018 Land Trust dated October 4, 2005, with full power and authority t0pr0tect, conserve, sell, lease, encumber, orotherwise manage and dispose of the real estate describ of it, whose past office address is: Goodlette, Coleman &Johnson, A.A., 4001 Tamiami Sfaiit�lp�' 3, hereinafter called the "Grantee ": N v�,oer.m uvc.. ormmo.ubw.l WITNESSETH: That considerations, receipt whereof conveys and confines unto the G All of Tracts 14 (aeJldk,O�F}(/Gj to the plat there Yf" \o�r�ded in Plat Book Records ofColli Florida. SUBJECT TO rest. J d easements valorem taxes for the v Grantor warrants that the su thereto, and that he resides at — ..,..,�nu,."w �.Tew+.M+,m unBarar4Hlufwlt „d �k d ation a the um of $10.00, and other valuable rgll s, sells, aliens, remises, releases, I e' 11 r C wry, Florida, viz IS 7 -No. 11, according es 03 04, of the Public n subdivision, and ad �v not his homestead, nor adjacent Naples, Florida. TOGETHER, with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple farever. AND the Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee that the Grantor is lawfully seized ofsaid land in fee simple; that the Grantor has good right and lawful authority tosell and convey said land, and hereby warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims Grail persons claiming by, through or under the said Grantor. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail, N. Naples Ste 34103 6W 950, 0 Y Special Warranty Decd page I oft Schweikhardt, Trustee to Johnson, Trustee Tracts 143 and 144, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. I I Lot ID —AandB CP- 2008 -1 Page 1 of 29 EXHIBIT GA V 4 8A OR: 3912 PG: 2759 * ** IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal the day and year first above writren. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence_ 7 MIK14A LLIAM SCHWT, ndivtdu y and as Tmslee STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT by WILLIAMSCHWEIKHARDT, Individue oath. 7T before me this day of October, 2005, Vversonally known to me, and did not take an LE K (seal) ,�°"� Vipfnlaebvpp,,, n %►"Min 09 btlaere6{ E%#1°Rm&'"nwrtLSo05 Special Warranty Deed Page 2 of 2 Schweikhardt, Trustee to Johnson, Trustee Tracts 143 and 144, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. I I CP- 2008 -1 Page 2 of 29 EXHIBIT GA Prepared by and renrm ro: David E. Leigh, P.A. 5150 Taml2mi Trail North Suite 501 Naples, FL 34103 239.435 -9303 File Number: 06-008 Parcel Identification No. 37119800009 This Indenture made this 29th day C. Gregory Rubin and Shari Ragar address is IIn - 1st Street NW, Naples to Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee of offree address is 4001 Tamfaml Trail authority to protect, eonseme.convey. herein. 3610306 OR; 4007 PG; 1533' A RICOROIO In 0111CIAL RICOROS of COLLIHR CoVnl, IL 03/29/2006 at 03:29PM OHIGBf H. BROC1, cLIRI Cogs 1060000.00 He Us 11,50 00C -30 112030 RetO: GOOOLHITI COLHMAM if AL 1001 TAMIAMI TR g 1300 WAPLHS HL 31103 Une For Recording Warranty Deed between and wife, whose post office r st 850.033 under st A tee t dated December 1, 2005, whose past Ile 300, Naples, Fl. ] 03 FI grantee +, who shalt have the power and encumber, and oche e o e and dispose ojthe real property described Witnessetll that said grantor, for and in considers a {I 6' TBI AND NO 1100 DOLLARS (SI0.00) and other good and valuable considerations to said grantor in hand paid by said grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, and sold to the said grantee, and grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Collier County, Florida, to -wit: The South 160 feet of Tract No. 142, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 1I, according to the plat thereof, as recorded In Plat Book 4, Page 103 -104 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. and said grantor does hereby fully warrant the tide to said land, and x411 defend the same against lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. "Grantor' And "Grantee" are used for singular ur plural, ar contezl require,. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tandatni Trail, N. Suite Boo Naples, FL 34103 8rt+? 85 a •o[i naubleTimee LotID—C CP- 2008 -1 Page 3 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 ""8A OR: 4007 PG: 1532 **t In Witness Whereof, grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed se ed and delivered in our presence: T HLEEN R. SING FtI C.C. Cregvry Rub "KALRMIME '— �Shap Ragan Rubin, formerly Imam as Sltati Ragan State of Florida County of Collier T'he foregoing instnunen Rubin, fomerly known as Mavnnry Deed (Romary Farm) " Page 2 Ooublarmea ,an CP- 2008 -1 Page 4 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 3748701 OR: 3946 PG: 020 RBCOR010 in OFFICIAL RECORDS of COLLIER COOATT, IL 12/12/2005 at 02:02FX OIIGAT 1. BROCT, CLIRE Cogs (60000.00 AEC FBI 18.50 OOC -170 3220.00 Reta: GOULETTE COLIXAR 17 Al 4001 TAXIAXI TR 1000 AAFLES IL 34103 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, is made on this day of December, 2005 between OSVALDO RIJERO and EDY P. MONTERO, husband and wife (the "Grantors "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.024 under trit M%0ZORWr mber 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, con e encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose ofthe real property de ®`b whose post office address is 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 30 , es, FL 34103. Grantors, in cvr good and valuable col sufficiency of which is and Grantee's heirs, sue and being in Collier Co The West 150 il according to the 104, ofthe'Publi ne s JrN A(VD NO LO DOLran ($10.00) and other 1 ai by e, the receipt and e , t d anto the said Grantee s v r, ef0 cribedproperty,siivated,lymg to wit: , 110, Golden t tes Unit No. 11, asrccord M t Book 4, Pages 103 - fI , Florids- Collier County Tax Folio Number. 37117160000 SUBJECT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2005 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; restrictions, reservations and easements of record common to the subdivision; provided, however, that no one of them shall prevent use of the property for residential purposes. And said Grantors do hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. LotID — E CP- 2008 -1 Page 5 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 This Instrument Prepared By Closings Dnda C. Brinkman, Fsq. Goodleae, Coleman & Johnson, PA.. Rivrandy ivera st xw Trustee 4001 Tamiun2 Trail Notth, Suite 300 Warranty Deed 750 • O2L1 Naples, FL 34103 (Page I 0(2) LotID — E CP- 2008 -1 Page 5 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 IM, * ** OR; 3946 PG; 0202 M IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantors have duly executed and delivered this instrument on the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and delivered in the Presence of: (as to both) 7"►�1�7�. �Ztd�.. is li L _•_��.� 1 I 11111 114 W :1 14 STATE OF FLORIDA ( ( "( ( j Y/ COUNTY OF COLLIER �lJ/ jr .! h THE FOREGOING UMENT was a _ • w ~ efore me on this day of December, 2005, by OS ERO and EDY P. RO, who (_) are personally known to me or who have t their driv ' I a as identification. S:T=dy Closings Rivera st KRJ Trustec warranty Deed 1 jNo ?ublic Print Name. State ofFlorida at Large My Commission Expires: (Page 2 of 2) (Notary Seal) . °':�• "t't, att4lDYAaA Qf , MY MUMISSIDa t as Mx6 EXPIRES: Febmq it 2oo? S�aSx.ry Sin4x[ CP- 2008 -1 Page 6 of 29 EXHIBIT GA Rerum w: This InNamrnt Prepared by. Susan D. Evans, Eq 1404 Goadlaw Road Nwh Naples, FL 34102 Property Appraisers Parcel identlawtion (Folio) Number(0:37117040007 Grasttt(s) S.s B(s): 8 j 3793126 OR: 3990 PG: 0289 HCOROID In OFFICIAL RFWRDS of COLLIER COONTI, PL 03/0112006 at 08:40AN DNIGNT I. SROCI, CLIRI CONS 750000.00 RFC Fit I8.50 WILING 1.00 OOC -.70 52SO.o0 Retn: (300011"1 COLIM IT AL 4001 TAIIAII TR I POO NAPLIS PL 34103 _SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR PROCESSING DATA SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDR4GDATA Mcmva used herein the terms `Grantor" and moranteem shall include singulu and plural, heirs, legal rcpreunulivea, and asstgru of individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations. whatever the context to sdroh, or requtra,) DEED THIS INDENTURE, made this and AMELIA HERNANDEZ ai and KENNETH R. JOHNS December 1, 2005, with full o or to encumber, or otherwise o r in Florida Statute 689.071, ho; GRANTEE. WITNESSETH, that the said' TOR, for and in and other good and valuable co tion to them it whereof is hereby acknowledge , b ted, baq GRANTEE'S heirs and assigns forer7tLaL OHO County of Collier, State of Florida to wit, between MIGUEL HERNANDEZ 3,v ILIA BAR.BERIS, GRANTOR, ) 1 under trust agreement dated ct, onserve and to sell or to lease, �enr herein described as provided . ate Blvd., Naples, FL 34120, 2I rthestunof - -- TEN -- Dollars, the said GRANTEE, the receipt sold to the said GRANTEE, and d land, situate, and being in the The East 150 feet of Tract 109, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 11, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, Pages 103 and 104, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Subject to: restrictions, easements common to the subdivision; taxes for the current year and subsequent years; applicable zoning laws, building codes and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authorities; and outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, And the said GRANTOR does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The said GRANTOR has hereunto set grantor's hand and sea] the day and year first above written. Goodlette, Coleman & Johaeon, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail, N suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Lot ]D — F 13AR 650.031 CP- 2008 -1 Page 7 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 *'* OR; 3990 PG; 0290 "t Signed aled and delivered in the presence of: 8A r4Vitness Signature Miguel Hernandez Printed Name Witness Si Lure P�e e 56ye N STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instnunent was acknowledged before me this a$1'k day of February, 2006, by MIGUEL HERNANDEZ and AMELIA HERNANDEZ who ar nersonatI known to moor have produced as identification. NA VY $'�; SCam iceman D Evans s DDS Gm Notary Public -State of Flon a '`• imp w�a k M. me Print Name: �SI'�ti�� i a�i LS My commission expires: CP- 2008 -1 _ Page 8 of 29 EXHIBIT GA WARRANTY DEED THIS INDENTURE is made this 28 day of February, 2006, between Shane Robertson, alsc known as Shane G. Robertson and Shane Gene Robertson, and Robin Robertson, also known as Robin E. Robertson, Robin Edgar Robinson, and Robin L. Robertson, formerly known as Robin Edgar Husband and Wife, hereinafter called the Grantor, and Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.027 under Trust Agreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority to either to protect-, conserve and to sell, or to lease, or to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein or any part thereof, whose Post office address is Suite 300, 4001 Tamiami [Federal Identi- fication No. 2111 0Sgmq -1, hereinafter called the Grantee. WITNESSETH: THE GRANTOR, fo ($10.00) and other val Grantee, receipt of whic) sell and convey unto th situated in Collier cons The East 75 feet o , e Waet 180 ESTATES, uNIT NO. 11, rdin to I 4, Pages 103 and 104 0 ar,ri4 The Property Appraiser's%r- described real estate is 3 LOT 3793105 OR; 3990 PG; 0209 11CO1D111 in OFFICIAL WORDS of cows CODITT, n 03/01/2006 at 01:14H DIIM 1. I10C[, CLIII COIs 600000.00 RIC 111 11.50 IIDI[IIG 4.00 DOC•.00 4200.00 tetu; COODUM calim IT Al 4001 TA10A11 T1 11300 IMLIS IL 34103 RESERVED FOR USE BY CLERK Trail North, Naples, FL 34103 the sum of Ten Dollars to the Grantor by the s hereby grant, bargain, described real estate, act 109, GOLDEN GATE recorded in Plat nook .lien County, Florida. ion Number for the above THE GRANTOR hereby covenants with the Grantee that said real estate is free of all encumbrances, that lawful seisin of and good right to convey said real estate are vested in the Grantor, and that the Grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever, except with respect to (a) ad valorem and non ad valorem real property taxes for 2006 and subsequent years; (b) zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; (c) outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and (d) restrictions, reservations, and easements common to the subdivision, provided, however, that none of the foregoing shall prevent herein described real estate for residential purposes. the use of the AFTER RECORDING, PLEASE RETURN THIS INSTRUMENT To. Kemeth Johoaorn Esq. eaadlette, C010man 6 Johnson. PA Suits 300 4001 TOmiami Trail North Naples, FL 34103 PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES LotID - G CP- 2008 -1 Page 9 of 29 EXHIBIT GA IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has executed this instrument on this 28 day of February, 2006. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: SIGN: PLEASE PAINT OR TYPE NAME OF FIRST WITNESS ABOVE SIGN: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER * ** OR; 3990 PG; 0209 fft ftt e D FOP USE 6 MEEK Shane R son - K�aE_ (SEAL) 171 Golden Gate Boulevard West Naples, FL 34120 rsbw�� Robin Robertson (SEAL) Golden Gate Boulevard West e FL 34120 s. •1 /-1 �11/ rt THE FOREGOING INSTRUMi�F �' v77s%t !edged before me this 28 da February, 2006, by Shane Robertson as Robin Robertson, Husband and Wife£ being personally known to me or having identification. r produced a current drives license as (NOTARY SCOLOASSIONtlto15�76 ,u' SIGN �'IRF.�Fdnnn• 16,2007 ^ 9M. eft", NOT PUBLIC MY commission expires: PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE NAME OF NOTARY PUBLIC ABOVE THIS INSTRUMENT WAS PREPARED BY: Richard M. Jones, Esq. Richard M. Jones, P.A. 163 Tenth Avenue South Naples, Florida 34102 AVihrtsnSTJnaniWD WITHOUT OPINION OR BENEFIT OF TITLE EXAMINATION -PAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES CP- 2008 -1 Page 10 of 29 EXHIBIT GA I am 3817062 OR: 4014 PG: 2946 RIC00111 la 0111CIAl 11COROS of COLLIBR CoORTT, PL 04116/2006 at 03:22M MOT B. BIOCI, ctfir CM 580000.00 RIC BIB 18.50 Rets: Doc-,70 4080.00 00OU1111 COLIRAI ST AL 1061 TARIARI TR 11300 RAPLIS IL 34103 WARRANTY PEED THIS DEED, is made on this day of April, 2006 between AINSLEY B. CHRISTIE and ORDENE CHRISTIE, husband and wife (the "Grantors "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.035 under trust agreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease, or to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose Of the real property described herein (th rest ee�j se�ost office address is 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103 _+, til- --� UA, . Grantors, inconsidei and valuable considerations which is hereby acknowledg successors and assigns forei County, Florida, to wit: The West 10 VQ of Tract 1114, according to t thereof, as 103 -104, of the b}i4Y2ecords e Collier County Tax w I'DID`OLLAM'S 0' 0" andothergood by nteie, the receipt and sufficiency of he iL anteeandGrantee'sheirs, �p situated, lying and being in Collier $tes Unit No. 11, Book 4, at Pages Florida SUBMCT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; restrictions, reservations and easements of record common to the subdivision; provided, however, that no one of them shall prevent use of the property for residential purposes. And said Grantors do hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. SABrandy Closings Christie st KRJ Trustee Warmly Deed %50 •o3-5 Lot ID — K (Page I of 2) This Instrument Prepared By Linda C. Brink -man, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, p.,l. 4001 Tamiaml Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 CP- 2008 -1 Page 11 of 29 EXHIBIT GA i *t* OR; 4014 PG; 2947 '** IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantors have duly executed and delivered this instrument on the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and delivered in the Presence of (as to both) / IJI'J iM-W, Print Name: � STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER THE FOREGOING 2006, by AINSLEY B, CH personally known to me or, S:13randy Closings Chtisde st KRI Trustee Warranty Decd �i HRISTIE i it '"� �1 me on this -/40w- day ofApril, nd and wife, who (1) are o identification. PrinrName. -fa6k /It,f7rme-LL. State of Florida at Large My Commission Expires: (Page 1 of 2) (Notary Seal) CP- 2008 -1 Page 12 of 29 EXHIBIT GA 3752019 OR: 3949 PG: 1405 RECORDED ID OFFICIAL RECORDS of COLLIAR CODRYY, It 1211112005 at 01:43FN OYIOEY E. BROCK, CLERK Cows 350000.00 He FEE 18,50 DOC -.10 2450.00- Rein MODLIT71 COLIK" 81 AL 4001 UNIANI YR Y 1300 NAPLES FL 34103 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, is made on this 12thday of December, 2005 between MARIE ANNA FLICEK (the "Grantor "), and KENNIM R JOHNSON, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.028 under trust agreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease, or to encumber, S-49umwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein (the "Grantee "), whos '�ig"a r 's 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103. Znti� \ rT Grantor, in considt good and valuableconsidel of which is hereby aclmow: heirs, successors and assig Collier County, Florida, to The South 18 �i'�e f Tract 111, Golo. according to Cite fat Tract as recorded 104, of the Public Collisr C-d Collier County Tax Folio DOLLARS (510.00) and other tee, the receipt and sufficiency e said Grantee and Grantee's situated, lying and being in Unit No. 11, 1, Pages 103- SUBJECT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2005 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by govemtnental authority; restrictions, reservations and easements of record common to the subdivision; provided, however, that no one of them shall prevent use of the property for residential purposes. Grantor warrants that the property described above is vacant land and not her homestead. Grantor's homestead address is: 312 Lincoln Avenue North, New Prague, MN 56071 -2153. And said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. CP- 2008 -1 Page 13 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 This fristrumrnt Prepared By L01 ID — 1 Linde C. Brinkman, Esq. S:%Brandy (losings Goodlene, Coleman 4 Johnson, P.A. FliWt st M Trustee 4001 Tatniami Trail North, Suite 300 warranty Deed Naples, FL34101 O JG.C2� (Page I of 2) CP- 2008 -1 Page 13 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 "00 A * ** OR; 3949 PG; 1406 * ** IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor has duty executed and delivered this instrument on the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and delivered in the Presence of Q 119, nnr ame. Lisa Schneider MARIE ANNAFLICEtC dLh&ak� - (4 p Hn[Name: Ann M. Chmit STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF S(MTT THE FOREGOIls December; 2005, by MAI has produced her driver's mPIry i was ai FLICIM who S:Brandy Closings Flick at KtU Trustee Wamanty Dad me on this 12th day of known to me or who (_j Notary Public PrtntNamer Richard F. Wornson State ofMinnesota at Large My Commission Expires: (Page 2 of 2) (Notary Sea]) CP- 2008 -1 Page 14 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 Vas uH.unnn hnparcd h, a,d Rwm Ia; Sohn Holloway, Esquire Garber, Hooley s' Holloway, LLP 700 11th Street So_, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34103 I'artul [U Numbv: 37116720001 Warranty Deed • • **13802479 OR: 3999 PG: 2240 "Colon 9e ITTICUL RICORU of COLD,,, fOOpH, 1L 0311617006 at 09:flA1 mrim 1. AROCr, 01111 COBS 910000.00 An Mt 10.00 fete: 006.30 !010,00 600DLI"I COLIKU IT Al 1001 TARTAR[ TR 1 1300 fA9LIR it 31103 This fndenturet Made this 15th day al March, 2006 A.D., Between Michael J. Liassen, a single man of the GnH.ly n1 Collier. Sram nT Florida, grantor, and Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.034 under Trust Agreement dated December 11 2005, witlf Full poser and authority either to protect, conserve, and to. dell or to lease or to encumber, or otherwise manage and dispose of the real property described herein. w9nrve Haan:.. �.: 4001 T:uniaini Trail Noah, Nap,y�nrldn 34103 „nnH campm ..arrr„H c3k1':� \_._ Witnmwh 11alft GRANTOR.D :red Hrk,.r gave wm ' ;.Whlc umddetN enm1W. h-Wftd MW add In rte raid iruae. Iling and hemp In Ilm Cnunry of The south 180 feet according to the plat Public Records of Col This parcel is uflM mm Hl' �'A`\ _______ — _DOLLARS. h,r aid h rRAME'�, dy rttdpl wiloeul n Inrclly aekonn Wj ui. has anJ {I,Wgns Ihawv, she foiluwing deudhW rood. Estates t3nit Mo. 11, Hook 4, page 103 -104, .red lMf!nmar.h,u. Iluuhy liJly v:ammlhe lltle to WA�ullwl�jl6(d� ^� ' In Witness Whereof, arc rnntnr ha5lucunm xe aameaavhW bwui daimsufufl pHrsnnxw1 :nmuasrr_ g, Aiihmd and ail lMt dap and yea 0m ahnvc linen. Sldntd, stated and delivered In our prexenu: '^f O • d-- —(Sall Witness VlzaA ,�: > tl/FN.)Ea Michael J. Musson P.[e AdJrxs; naJbsl,ea NnH6�el. Napie,. Ft. JalEe J110 j P • LotkL�5 STATE OF Florida COUNTY OF Collier 1'Iw Inrepumgm,Wme,nr mx n"lmg'dhlrlx thnl5thday,rma ,h, 2006hy Michael a- Liassen, a single man t�x•4pearel;dle 4mwn mne ut he figs Olumd to his Florida driserrs license ux hLMlli6cnon. jP1 n.d. tic RadMglaEM heaaea My CHmmi dim eapims: / / Coodletta, Coleman &ddhawu, PA 4001 Tamldm! T x11, N. Suite 500 Naples, PL 34105 Lot ID — J CP- 2008 -1 Page 15 of 29 EXHIBIT GA TIP, ls, uv .l YP".1 by and Rasa Iv: John Holloway, Esquire Garber, Hooley E Holloway, LLP 700 11th Street So., Suite 202 Naples, FL 34103 Parcel rr/ Numhur: 37116720001 Warranty Deed 'MIS Indenture. made dsi ,isth day ofuarch,2006A.D.. Between Michael J. Linssen, a single man ,,rik 4amly Pi Collier, sun of Florida, grantor, end Kenneth A. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.034 under Twat kgreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve, and to sell or to lease or to enovlb aer, or otherwise manage and di npone of the real property described herein. wnn:eafdrrs.,: 4M) I Tamiumi Tatii North, Napl arida3g103 .vdm cna,ny,.t .nine af• Mrd;;Ishb. 1WItnGSSeth_ mm the GRANTOR,fafnndi�r undnnur Inssumor ____ _ T and nth i da,ai ,cod "1110Ii wnsidmala m h d h3 $ailed. harp;dnod sad .1M In the said n whim, lylnpaidhenpm theewnyof 1 a The South 180 feet F- 6 0 according -to the plat r r Public Records of Coll \Coaaty, FlOZ This parcel is non- homeeb�ycDropertv. ______________ DOLLARS. apt nhennr rs hoi ad sia,ledacd, hu pas filrcru. the fnilaulnS denriyed LW. Estates unit No. 11, Book 4, page 103 -104, aml WitnunrlWhereof,te caesm the haemsa rCW11Q rl�wrK oilits WWUl Mahn uFell posnm wlwmsnrvrr. In led, eesa Whereof, d e0P Its: Inou r pasta on so his had and self dm day and Year net dove vrcRtso, Signed, styled and delivertd In our pMmee: Prince ra a nwh' isms) witness /,¢rf y%jWA _0EZ Michael J. Simsen i-\ n I _ .L/ 90.MIdm¢ 11031d Strew N,eh.rea. Willa, hL3n20 TL,11y P-1 -nu1`5 STATE OF Florida COUNTY M Collier th. fiacp�ine msl,um Tl,su ecenaWedged hefim meehisl5thduy afRdnreh, 2006ie /ttxchnal J- Linseett, a single man V hr is pannnaly� exl,.a x, nm m he his pmdumd hie Florida driver•a licameeido ir"11us. ®d0lYalals P ed NfCaLrsS58N11C0eS�m � OPWd:000a2tdm N ry P Iic Oaaeeyfadhnherese hiy C(Iffmotsroareplal / / roddlene, Coleman & Jdhnrlm, P.A. 40014LmtamO Trvg, N. suite 3110 Nepleh, PC 34103 CP- 2008 -1 Page 16 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 Q`t1 3802478 OR: 3999 PG; 2240 "Como In oftlan tico"s of rourn 011311041 It O1oIM 0016RT Cowl it 1, IROCt, CIIRt cots 110001.00 RIC 111 10.00 ttth. OOC•. )0 1010.00 00111111 1 fALltRlt. it AL 0101 IMIAR1 TR 11300 WLU 1L 31103 'MIS Indenture. made dsi ,isth day ofuarch,2006A.D.. Between Michael J. Linssen, a single man ,,rik 4amly Pi Collier, sun of Florida, grantor, end Kenneth A. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.034 under Twat kgreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve, and to sell or to lease or to enovlb aer, or otherwise manage and di npone of the real property described herein. wnn:eafdrrs.,: 4M) I Tamiumi Tatii North, Napl arida3g103 .vdm cna,ny,.t .nine af• Mrd;;Ishb. 1WItnGSSeth_ mm the GRANTOR,fafnndi�r undnnur Inssumor ____ _ T and nth i da,ai ,cod "1110Ii wnsidmala m h d h3 $ailed. harp;dnod sad .1M In the said n whim, lylnpaidhenpm theewnyof 1 a The South 180 feet F- 6 0 according -to the plat r r Public Records of Coll \Coaaty, FlOZ This parcel is non- homeeb�ycDropertv. ______________ DOLLARS. apt nhennr rs hoi ad sia,ledacd, hu pas filrcru. the fnilaulnS denriyed LW. Estates unit No. 11, Book 4, page 103 -104, aml WitnunrlWhereof,te caesm the haemsa rCW11Q rl�wrK oilits WWUl Mahn uFell posnm wlwmsnrvrr. In led, eesa Whereof, d e0P Its: Inou r pasta on so his had and self dm day and Year net dove vrcRtso, Signed, styled and delivertd In our pMmee: Prince ra a nwh' isms) witness /,¢rf y%jWA _0EZ Michael J. Simsen i-\ n I _ .L/ 90.MIdm¢ 11031d Strew N,eh.rea. Willa, hL3n20 TL,11y P-1 -nu1`5 STATE OF Florida COUNTY M Collier th. fiacp�ine msl,um Tl,su ecenaWedged hefim meehisl5thduy afRdnreh, 2006ie /ttxchnal J- Linseett, a single man V hr is pannnaly� exl,.a x, nm m he his pmdumd hie Florida driver•a licameeido ir"11us. ®d0lYalals P ed NfCaLrsS58N11C0eS�m � OPWd:000a2tdm N ry P Iic Oaaeeyfadhnherese hiy C(Iffmotsroareplal / / roddlene, Coleman & Jdhnrlm, P.A. 40014LmtamO Trvg, N. suite 3110 Nepleh, PC 34103 CP- 2008 -1 Page 16 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 • �. 3764136 OR; 3962 PG; 2201 UMMI0 in OIIICIAL 1 MUM of COLLIE[ WDHI, IL 0110912006 at 02:30PI DIIGI9 1. IIOCI, C411I COIL 475000.00 Ile III II.St DOC -.10 3325,00 lets: GOODWti1 MUKU 11 AL 4601 UMAU TI 6300 IAILI3 IL 34103 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, is made on this 9 " day of January, 2006 between SMUDER -FAUST REALTY, INC., a Florida corporation (the "Grantor "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, as Trustee of Land Trust 850:026 under trust agreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease, or to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein (the "Grantee "), whose poste ra 44001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103. / titi ft 411I Grantor, in consideratio and valuable considerations to sr is hereby acknowledged, has € successors and assigns forever, County, Florida, to wit: The East 150 fee i feet ofthe South 8 Estates Unit No. t Book 4, Pages 103 Florida AND NOIIObpOdL.ARS (310.00) and othergood �aidbyfi ntee,t ere eipt and sufficiencyofwhich � rantee, and Grantee's heirs, I etlttYYlt �te lying and being in Collier 108 and the le North 207 in¢ to the o] :he West 180 Golden Gate orded in Plat 411cr County Less and except the West 9.00 feet of the East 150 feet of the North 87 feet of the South 272 feet of Tract 108, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 11, according to thi plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 4, Pages 103 and 104, of the Public Records of Collier County Florida Collier County Tax Folio Number: 37116961006 SUBJECT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; restrictions, reservations and easements of record common to the subdivision; provided, however, that no one of them shall prevent use of the property for residential purposes. This Instrument Prepared By Lot ID — K Linda C. Bnnkman, Esq. SAtBnndy Closings Goodlene, Coleman & Johnson. P.A. Smuder -Faust it Knl Trustee. - 4001 Tarniami Trail North, Suite 300 Warranty Deed Naples, FL CO3 (Page 1 of?) CP- 2008 -1 Page 17 of 29 EXHIBIT GA :i * *x OR; 3962 PG; 2202 *** And said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. fN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor has duly executed and delivered this instrument an the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and delivered in the Presence of "11 M21 tatlltiL�L'lifi.��7C•lw\ �\ � .: J STATE OF FLORIDA COLtNTY OF COLLIER THEFOREGOINGE 2006, by Richard Faust, who license as identification, as E corporation. S: !Handy Closings Smuder -Faust st KRJ Trustee Warranty Oeed SMUDER FAUST, REALTY, INC., a Florida Corporation By: Rte rd a st President J a fJanuary, s driver's AUST, REALTY INC., a Florida . MAO, 6CJL� Notary Pu Sic Print Name: State of Florida at Large My Commission Expires: (rage 2 of 21 (Notary Seal) .a. •••.`kt. 11"MYA RASIM EXPIAES: Fsbtu67Ik26e7 +`? cam�drN„erpnxa,grwrm CP- 2008 -1 Page 18 of 29 EXHIBIT GA a 8A THIS DOCUMENT PREPARED WITHOUT EXMInA71ON OR OPINION OF TITLE BY: RETURN TO! Stephen D. M[Genn. Eequire stephen 0. Ncc.nn' P.A. 2180 Imootelee Road sulta 306 naples. Florida 34110 Folio Number - 37116960007 WARRANTY DEED 3194015 OR: 3990 PG: 3499 N01031) Is 0111CIlL "Cons of COL1,111 Copnl. IL 01111/1006 it 11:4111[ Altar 1. IM, tL111 alt tllolo.00 UC 111 11.50 It ooc-.10 1900.00 ta: OWONII3 COLBf1111 11 1001 TBUIXT if 1 1310 11!113 It 11103 This Indenture, Made this day of Fc Ej ✓nr 2006, Between Michael Madsen and Kelly H. Madsen, uaband and Wife, IT post office address is 241 Golden Gate Blvd. West, Naples, Florida 34120, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor," and Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.032 under Trust Agreement dated December I, 2005, conferring unto the Trustee hereinabove named, the power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell and to convey, or to lease, or to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein. Said Trustee is hereinafter referred to as "Grantee." The post office address for Grantee is 4001 Tamiami -��il North, Suite -300, Naples, Florida 34103. / C R ('rY. T K That the Granto o a d 1 j t n of the sum of - - - -- -TEN AND 00 /100 (510.00. a o good and valuable considerations to sa an n hand al y Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby ac ad d, has gr i:e Pained and sold to the said Grantee, and Gr k's heirs an r/� /14,11 forever, the following described land, situate Ily�JA�D end begpler County, Florida, to- Witt � 1 L 7g� C The Wes[ 180 feet of Tra N GATE ESTATES; Unit No. 11, according to the plat thereof of record in Plat Book 4, Page 103 -104, Public Records of Collier county, Florida, Together with the West 9.00 feet of the Fast 150 feet, of the North 67 fact of the South 272 feet. Less the East 9.00 feet Of the West 180 feet of the South 87 feet of the North 207 feet of said Tract 108. SUBJECT to the following: (al Taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years; (b) Zoning, buildino code and other restrictions imposed by governmental authority; (c) Outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and (d) Restrictions and easements common to the subdivision. And said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. "Grantor" and "Grantee" are used far singular or plural, as context requires. Goodlette, Colman & Johnaon. P.A 4001 Tamla to) Trail, N. Napless. FL 34103 W 85D.n31 Lot ID — L CP- 2008 -1 Page 19 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 > t OR: 3990 PG: 3500 * *' 84 In Witness Whereof, Grancor has hereunto set Grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above Written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: elcnaot xatlsen xel ly N. eatl en STATE OF FLORIDA ) 1 COONTr OF COLLIER ) .,Q�12. -C 0v. I HEREBY CERTIFY on this day qualified to take ackn wl are 1 Kelly H. Madsen, to m k to 'e h executed the foregoi g executed a same. Th a e a 1 G ^f 0 WITNESS my hart s�. d official se aforesaid this ZFLl, a1k f F�A�.._�_— �aEAW My Commlfa ten \1140 4114194 Stephan D, McCann Cann isflan t DD356669 Ex�f Odnher 19, PW6 � K.r�a,a ewesn CP- 2008 -1 Page 20 of 29 me, an officer duly 'ad Michael Madsen and described in and who before me that they me or have produced dentification. )unty and State last t EXHIBIT GA Pre a red by and return to: Linda C. Brinkman,Esq. Goodlelle, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamlami Trail North Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 239435 -3535 File Number; 850.023 Will Call No.: Parcel identification No. 37116920005 CORRECTM 8A 3719723 OR; 3914 PG; 3601 RICOIMD In OTACIAL IICORDS Of MUM 00911, PL 10(1912009 at 09:37AA MaT 1. 810CI, CLARI RAC 111 18.90 DOC -.T0 TO Leta: GOOOLITTI COLIM AT AL 1001 TAHIANI TR K 1300 TAPLIO FL 34103 Above This Liam Fur Recording Warranty Deed (STATUTORY FORM - SECTION 689.6- F.S.) This Indenture made this 1 '7 44,)day of October, 2005 between Joseph D. Peterson and Mary Peterson, husband and wife whose past office address is 101 Willoughby Drive, Naples, FL 341I0 of the County of Collier, State of Florida. grantor -, and Kenneth M Johnson as Trustee or the 850,023 Land Trust. dated October 4, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, is�t ! that, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein, whose post office� ;irc0s.' 1 �iiJ II North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103 of the County of Collier, State of Florida, granteyc, 0 Witnesseth that said grantor, for an in Ff r erano of TE A N01100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable considerations to s Fd g {(antoIF m d by sai grantee the eceipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, and sold to a s 9i forever, the following described land, situate, lying and being in Co11Ier C0 my dd to wi : The East 150 feet of Trac , n t nit . 1 I" rding to the plat thereof, as retarded in Plat Book 4, Pn 3 -104, arthe Public ords of .-Ha County, Florida. and said grantor does hereby fully warrant dal Wtq�, aid t.+,d snd a Wd the same against lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. ! �£F CM , " "Grantor" and "Gramec" am umd for singular or plural, as tomcat mquims. In Witness Whereof, grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year First above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: Lot ID —M DouateTimeo CP- 2008 -1 Page 21 of 29 EXHIBIT GA ff� * ** OR; 3914 PG; 3602 *" Stale of Florida County of Collier ip) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this h day of October, 2005 by Joseph D. Peterson and Mary Peterson, who L] are personally known or [X] have produced a dn'vets license as identification. I've, (Notary Seal] .?`:f•:;7';. 8AMDYA.MCW.6 Notary P° - -I blicl MYCOIAlIS6g8 t ED 159976 - EXPff0:Fsbatary16,2w7 Printed Name: FatnN Banegtbv BWyq Hdin Semi My Commission Expires: THIS CORRECTIVE WARR" SHOWN IN THAT CERTAIN OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS tPararcol Dmd (Srnauurn Form; • Page 2 THE NA HE OF THE WITNESS HCORDS BOOK 3907 PAGE 2749 Ooublalnme CP- 2008 -1 Page 22 of 29 EXHIBIT GA • , 3793121 OR: 3990 PG: 0267 HCOBID fa 0111CM WORDS of COLLIII COOHI, PL 03/01/2008 at 08:28Aa OrIGIt 1, BIOC[, eL1r[ Coy$ 250000.00 He M 11.50 OOC -.70 1750,00 cart: G000UM COLIILU IS AL 1001 TijaAll to 11300 Will IL 3 4203 WARRANTY DEED 4N THIS DEED, is made on this 9 day of February, 2006 between HERBERT 1. BUCK (the "Grantor "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, as Trustee of [and Trust 850.025 under trust agreement dated December 1, 2005, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease, or to encumber, or otherwise to manage anndg—dispose of the real property described herein (the "Grantee "), whose post office addres North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103. Grantor, in considerationA6 td um of TEN AND and valuable considerations to acid tort andpaidby is hereby acknowledged, h to , am an s Count and assigns fore v r, t yfp!♦q* r County, , Florida, Fi to wit: The East 75 ee 0 0fi(ie �l�f Estates Unit 1 I, according to the Book 4, Pages �(04, of the Pub'. Florida. { n. Collier County Tax ,k/d9MOLLARS ($10.00) and other good e, ereceiptandsuficiencyofwhich to the skid Grantee and Grantee's heirs, t� re si ated, lying and being in Collier 7, Golden Gate recorded in Plat Collier County, SUBJECT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental authority; restrictions, reservations and easements of record common to the subdivision; provided, however, that no one of them shall prevent use of the property for residential purposes. Grantor warrants that the above described property is vacant land and not his homestead. Grantor's homestead address is 5405 Jaeger Road, Naples, FL 34109. And said Grantor does hereby fully warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. SADrandy Closings Suck at KRJ Tlvstee wamn Deed S:U•aLS Lot ID — N (Page I or 2) This Instrument Prepared By Linda C Srinkmtao, Esq. Gaodlene, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tantiami Trail Nonh, Suite 300 trapla, FL 34103 CP- 2008 -1 Page 23 of 29 EXHIBIT GA ME * ** OR: 3990 PG: 0268 >r>kz IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor has duly executed and delivered this instrument on the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and delivered in the Presence of STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER THE FOREGOING! February, 2006, by HERBEI Produced his driver's license SABrandy Closings Buck st KPJ Trustee Warranty Deed Notary public Print Name: U State of Florida at.Large My Commission Expires: (Page 2 of 2) me on this day �of n to me or who (_� ltas (Notary Seat EMAES: Fabaoy 16, 2001 CP- 2008 -1 Page 24 of 29 EXHIBIT G.4 Retn: 4101163 OR: 4307 PG: 1221 R A GOODLITTF COLFWAW IT AL RRCORDHD in the OFFICIAL HCORDS of COLLIFR COU", It COR!' • '455000.00 4001 TAHIAWI TR W 1300 12/03/2007 at WORK DWIGHT R. RROCA, CLRRA RIC FAT I8.50 RAPLRS FL 34103 DOC-.70 3155.00 WARRANTY DEED <�-- THIS WARRANTY DEED, is made, executed and delivered on this J day of November, 2007 between SAINT LOUIS GEDEUS AND CHRISTINE GEDEDs,husband and wife (the "Grantors "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, AS TRUSTEE UNDER LAND TRUST 850.038, with full power and authorityto protect, conserve and to sell, lease, encumber or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property hereinafter described, whose post office address is: c/o Goodlette Coleman & Johnson, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103, (the "Grantee "). WPfNESSETH: that Grantors, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND 00 /100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable considerations to Grantors in hand paid by Grantee, the receipt and sufficiency wher eb cknowledged, have granted, bargained and sold to said Grantee and Grantee's igns forever, the following described property, situate, lying and bein ounty of Co of Florida, to wit: THE WEST 10 F F C D G TE ESTATES, UNIT No. 1, c r g o th re_ rded in Plat Book 4, at P s 03 1 4 f e P It o s of Collier County, FI Pr Ae Property ID W.A7 116880006 SUBJECT TO: re tai 07 and subsequent years; zoning, buildin do restrictions imposed by governmental authority; outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and restrictions and easements common to the subdivision, provided however that no one of them shall prevent use of the property as a single family residence. AND Grantors hereby covenant with the Grantee that Grantors are lawfully seized of said Property in fee simple; that Grantors have good right and lawful authority to sell and convey this Property; and that Grantors hereby fully warrant the title to the Property and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. C:\KRI\DEEDs GEDEUS To KRI, As TRUSTEE 90 34 Street NW, Naples, Fl, Warmty Deed (Page I of 2) CP- 20984 - -- Page 25 of 29 EXHIBIT GA P8 OR; 4307 PG; 1222 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantors have hereunto set their hands and seals on the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed, and delivered in the esence as to both: S� //lAa'/ fv C�FJSEb/� Print Name: �� � •� /ultl mot► �. GRANTORS: SAINT LOUIS GEDEUS CHRISTINE GEDEUS STA'T'E OF FLORIDA t - - -� COUNTY OF COLLIER THE FOREGOING PQT kno e ge ore me on this 5 day of November, 2007 by SAINT d DE US D H TIN E , HUSBAND AND WIFE, 0 Who are is personally known to r ❑ who produe a tive driver's license as identification. , G Ciu NOTARY P138L1CSTATB t FLORIDA *=Sloii C Stevenson # DD467739 public Nbtary E,odedTh,, timci B� emgco,�9 State of Florida at large( I Print Name. 2t _ ! • Jt 7�yp( My Commission Expires: 1D . tt.E . 2 c1 �� l (Notary Seal) CAKRJIDEEDS GEDEUS TO KRJ, AS TRUSTEE 90 30 Street NW, Naples, FL Warranty Deed (Page 2 of 2) CP- 2008 -1 Page 26 of 29 EXHIBIT GA R. 1►i # rR 1 Retb: 3828408 OR: 4026 PG: 1313 RIC FEE IB.60 GOODLETTE COLEMAN NT AL 4001 TAMIANI TR 11300 RECORDED is 04/27/2006 the OFFICIAL RECORDS at 03:24PN OUGHT R. of COLLIER COUNTY, FL DOC -.10 .70 BROCA, CURE MISS F1 34103 Note to Tax Collector: The transaction evidenced by this Instrument Is exempt from Florida Documentary Stamp Tax In accordance with Florida Administrative Code Rule 12".013(32Nd) being a transfer from one trustee to a successor trustee without change In benef vial ownership. DEED TO SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE THIS DEED is made on this 2,6 -t1day of April, 2006, between BRETT RUBINSON, AS TRUSTEE OF THE GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WEST TRUST, with full power and authority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease or to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property described herein, pursuant to Florida Statute 689.071 (hereinafter called the "Grantor "), and KENNETH R. JOHNSON, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD WESTTRUST, with full power and.anthority either to protect, conserve and to sell, or to lease or to encumber, or otherwise to. an4g$°anftlrl— ohs of the real property described herein, pursuant to Florida Statute 689.071 (1�'sjiDrtt a>zr calledtht oep "), whose post office address is: c/o GOODLETTE, C P.A, 4001 Tamiarn hi North, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103. , -- -- -. A The Grantor, in consi era o e N}` (1 /100 DOLLARS $10.00 and other good and valuable conk der tid s tt sa dd�ir o n, 'd d'by tite Grantee, the receipt and sufficiency of which is here byfap o\vjogr�d h � (ed ll,�rg�atned and sold to the said Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successor ,�att assigns forever, the fgllowi'r g d sFri ed property, situated, lying and being in Collier County, F r to wit: � s The East 180 feet of. 'ryp� ,l 10, Golden GTt,' Fgt (es, Unit No., 11, according to the map oi- at t i gde`d'jn -Plat Book 4, at Pages 103 and 104, of the Public Rze ofg(CR erCounty, Florida.(being the same property conveyed to grantor by Deed to Successor Trustee dated October 14, 2005 and recorded October 19, 2005 in Official Records Book 3914, at Page 3577, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida). The subject property is unimproved and vacant land and not the homestead of Grantor who resides outside the State of Florida. Collier County Tax Folio No: 37117120008 SUBJECT TO: real estate taxes for the year 2006 and subsequent years; zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental This Instrument Prepared By: Linda C. Brinkman, Esq, Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A. C:IBAR`.Crown 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Rubinson Deed to Successor Trustee Naples, FL 34103 btlq 85 .e' -o (Page 1 of 2) CP- 2008 -1 Page 27 of 29 EXHIBIT GA OR: 4026 PG: 1314-twt authority; outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and restrictions and easements common to the subdivision. And said Grantor does hereby specially warrant the title to said land, and will defend the same against the lawful claims and demands of all persons claiming by, through or under Grantor, but against none other. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Grantor has duly executed and delivered this instrument on the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: Print COMMONWEALTH OF COUNTY OF e&5' THE FOREGOING INS 2006, by BRETT RUBINSON, ❑ license as identification, As TF behalf C'�BAR'Crown Rubinson Deed to successor Trustee CP- 2008 -t J- I/ lf� Z� BRETT RUBINSON, AS TRUSTEE OF THE P,©EDEN GATE BOULEVARD WEST TRUST j L.y �a p lio0remeon this A G "tlay ofApri I, me or Dwho produced his driver's BOULEVARD WEST TRUST and on its lic P inlWame: / C• g1um,5,K-r ,91- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania My Commission Expires: (Notary Seal) (Page 2 of 2) MW 68 I&M9Y "IP 4SSOCistM Of NOW" Page 28 of 29 EXHIBIT GA I hfs 11 —mein Prapured b, Michael A. Durant CONROY, CONROY s DURANT, P.A. 2210 Vanderbilt Beach Road, Suite 1201 Naples, Florida 34109 4306492 OR. 4461 PG, 0447 RECORDED in OPPICI.AL RECORDS of COLLIER COUNTY, PL 061,11/2003 at 10:06AM DWIGHT E. BROCE, CLERK CONS 210000.00 RIC PER 10,00 DOC -,10 1680.00 Retn: GOODUTTI COLEMAN V AL 400) TAXIANI TRL X qOG NAPLES PL 34103 RaraIII) Nnmhe,: 37117200009 Warranty Deed This Indenture, Madc Ihis 10th day of June 2009 AD Between Kevin P. Broader, a single man nl mn t'ann, of Collier Smte of Florida , grantor, and Kenneth R. Johnson, as Trustee of Land Trust 850.045 add ..:, a. 4001 Tamiami Trail, Suite 300, Naples, FL 34103 of die Cown, of Collier I Slab of Florida , grantee. Wltnesseth that the GRANTOR_ for and m. .... dcrmion of Om sum of ________________________TEN DOLLARS ($10)_______________________ DOI.I.ARS. and alhcr g.,d and valnanle cons,dermion to GRANTOR at hand Fla,d h, GRANI II L. the n,,,.n ,hrnral s hereby ackno,aled,d. has ,,inmdd hagained and snId ,, Ih, mid GRANTEE and GRANTEE'S hnr, . cucwaors and assigns fr, -, the following desuibcd land_ siumm . Mn, nd nn,, nme ❑m,ut of Collier stale of Florida 1."1 The South 75 feet of the North 150 feet of Tract 111, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. 11, accord3'n o. -.plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4, pages 103 ants: rg9�L = a #,"c7prds of Collier County, Florida. Subject to real property ad valorem _taxes for the year of closing; zoning, building code./and titlNt{ uae $ii �tric tioA,s imposed by governmental authority; I uJ�'tar diNlt�S -0t1P; gds- . #nd'I mineral interest of record, if any; resiriat oR ,� re�terl4lat)ion¢'snd� easements common to the subdivision. Together with all tenements, hereditaments and,�,appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywi3';'fo ertaining.� and the grannx does hoeh> Inllc ,.attar the line to said land_ and „dl defend the same a,l 1 Ia,rrul claims of all persons ,. hon,cs,.+ In Witness Whereof,me nra ,r„ h..r h..e,nno :a hi: hand and zeal me da, and , r r,nl ahn.e .,,men n e:, Srflltd sealed and dehverfd m our presence ��� -G a �L. -� I // (seal int d Name 1, r " AI✓1r1' ., C %even P Broader Witness / 1 PO Addmcs 131 Ise Street NR, Naples, FLl120 -r Printed Name: ./nb�', A! Witness STATE, OF Florida COUNTY OF Collier II,, forvn.ns .,In ter, „a, aennn„irdsed here me n, d" nt 2009 hl Kevin P. Broader, a single man n. �. per ILk Non. nr ne n,r prdeed m, Florida driver's 1 sense d Ilcminn A Cd N"e: c! 4 lEN5t ,201e Crated a 2, 10,1 (}Votary P tic q M, C'omlmss,on I ' . me CP- 2008 -snot oeR,oaasoa Page 29 of 29 EXHIBIT GA LOT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD EXHIBIT G.5 LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: #8A RECEIVED AUG 08 2009 $ Q. eMI PA. I hereby authorize O. Grady Minor & Associates. P.A. and Coleman, Yovanovich, & Koester, P.A. (Name of Agent — typed or printed) to serve as my Agent in a �t st to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property idd nt led in the ppli Signed: (Name of Printed Name: Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to true, correct, and complete to the best of m) Date: 5- 1 Lo I OR and that the application is STATE OF (Florida COUNTY OF (Collier) Sworn to subscribed before me this /n}� day of 2009 By �a R. G t, J (Notary Public) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: I C)/ C) (, /O \ CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: who is personally known to me, who has produced and as identification did take an Oath Ko GIL � did not take an Oath DD]57874 +06. 2009 NOTICE — BE AWARE THAT: M Assx CO. Florida Statute Section 837.06 -False Official Statements Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of $500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term. CP 2008 -1 1 08/2009 r Goa ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT CP- 2008 -1 REVISED EXHIBIT IV -B AND ADDITIONAL DATA AND ANALYSIS BCC Transmittal Hearing January 19, 2010 GradyMinor ,. 8 A Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects Ms. Michele Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Collier County Comprehensive Planning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 Re: CP- 2008 -1, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Revised Exhibit IV.B and Additional Data and Analysis Information Dear Ms. Mosca: Thank you for making time to meet with us to discuss the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment pertaining to the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict. As discussed, we are providing with this correspondence some additional information, which responds to comments made by staff and Collier County Planning Commission members at the October 19, 2009 public hearing. Some members of the Planning Commission and a few members of the public questioned whether a commercial project of the scale proposed in this amendment was appropriate at this location. The project location is appropriate because it is centrally located in North Golden Gate Estates, and located at the intersection of two of the primary roadways serving the Golden Gate Estates resident population. In addition to the extensive population currently residing and projected to reside in the primary trade area of the project, your Transportation staff has confirmed that Golden Gate Boulevard is a commuter corridor which provides for a high volume of through traffic and potential high capture rate for the commercial center. In fact, Transportation staff applied a 35% pass by capture rate instead of the typical 25% pass by capture rate. The public also directly benefits from the project by receiving needed right-of-way for improvements to the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard at no cost to Collier County. A centrally located grocery - anchored shopping center will have a positive impact on the transportation network internal to and external to Golden Gate Estates by reducing vehicle miles traveled for Estates residents. Residents east of Wilson Boulevard will no longer be required to travel an additional six miles each way to get to a grocery anchored shopping center. The reduced vehicle miles traveled also equates to reduced green house gas emissions as mandated by Florida law. Based on methodologies provided by staff, we have calculated the estimated reduction in vehicle miles traveled and reduction in green house gas emissions resulting from the project. A report outlining the effects on vehicle miles traveled and green house gas emissions prepared by Keystone Development Advisors is attached to this correspondence. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239 -947 -1144 • Fx: 239 - 947 -0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 • LB 0005151 • LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com Ms. Michele Mosca $ A RE: CP- 2008 -1, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Revised Exhibit NB and Additional Data and Analysis Information August 25, 2009 November 24, 2009 Page 2 of 3 With regard to the scale of commercial development proposed on the 41 +/- acre site, the amount of commercial square footage has been reduced from 225,000 to 210,000 square feet of commercial space, which is approximately one -half the intensity of a typical urban area shopping center. Further, the conceptual plan submitted with the comprehensive plan amendment has been refined to depict larger buffers, additional green space and reconfigured preservation areas, which further demonstrates that the proposed commercial area is an appropriate scale and compatible with the surrounding area. The text of the proposed amendment has been modified to reflect the decrease in commercial square footage, as well as the increase in buffers and building setbacks. We are committed to developing a grocery - anchored shopping center for the community. A successful center must have an appropriate size and combination of uses to insure economic viability. The commercial demand figures for the primary trade area indicate demand for a commercial shopping area in this location, and staff acknowledges that there are no sufficiently sized parcels within the primary trade area to permit development of a grocery- anchored shopping center. The small acreage parcels currently located within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and designated as Neighborhood Centers are not capable of supporting a true neighborhood or community sized commercial center. The original staff findings as outlined in the Collier County East of CR 951 Services and Infrastructure Horizon Study Preliminary Report, conclude that the existing neighborhood center concept cannot satisfy the long- term demand for commercial services in Golden Gate Estates and that larger sites over 40 acres in size will be needed. In addition to the supportive commercial demand and supply analysis, we have analyzed other economic impacts associated with the proposed shopping center. Fishkind and Associates has reviewed the direct and indirect economic benefits of the proposed project and have prepared a report outlining the employee earnings and job creation associated with construction and operation for the proposed 210,000 square foot commercial project. This analysis is attached for your review. The applicant has also demonstrated that in addition to the population and demographic data which supports development of a commercial shopping center, the residents of the community have participated in several outreach efforts and have indicated their support for a grocery- anchored shopping center at this location. A mail survey conducted by the applicant demonstrates an overwhelming level of support for the project. Further, nearly 2,000 letters of support have been provided from the community for the project. We are confident that the original and supplemental information provided as supportive information for this comprehensive plan amendment demonstrates: 1. There are no other commercial sites available in Golden Gate Estates large enough to support a grocery- an chored center, 2 Cover Letter Revised and Additional Info (2).doc RCGMPA Ms. Michele Mosca *, 8 l� RE: CP- 2008 -I, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict V H Revised Exhibit IV B and Additional Data and Analysis Information August 25, 2009 November 24, 2009 Page 3 of 3 2. There is significant resident support in the primary trade area for this type of commercial project, 3. There are significant short-term and long -term economic benefits resulting from this project, 4. There are significant public benefits resulting from the project which include donated land for right -of -way, a reduction in green house gas emissions, and a significant reduction in vehicle miles traveled for area residents. Please contact Richard D. Yovanovich at 435 -3535 or me if you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 2 Cover Letter Revised and Additional Info (2).doe RCGMPA �L 1 Exhibit IV.B Proposed Growth Management Plan Text a. Estates — Commercial District (VllQ1) Residential Estates Subdistrict — Single- family residential development may be allowed within the Estates — Commercial District at a maximum density of one unit per 21/4 gross acres unless the lot is considered a legal non - conforming lot of record. 2) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates, the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict has been donated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Subdistrict is located at the NW corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard westward to 3`d Street NW and extending northward to include the southern 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates, totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to provide convenient shopping, personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for many residents, assist in minimizing the road network required, and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier County. All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: Amusement and recreation Groups 7911 — Dance studios. schools and halls. excludin discotheques 7991 — Physical fitness facilities 7993 — Coin - operated amusement devises 7999 — Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified, including only day camps, gymnastics instruction, ludo /karate instruction, sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales) Groups 5611 — Men's and boys' clothing and accessory stores 5621 — Women's clothing stores Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page I of I I Exhibit IV.B 5632 — Women's accessory and specialty stores 5641 — Children's and infants' wear stores 5651 — Family clothing stores 5661 — Shoe stores 5699 — Miscellaneous apparel and accessory stores 3. Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations Groups 5531 — Auto and home supply stores 5541 — Gasoline service stations, without repair 3 Groups 7514 — Passenger car rental 7534 — Tire retreading and repair shops including only tire repair 7539 — Automotive Repair Shops, Not Elsewhere Classified, including only minor service, lubricating and diagnostic service 7542 — Carwashes as an accessory to convenience stores only 5. Building materials hardware garden supply, and mobile home dealers Groups 5231 — Paint, glass, and wallpaper stores 5251 — Hardware stores 5261 — Retail nurseries lawn and garden supply stores Business services Groups 7334 — Photocopving and duplicatinq services 7335 — Commercial photography 7336 — Commercial art and graphic design 7338 — Secretarial and court reporting services 7342 — Disinfecting and pest control services 7352 — Medical equipment rental and leasing 7359 — Equipment rental and leasing, not elsewhere classified 7371 — Computer programming services 7372 — Prepackaged software 7373 — Computer integrated systems design 7374 — Computer processing and data preparation and processing services 7375 — Information retrieval services 7376 — Computer facilities management services 7379 — Computer related services, not elsewhere classified 7382 — Security systems services 7383 — News syndicates 7384 — Photofinishing laboratories Exhibit IV B - Amended language 122309.doe Page 2 of 11 Exhibit IV.B • t ON 7389 — Business services, not elsewhere classified 7. Child day care services (Group 8351) 8. Communications Groups 4812 — Radiotelephone communications 4841 — Cable and other pay television services Construction special trade contractors (office use onlv. no on -site equipment storage) Groups 1711 — Plumbing, heating and air - conditioning 1721 — Painting and paper hanging industry 1731 — Electrical work industry 1741 — Masonry, stone setting, and other stone work 1742 — Plastering, drywall, acoustical, and insulation work 1743 — Terrazzo, tile, marble, and mosaic work industry 1751 — Carpentry work 17F9 — Flnnr Invinn and nfhnr flnnr wnrlr nnf clQcWhorc 1761 — Roofing, siding, and sheet metal work industry 1771 — Concrete work industry 1781 —Water well drillinq industry 1791 — Structural steel erection 1793 — Glass and glazing work 1794 — Excavation work 1795 — Wrecking and demolition work 1796 — Installation or erection of building equipment, not elsewhere 1799 — Special trade contractors, not elsewhere classified 10. Depository institutions Groups 6021 — National commercial banks 6022 — State commercial banks 6029 — Commercial banks, not elsewhere classified 6035 — Savings institutions, federally chartered 6036 — Savings Institutions, not federally chartered 6061 — Credit unions, federally chartered 6062 — Credit unions, not federally chartered 6091 — Non - deposit trust facilities 6099 — Functions related to depository banking, not elsewhere classified 11. Eating and drinking places (Group 5812, including only liquor service accessory to the restaurant use, no outdoor amplified music or televisions) Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page 3 of 1 I Exhibit IV.B • 12. Engineering accounting research management, and related services Groups 8711 — Engineering services 8712 — Architectural services 8713 — Surveying services 8721 — Accounting auditing and bookkeeping services 8741 — Management services 8742 — Management consulting services 8743 — Public relations services 8748— Business consulting services not elsewhere classified 13. Executive, legislative, and general government, except finance Groups 9111 — Executive offices 9121 —Legislative bodies 9131 — Executive and legislative offices combined 9199 — General government, not elsewhere classified 14. Food stores Groups 5411 — Grocery stores (minimum 27,000 square feet) 5421 — Meat and fish (seafood) markets including freezer provisioners 5431 — Fruit and vegetable markets 5441 — Candy, nut, and confectionery stores 5451 — Dairy products stores 5461 — Retail bakeries 5499 — Miscellaneous food stores including convenience stores with fuel pumps and carwash 15. General merchandise stores Groups 5311 — Department stores 5331 — Variety stores 5399 — Miscellaneous general merchandise stores 16. Home furniture furnishings, and equipment stores Groups 5712 — Furniture stores 5713 — Floor covering stores 5714 — Drapery, curtain and upholstery stores 5719 — Miscellaneous home furnishings stores 5722 — Household appliance stores 5731 — Radio television and consumer electronics stores 5734 — Computer and computer software stores 5735 — Record and prerecorded tape stores (no adult oriented sales) 5736 — Musical instrument stores Exhibit IV B -Amended Language 122309.doc Page 4 of 11 Exhibit IV.B M • 1 17. Insurance carriers Groups 6311 — Life insurance 6321 — Accident and health insurance 6324 — Hospital and medical service plans 6331 — Fire, marine, and casualty insurance 6351 — Surety insurance 6361 — Title insurance 6371 — Pension, health and welfare funds 6399 — Insurance carriers, not elsewhere classified 6411 — Insurance agents 18. Justice, public order and safety Groups 9221 — Police protection 9222 — Legal counsel and prosecution 9229 — Public order and safety, not elsewhere classified 19. Meeting and banquet rooms 20. Miscellaneous retail (no adult oriented sales Groups 5912 — Drug stores and proprietary stores 5921 — Liquor stores (accessory to grocery or pharmacy only) 5932 — Used merchandise stores 5941 — Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops 5942 — Book stores 5943 — Stationery stores 5944 — Jewelry stores, including repair 5945 — Hobby, toy, and game shops 5946 — Camera and photographic supply stores 5947 — Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops 5948 — Luggage and leather goods stores 5949 — Sewing, needlework, and piece goods stores 5992 — Florists 5993 — Tobacco stores and stands 5994 — News dealers and newsstands 5995 — Optical goods stores auction rooms, monuments, swimming pools, and sales barns) 21. Non - depository credit institutions Groups 6111 — Federal and federally- sponsored credit agencies 6141 — Personal credit institutions Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page 5 of I 1 Exhibit IV.B • 6153 — Short-term business credit institutions, except agricultural 6159 — Miscellaneous business credit institutions 6162 — Mortgage bankers and loan correspondents 6163 — Loan brokers 22. Offices and clinics of dentist (Group 8021) 23. Personal services Groups 7212 — Garment pressing and agents for laundries and drycleaners 7221 — Photographic studios, portrait 7231 — Beauty shops 7241 — Barber shops 7251 — Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors 7291 — Tax return preparation services 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services not elsewhere classified. excluding massaqe parlors Turkish baths and escort services 24. Public finance taxation and monetary policy (Group 9311) 25. Real Estate Groups 6512 — Operators of nonresidential buildings 6513 — Operators of apartment buildings 6514 — Operators of dwellings other than apartment buildings 6515 — Operators of residential mobile home sites 6517 — Lessors of railroad property 6519 — Lessors of real property, not elsewhere classified 6531 — Real estate agents and managers 6541 — Title abstract offices 6552— Land subdividers and developers except cemeteries 26.Schools and educational services not elsewhere classified (Group 8299 27. Securitv and commodity brokers, dealers exchanges, and services Groups 6211 — Security brokers, dealers and flotation companies 6221 — Commodity contracts brokers and dealers 6231 — Security and commodity exchanges 6282 — Investment advice 6289 — Services allied with the exchange of securities or commodities, not elsewhere classified Exhibit IV B -Amended Language I22309.doc Page 6 of 11 Exhibit IV.B 28. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services (adult day care centers only) 8351 — Child day care services 29. Travel agencies (Group 4724) 30. Veterinary services for animal specialties (Group 0742) 31.Video tape rental (Group 7841, excluding adult oriented sales and rentals 32. United states postal service (Group 4311, excluding major distribution centers 33.Any other_princioal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA ") by the process outlined in the LDC. b. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: a. Utility buildings b. Essential service facilities C. Gazebos, statuary and other architectural features C. The following uses shall be prohibited: 1. Amusement and recreation services. not elsewhere classified (Grou 7999. NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 2. Air and water resource and solid waste management (Group 9511) 3. Business Services Groups 7313 — Radio, television, and publishers' advertising representatives 7331 — Direct mail advertising services 4. Correctional Institutions (Group 9223) 5. Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) (Group 5813) Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Pagel of I I Exhibit IV.B P8A 6. Educational services Groups 8211 —Elementary and secondary schools 8221 — Colleges, universities and professional schools 8222 — Junior colleges and technical institutes 8231 — Libraries 7. Health services Groups 8062 —General medical and surgical hospitals 8063 — Psychiatric hospitals 8069 — Specialty hospitals, except psychiatric 8. Miscellaneous Retail Groups 5921 — Liquor stores 5961 — Catalog and mail -order houses 5962 — Automatic merchandising machine operators 9. Personal services Groups 7211 — Power Laundries family and commercial 7261 — Funeral service and crematories 10. Social services Groups 8322 — Individual and family social services, excludin adult day care centers 8361— Residential care, including soup kitchens and homeless shelters d Development intensity shall be limited to 210.000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. area. f Development within this Subdistrict shall be phased and the following commitments related to area roadway improvements shall be completed within the specified timeframes: 1 Right -of -Way for Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion and Right -of -Way for the Wilson Boulevard Expansion will be donated to the County at no cost within 120 days of a written request from the County. request for reimbursement. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page 8 of 11 Exhibit IV.B w8A of Occupancy (CO) for more than 100,000 square feet of development. The applicant must obtain a C.O. for a grocery store as part of this 100,000 square feet, and the grocery store must be the first C.O. obtained. g. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the rezone ordinance must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial land uses will be compatible with neighboring residential uses. A conceptual plan, which identifies the location of the permitted development area and required preserve area for this subdistrict is attached. The preserve area depicted on the conceptual plan shall satisfy all comprehensive plan requirements for retained native vegetation, including but not limited to the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 of the CCME. A more detailed development plan must be developed and utilized for the required PUD rezoning. h. Development standards, including permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: (1) Landscape buffers adjacent to external rights -of -way shall be: • 15t /3 `d Streets- Minimum 30' wide enhanced buffer • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building, no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106, which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.H of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in Exhibit IV 8 - Amended Language 122309.doc Page 9 of I I Exhibit IV.B • >t annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. (5) If the proiect requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District the proiect shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. (6) If the proiect is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. a. Estates — Mixed Use District (VI)2— Neighborhood Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. - The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. (VI) a) The Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to provide rural design criteria to regulate all new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. (III)(V)(VI) b) Locations Neighborhood Centers are located along major roadways and are distributed within Golden Gate Estates according to commercial demand estimates, (See Map 9). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning, and conditional uses, as allowed in the Estates Zoning District, in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial and conditional use development. Four Neighborhood Centers are established as follows: • Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center. This center consists of all few r three quadrants at the intersection of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards (See Map 10). The NE and SE quadrants of the Center consist of Tract 1 and 2, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The NE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately 8.45 acres. The parcels within the NE quadrant shall be interconnected and Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page 10 of I I Exhibit IV.B 4 g p share access to Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard to minimize connections to these two major roadways. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development, and allocates 2.15 acres to project buffering and right -of -way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The NW quadFant of the (`ante. is appFOXimately A 94 agires d rnnci�l� nF T..'.�, iAA 1 In t 11 es GAlnen Gate Ce Ts The SW quadrant of the Center is approximately 4.86 acres in size and consists of Tract 125, Unit 12 of Golden Gate Estates. Also revise as follows: TABLE OF CONTENTS, LIST OF MAPS [Page 1] Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add name of this inset map in FLUE where maps are listed. Policy 1.1.2: [Page 5] The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: 1. ESTATES — MIXED USE DISTRICT a. Residential Estates Subdistrict b. Neighborhood Center Subdistirct C. Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict d. Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2. ESTATES — COMMERCIAL DISTRICT a. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict • add the new Subdistrict in FLUE policy 1.1.2.2 that lists all Designations /Districts /Subdistricts. Exhibit IV B - Amended Language 122309.doc Page I I of I I Exhibit IV.B C C a d N iF I z rn W C W 0 O N II u U r N ii N w 0 G ca o� Aw g� 1 ut ot U � y Y Fm u C y O' �y O N a u o M . 1 • Greenhouse Gas Reduction Analysis Collier County GMPA 2008 -1 For Proposed 41 -acre Commercial Project NW corner Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Collier County, Florida c/o Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Northern Trust Bank Building 4001 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 November 2009 Client File No: 2009 -11 -3 FK Keystone Development Advisors, LLC A LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTING COMPANY 12355 COLLIER BOULEVARD, Some B NM,uL s, FLORIDA 34116 TEu:P[tONE: (239) 263 -1100 FACSIMILE (239) 236 -1103 dave @keystonellc.net - www.keystonellc.net ME INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to analyze and calculate the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) and Vehicle Mile Travel (VMT) reduction for the proposed 2008 -1 GMP Amendment. The proposed amendment consists of a 210,000 sf shopping center located at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard with a grocery anchor within Golden Gate Estates, Naples, Florida. METHODOLOGY Our analysis began by reviewing the Collier Interactive Growth Model (CGIM) population projections for years 2010 through build -out. We then identified the homes located east of the project by Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) and those homes west of the proposed project by TAZ within the market area. The proposed project was identified as a destination alternative to existing shopping centers. The closest Neighborhood or Community shopping center alternative is 6 miles from the proposed center. Therefore every home located east of the proposed project would save 6 miles, one -way, or 12 miles roundtrip, for every trip not made to the existing shopping alternatives. Homes west of Wilson Boulevard have varying trip lengths to existing alternative centers depending upon their location. There are 6 TAZ's within the proposed project's market area. The centroid of each TAZ was located relative to the market area boundary which is 2 miles east of Collier Boulevard. The market area boundary is the approximate midpoint between the existing shopping centers and the proposed center. The reduction in VMT for homes west of Wilson Boulevard is found by multiplying the distance from each TAZ centroid to the market boundary by the number of homes in the subject TAZ. After calculating the reduction in VMT, a subsequent calculation is provided identifying the gallons of fuel saved. The quantity of fuel gallons saved is used in two additional calculations; one for reduction in carbon dioxide and a second for saved fuel costs by consumers in Golden Gate Estates. VMT REDUCTION CALCULATION The proposed project was identified as a destination alternative to existing grocery anchored shopping centers on Collier Boulevard. The closest Neighborhood or Community shopping center alternative is 6 miles from the proposed shopping center located at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Therefore every home located east of the proposed project will save 6 miles, one -way, for every trip not made to the existing shopping center alternatives on Collier Boulevard. According to the CGIM there are 3,217 homes within the market area east of Wilson Boulevard in 2010. In addition there are 2,177 homes west of Wilson Boulevard in 2010 for a total of 5,394 homes within the subject's market area. • ff A Based on the 12 mile roundtrip saved for every trip not made to the alternative centers for homes east of Wilson (and within the market area), to the proposed grocery anchored center, there will be a reduction in VMT of 36,972 miles. Said another way, assuming 100% of the homes described above make one roundtrip to the proposed center 38,604 miles will never be driven based on the number of 2010 households. For households west of Wilson, Table I shows the miles saved when consumers choose the proposed center over the existing alternatives. The miles shown are based on the difference between distances from the TAZ centroid to proposed center versus the existing centers: Table 1. TAZ ID# Miles Reduced (calculated from TAZ centroid) Round Trip Distance Saved /Reduced 215 5.5 miles I I miles 216 4 miles 8 miles 218.1 3.688 miles 7.376 miles 238.1 3.688 miles 7.376 miles 236 5.375 miles 10.75 miles Based on the specific number of homes in each TAZ and the round trip miles saved for every trip the households west of Wilson and within the market area make a dedicated trip to the proposed grocery anchored center there will be a reduction in VMT of 12,944 miles. Said another way, assuming 100% of the homes in TAZ 215, 216, 218.1, 238.1 and 236 make one roundtrip to the proposed center 12,944 miles will never be driven. The total reduction in VMT for each dedicated trip to the proposed center within the market area boundary is 51,549 miles. The next logical question is: how many trips are made to the grocery store by the typical household per week? According to the Food Marketing Institute the average number of trips to the grocery store per week is 2.0 per consumer. For the purposes of this report a conservative interpretation of the stated metric will be a consumer is a household regardless of the number of consumers live in each household (I household = I consumer). We are also neglecting any other trips generated by the center for needs other than groceries (i.e. dining, coffee, postal services, personal service, etc). Not all trips to the grocery store are unique or dedicated. There is the trip home from work where one stops and picks up a few necessary items. 'There are also specific trips or dedicated trips to the store by the household shopper where home is the origin and final destination. The trip home from work is called a pass -by trip. Based on the location of the proposed center, the transportation corridor and the lack of alternative grocery stores in the immediate area 35% of the trips will be pass -by and 65% will be dedicated. The adjusted weekly reduction in VMT due to shopping is therefore: 51,549 miles /trip x 2.0 trips / weekx 65% dedicated trip rate = 67,013 miles /week saved. The proposed center is expected to generate 303 new jobs in Golden Gate Estates according to a study by Fishkind and Associates. The location and distribution of each new employee is assumed to have the same distribution as the households. The average roundtrip savings per employee is calculated to be 9.56 miles. The adjusted weekly reduction in VMT due to employment is therefore: 303 employees x 9.56 miles /trip x 5 trips /week = 11,945 miles /week saved. The annual reduction in VMT based on the number of household in 2010 is 4,105,824 miles if the proposed GMPA is approved and built. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION The fleet fuel efficiency rate provided by Collier County Transportation Planning is 20.8 miles per gallon. Based on the reduction in VMT the volume of fuel conserved is 197,395 gallons in 2010. Collier County Transportation Planning also provided the rate of 19.6 pounds of carbon dioxide produced per gallon of fuel burned. Based on the rate of carbon dioxide produced per gallon burned, 1,934 tons of GHG would be reduced if the GMP amendment was approved. It is important to note the amount of carbon dioxide produced will increase every year until build -out of Golden Gate Estates. At build -out a reduction of 4,161 tons of GHG per year will be eliminated. The chart below shows the reduction in carbon dioxide in 5 year increments through build -out. Tons COZ Reduced by GMPA n,snn n,OOD 3,50D - - -- --- 3,000 2,50D 2,OOD 1,500 1,00D 50D 10 tih ryo ,yh 30 ,50 oP ay y� q'' �� 3 ,LO ,t0 ,t0 ,y0 ,10 ,10 .LO ,y0 .y0 ,t0 ,t0 J\so 6 M Tons CO2 FUEL SAVINGS The average price of gasoline today is $2.71. 1 he annual savings by consumers, assuming the GMP amendment is approved will be $2.71 x 197,395 gallons in 2010 = $534,942. Assuming the price of fuel never increases, the annual savings at build -out by consumers if this GMP amendment is approved will be $1,150,731. "Che chart below shows the reduction in consumer spending on fuel in 5 year increments through build -out. Annual $ Savings /Year on Fuel $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 O,yp O,yh O,tiO O,tiS O.yO O•�y OQO Oah Oy0 Oy5 OHO OOw. ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti J`a 0 U $ Saved /Year CONCLUSIONS The calculated annual reduction in Vehicle Mile Travel (VMT) for the proposed 2008 -1 GMP Amendment is 4,105,824 in 2010 and 8,832,117 by build -out. "I he calculated annual reduction in Greenhouse Gases is 1,934 tons in 2010 and 4,161 tons by build -out. The calculated annual savings to consumers due to reduced fuel consumption is $534,942 in 2010 and $1,150,731by build -out (in 2010 dollars and assuming the cost of fucl does not increase overtime). Exibit A P qP V N p di m • .0 n � J TIE 4 1 s m P i 9 H i 1 L� N N F p � N N _.,rv.... ^ y Estates Shopping Center Sub district Economic Impact Analysis November 24, 2009 Prepared for Mr. Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Mr. Wayne Arnold Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. Prepared by Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1415 Panther Lane, Suites 3461347 Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 254 -8585 • • 4 Table of Contents 1.0 Economic Impact Analysis Overview ............................................... ............................... 3 2.0 Economic Impact Methodology ........................................................ ............................... 3 3.0 Construction Impacts ....................................................................... ............................... 5 4.0 Operating Impacts ........................................................................... ............................... 6 5.0 Summary of Economic Impacts ....................................................... ............................... 7 Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 2 Commercial Needs Analysis 1.0 Economic Impact Analysis Overview Fishkind & Associates, Inc. conducted an analysis to determine the economic impacts of the construction and operations of the Golden Gate Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict located in Collier County. This study relies on data gathered from the following sources: • Client Provided Project Data • Consultant Estimated Construction Cost Data • Regional Input- Output Modeling System (RIMS II) 2.0 Economic Impact Methodology A systematic analysis of state and local level economic impacts is essential for effective planning in the public- and private- sectors. In the 1970's the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) developed a method known as RIMS (Regional Input- Output Modeling System), which measures these economic impacts. The RIMS method utilizes 1 -0 (Input- Output) tables, the distribution of the inputs purchased and the outputs sold, to analyze these economic effects. In the 1980's BEA completed an expanded update of RIMS which is now known as RIMS II (Regional Input- Output Modeling System). The regional multipliers presently found in a third edition of the BEA handbook reflect the most recent input - output data available. The Consultant uses RIMS II for this analysis. If the Project is approved and implemented, it will generate economic output from two separate sources: 1) Construction of the Project; and 2) The on -going operation of the Project (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 3 Commercial Needs Analysis These two sources of economic output have unique RIMS II multipliers which assist in calculating the total direct and indirect economic impacts of the project. The table below shows the two categories of economic output as well as the multipliers associated with each category for Collier County. T�klI 4 921MA II Mnitinliarc Activity Type Final- demand multiplier Direct -effect multiplier ut rs) n A Earnings (dollars) Column B Employment (jobs) Column C Earnings (dollars) Column D Employment (jobs) Column E Construction ji 56 F 0.7044 21.5918 1.8371 1.9434 Retail 89 0.6171 24.5830 1.7193 1.5220 Office 26 0.8055 21.7569 1.7847 2.1797 tiource: runny a tKegionai urpuo-vuipui rvwueuiiy oyaicu,) The economic impacts identified here take the form of: Output - value -added dollars and wage earnings spent and re -spent in the analysis area as a result of the project; Earnings - wage earnings in the analysis area generated by employment associated directly and indirectly with the project; and Employment - jobs created directly and indirectly in the analysis area as a result of the project. For both the construction and operational periods of the Project, there are direct and indirect economic impacts created. Direct economic benefits are the result of people purchasing goods or services from a business. For example, people shopping at the center create a direct impact on the economy. Indirect economic benefits are created by a 'ripple effect' through the economy. For example, as more people shop at the center the center must purchase more from wholesalers who in turn hire additional salespeople, clerical workers, etc. These employees in turn purchase additional goods and services in the local community, thus further indirectly impacting the economy. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 4 Commercial Needs Analysis • s 3.0 Construction Impacts The economic impacts of construction take place during the construction period only. These impacts will cease after the construction term. Based on the volume of construction, the time frame of construction, and generally accepted guidelines for number of construction employees required per commercial square foot, the Consultant estimated the number of construction workers that will be required assuming the project is completed in the time frame of 1 year. The table below shows the number of units /square feet for each facet of construction as well as the annual number of employees for the year. Table 2. Construction Employ ment Generated by the Project Source: Fishkind and Associates, Inc. Utilizing the multipliers found in the Table 1, the Consultant was able to determine the economic output that will be generated by the construction of the Project. According to the methodology outlined by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the construction employees will be directly responsible for $14.9 - million in economic output. The formula for determining this output is listed below: Econ. Output = (# of Emp. / (Emp. Final, Column C / Emp. Direct, Column E)) * 1,000,000 The direct economic impacts of each phase of construction (described above) combined with the indirect economic impacts which ripple throughout the County are significant. The total economic output was calculated using the RIMS II multiplier system and includes the output, earnings, and employment associated with the construction of the Project. Table 3 below summarizes the results of the economic output analysis for the construction phase. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Construction Employment Units Year 1 AM Ann. Retail (sgft) 195,000 154 154 Office (sgft) 15,000 12 12 Total 210,000 165 165 Source: Fishkind and Associates, Inc. Utilizing the multipliers found in the Table 1, the Consultant was able to determine the economic output that will be generated by the construction of the Project. According to the methodology outlined by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the construction employees will be directly responsible for $14.9 - million in economic output. The formula for determining this output is listed below: Econ. Output = (# of Emp. / (Emp. Final, Column C / Emp. Direct, Column E)) * 1,000,000 The direct economic impacts of each phase of construction (described above) combined with the indirect economic impacts which ripple throughout the County are significant. The total economic output was calculated using the RIMS II multiplier system and includes the output, earnings, and employment associated with the construction of the Project. Table 3 below summarizes the results of the economic output analysis for the construction phase. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis Tnhln R Frnnnmir_ (71iAmit fnr Construction Activity Type Direct Impacts Direct and Indirect Impacts # of Emp. Retail Employment (jobs) Output (dollars) Output (dollars) Earnings (dollars) Employment (jobs) Construction 165 $14,883,281 $30,445,240 $10,483,783 321 source: rlsnKl no ana Associales, Inc. anu rcl lvlo kndyl U 10 Illyurvu.yuu.,....o I I, Iy vY -111) 4.0 Operating Impacts The Client plans to construct retail and office commercial uses. At build out, the Project will have generated 303 onsite employees. This is shown in Table 4 below. Tnhln d rinnratinn FmnlnvmPnt GPnP_raterf by the Proiect Land Use Sqft Sgft/Emplovee # of Emp. Retail 195,000 750 260 Office 15,000 350 43 Total 210,000 n/a 303 source: rlsn Klnu d A6SUGId Mb Utilizing the multipliers found in Table 1, the Consultant was able to determine the annual economic output that is directly generated by the operation of the Project. According to the methodology outlined by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the permanent employees generated by the Project will be directly responsible for $20.4 - million annually in economic output. The formula for determining this output is listed below: Econ. Output = (# of Emp. / (Emp. Final, Column C / Emp. Direct, Column E)) " 1,000,000 The direct economic impacts of the Project at build out (described above) combined with the indirect economic impacts which ripple throughout the County are significant. The total economic output was calculated using the RIMS II multiplier system and includes the output, earnings, and employment generated by the completed Project. Table 5 shows the results of the economic output analysis for the ongoing operations of the Project. T.WJ r Frnnnmir Antnnt fnr ()nPratlnn -q Activity Type Direct Direct and Indirect Impacts Employment gobs) 7;;v$39,326,682 utput dollars) Earnings (dollars) Employment (jobs) Retail 260 0,084,250 $9,933,646 396 Office 43 242.432 $3 458 505 93 Total 303 $20,39,326,682 $13,392,151 489 source: riswna ana Associates, Inc. anu nnvlo mR yl Vlldl IIIpUL—u Pu IYIVVG,IIIy yo.ulu, Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict 6 Commercial Needs Analysis 5.0 Summary of Economic Impacts The proposed Golden Gate Shopping Center Subdistrict is directly responsible for a level of economic output, earnings, and employees as well as indirectly responsible for additional output, earnings, and employees which has a ripple effect throughout the rest of the County. The total direct economic impact from the project is estimated at $14.9 - million annually during the construction period and $20.4 - million annually during the operating period. This figure is a function of the 165 construction employees and 303 permanent retail /office employees. It should be noted again, that the impacts of the construction will terminate upon project buildout. Therefore, the on -going direct economic impact will be $20.4 - million. In addition to the direct impacts, the project has an indirect ripple effect on the entire Collier County economy. In total the project will be directly and indirectly responsible for generating $30.5- million in economic output throughout the County during the construction period. Also during this period, it will create $10.5- million in earnings and be responsible for 321 employees throughout the County. Allowing for the temporary nature of the construction impacts, the on -going total economic output will be $39.3 - million, the on -going earnings will be $13.4 - million, and 303 permanent new jobs will be created, along with 186 additional jobs supported indirectly. Table 6 summarizes the total economic impact of the construction and operation of the project. Table 6. Summary of Project Economic Impacts Activity Type Direct Impacts Direct and Indirect Impacts Employment gobs) Output (dollars) Output (dollars) Earnings (dollars) Employment (jobs) Construction Im acts Construction 165 $14,883,281 $30,445,240 $10,483,783 321 Activity Type Direct Impacts Direct and Indirect Impacts Employment gobs) Output (dollars) Output (dollars) Earnings (dollars) Employment gobs) Permanent Im acts Retail 260 $16,097,303 $30,084,250 $9,933,646 396 Office 43 $4 .293.613 $9.242.432 $3,458.505 93 Total 303 $20,390,916 $39,326,682 $13,392,151 489 Source: Fishkind and Associates, Inc. and RIMS (Regional Input - Output Modeling System) Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Commercial Needs Analysis ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER 8 A SUBDISTRICT CP- 2008 -1 COMMUNITY SUPPORT PACKET BCC Transmittal Hearing January 19, 2010 wol SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNITY SUPPORT PACKET ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD and WILSON BOULEVARD APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED BY: COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER, P.A. 4001 Tamaimi Trail North, Suite 300, Naples, Florida 34103 239.435.3535 239.435.1218 fax and Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Spring, Florida 34134 239.947.1144 239.947.0375 fax GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SUBMITTED APRIL 2008 AMENDED APRIL 2009 AMENDED AUGUST 2009 AMENDED SEPTEMBER 2009 CP- 2008 -1 Page 1 of 47 • V • Estates Shopping Center Public Outreach The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Comprehensive Plan amendment proposes to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit a grocery store anchored shopping center to be developed on a 41 acre site near the intersection of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The Subdistrict will permit a maximum of 225,000 square feet of commercial space, including a required full- service grocery store component and other uses commonly found in neighborhood and community commercial centers such as banks, restaurants and personal services. The grocery store will be a minimum of 27,000 square feet and be the first use to receive a certificate of occupancy. The site is central to the northern Golden Gate Estates area residential population, and is located near one of the most established intersections within Golden Gate Estates. This central location makes the site ideally situated to provide convenient shopping and service opportunities currently unavailable in this area of Golden Gate Estates. In addition, the proposed development intensity is approximately 5,500 square feet per acre which is less than the intensity of approximately 6,000 square feet per acre utilized by staff in its analysis for the current estates neighborhood centers and estates vacant designated commercial land. The property owner has worked hard to enlist the input of area residents in determining support for a shopping center and what uses are needed to serve the residents of the area. An extensive public outreach effort has occurred over the past two years in which the application has been pending Board of County Commissioner review. The outreach effort has included mail surveys, extensive public meetings and focus group efforts. A summary of the community outreach effort is described below: • Focus Group Input ( November 2007) The Developer invited a number of area residents to participate in a focus group to share ideas on what types of uses would be well received in a shopping center at this location. The participants identified several land uses that were needed in their community such as grocery store. sit -down restaurant, hair salon, bank, etc. • Informal Meeting with Nearby Property Owners (January 15, 2008) • Golden Gate Estates Civic Association Meeting (January 16, 2008) • County NIM Meeting (February 19, 2008) At the February 19, 2008 NIM it was clear that there was a tremendous amount of misinformation pertaining to the project. In addition, at that NIM, the nearby residents requested that there be more details presented as part of the comprehensive plan amendment process. The Petitioner voluntarily withdrew Page 2 of 47 from the 2007 amendment cycle and resubmitted its petition as part of the 2008 amendment cycle. After the petition was resubmitted to the County as part of the 2008 cycle, the Petitioner then continued to present the petition and solicit information through public outreach. Results of the Fathom analysis and a more detailed comprehensive plan petition which included a conceptual master plan was presented to the public in many public information meetings. The process is outlined below. As a result of the out reach, the petition has become more detailed than is typically found in a comprehensive plan amendment. • Fathom Study Interviews (February 2 -5 and February 28/29,2008) 1.5 hour long interviews with project neighbors and area property owners to determine how a center should function and feel. • Mail Survey (March 4, 2008) A survey was prepared and mailed to more than 5,500 property owner is our defined market area, with a response rate of approximately 30 %. An independent accounting firm tabulated the results, in which 83% of the respondents indicated that they supported a community sized shopping center at this location. Respondents also indicated their preference for prospective tenants to include major grocer, post office, family restaurant, drug store, hardware store, and bank. • Immediate neighbors meeting (November 5, 2008) • General area meeting (November 13, 2008) • General area meeting in Spanish (November 20, 2008) • Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association meeting (January 21, 2009) • Collier County Fair, Community Outreach Booth (February 5-15,2009) • Homeowners Organization of Golden Gate Estates (February 25, 2009) • Collier Citizens News paer independent poll (March 6, 2009) February 2 "d thru March 6f , 2009, Yes or no For a 40 acre 225,000 sq. ft. shopping center at the NW corner of Wilson and Golden Gate Blvd. 2.365 total vote YES 65% NO 34% • County NIM (September 14, 2009) • 1 Page 3 of 47 • Meetings with representative of the First and Third group both prior to and after the September 14, 2009 NIM. Community Support The property owner has also solicited support for the proposed Estates Shopping Center comprehensive plan amendment by mailing to each property owner within our identified market trade area a letter requesting support for the project. To date, 1,838 letters supporting the shopping center have been returned to us from this initial mailing. Additional letters were signed and received at various community events such as the Collier County Fair. In total, 1,947 letters of support have been received. We have enclosed a representative sample letter, a CD which includes a copy of each returned letter of support, a spreadsheet identifying the name and address of each supporting letter, and a map identifying the location of each of the letters. Staff has indicated that the proposed plan amendment represents a departure from the resident's established vision for Golden Gate Estates, and that the vision can only be established through public input and a coordinated effort to insure that commercial centers are appropriately located. With over a dozen community meetings in which resident input has been provided, the Estates Shopping Center has established an unprecedented level of community input for a privately initiated growth management plan amendment. In both mail and newspaper surveys of area residents, there is overwhelming support for a grocery store anchored shopping center at this central location within Golden Gate Estates. Staff has also noted that there are no other community commercial centers within Golden Gate Estates. Based on the community input there is clearly a demand for the proposed amendment, and the County through use of the Collier Interactive Growth Model has determined that there is no supply of this type of commercial within Golden Gate Estates. The Estates shopping center as proposed is a "community" sized center. The first certificate of occupancy will be for a grocery store that is at least 27,000 square feet in size. The comprehensive plan amendment proposes the uses requested by the Golden Gate Estates residents. In addition, the Petitioner has included a conceptual master plan that assures compatibility with surrounding neighbors and compatibility with the Golden Gate Estates community. Finally, the Petitioner is in the process of preparing a petition for PUD zoning on the property that will be processed concurrently with the comprehensive plan amendment. The proposed PUD further assures that the project is compatible with the immediate neighbors and the Golden Gate Estates community. Page 4 of 47 RESIDENT NAME 1 Adam and Amy Reynolds 2 Robert and Bianca Long 3 Leslie Perez 4 Scott Meadows 5 Vicente Camacho 6 Sharon Waterson 7 Betty Smoot 8 JoAnne Baker 9 Joseph Figga 10 Francisco Valerno it Rachel McCrary 12 Juan Sanchez 13 Luis and Maria Rivas 14 James and Amy Piechocki 15 Ken Langford 16 Pat Barth 17 Maria and Lillian Lozano 18 Joseph Short 19 Vilma Garcia 20 Ruth Schmit 21 Michael Malay 22 Sandy Steinheiser 23 Estella Medina 24 Gerald Swales 25 Scott Falcone 26 Jose and Geraldine Conde 27 Guillermo Pena 28 Guillermo Pena 29 Carleton Tapley 30 AJ Arguello 31 Almermora Toro 32 Carlos Martinez 33 Joy Anderson 34 T. Robert Lopez 35 Barbara Rowan 36 Yolanda Mayo 37 Becky Alzamora 38 Aurelio Pelier 39 Travis Morgan 40 Peter Hablutzel 41 Magaly Santana 42 Lisa Malone 43 Kenneth Oppie 44 Richard Berman 45 Seafood Christian PACKET1 ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 1301st Street NW Naples FL 34120 1601st Street NW Naples FL 34120 171 1st Street NW Naples FL 34120 181 1st Street NW Naples FL 34120 220 1st Street NW Naples FL 34120 221 1st Street NW Naples FL 34120 2301st Street NW Naples FL 34120 3401st Street NW Naples FL 34120 4101st Street NW Naples FL 34120 4301st Street NW Naples FL 34120 841 1st Street NW Naples FL 34120 91 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 160 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 170 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 230 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 420 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 490 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 660 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 661 3rd Street NW Naples FL 34120 120 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 130 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 130 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 140 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 321 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 331 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 371 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 411 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 391 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 444 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 450 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 470 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 771 Golden Gate Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 91 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 121 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 110 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 121 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 131 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 141 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 1701st Street SW Naples FL 34117 241 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 275 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 325 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 375 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 541 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 570 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 Lz PHONE# 2393527570 2397841873 2395959610 2392180329 2393532548 2392730601 2393530037 2393548096 2394557910 2393317176 2394552877 2393482454 2394554673 2394553305 2393483340 2393537515 2396926266 2392611369 2392807409 2394555620 2396926706 2392003736 2393542797 2394040364 2392538460 2394046654 2396920561 2393535970 2393528204 2394551065 2394551382 2398252308 2394552616 2396828393 2394658770 Page 5 of 47 I Page 6 of 47 PACKET1 � 8A 46 Berne Alexis 581 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393532106 47 Mary Ann Cook 611 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393543019 48 M. Anderson 7301st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2395303294 49 Lawrence Rioux 760 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393538553 50 James D'Agata, Jr. 771 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394049054 51 John Trapani 831 1st Street SW Naples FL 34117 4403760035 52 Juvencio Nicolas 104 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394624417 53 Syda Delgado 210 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 54 Yusimi Valencia 220 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393538374 55 R. Campins 240 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 56 Kathleen Miller 260 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393528989 57 lunette Accime 340 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2396016460 58 Nancy Pullen 381 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394552695 59 Grady Harrison 441 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 60 Aida Sola 490 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 61 Michael Stallsworth 470 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2398600117 62 Tammy Gainey 510 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 9546056309 63 Judith Montgomery 570 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2396591672 64 Patrice Dalton 621 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393538254 65 Vicki Grieser 621 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 66 Sherman Breefore 621 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 67 Martha Balliache 690 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 68 Carol Scott 760 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 69 Mildred Sullivan 780 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393520465 70 Ron Maglothin 791 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 71 Meliza Terrero 840 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394556900 72 Natalie Risden 841 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393521091 73 Manuel Terrero 840 3rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394556900 74 James Ashness 170 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2394555946 75 Leslie Pelaez 171 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2395959610 76 John Greaves, Jr. 190 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2393528771 77 Valentin Ayala, Jr. 321 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2393530743 78 Marina Guzman 360 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2393493449 79 Pauline Figga, Sr. 411 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2394557910 80 Luisa Tamayo 460 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2393524432 81 Dany Thuman 470 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 82 Domenick D'Alterio 500 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 83 Audrey Thomas 560 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2396929162 84 Jeanne Ann Murray 671. Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2394556006 85 Maria Gonzalez 710 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 86 Kenneth O'Neil 875 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2398257488 87 Deborah Bator 991 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 2393314569 88 Jose and Isabel Perez 110 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 2394385835 89 Bernice Rowley 186 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 2397759702 90 Warnell Ogden 271 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 2393488589 91 Taril Bruce Sims 360 Wilson Blvd, S Naples FL 34117 2393487087 Page 6 of 47 PACKETI 92 Bruce Sims 380 Wilson Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 93 Evelyn Burrell 430 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 94 Robert Meneley 440 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 95 Henry and Denise Fernandez 521 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 96 Dan and Julie Zalimer 581 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 97 James and Jamie Baker 810 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 98 Maria Slenkai 835 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 99 John Donovan 840 Wilson Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 s 2393487087 2394306085 2393047520 2396929904 2392533586 2392533586 Page 7 of 47 Page 8 of 47 PACKET 2 I. Q n f'1 RESIDENT NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONEY# 1 Jesus Sanchez 160 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2392534406 2 Charles Goodacre 191 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393530886 3 Rosalinda Blankenship 210 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394556940 4 Cayman Warrington 2305th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394657214 5 Sam Ripoli 340 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2392902353 6 Jon Anglin 390 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394553391 7 Louise Smith 425 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 8 Angela Henderson 440 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393318415 9 Matthew Collier 460 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394655064 10 Teresa Hammons 490 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394553370 11 Ibrahim Imbrahim 510 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393524427 12 Yolanda Santana 561 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393537011 13 Christina Lozano 611 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394652147 14 Jay Bonard 675 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393542136 15 Shane Tilley 7205th Street SW Naples FL 34117 16 W. Fred Rump 730 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2397757838 17 Alice Roth 740 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393983944 18 Maco Touchet 790 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394553584 19 Dagmar Regel 810 5th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394552598 20 Diana and Jeff Jones 216 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2394340091 21 Julie Roy 241 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2396013174 22 Linda Nolan 281 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 23 Lee Land 411 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2394552408 24 Monica Prieto 520 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2392628234 25 Rick Compton 525 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393520981 26 Carl Schumann 540 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393525276 27 Jacob Fischer 595 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2394556656 28 Thomas Adams 611 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393541588 29 Raudel Hernandez 680 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393482836 30 Fred and Monica Rump 730 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2397757838 31 Vivian Randall 741 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2392061972 32 Luis Espino 761 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2395952368 33 Stephen Harrison 880 5th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2398215180 34 Magaly Saggio 111 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 35 Kris Richard 130 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 36 Frank Gonzalez 161 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 37 Randall Mohr 261 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2394386778 38 Kelly Smith 291 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 39 Valerie Hayri 431 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393520868 40 Debra Manefield 460 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 41 Leslie Figuekoa 560 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393524393 42 Denise Brimmee 561 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393543224 43 Norma Martin 711 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 7867152464 44 Paul and Deborah Rompot 761 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2397747050 45 Sandra Murray 811 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393045420 46 Sandi Chernoff 840 7th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393483171 Page 8 of 47 PACKET 2 47 Joy Woods 1017th Street SW Naples FL 34117 48 Lomry Moore 120 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 49 Laura Goodknight 161 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 50 Barbara Hernandez 211 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 51 Mark and Sarah Poteet 2417th Street SW Naples FL 34117 52 Liliana Garcia 2707th Street SW Naples FL 34117 53 Monica Padilla 280 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 54 David Clarkson 260 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 55 Rick Mercer 385 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 56 Roberto Perez 4217th Street SW Naples FL 34117 57 Dave Schaner 470 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 58 Maria Gonzalez 538 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 59 Norberto DeArmos 540 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 60 Jon Fiori 610 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 61 Evidio Gueuara 6217th Street SW Naples FL 34117 62 Brian Stafford 671 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 63 Cherylann Amodeo 230 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 64 James Warner 740 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 65 Cheryl VonGeldo 760 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 66 K Duggan 770 7th Street SW Naples FL 34117 67 Brian Coleman 7317th Street SW Naples FL 34117 68 Janine Dettbarn 7217th Street SW Naples FL 34117 69 Craig Mason 7817th Street SW Naples FL 34117 70 Dave Alexander 120 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 71 Randy Riordin 1609th Street SW Naples FL 34117 72 David and Janice Harper 1709th Street SW Naples FL 34117 73 Joanne Keys 221 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 74 Guelys Hernandez 260 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 75 Sandra Wirt 280 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 76 Shyrie Ferminen 320 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 77 Michael Reynolds 460 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 78 Jayne Erickson 495 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 79 Patricia Utsher 499 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 80 Mike and Lonna Santiago 621 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 81 Charles Holliday 680 9th Street SW Naples FL 34117 82 Kathy Bartalin 7119th Street SW Naples FL 34117 83 Richard and Julie Hamilton 7719th Street SW Naples FL 34117 84 Louis LaFemina, Jr. 3409th Street SW Naples FL 34117 85 Ashley Reites 3719th Street SW Naples FL 34117 86 Curtis Boyatt 145 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 87 Michael and Jane Rice 162 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 88 Alberto Fajardo 1719th Street NW Naples FL 34120 89 Mark and Elizabeth Poole 2409th Street NW Naples FL 34120 90 Robert Windusch 3409th Street NW Naples FL 34120 91 Michelle Nash 3619th Street NW Naples FL 34120 92 Mark and Conny Kennedy 440 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 93 R. Miller 490 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 w 8A 2393525257 2393527631 2393521836 2394552815 2393532905 r7ckRl11WPOU 2394629268 2394552950 2393483700 2392729714 2393535713 2392131246 2393534955 2398601077 2394655200 2392728353 2393526725 2397847308 2393482752 2398253448 2393520391 2397757079 2395957620 2394175150 2393521830 2394553950 2393981017 2395953432 2394650262 2393525332 2393045200 2393537821 2394557052 2392489471 2393532835 Page 9 of 47 PACKET 2 94 Kevin Smitz 510 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 95 Cindy Titus 591 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 96 Tammy Canealosa 610 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 97 Elizabeth Mulco 7119th Street NW Naples FL 34120 98 Lora Skinner 765 9th Street NW Naples FL 34120 99 David and Patricia Deberaidis, Sr. 11011th Street SW Naples FL 34117 100 Bridget Doria 23011th Street SW Naples FL 34117 101 Jack Piper 235 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 102 Janis and Larry Tolley 330 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 103 Diego Palacio 35111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 104 Juan Suariez 34111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 105 Brian and Virginia Caron 355 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 106 Jason Gzay 41111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 107 Dania Sosa 43011th Street SW Naples FL 34117 108 Joseph Steves 54111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 109 Helene Heaton 560 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 110 Charles Yates 561 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 111 Frank Pardze 620 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 112 Geoffrey Yergey 660 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 113 Synra Gutienez 62111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 114 Linda Puchhas 66111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 115 lames Clifford 73011th Street SW Naples FL 34117 116 Jorge Quinones 78011th Street SW Naples FL 34117 117 Jeff and Linda Zokan 781 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 118 Lugo Gomez 1370 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 119 Mary Terrell 1230 11th Street SW Naples FL 34117 120 Kenyon Egbert 113111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 121 Esmeralda Alvarado 139111th Street SW Naples FL 34117 122 Merritt Reed 10111th Street NW Naples FL 34120 123 Robert and Marjorie Erickson 18111th Street NW Naples FL 34120 124 David and Susan Martinsen 350 11th Street NW Naples FL 34120 125 Joe Cordera 375 11th Street NW Naples FL 34120 126 Ernesto and Megan Rubin 79111th Street NW Naples FL 34120 127 Richard and Stacee Burton 68511th Street NW Naples FL 34120 Total Sheets 1 -2 226 ME, 2393534498 2394553592 2392899416 2392487839 9088132838 2394554002 2398254010 2394555953 2394553982 2393536424 2393483267 2394551719 2397758931 2397935135 2392986483 2394558362 2393481027 2393531220 2393527906 2392983186 2394559181 2393539201 2397747101 2393700078 2392539234 2394559869 2393482697 2393489713 2398252202 Page 10 of 47 PACKET 3 RESIDENTNAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 1 Kim Deberardis 1302nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2 Richard and Patricia Becker 521 2nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 3 Juan and Daria Rodriguez 810 2nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 4 James Ito 715 2nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 5 Luis and Celida Trujillo 770 2nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 6 Alex Vienna 2670 2nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 7 Michael and Deborah Heisey 140 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 8 Robert Siwals 170 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 9 Juan Gonzalez 191 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 10 Carlos Santiago 4402nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 11 Iraida Castano 461 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 12 Luis and Yania Sanchez 481 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 13 Joseph and France Amell, Jr. 631 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 14 Kenneth Parker 810 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 15 Thomas and Roxana Walsh 820 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 16 Mike Longo 8402nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 17 Jesse Olsovsky 2431 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 18 Todd and Lori Lainhart 2531 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 19 Maria Rakes 2820 2nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 20 Janet MacLaverty 210 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 21 Kristina Gentile 491 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 22 Bobby and Leigh Jones 510 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 23 Leonardo Pace 581 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 24 Jack Craft, III 680 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 25 John Venuto 691 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 26 Jack Craft, Jr. 700 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 27 Clare Lewis 741 4th Street NE Naples FL 34120 28 Timothy and Deborah Reynolds 7804th Street NE Naples FL 34120 29 Chris and Leticia Trejo 8104th Street NE Naples FL 34120 30 Eddie Frost 28214th Street NE Naples FL 34120 31 Rodrigo Morales 1414th Street SE Naples FL 34117 32 Charles and Edith Phillips 1604th Street SE Naples FL 34117 33 Donna Eiswerth 3104th Street SE Naples FL 34117 34 Mary Shipman 3304th Street SE Naples FL 34117 35 Gina Dake 331 4th Street SE Naples FL 34117 36 Michael Castro 390 4th Street SE Naples FL 34117 37 Mary Johnson 4104th Street SE Naples FL 34117 38 Herbert and Joy Wright 490 4th Street SE Naples FL 34117 39 Juan Medina 6204th Street SE Naples FL 34117 40 Luis and Ivette Monroig 621 4th Street SE Naples FL 34117 41 Miguel Garcia 841 4th Street SE Naples FL 34117 42 Georgette Butcher 111 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 43 Patricia Harbester 190 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 44 Rick Ingle 2316th Street NE Naples FL 34120 45 Jon Stephens 260 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 46 Oscar Williams, Jr. 340 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 47 Daniel Matton 3906th Street NE Naples FL 34120 48 Edward Frick 4106th Street NE Naples FL 34120 PHONE# 2393520582 2393536472 2393521293 2393536580 2397772585 2394342986 2393530899 2392537211 2397775656 2393257189 2393522700 2393045485 2395959600 2393540159 2394554686 2394559144 2393489551 2392936163 2393536882 2393529654 2394385056 2392983136 2394553327 2393537298 2394558797 2399190861 2392489527 2393529325 2394553793 2394552045 2395713506 2393537437 2397750211 2397779994 2393041438 2393539399 2393529848 2393525507 2393480388 Page 11 of 47 PACKET 3 49 David and Courtnay Newransky 531 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 50 Norbert Ward 590 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 51 Efrain and Pallas Diaz 591 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 52 Kenneth and Kelly Geiger, Jr. 640 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 53 Alexander and Jenny 7orilla 6616th Street NE Naples FL 34120 54 George Hurst 731 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 55 William Mejia 681 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 56 Soyla Rausch 730 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 57 Brianne Hibbans 7916th Street NE Naples FL 34120 58 Patrick and Cindy Murray 870 6th Street NE Naples FL 34120 59 Josefina and Sidronio Lopez 110 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 60 Maria Zavala 1106th Street SE Naples FL 34117 61 Paul Schoeninger 131 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 62 Cynthia Crouse 171 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 63 Manuel Rodriguez 2406th Street SE Naples FL 34117 64 Salusyiano Rives 310 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 65 Trina Cooper 341 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 66 Tim Lynch 341 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 67 Stacy May 410 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 68 Roberto and Trinidad Santana 440 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 69 Otto and Wilma Lchachmer 470 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 70 Kenneth and Debra Sarrio 660 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 71 Marc and Rachel Shea 661 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 72 Alfredo Villagomez 711 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 73 Luis Artenga 775 6th Street SE Naples FL 34117 74 Thomas Roe 130 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 75 Edmund Chandler 181 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 76 Robert Hubing 2208th Street SE Naples FL 34117 77 Mary Verro 240 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 78 Vincent Barbera 241 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 79 Alexandra Perez 260 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 80 Jose Perez 280 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 81 Denise Belyea 4308th Street SE Naples FL 34117 82 Fred and Tina Ottman 491 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 83 Maxine Bailey 5208th Street SE Naples FL 34117 84 Diana Ortiz 561 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 85 Liz Lister 610 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 86 Robert Van Hullo 611 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 87 Michael Fraire 730 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 88 Damir Akhoundon 755 Sth Street SE Naples FL 34117 89 Gary Guerrero, Sr. 775 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 90 Anne -Liese Heinichen 755 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 91 William Gurley 810 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 92 Mark and Debbie Van Prooyen 821 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 93 Parambil Mathew 8308th Street SE Naples FL 34117 94 Willy Metayer 831 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 95 Amy Pile 841 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 96 Clara Chavarro 910 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 97 Jamie Caldwell 1621 8th Street SE Naples FL 34117 • 1 • 2396928601 2392625878 2393539271 2393042316 2395374584 2396815046 2393538242 2394035490 2397742545 2392346890 2394558254 2393524131 2393487835 2393537575 2393528424 2393540863 2393045488 2393534795 2393527781 2393537247 2398252836 2392890958 5134600807 2392539711 2394550296 2396011971 2393533306 9545934963 2393318450 2393481222 2394554622 2393044422 2393981248 2394559316 3053946166 2393487726 2393529951 2394558127 2398215218 2394557588 3053957719 2394043760 Page 12 of 47 PACKET3 98 Juan Navarro 102 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 99 Paula Gustavo 104 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 100 Virginia Ruiz 1308th Street NE Naples FL 34120 101 Beatriz and Renier Rodriguez 141 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 102 Arbedio Rives 2318th Street NE Naples FL 34120 103 Debra Berry 490 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 104 David and Theresa Thompson 540 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 105 Timothy Willis 4818th Street NE Naples FL 34120 106 Gardine and Susan Betts 770 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 107 Kathy Johnson 780 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 108 Jacob and Katie Flicker 831 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 109 Peter and Mildred Williams 840 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 110 Belkis Casas 1840 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 111 Richard Eckstein 2541 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 112 Maria Cox 2371 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 113 Michelle Bigelow 4860 8th Street NE Naples FL 34120 114 William Sherwood 10910th Street NE Naples FL 34120 115 Timothy Stern 130 10th Street NE Naples FL 34120 116 Diovanys Hernandez 17110th Street NE Naples FL 34120 117 Eugen Naum 19010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 118 Raymond Conrad 22110th Street NE Naples FL 34120 119 Carl and Karen Shepard 29010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 120 Ellen Mendo 341 10th Street NE Naples FL 34120 121 Jennifer Hubbell 38110th Street NE Naples FL 34120 122 Melanie Bocock 420 10th Street NE Naples FL 34120 123 Jenna Large and Sean Sims 56010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 124 Dennis and Nancy Large 56010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 125 Jesse Smith 63010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 126 Stefan Mende 64010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 127 Carlos and Lenia Sardinas 81010th Street NE Naples FL 34120 128 Nesther Valiente 81110th Street NE Naples FL 34120 129 Orlando Rodriguez 840 10th Street NE Naples FL 34120 130 Mark Thieme 18010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 131 Kara Souza 21010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 132 Kenneth Owens, Jr. 22110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 133 Jack and Barbara Hogue 23010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 134 Jeffrey and Joanne Snyder 31010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 135 Parker Fausnight 31110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 136 Joanne Tirnk 31110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 137 Elizabeth Bellaris 34010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 138 Kirk and Laura Fernald 46110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 139 Coretchen Moen 390 10th Street SE Naples FL 34117 140 Gale, and Jennifer Ordanez 39110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 141 Jamie Luderman 542 10th Street SE Naples FL 34117 142 Florencio Andrade 55010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 143 Hector and Maria Herrera 56010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 144 Charles Montgomery 58010th Street SE Naples FL 34117 145 Emily Longworth 71110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 146 Sadie Grace 71110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 ' � I 2393040201 2393532021 2393533271 2393482486 2396925910 2393314795 2393530222 2395951004 2394552356 2393042817 23292494475 2393488978 2394552296 2394042749 2392898296 2393535662 2393522833 2393531396 2393526324 2393314705 2394552500 2393530644 2393530644 2394556779 2394042268 2393535849 2392893881 2393528788 2393482626 2393489442 2394553760 2399611189 2396437302 2393986380 2393529001 2393535134 2398618688 2392904791 2394557628 2394382040 2393526301 2393532105 2397843020 Page 13 of 47 Page 14 of 47 8 A PACKET 3 147 Richard and Terri Dubrueler 811 10th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394557425 148 Josue and Sara Gonzalez 83110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393537614 149 Suzanne Bartolatto 91110th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393480451 150 Timothy Hicts 107 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392892029 151 Nancy Carter 13012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393041619 152 Irvine Baez 129 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2397323036 153 Kevin Miller 18012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392001832 154 Donna Spohter 191 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2396010339 155 Vandee Boyatt 245 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393530177 156 William Lawrence 28112th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393042711 157 Joel Barrio 36012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394552959 158 Richard Graham 43012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394044821 159 Diane Eager 44112th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393049850 160 Thomas and Justina Allen 460 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393537276 161 Raul Menendez 52012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393534779 162 Maryanis Sotolongo 53012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393526254 163 Marie Crevecoear 57012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 164 Hazel Durety 57112th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394550826 165 David Bowman 590 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394307293 166 Ralph Anthony 66112th Street NE Naples FL 34120 167 Charles and Victoria Cassin 731 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394552712 168 Gayle Aull 810 12th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393538772 169 Bryan Bo 81112th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2398214085 170 Karen and Greg Martsolf 83012th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393480703 171 Earl and Marcia Nass 126 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395710943 172 Paul Murphy 16012th Street SE Naples FL 34117 173 Todd Watkins 191 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 174 Brian and Victoria Hughes 310 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392891047 175 Nayris De La Torres 311 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394380081 176 Janet Stocker 790 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 177 Josh and Melanie Norris 790 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393040620 178 Jose Valarez 829 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394510411 179 Rodger Tobey 130 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393543399 180 Deborah Kennedy and Anna Kobus 28112th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392346595 181 Brian Hicks 560 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395952628 182 Frank Richard and Debra Good 571 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2396432218 183 William and Celine Emerson 761 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392070724 184 Mario and Rene Fernandez 910 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392898718 185 Michael and Tersa Dent 225 12th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394558276 186 Kevin Schoh 130 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 187 Bruno and Vereonika Bustamante 189 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2398776267 188 Scott Perez 811 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393531185 189 Victor Ira 581 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 190 Mario Zapata 480 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 3059783155 191 Ralph and Wilma Balzarano 78114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394551231 192 Elvin Cornit 869 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393483558 193 Walter and Regina Ignell 235 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393538468 194 Rochelle Mathis 931 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 195 Benjamin and Cynthia Kurke 140 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393535905 Page 14 of 47 PACKET 3 196 Douglas Jones 26014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 197 Juan Palacios 51114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 198 Tina Spergei and Lawrence Reich 690 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 199 Jeffrey Perkins 74014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 200 George Williams 17114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 201 Pedro and Mariam Padilla 78014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 202 Philip and Mariamma Samuel 870 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 203 Paulette Jones 41114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 204 Rusty Williams, Sr. 17114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 205 David Silm 11114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 206 Todd Sanneiz 13114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 207 Patricia Verellen 18114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 208 lane Thompson 19014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 209 Luis Medina 41014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 210 Russell Jarchon 561 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 211 Theresa Scheller 660 14th Street SE Naples FL 34117 212 Tom Haskins 68014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 213 Mr. and Mrs. Padilla 78014th Street SE Naples FL 34117 214 Keith Walker 88114th Street SE Naples FL 34117 215 Juan Tryillo 27014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 216 Nancy Frye 36114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 217 Linda Dafcilo 34014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 218 Joe and Gloria Guzman 28114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 219 Zayli Perez 49014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 220 Luisa and Rodolfo Ortiz 61114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 221 Glenn Duryea 36014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 222 Ashley Stalling, III 540 14th Street NE Naples FL 34120 223 Richard Bowen 64114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 224 Heather Knight 43014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 225 Anthony Forster 44414th Street NE Naples FL 34120 226 Jorge Vazquez 62114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 227 Mark and Erica Fields 89114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 228 Juan and Sandra Sanchez 914 14th Street NE Naples FL 34120 229 Pedro Roa 11014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 230 Gerald Batten 21014th Street NE Naples FL 34120 231 Joe Guzman 28114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 232 Reynolto Woodward 59114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 233 Renee Sosbe 790 14th Street NE Naples FL 34120 234 Brenda Bayrd 38114th Street NE Naples FL 34120 235 Robert Elliott 109 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 236 Binsworth and Merle Robinson 11016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 237 Debra Van Gelder 19016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 238 Joseph and Roxanna Hicks 19116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 239 David and Jerrie Whitford 24116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 240 Ariel and Gloria Reyes 32116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 241 Renier Nuno 33016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 242 Michael Sooley 34116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 243 Gary and Lawana Zielinski 38116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 244 Onel Gort 42116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394347306 2398777229 2398963858 2398105562 2393312995 2393487311 2393312281 2394559962 2393483283 2393529937 2394555115 2398251045 2396432149 2392481239 2394037150 2393487311 5122154207 2396928355 2397770015 2397745588 2394551716 2392008224 2393528714 2393529491 2394948240 2393533805 2392611776 2392072047 2393040464 2393041575 2396879776 2393521122 2397938927 2393520620 2393482157 2398779347 2393538565 2398604102 2393533397 2394557436 2393540530 Page 15 of 47 a'4 Page 16 of 47 " PACKET3 245 Leonela Morales 440 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393040189 246 Anita Tuapola 48016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393535968 247 Dillia Camacho 540 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393531380 248 Victor Molina 570 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393542473 249 Gabriel Noyole 58016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394557028 250 Louis Tintodonalo 610 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393480495 251 Lilla Chastain 620 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393526226 252 Randy and Pamela Garrett 631 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393528999 253 Rodney and Beverly Foytik 581 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 254 Nakia Thomas 63016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392000782 255 Jean Augustin 63016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392724158 256 Pam Jones 630 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393041614 257 Ernesto Scerpella 640 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 258 Luis Castro 66016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393489484 259 Deborah Gonez 66116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394388695 260 Allan Griff 670 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393520248 261 E.J. Borg 681 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 262 Joseph Ritondaro 74116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395377747 263 Margaret Bush 72116th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394551693 264 Ragie Lamgur 78016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392346071 265 Julina Dirudonne 780 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392346021 266 Jhamson Lamour 780 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395378408 267 David Fracasso 781 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2398258087 268 Ramiro Garcia 790 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393539491 269 Patricia Mosher 830 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393522109 270 Jorge and Mercedes Puente 930 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393537985 271 Arlain and Yolanda Fuentes 870 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394554379 272 Camilo Puente 94016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393529061 273 Dale and Freda Williams 109 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2396928790 274 Angelic Squirewell 109 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2395379105 275 William Preston 11016th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393542092 276 Barry Smith 121 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392983455 277 A.J. Martin 140 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393543333 278 John Kinder 18116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2399945503 279 Freddy Mejia 21016th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393541922 280 Teresa Kidder 22616th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393539326 281 Mejia and Myriam Freddy 21016th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393541922 282 Miriam Vaquez 26116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392434016 283 Jose and Elba Olivera 27116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2395710668 284 H. and Margareta Machin 29116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394554046 285 Claudia Moreno 46016th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2395807271 286 Thomas Tunney 61116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393481426 287 Marty and Theresa Moore 64116th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393537538 288 Hilda and Nathanael Peguero 830 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392007487 289 Noel Gonzalez 420 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393520599 290 Robert Silva 521 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394171045 291 David Krawic 131 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393480376 292 Donna Furlani 21118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393534842 293 Kizzi Schank 27118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 Page 16 of 47 PACKET 3 294 Colleen Launch 235 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 295 Philipp Sanford 29018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 296 benjamin Carosella 32118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 297 Carlos and Dorothy Quiles 31018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 298 Timothy Dzoba 33118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 299 Vincent and Rosemarie King 36018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 300 Russell and Michelle Ueeck 420 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 301 Joseph and Lynn Delaney 460 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 302 Alejandro and Marceia Sandoval 41018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 303 Petra Gustkey 48018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 304 Barbara Cassin 470 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 305 Hilarry Mills 510 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 306 Daniel Michigan 52018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 307 James Riner, II 51118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 308 Jessica Riner 51118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 309 Jennifer Lambert 53018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 310 George Aderson 56118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 311 Jeffrey and Lynda Rawlett 58118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 312 Jacek and Agnieszka Tokarz 59118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 313 Bobbi Castrop 62018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 314 Christina Lopez 61118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 315 Morgan Rogers 62118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 316 Wilmer Valladares 64118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 317 Juan Valle 66118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 318 Candace Zigler 789 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 319 William McGreevy 83018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 320 Belinda Scott 81118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 321 Barbara Platt 88018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 322 Russell Godette 88118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 323 Carolyn Shepherd 92118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 324 Joel Diaz 94118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 325 Monila Rodriguez 94118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 326 Carlo Geratossio 92018th Street SE Naples FL 34117 327 Eugene and Veronica Keene 850 18th Street SE Naples FL 34117 328 Anthony and Janet Snyder 81118th Street SE Naples FL 34117 329 Nery Moise 71018th Street NE Naples FL 34120 330 James Eichelberger 54018th Street NE Naples FL 34120 331 Donald Ward 17118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 332 Henry and Maria Auila 221 18th Street NE Naples FL 34120 333 Lino Oropesa 37118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 334 Jeremy Bowles 42118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 335 David Sheppard 59118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 336 Allen McCormick 11118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 337 Larry Muirhead, II 79118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 338 Una Oropesa 37118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 339 Guillermo Gomez 77118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 340 William Watson 67018th Street NE Naples FL 34120 341 Juanita Morillo 49118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 342 Judith Millroy 84118th Street NE Naples FL 34120 • 2393542420 2393535690 2393540950 2394554423 2394551868 2393525999 2393534308 2396928874 2392893714 2392890748 2393488845 2393541226 2395950695 2393522002 2397753672 2393042221 2392535001 2393537638 2393046073 2393480044 2394559819 2399892728 2393521650 2393526571 2393521901 2393986740 2393986741 2394554184 2395714809 2393520848 2393543514 2393524629 2393545611 2394550509 2392002621 2394550609 2392500282 2393483932 2398257115 2394550321 2393487857 2392931966 2393044510 2393525546 Page 17 of 47 • PACKET3 343 Sherri Chapman 434518th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393537097 344 Kathleen Martinson 141 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395376167 345 Danielle Dwille 161 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394551312 346 Judy Nelson 260 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393523282 347 James and Christine Schott 341 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394553190 348 Marsla and Matthew O'Neill 391 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392725311 349 Darby McSorley 430 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393042373 350 James Camacho 430 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394703123 351 Jessica Camacho 430 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2397341078 352 Richard Van Tol, Sr. 480 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394553368 353 Rodger and Diane Nelson 310 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393538677 354 Martha Soler 510 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393535125 355 Thad and Toni Rhodes 511 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394554185 356 Terri Harris and Michael Taivarski 540 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393481897 357 Ricardo Cabresa 570 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393526180 358 Elizabeth Carr 611 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394552083 359 Robin Barbera 631 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 360 Modesto Rodriguez 720 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393701559 361 Rafael and Sonia Perez 780 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393526829 362 Thomas and Diane Brooks 920 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393488795 363 Ronald Jogee 985 20th Street SE Naples FL 34117 364 Manuel Ynestroza 130 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2398608226 365 Gostano Rodriguez 140 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393482419 366 Darelina Orestin 190 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392009622 367 Asovado Jiminez 410 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393488679 368 Donald Dussard 411 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393527873 369 Giraldo and Rosa Hernandez 581 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 370 Edward and Robin Kelly 510 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2397754284 371 Thomas Kanman 521 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393489854 372 Jeradl Lashley 561 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392807219 373 Gorki Hernandez 770 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2392983819 374 Paul Burne 860 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394553505 375 Rick and Michele Henderson 875 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393529045 376 Bradley and Terri Moak 290 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393520507 377 Alexi Campos 530 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393489520 378 Robert and Maria Collins 170 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393313436 379 PeterAmiclon 37022nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2396490743 380 Olivia Verg 441 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393522044 381 David and Denise Fussel 641 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2394555730 382 Brandon and Rebecca Atkinson 641 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393042346 383 Trudy Torgler 671 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2395377969 384 Kevin and Dawn Reynolds 791 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393483755 385 Kimberly Bloomer 875 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 386 Clotilde Perez 341 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 3052155741 387 Saul and Sherry Llorca 431 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394555271 388 Lee Meyer 571 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394558528 389 Marian Davis 870 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393520497 390 Raymond Johnson 88122nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2394555532 391 An Trinh 1020 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2393534871 Page 18 of 47 PACKET 3 392 Paul Munro 511 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 393 T. P. Busbin 461 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 394 Discount Beverage and Deli 461 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 395 Lawrence Elberson, Jr. 331 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 396 Thomas and Donna Bartoe 29022nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 397 Dennis Turner 170 22nd Street SE Naples FL 34117 398 Nod and Teresita Hernandez 461 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 399 Nolan Sanchez 661 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 400 Eva Baldaich 1210 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 401 Diana Baldrich 1210 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 402 Nelson Munoz 1441 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 403 Antonio Rodriguez 1461 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 404 Fred and Kim Manchso 1470 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 405 Robert Caskell 1490 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 406 Tavio and Zoraida Alfonso 1511 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 407 Jesse and Mary Ann Ybarra 1531 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 408 Maximilino Lopez 1561 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 409 Alga and Alberto Carrea 1871 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 410 Ingrid Sierra 2161 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 411 Olga Correa 1871 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 412 Danelis Hernandez 1731 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 413 Jean Stania 1761 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 414 Roberto Mendez 1840 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 415 Gerald Chiappetta, Jr. 1720 Golden Gate Blvd, E Naples FL 34120 416 Dee Hernandez 1731 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 417 Jodi Crossman 1490 Golden Gate Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 Total Sheets 1 - 3 643 2393543230 2393898890 3055224355 4436761326 2393531484 2393040249 2393527313 2392531495 2393521497 2392538162 2393482483 2396013996 2393548076 2398509601 2393482953 2393520543 2393041937 2393415195 2395351322 2393527837 2394550371 2394302628 2398778405 2393480346 Page 19 of 47 PACKET4 RESIDENT NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONE# 1 David Agoston 18010th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2 Richard Graham 23110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2399617401 3 David Kirkhoff 53110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 4 Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Oppie 83010th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393521099 5 Thomas and Rebecca Franks 76110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393533532 6 Borham Ahmed 21110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394559997 7 Tibor and Elizabeth Agoston 36010th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394558400 8 Mark and Theresa Trembley 69010th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398211646 9 Tom and Rebecca Franks 76110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393533532 10 Richard Coppola 26110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393480596 11 Silvio Pino 48110th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392890368 12 lean Clinton and Jacqueline Marcelin 23110th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393535455 13 Gary Hauze 28010th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 14 Enrique Miranda 28510th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393535495 15 Arturo Alvarez 10010th Ave NE Naples PL 34120 2393042913 16 Maria dejesus Alvarez 10010th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393042913 17 Robert DeCamp 148510th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394558608 18 Colleen Curry 18010th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 19 lose Luviano 131 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392806119 20 Chris Howell 23112th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 23994559182 21 Carla Werner 62012th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393521921 22 Chris Andreoulakis 132512th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 23 Nikolaos Andreoulakis 132012th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 24 Jo and Blaine Brisson 122112th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393527775 25 Daniel Pritchard 104012th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554389 26 Cosme Perez 16012th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394557100 27 Erin and Jake Brouillard 14012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393529323 28 Michael and Krista Lepa nak 16012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2396928450 29 Brian Haldeman 19012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393541289 30 Timothy Schlief 26112th Ave NW Naples FI. 34120 2393549968 31 Richard Tranchand 31112th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 32 Tricia Sabando 34112th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 33 Mitch and Monica Russell 40012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 34 Stanley and Rhonda Viva 40512th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394559878 35 Noreen Kuenster 41512th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393542620 36 Jacquelyn Dzingleski 45512th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394556852 37 Nicole and Keith Reynolds 52012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 38 Evelyn Stone 65512th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393524531 39 Madelin Carte 68012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393522247 40 Florence Beasley 68512th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393489332 41 William and Felicitas Lecuyerjur 71012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 42 lack Craft, Jr. 74012th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394349448 43 Mark and Rebecka Drake 74112th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2399632173 44 Rex O'Dell 19014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393521930 45 Ellen Alyne 25014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394557150 46 Joseph Decker 26014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392921482 47 Jayson and Amelia Horadam 56014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393520207 48 Daniel Worsdale 64014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393536490 49 Thomas Myers 66514th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394552028 50 Maria Davis 68114th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394550186 51 Donald Cook 78014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393528194 52 William and Sandra Minder 76014th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395308838 53 Daniel Tomici 12114th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393483316 54 Rigberto and Marielys Arteaga 46114th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393041457 55 Tim Speakman 53114th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395304227 56 Gary and Linda Stein 78114th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393539846 • Page 20 of 47 PACKET 4 57 Jorge Valle 12114th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554086 58 David and Stacy Kaminski 19014th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393489314 59 Mr. and Mrs. Ron Torge 23514th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554628 60 Melbourne Barnett 24014th Ave HE Naples FL 34120 61 Melanie Handschman 142014th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 62 Michael Shields 16114th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394558536 63 Paul and Elaine Garcia 17016th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395952432 64 Pedro Lopez 49016th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393537610 651slaty Fernandez 49116th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2399637427 66 Michelle Mony Deoca 233016th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392937672 67 Mike Davie 126016th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 68 Brandi Verder 112016th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394381377 69 Perfecto Reyes 367016th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 70 Elizabeth Duran 243116th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 71 Yonel Riveras 17016th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394044366 72 David Warren 70 Jung Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 2398251340 73 Tamyra Murphy 90 Jung Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 2394045530 74 Ginny Brooks 1861 Jung Blvd. E Naples FL 34120 75 Paul and Tammy Mahoney 260 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2393543002 76 Estela Merson 165 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2398253231 77 Arturo Santos 465 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2393542534 78 Richard lean Baptiste 360 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2394550979 79 Robert and Marta Massey 611 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2393532763 80 William Apperson 540Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2397326890 81 Hector Ortegon 630 Jung Blvd.W Naples FL 34120 2392534073 82 Heidi Wynn- Gafford 205 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2393488591 83 Maria Velarde 530 Jung Blvd. W Naples FL 34120 2393317643 84 Casey and Monica Merriam 22018th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393041463 85 Boyd and Luz Underwood 18018th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395954464 86 Justin Osnes 13018th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392130321 87 Robert Warren 9118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393487242 88 Edwin Hulio, Jr. 23118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393040447 89 Johnnie Moreno 32118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393521039 90 Juan Mieto 31118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393314447 91 Frederick Schulz 43118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 92 Lynn and Sandra Keller 37118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394351849 93 Mike Linssen 52018th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 94 Ronald Moore 58518th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393533014 95 Patricia Schultheis 60118th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393318192 96 Scott and Bridget Black 66018th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393530063 97 Janet Duncan 16118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 98 Ruth Hobkirk 24118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393534544 99 Cooridad Carieago 29118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396921169 100 Michelle Burgos 26118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394300149 101 Naomi Stephens 36018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394553192 102 Maribel Ortiz 49118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 103 Shawn and Stephanie Van Wie 109018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522445 104 Josie Rico 143118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393543380 105 lose Durse 143118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393543380 106 Laura Duren 143118th Ave NE Naples FL, 34120 2393543380 107 Debra Borzman 177018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 108 Penny Raymond 12020th Ave NE Naples Ft, 34120 2393983113 109 Rubin Aira 280 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393533630 110 Pete Rodriguez 16020th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2397778415 111 Martha Velasco 240 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393480982 112 Richard and Carolyn Demko 26120th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393532103 113 Kieran Herrera 1081 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 Page 21 of 47 � 1 Page 22 of 47 PACKET4 gA 114 Paula Bowins 1081 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 115 lames Davenport 1871 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 116 Joseph Fiola 1431 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 117 Pam Roberts 172120th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 118 Barbara Suarez 2041 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 119 C.J. Lee 140 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2397777777 120 Christi Walsh 14020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392007259 121 Eliseo Chao 181 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393481111 122 Linda Tischler 22020th Ave NO Naples FL 34120 2394554154 123 Robert and Natalie Epperson 26020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394552366 124 David and Theresa Watson 29120th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393318762 125 Dave Galbreath 320 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392639227 126 Paul and Pat Steg 321 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394556074 127 Eileen and Ralph Leonard 375 20th Ave NO Naples FL 34120 2392131723 128 Robert Young 377 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393532070 129 Sandra Csonka 44020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2399631808 130 Michael Williams 51020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395956246 131 Susan Gianferrara 54020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393483151 132 Craig Witkowski 71120th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2395657683 133 Miata Pantoja 78020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392891479 134 Jerold Tischler 220 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394554154 135 Hayle Castillo 261 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392980815 136 Michelle Meyer 281 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398786606 137 Michael Camps 39020th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394554608 138 Jon and Yvonne Wiltberger 440 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2399631808 139 John Swick 681 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392896905 140 Ben and Stella Gyimah 76120th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394496339 141 Richard Thackston 791 20th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398259452 142 Maria Rosado 243 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393533589 143 Gloria Perez 560 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394037742 144 Ray Ladorin 1041 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393488512 145 Jose Courtin 1160 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394559425 146 Danny Maesten 1190 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 9544477215 147 Doreen Christoffel 110 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2398778096 148 Andres Mederos 1.10 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394042929 149 Luz Mederos 110 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392505794 150 Joan Mederos 110 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392902376 151 Juan Ramirez 90 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398258459 152 Eric Ramirez 9022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392007083 153 Phillip Hartzell 11022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393530220 154 Sonia Callejas 130 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393531810 155 Jose Callejas 13022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393531810 156 Cara Talley 250 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 157 Elvia Ramirez 21122nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2396828348 158 Heather Taccone 231 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393487752 159 Jacquelyn Barr 270 22nd Ave NW Naples Fl. 34120 2392638355 160 Isabel Gonzalez 27022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393040019 161 Sari McMahon 36022nd Ave NW Naples Fl. 34120 2393530110 162 Mike Randolph 37022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398259519 163 Jason Anshan 580 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2392295009 164 Jessica Dupree 58022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 165 Carlos Gonzalez 621 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2398600750 166 Amparo Gonzalez 631 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394049297 167 Martin and Lynn Rhoades 73022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394552300 168 Tammy and Leonard Gelormine 770 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393534785 169 Bobbi Jo Forhay 78022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393522187 170 Harold Pease 79022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2394553956 Page 22 of 47 PACKET 4 171 Daniel and Estrella Alba 825 22nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 172 Aladino Vilela 84022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 173 Gary Tyssen 86022nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 174 Lisa and Jerome John 88122nd Ave NW Naples FL 34120 175 Lance Nikis 110 24th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 176 Gary Stone 8024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 177 Vicky Stone 11024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 178 Robert Creedon 24024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 179 Sheila Riggs 260 24th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 180 Ariel Gonzalez 270 24th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 181 John and Alicia Copeland 560 24th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 182 Michael and Vickie Thomas 66024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 183 Frank Domino 74024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 184 Ed Marchere 87024th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 185 Clarence Walkup 720 24th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 186 Jennie Gasperson 90 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 187 Keith Thomas 131 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 188 Steven T02ier 19124th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 189 Paula Markham 220 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 190 Elizabeth Mederos 13024th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 191 Nathan Payment 22024th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 192 Nikki Roddy 2040 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 193 Sarah Londell 2160 24th Ave NE Naples FL. 34120 194 Tyson Beebe 2040 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 195 Brian Jones 216024th Ave NE Naples FL. 34120 196 Zara Leyua 1041 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 197 Marcelo and Maricela Menejias 1460 Wilson Blvd, N Naples FL 34120 198 J. Carlos Molano 1370 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 199 Gasbar Lopez 1461 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Fl. 34120 200 Orlando deBien 1340 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 201 Omar Garciduenas 1170 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 202 Miguel Grana 1711 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL. 34120 203 Cesar Alsina 2211 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 204 Orlando Cubas 1741 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 205 Ariel de Jesus 1861 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 206 Amaztazio Rodriguez 1971 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 207 Eric Rudd 2060 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 208 Auq Mederos 2160 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Fl. 34120 209 Nelson Lopez 2191 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 210 Cesar Milla 2310 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 211 Santos Gonzalez 2330 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 212 James Brown 1841 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Ft. 34120 213 David Baxley 1541 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 214 Kevin and Barbara Kuypers 3160 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 215 Charles and Diane Merkelom 4014 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Fl. 34120 216 Sandy Kozlow 3575 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 217 James Fox 3011 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Fl- 34120 218 Joyce Sanacora 2680 Wilson Blvd. N Naples Fl- 34120 219 Wilkinson 4515 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 220 William Townsend 1271 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 221 Michael Sonney 2335 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 222 Iona and Santon Gonzalez 2330 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 223 Jason Hendry 2130 Wilson Blvd. N Naples FI- 34120 Total Sheets 1- 4 866 2393543628 2393531844 2393314852 2397746284 2393488678 2396924995 2392858714 2394557479 2394037096 6164771181 2396829025 2393534122 2395952075 2398601609 2395710076 2393314566 2394651778 2393536731 2393539572 2393313029 2394037416 2393542044 2392489693 2392540096 2399473347 2396924874 2394041473 2397776929 2393540864 2394551289 2393527431 2392723650 2394552574 2394550905 2393482118 2392480886 2393482390 2393541987 2395717781 2393527431 2394625592 • Page 23 of 47 Page 24 of 47 8 " PACKET 5 RESIDENT NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONE# 1 Jessica Harmison 2470 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394498296 2 Maria Miguel 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392851545 3 Danny Cox 2551 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394550342 4 Thomas Wojiciechowski 2620 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394501116 5 Nicolas DeAlana 2740 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 6 Maria Riveria 2821 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 7 Elmer Goyette, III 2831 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394551383 8 Erica Spreth - Martuz 4175 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396928034 9 Guy Spieth 4175 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396928034 10 Robert Smarks 4121 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394555997 11 James Showalter 4280 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394556235 12 Jeffrey Ricigliano 4030 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393045917 13 Meghan O'Sullivan and James Ahlbrandt 2840 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393538386 14 Christopher and Heather Shields 4115 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394351504 15 Michael and Therese Mentes 3980 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396929732 16 Anita Ford 4875 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393546753 17 Charlotte Copeland 4195 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395720255 18 Edward and Edmee Equilir 4785 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394500273 19 Robin and Randy Wright 4105 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394557110 20 Laz Diaz 2510 2nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 21 Leone] Limia 23114th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393040485 22 Art Drange 2521 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 23 Enrique Irizarry 23204th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392723859 24 Phillip and Marabeth DeVille 32414th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 25 Thomas Smith 24614th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394553221 26 Julie Corona 27814th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392894427 27 Denise Bond 2581 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 28 Adam and Angela Nadelman 25104th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393520782 29 Glen Nichols 33104th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393483440 30 Marie Witt 32234th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393520739 31 Douglas Witt 3223 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393520739 32 Harry Bond 2611 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395710909 33 Kristina Thomas 2883 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 34 Donald and Hyecha Belcher 35404th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522289 35 Jean Lambotte 36114th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393534370 36 Lennard and Maria Benoit 26604th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393532156 37 Bryan Craft 44404th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393489579 38 Chris Bowman 3730 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393528953 39 Carlos and Alicia Falson 3620 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 40 Ricardo and Gladys Borges 2981 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393042449 41 Kaye Shaw 36404th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 42 Ivette and Gilberto Sanchez 4095 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394556838 43 Luis Gomez 23714th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394552507 44 Jose Landin 47204th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393485119 45 Joseph Vidal 4245 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 46 Gerard and Irmine Targete 3711 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393527592 47 Rudy Bershadski 4040 4th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 8473097282 Page 24 of 47 PACKET 5 48 Georgia Campbell 2881 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 49 Tracy Kahl 3531 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 50 Juan Gutierrez 36316th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 51 Betty Jo Hobby Brown 2880 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 52 David McNeely 3420 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 53 Albert Hicks 4020 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 54 Kelley Nadotti 3460 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 55 Olga Casanova 4231 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 56 John Tekdogan 4170 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 57 Juan Dominquez 25816th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 58 Luis Perez 2620 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 59 Jose Portillo 2871 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 60 Jorge Garcia 42806th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 61 Edel Aguila 4325 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 62 Margarita Segunas 2610 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 63 Aaron and Mandi Shuler 4420 6th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 64 Dennis Moore 38208th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 65 Nelson Costales 23668th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 66 Margarita Markim 2670 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 67 Sherri Mill 3840 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 68 J. Drury 3521 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 69 Gilbert and Jacqueline Sanabria 2730 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 70 Robert Castilla 2420 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 71 Curt Robidoux 28308th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 72 Solangel Gonzalez 27808th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 73 James Lockaby 4040 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 74 Richard Mewell 4241 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 75 Raelene Newell 4241 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 76 Robert Reeves 2581 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 77 Pierre Bonne -Anee 2911 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 78 Jaclyn Ouellette 34208th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 79 John Hart 34608th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 80 Johnh Lowery 3760 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 81 Helder Oliveira 37808th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 82 Denise Porreca and Steven Nickel, Jr. 3560 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 83 Maybelle McDonnough 2980 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 84 James and Edwin Guerrera 2511 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 85 Gregoria Fuentes 3720 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 86 Carlos Rodriguez 4355 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 87 Gloria Perdigon 29318th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 88 Reinaldo Martinez 24408th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 89 Maria Alvarez 2531 8th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 90 Mayrene Gonzalez 27808th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 91 Gina Occhogrosso 2595 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 92 Jerry Joseph 3031 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 93 April Kain 2432 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 94 Austin and Velvet Emrick 2430 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 95 Daniel Ohleyer 3020 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 • 2394558161 2393526815 2394556153 2394552098 2393522135 2393528032 2393535257 2393543660 2393049176 2393314906 2392002729 3054013248 2393526701 2393488847 2393489181 2399610031 2392346894 2393535283 2396012045 2393529452 2393529452 2393537078 2394380049 2394556132 2392981373 2392162106 2393989878 2394559421 2394557835 2393522151 2393521597 2393549863 2394553631 2394559421 2397751303 2396924554 2395808710 Page 25 of 47 PACKET 5 96 Luigi Noesis 3011 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393310489 97 Robert Noesi 3011 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2398215678 98 Petra Diaz 3011 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2392482349 99 Feliz Iglesias 3011 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2392482349 100 Xavier Rodrihuez 2911 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393533839 101 Kenneth and Jeanette Mouton 2761 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 102 Jeff and Sherry Williams 2481 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393527625 103 Gerald and Sheryl Gammell, Jr. 2580 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393537363 104 Gustavo Medina 2811 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394551279 105 Sharon Knim 3161 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2396013917 106 Lugo Trevilo, Jr. 3160 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393540422 107 Kara Manning 3170 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2396879166 108 John and Eileen Palak 3241 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 109 Luis Veloisquez 3321 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394551127 110 Raul Diaz 3421 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393042625 111 Carmen Sardin 2430 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2392596273 112 Ostin Stinfila 3020 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393535137 113 Joseph Yonel 3031 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393539096 114 Janet Chapman 3591 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 115 Lourdes Vrera 3351 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 7862601280 116 Olguine Dominque 3331 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394653460 117 Richard Milts 3340 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 118 Rhonda Price 3341 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2399639886 119 Jessica Anderson 3311 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2398218295 120 Anthony Tavarez 3355 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393545383 121 Angela Coffey 3361 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2397849191 122 Magaly Aneiro 3411 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394558449 123 Rafael Herrera 3460 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34117 2393534034 124 Gloria Mendez and Jorge Perez 3611 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394173087 125 Lauren Baro 3970 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393487904 126 Adrian Boro 3970 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 127 Enrique Sequeria 3970 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393487904 128 Ysmary Sequeira 3970 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393487904 129 Osualdo Mero 4347 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2399610499 130 Shirley Hinds 3585 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 131 Victor and Rosa Nienes 4060 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 132 Cliff Kobrin 4445 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393520332 133 Rafael Acevedo 4625 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393532639 134 Ruth and Olga Ruiz 4340 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393489774 135 Michael Buis 3775 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 9733355410 136 Debra Lista- Esposito and Charles Esposito 3310 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2392485516 137 William and Linda Wolf 4380 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 4132752191 138 Reineldo Tardines 4070 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393520640 139 Ernesto Tyira 2280 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2393482142 140 Massiel Pantalean 4221 Golden Gate Blvc Naples FL 34120 2394559480 Total Sheets 1- 5 1006 Page 26 of 47 PACKET 6 RESIDENT NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 1 David Batten 2960 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2 Jack Harvey 2331 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3 Tamara Broker 2940 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 4 Luis Roman 2991 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 5 Laura Ferrer 2941 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 6 Belinda Pittman 3461 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 7 Onorio Adragna 3630 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 8 Amanda Merarce 3340 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 9 Moraima Abrey 4170 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 10 Mary Whited 3775 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 11 Michael Whited 3775 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 12 Dana Ford 3491 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 13 Dave Liddle 3441 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 14 Pedro Battle 3421 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 15 Christie Brown and Michael Lehnhard 2370 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 16 Eugenie Sterlingcato 2861 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 17 Leonel Lopez 2971 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 18 Alejandro Del Zotto 2821 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 19 Zaila Martinez 2920 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 20 Scott Whidden 2840 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 21 Romanico Rios 2971 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 22 Javier Roda 3791 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 23 Pedro Marin 3230 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 24 Teresa Castillo 3781 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 25 Edward and Kim Weisacosky 3291 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 26 Rodney and Karen Michaels 3951 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 27 Larry Dellsfave 3360 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 28 Gregory Glemser 3240 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 29 Eric Sooleyo, Sr. 3961 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 30 Carl Crespo 4430 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 31 Amaurys and Xiomara Guerra 4041 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 32 Maritza and Jorge Lemes 4675 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 33 Jennifer Austin 3811 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 34 Pamela Carey 4845 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 35 Standrea Colella 3271 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 36 Pete Battle 3421 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 37 Jeremiah Carroll, Jr. 3481 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 38 Dennis Burke 3511 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 39 William Rodgers 4320 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 40 Fermin and Hilda Velez 3480 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 41 Terri Davis 3431 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 42 Yunayso Oro 2871 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 43 Amela Martinez 3560 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 44 Catalina and Cress Nunez 3760 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 45 Juan Perez 3330 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 46 Rafael Guerra 2421 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 47 Gilberto Martinez 4120 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 LOOK, PHONE# 2393535444 2393481316 2392330781 2393542983 2393531954 2393314600 8706560115 2393538925 2393538082 2397935262 2393548081 2393528219 2398777439 2393041204 2394550421 2394551297 2398773835 2393312867 2392480492 2394556188 2393532640 2393049192 2392532989 2394553349 2396928296 2396924700 2393531656 2394030985 2393487415 2393048861 2393532099 2393520329 2395301782 2396928085 2393488340 2393532085 2396922414 2395255481 2393367890 Page 27 of 47 Page 28 of 47 PACKET 6 8 N " 48 Vicente Santiago 2880 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 49 Jorge Lemes 4675 2nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393531656 50 Ana Guerra - Thompson 2504th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398390000 51 Ernest Williams 26404th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398250683 52 Alfredo Medina 2760 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396016637 53 Stanley Racut and Kathryn Dyroff 2930 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 8485250742 54 Sandra Fiuchman 29814th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395726264 55 Lillian Cruz 3281 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394552131 56 John Williams 3360 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397772989 57 Kristi Poisco 3421 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393040051 58 Dawn Malburg 3420 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393535450 59 Debra and Tim Braden 34804th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393530377 60 Angelica Canete -Perez 35804th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 61 Fred Olson 4115 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394503733 62 Angie Romak 4175 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 63 Silvia Denney 2510 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393529487 64 Elienay Cortina 29804th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395952783 65 Carlos Castillo 29414th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394041742 66 Julio Socorro 3281 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392070825 67 Carrie Randall 3461 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394557823 68 Donald Heyser 35714th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394555493 69 Dennis and Myrna Gress 3731 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396498613 70 Carlos Tejera 4290 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3057210126 71 Juan Jiminez 39314th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 72 Adam and Amanda Peterson 35804th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396432229 73 Donna Valdez 3590 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396010309 74 Robert Valdez 3590 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392006456 75 Hector Florez 3641 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393541238 76 Juan Avila 3665 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393485483 77 Larry McDonald 37914th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395723040 78 Erik Pohls 36714th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395957569 79 Veronica Pohls 3671 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397776094 80 Sherry Singletary 40754th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396928190 81 Gussie Sullivan 3370 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394550073 82 David King 26414th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397930667 83 Luis and Yolanda DeLlano 2741 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397744216 84 Andrew Bitting 3770 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393482649 85 David Lindsay 2681 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393524458 86 Amy Levitre 3255 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393537040 87 Pablo Jiminez 2971 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 7865861011 88 Elizabeth Martinez 32404th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393257831 89 Jose and Maria Canizarer 27314th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 8632013883 90 Andres Rodriguez 4440 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393049281 91 Roberto Acosta 2581 4th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398775415 92 Stephanie Gassiot 2331 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393257729 93 Robin Sizemore 2371 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395959973 94 Annette and John Smith 3360 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3053023687 95 Bigwave and Mary Sure Vadnais 3380 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397774823 Page 28 of 47 PACKET 6 96 Kimberly and Anthony Swanson 2390 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 97 Rosie Campbell 24406th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 98 Fred Bradley 3870 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 99 Russell Murray 2620 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 100 William Kidder 25416th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 101 Rogelio Martinez 26216th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 102 GeoyerCuba 2370 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 103 Phil Cramer 2371 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 104 Francisco Rivera 2641 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 105 Idalmis Mejias 2881 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 106 Leonel Mjias 2881 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 107 Maria Neaver 29906th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 108 Daniel Arias 3731 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 109 Mark Bragg 3694 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 110 Charles Lovelock 3620 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 111 Cheryl Korbel 3241 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 112 Keith Smith 3340 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 113 Felipe Cavazos 3530 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 114 Jorge Silva 35306th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 115 Anthony Swanson 2390 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 116 Danny Castro 2570 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 117 Juan Rivero 2580 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 118 David Butter 27816th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 119 William Wiehn 3281 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 120 Kelly Grandy 3690 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 121 Jeffrey Brooks and Nancy Gardon- Brooks 4825 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 122 Leon and Martha Krok 4275 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 123 Paul and Karen Esala 4375 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 124 Maria Tanes 4364 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 125 George and Ellen Schneider 3210 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 126 Hugo Montessi 4390 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 127 Lawrence Gates 2961 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 128 Luis Quintana 3819 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 129 Marco Hernandez 3670 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 130 Dylan Caldwell 4160 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 131 Peter Bithorn 3721 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 132 William Gilmartin 4620 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 133 Lawrence Elberson, Jr. 2521 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 134 Antonio and Hortensia Zafra 2940 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 135 Consuelo Castillo 4110 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 136 Ramiro and Cabidad Aria 4440 6th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 137 Laurie Carron 23418th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 138 Nelson Rodriguez 2421 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 139 Cheryl Earl 2441 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 140 Griselda Montiel 26708th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 141 Bill and Cindy Scott 2671 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 142 Dale Thompson 2721 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 143 Kelly Lawhore 2831 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 ME 2392533963 2392808410 2393535771 2397931941 2394552863 5516557300 2394656425 2394658281 2398607130 2394652509 2393540276 2394178735 2397933697 2394502076 2396925526 2399615694 2393540778 2398215249 2394658754 2393483256 2393481010 2393532490 2393524537 3054904138 2392720282 2397779901 2393520132 2392346972 2393042019 2392064535 4436761326 2393527445 2393040719 2394550080 2393539134 2393535806 2396929788 2398258966 Page 29 of 47 Page 30 of 47 PACKET 6 Q A 144 Robyn Fentress 2910 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393313678 145 Susannah Burghardt 3381 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393540711 146 Luis Guajales 3671 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397778983 147 Gary Ervin 3431 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394348069 148 Keith Bruneau 3441 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393312528 149 Kenneth Swanson 34718th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397765306 150 Serene Hellman 3520 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 151 Pedro Santovenig 3521 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393522457 152 Marie Faugue 3559 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 153 Cristina Alfaro 35608th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394559257 154 Michael Faircloth 3585 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393317046 155 Greg and Deidra Barlow 3611 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392620574 156 Curt Chapman 36808th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393538473 157 Manuel Lopez 36818th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393046900 158 Laura Martinez 36818th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392537043 159 Michelle Skrivan 3740 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 160 Chris Davis 3740 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 161 Jen Stevenson 3790 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 162 Kelly Knveppel 3830 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395710820 163 Jeff and Shannon Curl 4010 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393040958 164 Ann Padroro 4121 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394311900 165 Ellen Fischer 33618th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393528361 166 Yailin Herrera 4120 Sth Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397765513 167 Wayne and Jeannine Bunch 4060 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393480210 168 Jacob Shineler 3825 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394557034 169 Brian and Linda Eckels 32418th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393539434 170 Enrique Gonzalez 4795 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394555312 171 Allen Mitchell 3635 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393542512 172 Russell Miller 2830 Sth Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393533838 173 Robert Waverka 3371 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 174 Diana Ratz 3770 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393524413 175 Laney Sampson 37208th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394353720 176 Patrick and Mistie Merritt 3291 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 177 Nancy Riedel 2961 Sth Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394551436 178 Eduardo Sanchez 4225 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397325205 179 Roberto Aguiar 3035 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3052167058 180 Osdany de Rio Romero 3575 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395959777 181 Felimon Cendejas 3341 Sth Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398258125 182 Rene Pucha 4090 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 7862903431 183 Debbie Benavidez 3780 Sth Ave SE Naples FL 34117 184 Luis Cedeno 4335 8th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 185 Jeff Brown 2665 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397757359 186 Jose and Marlene Alvarez 4931 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 7862515628 187 Joseph KniKong 466110th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398774030 188 Dolores Nunez 3370 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393531409 189 Christopher Eckert 4416 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394650601 190 Roler Carrasio 3445 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393542678 191 John McGee 322010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 Page 30 of 47 PACKET 6 t 8 A 192 Richard Mojena 4080 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396928343 193 Cynthia VanRensselaer 4740 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393538226 194 David and Virginia Rich 237110th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 195 Juan Gonzalez 358510th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393526259 196 Carol Larsen 2955 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393538264 197 Robert Rogers 3795 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397766378 198 William and Wanda Warren 276010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393525983 199 Adam Park 2765 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393526937 200 Noemi Fraguela 361010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 201 Debra Antoniak 4499 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394511034 202 Greg and Monica Young 4065 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393528675 203 Carlos and Vilma Rivera 3225 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393529812 204 Raisel Alfonso 2675 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393043613 205 Raymond and Katharine Brandon 3175 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393489884 206 Marilyn Wheeler 2575 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393536581 207 Manuel Sanchez 288010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 208 Francisco Trevino 2825 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393531603 209 Matthew Shull 262510th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392899667 210 Christopher and Cindy Eckert 4070 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394650601 211 David Ward 2905 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393480493 212 Amaryllis Benavides 3230 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392446472 213 Robert Carden 408110th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 214 Monica and Jeremy Baxter 272010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 215 Diane Depalto 274010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397766117 216 Carlos Guillen 362010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394657368 217 Steve Olsen 3630 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 218 German Llanten 3685 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395955593 219 Pedro Mirabal 4575 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393530722 220 Marvin Steffen 3880 10th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393530508 221 Mario Torres 338010th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397321909 222 Joe Foster 2675 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397340996 223 Alan Laupert 2820 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393482824 224 Patrick Daly 4231 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 225 Marie Esti Verni 3847 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394655082 226 Renee Gallo 4620 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393485052 227 Ryan Dehnz 291012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393521526 228 Ralph and Linda McKellar 402012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 229 Michael Colello 472012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3306472731 230 Maria Delair 468112th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394551556 231 Lucierne Valcairo 2670 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397779871 232 Mr. and Mrs. David Jourdan 487012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393776623 233 Brian Stouffer 274012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397770246 234 Kenneth Ross 3212 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396490902 235 Robert Varaly 374012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393541265 236 Reanne Daly 423112th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 237 Natalie and Scott Hogan 3295 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393545642 238 Richard Croasdale 3781 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395300984 239 Marilin Alfonso 436112th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 Page 31 of 47 Page 32 of 47 8 A PACKET 6 240 Gereneldo Pagan 3475 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393530059 241 Raul and Kathleen Gutierrez 4617 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393405416 242 Carolyn Tuttle 426012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393532984 243 Mtizi Adams 337012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393483255 244 Matthew Mason 3575 12th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393541968 245 Martel Henry 445012th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3059870272 246 Oscar and Dleana Rivera 2930 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392005723 247 Ariel Dominiquez 2865 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392729313 248 Jeffrey Klein 284014th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393988802 249 Raul and Marlene Delvalle 291114th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394558034 250 Justin Young 2923 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397777616 251 Melissa Young 2923 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2398213642 252 Robert Anderson 4125 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2395378091 253 Robert lzzo 3670 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393533941 254 John Fulmer, III 466114th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393521159 255 Richard Lowery 3361 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393531728 256 Ramiro Dominques 2865 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393481870 257 Graydon and April Bullard 2622 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396928945 258 Norge Rivero 2955 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2399199978 259 Dennhis Roos 3670 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393533941 260 Randolph Guffey and Clarke Jacobelli 451514th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393487771 261 Craig and Lisa Direscher 326514th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396928425 262 Allen and Sandra Pflaster 306114th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393537418 263 Jennifer Walls 407014th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397752727 264 Christina Svec 4760 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 265 Dale Fey, Jr. 3925 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394173344 266 Barton and Judy Bradshaw 3833 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397321239 267 Lorna Walker 262714th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 9549148417 268 Rolando Henchaca 2931 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393524596 269 Antonio Rodriguez 3060 14th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 3054951869 270 Dulca Rodriguez 3235 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393532349 271 Jesus Octario Rodriguez 3235 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392897248 272 Ronald and Jessica Arevalo 344116th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 273 Gregory Akeln 3435 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 274 John Lawrence Beth, Jr. 284516th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394550696 275 Mike Barrile 398016th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392491530 276 Ricardo and Odette Brito, Jr. 3885 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393534447 277 Ross Friend 3525 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392721345 278 Briana Stasiak 368016th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 279 Jose Albin 404016th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394386262 280 Maria Belanger 296516th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393487381 281 Juan Bright 296016th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394550578 282 Alexander Ramos 4888 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 283 Arlain and Yolanda Fuente 870 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394554379 284 Onel Lopez 272016th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 9548160316 285 Robert Silya 521 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394171045 286 David Almodovan 4761 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393522118 287 Frank Lorenzo 4245 16th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394651898 Page 32 of 47 PACKET 6 4, 8 A 288 Cherilyn Tuppaldos 440416th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394351131 289 Rucker 2925 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393317583 290 Rachelle Ferguson 2735 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 291 Scott and Fulgencia Goins 298018th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392734913 292 Robert and Jo -Anna Lewis 288018th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394557984 293 Julio Guerra 406018th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394558082 294 Patricia Ison 256518th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393548133 295 Brenda Bunch 3365 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397740020 296 LanilKesselmann 4415 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394898491 297 Amaury Ranies 2685 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393049815 298 Henry lmbachi 2720 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396928100 299 Joseph Cadet 3385 18th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 300 Charlemagne Marius 376120th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393547378 301 Luis Cerda and Margarita Roldan 3520 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394559111 302 Zenon Conrad 2680 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393489612 303 Charles Schmitt 386020th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 304 Harris Vienes 3725 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392003344 305 Andres Estrada 3460 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397933058 306 Dayanna Cubillas 4860 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392535107 307 NeomiRakow 366020th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393534378 308 Jaslin Aubin 3210 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393533656 309 Kent Lloyd 3825 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393521760 310 Nancy Holland 3370 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397349112 311 Juan and Antonia Velazquez 4020 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393521577 312 David Fitts 4845 20th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393532338 313 Alba Rosas 2760 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393534937 314 Jose and Nacy Colmn 2820 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394553565 315 Francisco Garcia 3130 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394307522 316 Rosa Garcia 3130 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394307522 317 Rita Galipto 376422nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 7864165760 318 Frances Nix 4830 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393535885 319 Angela Monterosso 3880 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392933421 320 Angela Monterosso 3870 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2392933421 321 Jack and Eva Sobczak 3645 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2396590006 322 Juan and Berta Castro 3271 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393526997 323 Osleidy Lopez 4340 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394655504 324 Jennifer Wobecky 403122nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397771346 325 Kim Shimer 4305 22nd Ave 5E Naples FL 34117 2397776029 326 Frank Mix 4830 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393535885 327 Jamie Caldwell 3440 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394043760 328 Jose Medina 4425 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394553278 329 Monica Shee 3160 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 9547263723 330 Mercelimo Hernandez 4866 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2393483959 331 Trevor Chambers 4660 22nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 332 Charlene Vernor 2568 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 333 Ivis Castrillo 3570 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2399636087 334 Maria Pardo 3570 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2394553459 335 Donna Colon 3935 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 2397937669 Page 33 of 47 PACKET 6 336 Laura Naples 3935 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 337 Hiloomilio Socorro 4160 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 338 Margarita Henriquez 4375 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 339 Mario Menendez 3830 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 340 Thomas and Eunice Chavie 2765 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 341 Ruth Miranda 4140 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 342 Maria Pardo 3570 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 343 Gary Custaro 4880 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 344 Ray Rangel 4795 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 345 Jose Perez 4021 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 346 Eddie and Sabrina Lagace 2720 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 347 Maria Perez 3985 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 348 Stacey Dunn 2645 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 349 Gerardo Morales 3380 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 350 Gedrick Spencer 4440 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 351 Beatris Mendez 2965 24th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 352 Richard Lytle, Jr. 3120 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 353 Hector Morrero 3525 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 354 Nareiso Diaz 3735 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 355 Jonathan Smelko 2760 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 356 Danielle Brown 3570 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 357 Jeff and Christina Nelson 3930 26th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 358 Robyn Anderson 2641 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 359 Noel and Olga Rodriguez 3625 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 360 Norman and Jacqueline De La Paz 2980 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 361 Miguel Lopez 4415 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 362 Edward Griffin 2830 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 363 Nracy Bieberdorf 2661 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 364 Robert Giro 3685 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 365 Loren Bell 2820 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 366 David Cuthbertson 3810 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 367 Martin Andrade 3775 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 368 Shannon Brown 3231 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 369 Roberto and Dolores Santos 3647 28th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 370 Angella Dixon 3280 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 371 Hugh O'Connor 3091 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 372 Joseph DiCarlo 4835 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 373 Ervin Garriga 3430 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 374 Jose Ortiz 3169 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 375 Ivan Diaz 4310 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 376 Edel Reyes 4142 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 377 Joshua Wolfe 3150 30th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 378 Katia Marquina 2560 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 379 Reynaldo Ruiz 2560 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 380 Virginia Bazil 3075 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 381 Misael and Yolanda Betancourt 3630 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 382 Shari Ferguson 3074 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 383 Shelly Knapp 4487 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 6A 2397937669 2393481292 2393539092 2393040071 2394558805 2394553459 2398219449 2394550658 2397842239 9546831116 7864878014 2394552313 2393542481 2393544021 2393526370 2395950147 2392506186 2392536420 2394553415 2393844995 2394558647 2394650223 2393531013 2393481335 9546126811 2394504796 2392528524 2393483351 2393523188 2392982672 2394553179 2398779193 2393480781 2392340060 2396820647 2393480470 2393488393 2397743759 Page 34 of 47 PACKET 6 384 Charles Dean Smith 4920 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 385 P.J. Shelty 3475 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 386 Maribel Crespo 264032nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 387 Amy Brisson 4220 32nd Ave SE Naples FL 34117 388 Julio Irizarry 3945 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 389 Juan Alonso 2675 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 390 Adiela Rodriguez 4245 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 391 Jose and Oneida Garcia 3570 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 392 Harry and Milk Irizarry 393134th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 393 Antonio Lopez 3265 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 394 Mario Sanchez 2815 34th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 395 James White 3150 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 396 Barbara White 3150 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 397 Edwin Rosales 2965 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 398 Vicente and Maria Sancho 3621 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 399 Victor Ramirez 3380 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 400 Hiram Rodriguez 357136th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 401 Alberto Esquijarosa 358136th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 402 Donald Sloat 3180 36th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 403 Maria Falcon 358136th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 404 Christine Gomez 2835 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 405 John and Christine Gibbs 3595 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 406 Monica Garcia 2690 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 407 Angel Barbera 2984 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 408 Jaime and Luz Ceron 3480 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 409 Gabriel and Cynthia Pratt 2935 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 410 Todd Dukes 2961 38th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 411 Felix and Maria Negrin 336140th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 412 Otoniel Cameso 262540th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 413 Ana Alvarez 262540th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 414 Michael Stone 388140th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 415 William Llameza 2655 40th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 416 Pam Adkins 120 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 417 MoJun Kim 131 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 418 Yulian Perez 160 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 419 Julian Perez 160 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 420 Miguel Garcia 171 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 421 Jaime Vanegas 261 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 422 Jose Leds 280 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 423 Tommy Smith 290 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 424 Joy Smith 290 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 425 Christopher Huber 290 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 426 Reyna Berrios 310 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 427 Paula Estrada 331 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 428 Janet Perera 341 Everglades Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 429 Elena Morers 391 Everglades Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 430 Perfecto Reyes 411 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 431 Yennit 411 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 ,3 2393540140 2396826841 2393982683 2392853008 2394552469 2393539121 2393526896 2393487139 2393541892 2399197680 2393483781 2394550031 2398606852 2393528122 2393981359 2393521348 2393041352 2393489531 2393549194 2393489022 2397841454 2395373610 2394555100 2392690949 2393487762 2393042259 2396017191 2393489478 2393041505 2393483546 2392879247 2399199268 2399614137 2399616125 2396929172 2394558035 2392079134 3052826355 2396921728 2396410078 2395374897 2396924618 Page 35 of 47 PACKET 6 432 Maritza and Iburi 411 Everglades Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 433 Maritza 411 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 434 Reynaldo Soto 460 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 435 Jesus Pantoja 560 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 436 Rolanda and Isaura Llorch 720 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 437 Olwyn Smith 740 Everglades Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 438 Alberto Carreras 985 Everglades Blvd, S Naples FL 34117 439 Rolando Abino 1070 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 440 Onery Ramirez 1220 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 441 Shirley Garcia 1434 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 442 Felix Aranegui 1463 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 443 William Badolato 1870 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 444 Linda Badolato 1870 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 445 Howard and Donna Strobert 1995 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 446 Sam Rogers 2041 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 447 Sang Baccam 2260 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 448 Bevlyn Rogers 2041 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 449 Eduardo Rodes 2340 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 450 Jose Castello 3030 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 451 Nicasio Fernandez 3311 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 452 Angel Acular 3470 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 453 Stanley Viva 3639 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 454 Elinda Lago 3885 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 455 Mike and Gabriela Long 3960 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 456 Deyso Acosta 3961 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 457 Alls Shee 2770 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34117 458 Norma Marroquin 231 Everglades Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 459 Rataela Berdute 261 Everglades Blvd. D Naples FL 34120 460 Dennis and Beth Kerr 311 Everglades Blvd. t Naples FL 34120 461 Christine Crato 320 Everglades Blvd. K Naples FL 34120 462 Joe Crate 320 Everglades Blvd, N Naples FL 34120 463 Thomas Devhin 323 Everglades Blvd. h Naples FL 34120 464 Elvia Fletes 361 Everglades Blvd. h Naples FL 34120 465 Aleivis Morales 430 Everglades Blvd. b Naples FL 34120 466 Rachel Lanham 631 Everglades Blvd. l\ Naples FL 34120 467 Misty Kain 631 Everglades Blvd. D Naples FL 34120 468 Saria Davenport 631 Everglades Blvd. \ Naples FL 34120 469 Dan Loy 631 Everglades Blvd. h Naples FL 34120 470 Cesar Ayala 691 Everglades Blvd. \Naples FL 34120 471 Sherry Stevens 1462 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34120 472 Jeffret Rankin 1462 Everglades Blvd. Naples FL 34120 473 Patrick and Stacey Hurley 230 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 474 Jera and Craig Lorte 440 Desoto Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 475 Christopher Craig 530 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 476 Cynthia Kemp 970 Desoto Blvd. 5 Naples FL 34117 477 Deysire Gutierrez 770 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 478 Antonio Belliard 1080 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 479 Pedro Gutierrez 1121 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 2396924618 2392897765 2393844053 2394556831 2394555271 2396010154 2392066102 2392491455 2393541974 2394555530 2393521994 2393527732 2394388692 2393530316 2393480790 2394658630 2393482799 2393483709 2393522866 2393044499 2393520186 3057750787 2396928651 2392892803 2392896433 2393044633 2394380878 2399614410 2397969280 2394855322 2393528681 2393537391 2393529033 2396921980 2399616004 2393041653 Page 36 of 47 ti 1 11 PACKET 6 480 George Mountrakis 1620 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 481 Yerin Blanda 1860 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 482 Cilda Lugones 2146 Desoto Blvd.S Naples FL 34117 483 Yairea 7aneora 2235 Desoto Blvd.5 Naples FL 34117 484 Justin Arthur 2325 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 485 Ronald Ballard 2430 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 486 Tiffany Ballard 2430 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 487 Nicholas La Rocco 2490 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 488 Ana Corzo 2520 Desoto Blvd. S Naples FL 34117 489 Elda Rodriguez 440 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 490 Francisco Alves 665 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 491 Derek Hamm 1280 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 492 Dorothy Hamm 1280 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 493 Christopher Hall 5665 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 494 Dacia De La Rosa 120 Desoto Blvd. N Naples FL 34120 Total Sheets 1 -6 1500 • 2393537142 2394555682 2398211580 2395379035 2393040971 2393540516 2393844005 2393534718 9783957751 2392533200 9542431161 Page 37 of 47 PACKET 7 RESIDENT NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP PHONE# 1 Glen McDonald 2021 Golden Gate Blvd W Naples FL 34120 2393535206 2 Ralph Goodard 1565 Golden Gate Blvd W Naples FL 34120 3 Carlos Guzman 3320 Golden Gate Blvd W Naples FL 34120 4 Tracy Van Holle 2860 White Blvd Naples FL 34117 2394554622 5 Luz Lederson 3670 White Blvd Naples FL 34117 6 Randall Frank 3501 White Blvd Naples FL 34117 2394556443 7 Lasse Franeo 430 Weber Blvd S Naples FL 34117 2394559523 8 Jole Alonso 470 Weber Blvd S Naples FL 34117 2392806700 9 Carl Thrushman 2811 2nd Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393529231 10 Laura Nelson 2831 2nd Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393537188 11 Bill Kelly 2730 4th Street NW Naples FL 34120 12 Michael Combs 3475 3rd Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2397346453 13 Lisa Gorman 3630 3rd Ave SW Naples FL 34117 14 Kimberly Oretgon 3080 4th Street NW Naples FL 34120 15 Chastity Rivera 31314th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2392625264 16 Ismael Rivera 33134th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2392625264 17 Anne Shores 3555 5th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2393317393 18 Michael Rhodes 2731 6th Street NW Naples FL 34120 19 Neil Framain 2811 6th Street NW Naples FL 34120 20 Dan Mercer 4530 7th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 21 Barbara Hunget 4660 7th Ave NW Naples FL 34119 2393533303 22 Robert English 4660 7th Ave NW Naples FL 34119 2393533303 23 Dana Strom 3380 8th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2398257498 24 Sally Karian 490 8th Street SW Naples FL 34117 9177969113 25 Teressa Williams 246010th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393482321 26 Jonathan Druge 2612 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 27 Jeannette Sharp 2626 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522182 28 Gwen McHugh 2720 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 29 Dennis McHugh 2720 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 30 Juan Erbella 2890 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393526024 31 Michelle Rowland 358110th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393530767 32 Vernom Rowland 358110th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 33 Nathan Rowe 3945 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 34 Jennifer Borgs 3945 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 35 Ray Crews 4240 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 36 Karl Dogel 428010th Street NE Naples FL 34117 2393535247 37 Cecil Rim 4315 10th Street SE Naples FL 34117 38 Maria Rodriguez 4415 10th Street NE Naples FL 34117 39 Carlos Suaner 434410th Street NE Naples FL 34117 40 Alina Figueroa 2939 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393042474 41 Chad Butcher 3075 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 42 Nathan Sprag 3681 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392633759 43 Wilbert Glanville 3780 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 44 Pauline Glanville 3780 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 45 Diana Warner 4075 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394557325 Page 38 of 47 PACKET 7 108 A 46 Ken Werner 4075 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 47 Nikolaus Andreoulakis 132012th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393541978 48 Luz and Chris Andreoulakis 1325 12th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522103 49 Madelin Carter 680 12th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393522247 50 Noreen Kuenster 415 12th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 2393542620 51 Loretta Alijderar 4348 12th Street NE Naples FL 34117 52 Angela Engel 4375 12th Street NE Naples FL 34117 2394708759 53 Juan Flores 458412th Street NE Naples FL 34117 2394557193 54 Yesenia Flores 458412th Street NE Naples FL 34117 2394557193 55 Michele Diaz 17113th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2397779988 56 Anna Trucks 200 13th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2394552411 57 James Hamilton 660 13th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394559602 58 Andrea Morello 90013th Street SW Naples FL 34117 59 Joseph Morello 109013th Street SW Naples FL 34117 60 Kenneth Young 147013th Street SW Naples FL 34117 61 Johnny Walker 2695 14th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554059 62 Barry Liebonta 2765 14th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 63 Claire Christianson 293914th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394553731 64 Philip Sutton 2975 14th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2398773507 65 Thomas Coleman 2975 14th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393526933 66 Dennis Roos 3670 14th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393533941 67 Carolyn Holcomb 376114th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522223 68 Livia Oidorez 4560 14th Street NE Naples FL 34117 69 Elisa Aikey 44015th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2398773334 70 (same Aikey 440 15th Street SW Naples FL 34117 71 Richard Short 475 15th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2397777425 72 Brian Nidsen 136015th Street SW Naples FL 34117 73 William Sillery 369115th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2395809964 74 Maria Sillery 3691 15th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2393522345 75 Meagan Starr 4111 15th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 76 Kevin Wilkinson 361116th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 77 Natalie Jejencia 361116th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 78 Sherry Kish 3670 16th Street SE Naples FL 34117 2395378165 79 Laura Farnsworth 367016th Street SE Naples FL 34117 80 Juan Miguel 3834 16th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396922960 81 Mario Osorio 407116th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 82 Gary Cholewinski 4765 16th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 83 Wayne Gonzalez 4245 16th Street NE Naples FL 34120 84 Linda Ciabattar 256 17th Street NW Naples FL 34120 85 Betty Lou Scavone 268 17th Street NW Naples FL 34120 86 Serafin Riveron, Jr. 480 17th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393532955 87 Serafin Riveron, Sr. 500 17th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393536603 88 Robert Frazier 79017th Street NW Naples FL 34120 89 Tara Sparacio 991 17th Street SW Naples FL 34117 90 Lissete Rico 143118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395373020 91 Mayida Canto 2590 18th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393540730 Page 39 of 47 Page 40 of 47 8 A PACKET 7 92 Diana Watson 286118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2399638639 93 Eric Watson 286118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2398258865 94 Janet Esperon 288018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 95 Thomas Spino 328018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 96 Judith Ospino 328018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 97 Scott Geckler 336118th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393481352 98 Laroy Caldwell 3530 18th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 99 Mirta Portal 364018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393488764 100 David Morris 377018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 101 Chad McCumber 384018th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392982174 102 Carlos Ravelo 4430 18th Street NE Naples FL 34120 103 Yamile Leal 4430 18th Street NE Naples FL 34120 104 Dale Chapman 4345 18th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393537097 105 Jacqueline Martin 484418th Street NE Naples FL 34120 106 Heather Robinson 4875 18th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393542659 107 Melvin Rodriguez 37018th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2395808516 108 Tabitha Hardy 49119th Street SW Naples FL 34117 109 Lori Sams 555 19th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393522827 110 Dan Guess 118019th Street SW Naples FL 34117 111 Enrique Perez 147119th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394348274 112 Janette Perez 147119th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394348274 113 Sylvia Schulz 187019th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393044404 114 Laurie Housworth 4345 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393318782 115 Robert Taylor 4345 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 2393368782 116 Laura Kline 4525 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 117 Brian Creel 4595 20th Street NE Naples FL 34120 118 Linda Katon 3260 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 23928914244 119 Rafael Legoso 3331 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 120 Rick MacCluggage 4445 20th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 121 Shon Stevens 122 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2398258185 122 Julie Stevens 122 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 123 Linda Schulz 575 21st Street NW Naples FL 34120 124 Chris Beebe 590 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 125 Tina O'Connell 1281 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2392989126 126 Don O'Connell 1281 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 127 Nancy Castellano 2131 21st Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394553458 128 Milagros Garcia 4220 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 7862953517 129 Carlos Garcia 4220 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 7862953686 130 John and Jacqueline Lever 4560 22nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 2396491514 131 Luis Torez 2920 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 132 Melodi Oliveri 3531 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393045434 133 Miano Bonilla 3640 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393524232 134 Dennis Martin 4265 22nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 135 Angela Meister 785 23rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 136 Chanel Blunc 370 23rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2392533194 137 Jill Richards 1181 23rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 Page 40 of 47 PACKET 7 QA 138 Laura Cobet 1470 23rd Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394040830 139 Juan Coufanini 2880 23rd Street SE Naples FL 34117 2392862814 140 Christopher Scarpa 2510 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 141 Tonia Jones 2510 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 142 Casey Eagon 2821 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392874983 143 Lissa Hughes 2821 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393257019 144 David Eagon 2821 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392876997 145 Chris Wright 2910 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394558697 146 Robert Cleveland 3211 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 147 Amy Cleveland 3211 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 148 Reinier Rivero 3490 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392891934 149 Meridith Wulffen 4490 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393488559 150 Karl Wulffen 4490 24th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393488559 151 Daniel McKeon 135 25th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393521266 152 Carolyn McAlear 175 25th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 153 Lois Rainey 424 25th Street NW Naples FL 34120 154 Carolyn MaLinowski 424 25th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393537702 155 Joseph Salmad 741 25th Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393531016 156 Leonardo Castillo 1130 25th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393520574 157 Michelle Higgins 1580 25th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394556396 158 Terri Hart 281 27th Street NW Naples FL 34120 159 Terry Arwk 540 27th Street NW Naples FL 34120 160 Ana Gilliam 540 27th Street SW Naples FL 34117 161 Patrick Gilliam 54027th Street SW Naples FL 34117 162 Joseph Merriam 102127th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2394557192 163 Shirley Sheldon 1551 27th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2393521017 164 Gregory Garcia 2720 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 7863440985 165 Sharon Garcia 2930 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 166 Laura Gomez 3181 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2397328856 167 John Pedraza 3570 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395307508 168 Emily Wisland 4075 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 169 James Hamm 4485 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393487676 170 Scott Mac Neil 4465 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394559985 171 Ruth Hamm 4485 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393487676 172 James Lennon 4540 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394555762 173 Sharon Lennon 4540 27th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394555762 174 Jeannine Ciamcaglini 2290 25th Ave SE Naples FL 34117 175 Melania Rodriguez 460 29th Street NW Naples FL 34120 176 Tamera Smith 650 29th Street NW Naples FL 34120 177 Darin Ward 1020 29th Street SW Naples FL 34117 178 Juan Soras 2780 29th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393527952 179 Crowson 3360 29th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2397775034 180 Andrea Falcon 3440 29th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 181 Dana Holland 3500 29th Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2393527138 182 Pedro Suerra 2894 30th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 183 SandyThalheimin 321031st Ave SW Naples FL 34117 2397744912 Page 41 of 47 PACKET 7 184 Nelson Pine 2520 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395958048 185 Yusleify Aguirre 2980 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 186 Carlos Aguirre 2980 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2399637889 187 Jennifer Sarragne 3260 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393522094 188 Johanny A 3595 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392530343 189 Norta de Cespedes 3685 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393527412 190 Francisco Casanova 3785 31st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392004501 191 Lou Cianeaglini 460 31st Street NW Naples FL 34120 192 Lisa Krout 521 31st Street SW Naples FL 34117 193 Kim Linssen 780 31st Street NW Naples FL 34120 2393480628 194 Gilberto Reyes 3330 33rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 195 Kristi Shepard 3660 33rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 196 Adam Shepard 3660 33rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 197 Greg Lveago 11 35th Ave NW Naples FL 34120 198 Carlos Vallejo 2895 35th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 199 Luis Menedez 3290 35th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 200 Travis Delashmet 3811 35th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554837 201 Lupercio Torres, Jr. 160 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396018042 202 John Pequigney 220 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393045425 203 Kathleen Pequigney 220 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393045425 204 Michelle Alonso 2645 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393544414 205 Robert Alonso 2645 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393544414 206 Pedro Perez 2972 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 207 Gabi Andreu 2972 37th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 208 James Mourland 2645 39th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396596501 209 Barbie Brurland 2645 39th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396596501 210 Danielle Stauffer 2744 39th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 211 Crystal Hellingsworth 2960 39th Street SW Naples FL 34117 2398214865 212 Ivan Toruno 4546 40th Street NE Naples FL 34120 213 Lavonda Varon 6780 40th Street NE Naples FL 34120 214 Serena Santos 80 41st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2398259729 215 Javier Fort 2445 41st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393523147 216 James Ambrose 3840 41st Ave NE Naples FL 34120 217 Teresa Borges 2432 43rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394558899 218 Jose Borges 2432 43rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394558899 219 Osbaldo Rivera 3705 43rd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 220 Juan Aria 46045th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395951443 221 Mark tesar 3585 45th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 222 Lourdes Colon 363045th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2397759543 223 Marta Napoles 1465 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2392487552 224 Roland Garcia 1725 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 225 Manuel Garcia 1735 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 226 Mariaelee Alfoun 1735 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393521345 227 Rebecca Garcia 1729 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2396928481 228 Amanda Kelson 1786 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 229 Chuck Kelson 1786 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 Page 42 of 47 Page 43 of 47 PACKET? 8 230 Leah McCormick 3710 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394553655 231 Jessica Negron 3790 47th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393483709 232 Gene Salerno 1260 47th Ave 5E Naples FL 34120 2394557681 233 Daryl Salerno 1260 47th Street SE Naples FL 34120 2394557681 234 Inulda Gnoff 749 49th Street SE Naples FL 34120 235 Robert and Carol Adler 2760 50th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393537186 236 Andrea Gil 3820 50th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 237 Jim Haven 2411 52nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 238 Sergio Estrada 2480 52nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 239 Kimberly Estrada 2480 52nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394178575 240 Paul Graham 2520 52nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2398211453 241 Tiffany Graham 2520 52nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394342123 242 Guadalope Flores 52nd Street NE Naples FL 34120 243 Joseph Pinder 2471 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2399635103 244 Maigan Harvey - Pinder 2471 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2397764272 245 Michele Cole 3320 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 246 Juan Hernandez 3535 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 247 Jeffrey Zappavilli 4115 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 248 Jack West 4170 54th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 249 Leni Lopez 4490 56th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393042811 250 Steve Timmins 291056th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2395720602 251 Mercedes Arrate 3045 58th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 252 OscarArrate 3045 58th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 253 Donna Baduhkaid 3844 58th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 254 Sharon Sweeney 3840 60th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394255887 255 Carla Cordi 4420 60th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393487884 256 Todd Olson 2939 64th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 257 Peta Ledardson 3777 64th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 258 Cynthia Jones 4530 64th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394556907 259 Charles Rainey 2370 66th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 260 Chris and Tonya Cano 3421 68th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394554718 261 Judy Hall 2395 10th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393487662 262 Richard Bowenman 2395 70th Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2393487662 263 Bonnie Hamm 3542 72nd Ave NE Naples FL 34120 2394556061 264 Theresa Anders 6160 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 2393535843 265 Orlando Munoz 980 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 266 Pauline Gaynair 3674 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 2394555985 267 Susan Fariz 4230 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 268 Tom Perchonx 2850 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 269 Laura Wood 4360 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 270 Michael Wood 4360 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 271 Enrique Sequeira 3780 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 2393524287 272 Crystal Quintanilla 2475 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 2393702035 273 Kishia Thompson 2920 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 274 Steven Thompson 2920 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 275 Michael Gregory 2525 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 2393532835 Page 43 of 47 PACKET 7 276 Julie Gregory 2525 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 277 Gil Carillo 3020 Randall Blvd Naples FL 34120 278 J.J. Snyder 2080 Par Drive Naples FL 34120 279 Chris Crosseax 2899 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 280 Amy Nesmith 1958 Par Drive Naples FL 34120 281 Dale Nesmith 1958 Par Drive Naples FL 34120 282 Marisek Estrella 2233 Chadwick Circle Naples FL 34120 283 Patricia Della Posta 3522 Ocean Bluff Court Naples FL 34120 284 Emily Guerrero 2759 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 285 P. Gifford 788 Grand Rapids Blvd. Naples FL 34117 286 Howard Meikle 3270 Sturgeon Bay Court Naples FL 34120 287 Vanessa Meikle 3270 Sturgeon Bay Court Naples FL 34120 288 Jeffrey Gershon 2155 Grove Drive Naples FL 34120 289 Galima Gershen 2155 Grove Drive Naples FL 34120 290 David Martinez 3241 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 291 Nick D'Agostino 84492nd Ave Naples FL 34108 292 Aundree Jenkins 260 Weber Blvd 5 Naples FL 34120 293 Albert Balido 893 Summerfield Drive Naples FL 34120 294 David Puskaric, Jr. 980 Chesapeake Bay Court Naples FL 34120 295 Steven Soto 880 Grand Rapids Blvd. Naples FL 34120 296 Maureen Soto 880 Grand Rapids Blvd. Naples FL 34120 297 Dan Guernsey 3475 Ocean Bluff Naples FL 34120 298 Leroy Jensen 1057 Pout Orange Way Naples FL 34120 299 Mellisa Puskaris 980 Chesapeake Bay Court Naples FL 34120 300 Joseph VonTeinteln 1106 Grove Drive Naples FL 34120 301 Tammy DeCaro 2127 Grove Drive Naples FL 34120 302 Gabriella Reeve 985 Chesapeake Bay Court Naples FL 34120 303 Russell Parks 1939 Par Drive Naples FL 34120 304 John Schuckert 3260 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 305 Lou Anne Stacheli 2636 Citrus Key Lime Court Naples FL 34120 306 DeeAnn Manetta 2283 Grove Drive Naples FL 34120 307 Carol Schulz 2176 Rush Fig Court Naples FL 34120 308 John Ploprest 877 Grand Rapids Blvd Naples FL 34120 309 Hector Santiago 2067 Sagebrush Circle Naples FL 34120 310 Robyn Schuckert 3260 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 311 Dennis DiSarro 1724 Birdie Drive Naples FL 34120 312 Maria Casanova 2732 Orange Grove Trail Naples FL 34120 313 Ernesto Rivera 3160 Valencia Drive Naples FL 34120 314 Orlando Bouzo 3170 Valencia Drive Naples FL 34120 315 Pedro Valez 2201 Heydon Circle W Naples FL 34120 316 Concetta DiSarro 1724 Birdie Drive Naples FL 34120 317 Jeff French 863 Summerfield Drive Naples FL 34120 318 Juan Hurlode 1740 Birdie Drive Naples FL 34120 319 Susan Lohr 2645 Citrus Key Lime Drive Naples FL 34120 320 Ashley Abeln 3301 Lemon Lane Naples FL 34120 321 Deana Petrey 1061 Port Orange Way Naples FL 34120 8A 1 1 2393532835 2394653946 2393524742 2396929600 2394387755 2393409903 2393542643 2399194698 2393532295 2395373382 2394494887 2393488111 2392802444 2393488258 2398214994 2394651999 2393480425 2393534290 2395376966 2398210436 2393987782 2393530163 2396923271 2397840090 2394551544 2399619025 Page 44 of 47 Total Sheet 1 -7 1838 Page 45 of 47 PACKET 7 318 A 322 Cara Steele 5991 Dogwood Way Naples FL 34120 323 P.Novecosky 2037 Fairmont Naples FL 34120 23968827749 324 Leanna -Mae Norris 2239 Birdsong Lane Naples FL 34120 325 Joshua Norris 2290 Robin Drive Naples FL 34117 2392534001 326 Mark Minor 1630 Birdie Drive Naples FL 34120 327 Judy Villani 6150 Westport Lane Naples FL 34120 2394554070 328 Bill McDaniel 7000 Big Island Rock Road Naples FL 34120 2392531617 329 Raul Perez 2080 Keane Ave Naples FL 34117 2398254152 330 Edward Wiggins 700 Limpkin Road Naples FL 34120 331 Angela Wiggins 700 Limpkin Road Naples FL 34120 332 Amelia Macias 686 Wild Turkey Drive Naples FL 34120 333 Jorge Elizondo Corkscrew Area Naples FL 334 Noel Gomez 2656 Fish Tail Palm Court Naples FL 34120 2398957438 335 Corin Hubers 1395 Sanctuary Road Naples FL 34120 336 Elizabeth Perez 2080 Keane Ave Naples FL 34117 2398254152 337 Lorna McFutridge 1920 , Rock Road Naples FL 34120 2394507395 338 Louis Hilton 1450 Rack Road Naples FL 34120 Total Sheet 1 -7 1838 Page 45 of 47 E Fl� - s IJ �. eg S ia1R'M .btu • RESOLUTION NO, 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE NO. 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT FOR CERTAIN USES AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared a plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element of its Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, on January 20, 2011, considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA, must adopt with changes, or not adopt, the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution 1 of 2 WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed text amendment to the Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of , 2011. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Ll'E , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: N `Akl Heidi Ashton -Cicko Assistant County Attorney Land Use Section Chief CP \10 -CMP- 00785 \11 CP- 2010 -1 GMP Transmittal Resolution 2of2 , Chairman Exhibit A I. URBAN DESIGNATION CP- 2010 -1 [Page 44] A. Urban Mixed Use District 16. Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide primarily for neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict, and to provide employment opportunities for residents in the surrounding area. Allowable uses shall be a variety of commercial uses as more particularly described below, and mixed use (commercial and residential). Prohibited uses shall be gas stations and convenience stores with gas pumps, and certain types of fast food restaurants. This Subdistrict consists of two parcels comprising approximately 17 acres, located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road and east of Livingston Road, as shown on the Subdistrict Map. For mixed -use development, residential density shall be limited to sixteen dwelling units per acre. Residential density shall be calculated based upon the gross acreage of the Subdistrict parcel on which it is located (Parcel 1 or Parcel 2). Rezoning of the parcels comprising this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD, Planned Unit Development. At the time of rezoning, the applicant must include architectural and landscape standards for each parcel. a. Parcel This parcel is located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: retail, personal service, restaurant, office, and all other uses as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005); other comparable and /or compatible land uses not found specifically in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts, limited to: general and medical offices, government offices, financial institutions, personal and business services, limited indoor recreational uses, and limited retail uses; mixed -use development (residential and commercial uses). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet, except for a grocery /supermarket physical fitness facility, craft/hobby store, home furniture /furnishing store or department store use which shall not exceed a maximum of 50,000 square feet. (Words underlined are added, words skask-thrergh are deleted) b. Parcel 8A This parcel is located approximately '/< mile east of Livingston Road and is adjacent to multifamily residential uses. A maximum of 80,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed. Allowable uses shall be the following, except as prohibited above: General and medical offices, community facilities, and business and personal services, all as allowed, whether by right or by conditional use, in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance 04 -41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict (Ordinance No. 2005 -25 adopted on June 7, 2005). The maximum floor area for any single commercial user shall be 20,000 square feet. At the time of rezoning of Parcel 2, the developer shall provide restrictions and standards to insure that uses and hours of operation are compatible with surrounding land uses. Permitted uses such as assisted living facilities, independent living facilities for persons over the age of 55, continuing care retirement communities, and nursing homes, shall be restricted to a maximum of 200 units and a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6. The developer of Parcel 2 shall provide a landscape buffer along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD, at a minimum width of thirty (30) feet. At the time of rezoning, the developer shall incorporate a detailed landscape plan for that portion of the property fronting Vanderbilt Beach Road as well as that portion along the eastern property line, abutting the Wilshire Lakes PUD. In addition to the prohibited uses applicable to both parcels, the following list of uses shall also be prohibited on Parcel 1. 0742 — Veterinary services for Animal Specialties — Horses are prohibited, other animals are allowed 0752 — Animal specialty services, except Veterinary (dog grooming is allowed) 5261 — Retail nurseries lawn and garden supply stores 5499 — Poultry dealers — retail and egg dealers — retail 5531 —Auto and home supply store, except automobile accessory and parts dealers — retail (no on -site installation) 5813 — Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) 5921 - Liquor stores exceeding 5,000 square feet 5932 — Uses merchandise stores 5962 —Automatic merchandising machine operators 7211 — Power laundries, family and commercial 7215 — Coin - operated laundries and drycleaning 7216 — Drycleaning plants, except rug cleaning 7299 — Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified Coin operated service machine operations Comfort station operation Escort service Locker rental Massage parlors (except those employing licensed therapists) Rest room operation Tattoo parlors Turkish baths (Words underlined are added, words stwskthrough are deleted) 2 ROOK, Wedding chapels, privately operated 7389 — Business services not elsewhere classified, except Appraisers 7893 — Rpfrinprafinn and air - conditioning service and repair shoos I vca — ocuI wai 0 w i cyan Qi ivya, i wL v1avvn w! c �1a 11 7641 — Re- upholstery and furniture repair 7692 —Welding repair 7694 —Armature rewinding shops 7699 — Repair shops and related services not elsewhere classified 7841 — Adult oriented video tape rental 7993 — Coin operated amusement devices 8641 — Civic, social and fraternal associations CCPC Recommendation: Not part of the Subdistrict Text As a condition of approval, and prior to the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment, the owner shall record in the official land records restrictive covenants for the benefit of surrounding property owners, including the Orchards, Village Walk, Tiburon at Pelican Marsh and Wilshire Lakes, that will prohibit the prohibited uses contained within the Subdistrict. (Words underlined are added, words G«.nUo.k threugh are deleted) • VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SECTION 31 TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH RANGE 26 EAST PREPARED FOR: EverBank C/O Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 M D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 April 22, 2010 Revised October 5, 2010 Revised January 7, 2011 ` CP_2010_1 8 A 410 Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Amendment Justification The Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict authorizes a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on Parcel I of the Subdistrict. The property owner is seeking to amend Parcel 1 of the Subdistrict to remove the limitation that no single commercial user can exceed 20,000 square feet. The property owner seeks to permit limited commercial uses to exceed the 20,000 square feet cap, up to a maximum of 50,000 square feet. The overall maximum development limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses on this parcel will remain. The proposed 50,000 square feet maximum size will apply to uses such as grocery stores, department stores, furniture stores and physical fitness facilities -not general retail uses commonly associated as big box uses. The increased square footage will permit development of the site with a key anchor tenant, which will provide the synergy necessary to attract other neighborhood commercial uses to the site. The current market conditions strongly indicate that commercial centers with key anchor tenants are surviving and succeeding despite the poor local economy. According to the Urban Land Institute and other planning journals, traditional anchor tenants for neighborhood centers include the uses suggested in this amendment. The current size restriction has prohibited the property owner from securing a key anchor tenant for the property. Uses such as a grocery store, junior department store, hardware stores and even physical fitness facilities presently require up to 50,000 square feet in support of their successful business models. Although the size limitation was unposed by the County Commission during the plan amendment adoption hearing, it was in the context of attempting to deal with compatibility of large scale retail users adjacent to a single property that was not part of the subdistrict. Nearby property owners were supportive of the proposed subdistrict without the 20,000 square foot commercial user cap. The Land Development Code (LDC) does not define the phrase "big box"; however, additional architectural and site design standards are imposed on buildings exceeding 20,000 square feet in size. The current property owner has been working with commercial realtors and appraisers, and they have determined that the 20,000 square foot size limitation for any individual commercial use is a major factor in why this prominent commercially designated site has not been developed. They have also evaluated many sites in the Naples market and determined that those sites having strong anchor tenants are maintaining higher occupancy rates than those sites where no key anchor tenant exists. The specific uses for which the property owner is seeking to permit above 20,000 square feet are uses commonly found in neighborhood centers and commonly exceed 20,000 square feet in size. The few uses for which the amendment seeks to permit square Page 1 of 2 .r"footages above 20,000 square feet are viable uses for the site and are consistent with the intent and purpose of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Subdistrict. Modifying the Subdistrict to permit anchor tenants at sizes commonly found in neighborhood centers represents sound land planning, and responds to a land use model that has successfully been implemented in many other locations. The uses cannot exceed the intensity of the C -3 zoning district, and in order to obtain any of the permitted uses within the Subdistrict, the property owner will be required to rezone the property to a Planned Unit Development. During the PUD rezoning process staff and the County Commission will be able to evaluate specific land uses, the conceptual master plan, and impose conditions to insure that the site remains compatible with surrounding development. The proposed amendment will not increase the overall intensity of development or types of land uses permitted within the subdistrict. Paee 2 of 2 ROOF APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER GMPT -PL- 2010 -766 (CP- 2010 -1) DATE RECEIVED 4/22/2010 PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE 3/26/2010 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239 -252- 2400 (Fax 239 - 252 - 2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the fling deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97 -431 as amended by Resolution 98 -18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239 - 252 -2400. I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Name of Applicant Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President Company EverBank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 B. Name of Agent* Wayne Arnold • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company /Firm Q. Grady Minor and Associates. P.A. Mailing Address 3800 Via Del Rev City Bonita Springs State FL Zip Code 34134 Phone Number 239.947.1144 Fax Number 239.947.0375 Email Address warnold cDgradyminor.com Company /Firm Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President Everbank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 Email Address DOuglas.NeIson(@,EverBank.com Company /Firm Richard D. Yovanovich, Esg, Coleman. Yovanovich and Koester P.A. Mailing Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239.435.3535 Fax Number 239.435.1218 Email Address ryovanovidh(dicyklawfirm.com C. Name of Owner(s) of Record EverBank Mailing Address 1185 Immokalee Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239.415.5024 Fax Number 239.254.2194 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Page 1 of 6 VBRGMPA II. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION: Q A If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each, and provide one copy of the Articles of Incorporation, or other documentation, to verify the signer of this petition has the authority to do so. Name and Address, and Office Percentage of Stock EverBank 100% 1185 Immokalee Road, Naples, 34110 C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and /or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contact purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners, and provide one copy of the executed contract. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Page 2 of VBRGMPA 8A F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired (November. 2009) leased (): _Terms of lease _ yrs /mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: _ and date option terminates: or anticipated closing: H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Page 3 of 6 VBRGMPA III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 148 A A- LEGAL DESCRIPTION The SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 and the W 1l2 of the W 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 31 Township 48 South Range 26 east Collier County Florida less the South 150 feet thereof, LESS AND EXCEPT: That portion described in Warranty Deed in Collier County Florida recorded in Official Records Book 3022 Page 1128 and that portion described in Order of Taking recorded in Official Records Book 3599 Page 121 both of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. B. GENERAL LOCATION Sub ect property is located on the northeast quadrant of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Urban Estates D. TAZ 159 E. SIZE IN ACRES 9.2t F. ZONING Bradford Square MPUD (Ord. 07 -41) G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Urban Residential Subdistrict PUD CFPUD and A zoning. H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION (S) Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) OR SUB- ELEMENT(S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation /Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub - Element Mass Transit Sub - Element Aviation Sub - Element Potable Water Sub - Element Sanitary Sewer Sub - Element _ NGWAR Sub - Element Solid Waste Sub - Element _ Drainage Sub - Element _ Capital Improvement Element _ CCME Element ✓ Future Land Use Element Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE(S) 44 —45 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike - through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: Exhibit IV.B C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM TO D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: V. REQUIRED INFORMATION NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I"= 400'. At least one copy reduced to 8'% x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and /or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A 1 Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI'S, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Page 4 of 6 VBRGMPA Exhibit V.A.2 Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. 8 Exhibit V.A.2 Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Exhibit V.B Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C.1 a Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and Exhibit V.C.1b soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT- FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. N/A Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and /or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) Identify historic and /or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J- 11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1 INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)(5),F.A.C.) If so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County -wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. N Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and /or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J- 5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J- 11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS, and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Page 5 of 6 VBRGMPA Exhibit V.E Potable Water Exhibit V.E Sanitary Sewer Exhibit V.E Arterial & Collector Roads. Vanderbilt Beach Road Livingston Road Name of specific road and LOS Exhibit V.E Drainage Exhibit V.E Solid Waste Exhibit V.E Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and /or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit V.E2Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools, and emergency medical services.) 3. Exhibit V.E Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exhibit V.F Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable. N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable. NIA High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION X $16,700.00 non - refundable filing fee, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. $9,000.00 non - refundable fling fee for a Small Scale Amendment, made payable to the Board of County Commissioners, due at time of submittal. X Plus Legal Advertisement Costs (Your portion determined by number of petitions and divided accordingly. Exhibit V.G. Proof of ownership (Copy of deed) Exhibit V.G. Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (see attached form). X 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments, including maps, at time of submittal After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1" =400' or at a scale as determined during the pre- application meeting. Page 6 of 6 VBRGMPA . � 1 EXHISIT'll. D., PROFESSIO NNAAL C,'O,)NSUL.TfAt- NITIS Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Planning /Project Management: Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants . Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 (239) 94 1144 (239) 94 03 5 fax Coleman, Yovanovich and oester, P.A. Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 (239) 435 3535 (239) 435 1218 fax s 1 Page 1 of 2 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Principal, Director of Planning Education • Master of Urban Planning, University of Kansas, Lawrence • Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning/Geography, Missouri State University Professional Registrations/ Affiliations • American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) • American Planning Association (APA) • Urban Land Institute, S.W. Florida Chapter, Board of Directors 1996 • Collier County Rural Fringe Committee, Chairman, 1999 • Collier County Streetscape Ad boo Committee, 1999 • Leadership Collier, Class of 2000 • Bonita Springs Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee • Collier Building Industry Association, Board of Directors • Collier County Jr. Deputy League, Inc., Board of Directors '�ayz l.yy, 4 gq Gra(I yNEnoil Mr. Arnold is a Principal and co -owner of the firm and serves as the Secretary /Treasurer and Director of Planning. As Director of Planning, Mr. Arnold is responsible for and oversees services related to plan amendments, property rezonings, expert witness testimony, ROW Acquisition, public participation facilitation, and project management. Mr. Arnold previously served as the Planning Services Director at Collier County, where he oversaw the County's zoning, comprehensive planning, engineering, platting and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) functions. Mr. Arnold also has prior Florida planning experience with Palm Beach County Government and the South Florida Water Management District. Mr. Arnold has been accepted as an expert in land planning matters in local and state proceedings. Relevant Projects • Collier County Growth Management Plan • Marco Island Master Plan • Irnmokalee Area Master Plan • Collier County Land Development Code • Logan Boulevard Right -of -Way Acquisition Planning Analysis • U.S. 41 Right -of -Way Expansion Planning Analysis • Copeland Zoning Overlay • Collier County Government Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI) • Winding Cypress DRI • Pine Ridge /Goodlette Road Commercial Infill District • Lely Lakes PUD Rezoning • Henderson Creek Planned Development /Growth Management Plan Amendment • Orangetree (Settlement Area) Growth Management Plan Amendment • Mercato Mixed Use Planned Development • North Point DRI /MPD Vornado RPUD • Orange Blossom Ranch MPD • Palermo Cove RPD Q. Grady Allnor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers • Surveyors • Land Planners • Landscape Architects Page 2 of 2 E XHIBlE lll,,B,, ARTFICLEES, OF INCORPORATION 2010 FOR PROFIT CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT DOCUMENT# P04000142463 Entity Name: EVERBANK FINANCIAL CORP Current Principal Place of Business: 501 RIVERSIDE AVE. 12TH FLOOR JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Current Mailing Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVE. 12TH FLOOR JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 FEI Number: 52- 2024090 FEI Number Applied For( I Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM 1200 SOUTH PINE ISLAND ROAD PLANTATION, FL 33324 US FILED 8 A Jan 21, 2010 H Secretary of State New Principal Place of Business: New Mailing Address: FEI Number Not Applicable ( ) Certificate of Status Desired ( I Name and Address of New Registered Agent: The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund Contribution ( I. OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS: Title: DCEO Name: CLEMENTS, ROBERT Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: DNC Name: MEEKS, GARY Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: D/P Name: WILSON, W. BLAKE Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title; D Name: COMMANDER, CHARLES E III Address: 200 LAURA ST City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title: EVP Name: SURFACE, JOHN S Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 Title. S Name: HAJ DA, THOMAS A Address: 501 RIVERSIDE AVENUE, 12TH FLOOR City -St -Zip: JACKSONVILLE, FL 32202 I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath, that I am an officer or director of the corporation or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 607, Florida Statutes, and that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered. 'IGNATURE: THOMASAHAJDA S _ 01/21/2010 Electronic Signature of Signing Officer or Director Date • E:.2v"Ljl - � IT 111 IIHAMA C'A' M7 111 nb 1 1; .1 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 'm M.M%ZIeZON is Nou�35 io 3Nn ,99'096 OVOHNO1SON1A17 ;� a U N y a O ¢Hh r �¢ - x wm WU� -zm �WZF W mph 3 Ne��2O ~QhAv ooav� "4i 2o� Wmmgm O000 <� U WW2 ? 'n 22 z= o 2 ommmw OUO 3pi�s? �CZS Z Z e F- �po InpU O �pU 40� F¢��<Z \� O cwi � \✓I-io 6QN0° '� WI—E co WQ p Q FZ O p m O F O K J O nfi ¢�Bn N WZz W 0 3 0 ���¢m <pF. � Fza zr«� 30 S✓O.W F_'o o�mF�pcFi�z� - W °�N�� OR. 3620 PGS 1412 °12'44 "E 50584 - — --'-� S02 I L2 e N N m y N m � T U J N v O JE m 11 m � I IIf— I I I I50'.1 I I 'm M.M%ZIeZON is Nou�35 io 3Nn ,99'096 OVOHNO1SON1A17 ;� a U N y a O ¢Hh r �¢ 333 wm WU� -zm �WZF W mph 3 Ne��2O ~QhAv ooav� "4i 2o� Wmmgm O000 <� U WW2 ? 'n 22 z= o 2 W wm° Ju °oax InpU O �pU W J 0 a W Y C� w N v � C�o LL F W � Q 5 WWW O yy' m� Q F U O V h o� q °o m of m y C o C � � o m 5 d � G-I o g y 9 0 ✓]Sgg3 r.i C 8 p • ° X333 �y m © ° o c� 7_ O U y Tlll' kk - 0 O i, ,c'l.---:-:x,"HIIJBIIT IVI..B-. PR,1�0-)POSED GRO H MAN AGE MW ENT PLAN TEXT ElEXH11 8IITa VA.. 8 A LA�1D USE P,), l m 1 —u ww E 3Iy N 0 0� n Y r J W W 1 _ tt W a � ¢i —_� 2 > CIUVAnn08 NV901 — oavn3nnoe NV i -- a a N w y N FQ _ Q ti W b '✓1 ¢ 6 w� w zc W p a U Y wN p pN N m y 51 w a 5. �SZ L °z a Pj F z� o > a z J�IiYf?= LIVIN OAD( ss -'' Ciao) a Hsavw NdJnaa 0 pamx m ss __ N V S O W d m Z V1Z Vp >r UJU _ 2• W OZ � W �Q UZ SLl U U.. Z � - �Z p U� UQ sr IF mJ JJZ wWQ Y r \ J � LLL_ C G 9 6 .���✓✓✓ cis aot ti gg C — ado 11 0NI-nnd- L8Ddald x W w wn V 3 a V ¢ > W az o a j VSIa UV NQ N Z Q 1' VS .1 S a >n6 ui C Z zQ Iz 3 n j � - and ovca 3ii3�a000 Saw oo =` i? oavn31nos>INva� w� wZa tt a ' D aN QY O o O - �. It sn) ildaL Iwdlwdl J yss= P,), l m 1 a k I 6QNNw < T oN¢ W 6W „mVSO —w nQ Q ~ x0� 000w1 W x+ 6�LL N <pN 0=004 Fp „pZ EU•J QQ �TZ 64 pp= Q O> w iy ruZ U2N� 26 y3„ F p vu o ¢ ouz o>z aia ouo� I z N ( 2N> NNj WNj � N J w 1 II W e �( z» wW2 ,V •a v C � yF TTT A K � - �g� K e YW�TJ Ww�Y1 Ci QI z 1 b IFI }k I�.k �� • r�r --I^�- .arm'® LIVING.STON ROAD C: � R•.niwwt^ .,wr ... Fj fVC o J wV� IW. IF� 1• i <e� "..y l" s SWd'z w. Vj V N 1 i k Page 2 0f 2 Er- �HrIB9lITVB. FUTU Rr E LAND USE DESIIGI'WTYON -T1 6 5 41 5 T 48 5 Y _ 5959 ? � i z �o= �5ii31pa � %ap�� a a s a Q Qw �� QwW p9�.gg! � �� U�U 'n ?k�5��?3° 9 mam:.�o. ®r7M I [73r• I at® Oil iii a a Y:� xo z xo U U Z �n0 U U N wpm mp OF L¢ O WmO�- �SU m K, m2 j C7 ��ZU m K O �mv� �W F , U�ro i zo O m 0 W O I QWJ > Z N XN W J 7GWJ .> Z Vl -T1 6 5 41 5 T 48 5 Y _ 5959 ? � i �o= �5ii31pa � %ap�� o�oo��ol I lv.m ®I P p9�.gg! � �� 'n ?k�5��?3° 9 mam:.�o. ®r7M I [73r• I at® Oil iii a a Y:� Y° I. 9'. =P $ Y i1pF`s p p 9 y a o 37GJS p I4Y_ I E1.6tii It C��glli�.l3 t9f Eg99(� &i! i�[5 .Cdsg2 w iY q �i'i9 IOl Sii t gg r e8�n ® ®9�PQ ■��E \a Of•�f•O i� _e___ p 495 i 505 T 5 5 T 52S I P! 3?Si, a�,i °�&�gia�a��y�j ;4 °��IS ,a 3 ,ppep.p pp qS e: oppd en Q e!' eE aE i 1 1 1 8 i i 1 vi m gil i 53 5 1 'IIIIlIIIIIIlil9f ''.. 1B1111;;;;;; x� I9� Page 1 of 1 a. p z U a. o a 9 LLI o lv+ Gulf of s 9a i 5 Lo t 5 ee L s 60_ = 5 O i_ 5 1S a x� I9� Page 1 of 1 8 EXHIBIT'Vi..C., ENVIRONMENTAL Page 1 of 2 ! 1 � � N {{ #I 41 +1 i I ._ � iW as s •.. .' l'.� � y+.- ��IDNYW fl` •S, . .{ ~' ay � o - m a � c 4 4 o I � U a N O q Nv U N o 3 U oa3mm i, ^2 ry J 'CULL N p C C K N i N 1 t 4 �R II m LO u V a 1 E "= x r � w _ y. � a m i pp4¢ 1 •. t� Cr` 17514.71 Page 1 of 2 ! 1 � � i I ._ � iW as s •.. .' l'.� � y+.- ��IDNYW LIVINGSTONROAD . .{ ~' ay � o - � c 4 4 o I Page 1 of 2 o o <� 0 D = C U W � J � fll N N O C N o � m Z J C C m m m C FL : }}♦ aSm m o Ud a 0 Fk t !; F � O K C4 a; w � y� m8 3 M o ci �J O N f % Ll VINOSTONROAD =.a.r- r•t ••.•w, mi.sa.e.v:.ss <r xrsa..mn *.. r_.t .-.i �� ti l Page 2 of 2 CAB 0 @GJI T V u E, uN'IY PUBLIC FA CILITIES EXHIBIT V.E. PUBLIC FACILITIES V.E.1. Provide the existing adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: The subject Growth Management Plan Amendment proposes to permit a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial development on the 9+ acre property that comprises the Vanderbilt Neighborhood Commercial land use category. Approximately 100,000 square feet of general commercial use will be constructed within this land use category. Additionally up to 10 residential units will be constructed. Potable Water The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Potable Water established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Service to this area is provided by Collier County Water and Sewer District. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Potable Water are as follows: Potable Water LOS Standard Available Inventory as of 7/09 Required Inventory as of 7/09 Planned CIE FY 09 -14 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 170 GPD /Capita 46.8 MGD 31.9 MGD 2.0 MGD 16.9 MGD Minimum standards for Potable Water are being met or exceeded. It is estimated that potable water demand for the project will be as follows. 100,000 sq. ft. retail at 0.1 GPD /SF = 10,000 GPD 10 units at 170 GPD /UNIT = .1 ,700 GPD TOTAL = 11,700 GPD The total combined demand for potable water for the new land use category is approximately 11,700 gallons per day. Based on the available inventory identified in the 2009 AUIR, this demand will not have a significant impact on the Collier County Regional Water System. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Sanitary Sewer established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Exhibit V.E Page 1 of 6 MIX Growth Management Plan. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Sanitary Sewer are as follows: Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard Available Inventory as of 7/09 Required Inventory as of 7/09 Planned CIE FY 09 -14 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 100,000 sq. ft. retail at: 10 units at: 120 GPD /Capita 29.1 MGD 23.8 MGD 0.0 MGD 5.3 MGD 0.1 GPD /SF = 10,000 GPD 120 GPD /UNIT = 1,200 GPD TOTAL = 11,200 GPD Standards for Sanitary Sewer are being met or exceeded. It is estimated that wastewater demand for the project will be equal to that identified in the potable water analysis above and is approximately 11,200 gallons per day. This demand is within the available capacity identified in the AUIR, will not have a significant impact on the Regional Wastewater System. Arterial and Collector Roads The proposed amendment does not modify the previously approved maximum intensity of development. The previously approved impact statement for this site had an adjusted Total Daily trip count of 5185 with 480 adjusted PM Peak Hour trips (6880 Total Daily, 635 P.M. Peak Hour Trips — Unadjusted). The PM Peak hour service volume on Livingston Road between Vanderbilt and Immokalee Roads is 3,840 vehicles (Total Volume is 1510 trips and Remaining Capacity is 2330 trips). The PM Peak hour service volume on Vanderbilt Beach Road between Logan and Livingston Roads is 3,540 vehicles (Total Volume is 1934 trips and Remaining Capacity is 1606 trips). No new traffic impacts result from the amendment. Drainage The subject project is located within the urban boundary with standards for Drainage established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Exhibit V.E Page 2 of 6 Growth Management Plan. The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 1999 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Drainage are as follows'. Drainage LOS Standard Future Development — 25 year, 3 day storm Existing Development — current service level Available Inventory as of 7/09 373 Canal Miles Required Inventory as of 7110 373 Canal Miles Planned CIE FY 10 -14 N/A 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) N/A The proposed development in the amendment area will be designed to comply with the 25 year, 3 day storm routing requirements. Solid Waste The established Level of Service (LOS) for the solid waste facilities is two years of landfill disposal capacity at present fill rates and ten years of landfill raw land capacity at present fill rates. No adverse impacts to the existing solid waste facilities from the proposed project of 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. Solid Waste Generation: Retail: 100,000 sf x 0.01 Ib /sf /day x 1 cy /250 Ibs = 1,400 cy /yr Residential: 10 UNITS x 5 Ibs /unit/day x 1 cy /2501bs = 73 cy /yr Data source: "Solid Wastes: Engineering Principles and Management Issues ", Tchobangolous/Theisen and "Environmental Engineering and Sanitation ", Salvato. Parks: Community and Regional A maximum of 10 residential units will be allowed. Computation of projected demand is as calculated below. This demand is nominal and will not adversely affect Park capacity. 1.2 acres /1000 unincorporated population x 10 units x 2.5 pop /unit = fraction of an acre The currently adopted minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards and 2009 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) for Regional Park Land is as follows: Exhibit V.E Page 3 of 6 Parks LOS Standard 1.2 acres /10C Available Inventory as of 9/30/09 Required Inventory as of FY2016 Planned CIE FY 10 -15 Available Inventory as of FY 2016 5 -Year Surplus or (Deficit) 8A 10 unincorporated population 544.54 Acres 473.70 Acres (47.00) Acres 497.54 Acres 23.84 Acres No adverse impacts to the existing parks are anticipated from this project. Impact fees at the current fee structure will be paid and provide funding for future park needs. The development will be responsible for payment of impact fees if residential development occurs on this site. Exhibit V.E Page 4 of 6 lib'2 ViINVl lb s f) .__CV u ® u, m _ � � 4 ��.. jay EM F ✓� 130NHn ki _J�� oo - d -a0 196 1 in L o r i - a % � 1 w Is 1 a Y a � yy U ....s ❑J ' W o 0 m Y W o O Z w a t i u � NOISN31X3 -I W aavn3]noe � w - -- NVSOI a � w U i. o . i avoa NolsoNlnn 5 - A na 9Nmnd- 1aOda1V c. ° , U; J _ U 5 - -- - - /aVOa NNVad 3113�000S -- lib'2 ViINVl lb s f) .__CV u ® u, m _ � � 4 ��.. jay EM F ✓� 130NHn ki _J�� oo - 00 r 1 in yr r i - a % � 1 w Is 1 a Y a � yy Pace 5 0l6 V.E.3. Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. Schools A maximum of 10 residential units will be allowed. Given the mixed use nature of the project and likely residential component, maximum students would be 0.5 /unit or 5 students. This demand is nominal and will not adversely affect School capacity. The development will be responsible for payment of impact fees if residential development occurs on this site. Fire Service The proposed land use category is within the North Naples Fire District service area. No known service deficiencies exist or are anticipated. Fire impact fees will be paid at the time of development, which will offset increases in service demand. EMS Three EMS facilities are located in close proximity to the proposed land use district. No known service deficiencies exist. Impact fees will be paid at the time of development to off -set any increased service demand as a result of commercial development within this district. Exhibit V.E Page 6 of 6 8A E,-,',XKHllB--.;.,)IlT VWYAWF, � -� —� -- —�� -- - -� EXII V. c . —84- })} !b RZ \ :- �R /� {\ : })} Exhibit «r Page d, : , Exhibit «r Page d, • EAHI II " 11 V.G1.� SUPPLEMMENTA, L IINFO � �MATIION Details Page 1 of 1 8A Property Record I Aerial _ Sketches Trim Notices Current Ownership Parcel No. 00203042108 Property Address 14258 LIVINGSTON RD Legal 31 48 26 St /2 OF SWIM OF SW 114 LESS S 15OFT LESS E 495FT + -LESS R W DESC IN OR 3022 PG 1128& LESS RW DESC IN OR 3599 `For more than four lines of Legal Description please call the Property Appraiser's Office. Section Township Range Acres Map No. I Strap No. 31 48 26 9.04 3831 482631085.0003831 W� Millaae Rates Sub No. 100 ACREAGE HEADER "' Mlllaae Area School Other 'USe Code 10 VACANT COMMERCIAL 47 5.6990 6.1239 �' `See Instructions for Caicuh 2010 Final Tax Roll Latest Sales History (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Total Land Value $ 3,937,824.00 Date Book - Page Amount ( +) Improved Value $ D.00 10 / 2010 4614. 2846 F $ 3,937,900.00 ( =) Market Value $ 3,937,824.00 11 1 2009 4509 - 1464 $ 100.00 ( -) SOH Exempt Value & Other Exemptions $ 0.00 Ohl 2007 1248-2988 $ 9,500,000.00 ( =) Assessed Value $ 3,937,824.00 0212005 3729-1739 $ 3,750,000.00 ( -) Homestead and other Exempt Value $ 0.00 1 12 / 1999 11 2626-1650 J (_) Taxable Value $ 3,937,824.00 0711998 2436 - 2200 $ 675,000.00 (_) School Taxable Value (Used for School Taxes) $ 3,937,824.00 SOH = "Save Our Homes" exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. Page 1 of 8 http:// www. collierappraiser .com /RecordDetai I. asp ?Map= &FolioID= 0000000203042108 1/7/2011 INSTR 4514575 OR 4641 PG 2164 RECORDED 1/10/2011 3:34 PM PAGES 6 RE- RECORD DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA REC $52.50 C 0 u a ,1 w u v b ti m 00 u v N 0 C a H N u u a, 0 0 U 0 u b u N O a N a N r G A N H v v a N H v v u z" M Prepared by and after recording return to: J. Thomas Conroy, III Conroy, Conroy & Durant, P.A. 2210 Vanderbilt Beach Road Suite 1201 Naples, Florida 34109 Folio No.:00203042108 • INSTR 4485577 OR 4614 PG 2846 RECORDED 10/1512010 8:33 AM PAGES 6 DWIGHT E. BROCK COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOC @.70 $27,565.30 REC $52.50 CONS $3,937,824.00 RECEIVER'S DEED (Deed Without Covenant, Representation, or Warranty) STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER This Receiver's Deed is the FEDERAL DEPOSIT IN FLORIDA — SOUTHWEST Baymeadows Way West, ac SOUTHWEST having been lal referred to as "Grantee "), ho: Road, Naples, Florida 3411 i W day of October, 2010, between CORP O RECEIVER OF BANK OF referred to as ant whose address is 7777 e, the sat BANK OF FLORIDA - recelx s on a 28 20 0, and EVERBANK (herein V�ip¢ p f usiness is 1185 Immokalee For good and valuabl *"owled sufficiency of which are here SELL and CONVEY to Granature, express or implied, ancovenants or warranties creat are excluded, all of Grantor's right, title a N n in hand id t G r by Grantee, the receipt and ged, Gran t g� resents does hereby GRANT, covenant, repr on or warranty of any kind or warranties- In arise by common law and any Q s a be on amended or superseded, nd- nt�r iisin certain tract or parcel of land lying and being in Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Together with all of Grantor's right, title and interest in any and all improvements and fixtures thereon and thereto (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Subject Property"), and all and singular the rights and appurtenances pertaining thereto, including, but not limited to, any right, title and interest of Grantor in and to adjacent streets, alleys or rights -of -way, subject, however, to all liens, exceptions, easements, rights -of -way, covenants, conditions, restrictions, reservations, encroachments, protrusions, shortages in area, boundary disputes and discrepancies, matters which could be discovered or would be revealed by, respectively, an inspection or current survey of the Subject Property, encumbrances, impositions (monetary and otherwise) access limitations, licenses, leases, prescriptive rights, rights of parties in possession, rights of tenants, co- tenants, or other co- owners, and any and all other matters or conditions affecting the Subject Property, as well as standby fees, real estate taxes, and assessments on the Subject Property for the current year and prior and subsequent years, and subsequent taxes and assessments for prior years due to change in land usage or ownership, and any and all zoning laws, regulations, and ordinances of municipal and other governmental authorities affecting the Subject Property (all of the foregoing being collectively referred to as the "Permitted Record & Return To: Conroy. Conroy & Durer 4 PA 22 10 Vanderbilt Beach Road, Suite 1201 Naples, Honda 34109 Page 2 of 8 OR 4641 PG 2165 Encumbrances "). Grantee, by its execution and acceptance of delivery of this Receiver's Deed, assumes and agrees to perform all of Grantor's obligations under the Permitted Encumbrances. FURTHER, GRANTEE, BY ITS EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF DELIVERY OF THIS RECEIVER'S DEED, ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT (i) GRANTOR HAS NOT MADE, DOES NOT MAKE, AND SPECIFICALLY NEGATES AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, PROMISES, COVENANTS, AGREEMENTS OR GUARANTEES OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER WHATSOEVER, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ORAI. OR WRITTEN, PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE, OF, AS TO, CONCERNING, OR WITH RESPECT TO (A) THE VALUE, NATURE, QUALITY, OR CONDITION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE WATER, SOIL, AND GEOLOGY, (B) THE INCOME TO BE DERIVED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, (C) THE SUITABILITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY AND ALL ACTIVITIES AND USES WHICH GRANTEE MAY CONDUCT THEREON, (D) THE COMPLIANCE OF OR BY THESUHIECT— TROPERTY OR ITS OPERATION WITH ANY LAWS, RULES, GOVERNMENTAL AU POSSESSION, HABITAF FOR A PARTICULAR P1 QUALITY OF THE CON! THE SUBJECT PROPER LACK OF REPAIR OF " ANY IMPROVEMENTS OF ANY APPLICABLE OWNERSHIP, TITLE, TABILITY, OR FITNESS Y, (F) THE MANNER OR % INCORPORATED INTO STATE OF REPAIR, OR PORTION THEREOF OR QUALITY, NATURE, ADEQUACY, OR PHYSIC NDITION OF A U IL SERVING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OR (I) ANY ER MATTER T PECT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AND SPECIFIC THAT GRANT S NOT MADE, DOES NOT MAKE AND SPECIFICALLY SENTATIONS REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH ANY ENVIR HAS CTION, POLLUTION, OR LAND USE LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS, O RS, OR REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE DISPOSAL OR EXISTENCE, IN OR ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, OF ANY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS; (ii) GRANTEE HAS FULLY INSPECTED THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT THE CONVEYANCE AND DELIVERY HEREUNDER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS "AS IS" AND "WITH ALL FAULTS ", AND GRANTOR HAS NO OBLIGATION TO ALTER, REPAIR, OR IMPROVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS THERETO; AND (iii) NO WARRANTY HAS ARISEN THROUGH TRADE, CUSTOM, OR COURSE OF DEALING WITH GRANTOR, AND ALL STATUTORY, COMMON LAW, AND CUSTOMARY COVENANTS AND WARRANTIES, IF ANY, OF WHATSOEVER KIND, CHARACTER, NATURE, PURPOSE, OR EFFECT, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED OR ARISING BY OPERATION OF LAW, ARE HEREBY EXPRESSLY, UNCONDITIONALLY, AND IRREVOCABLY WAIVED, DISCLAIMED, AND EXCLUDED FROM THIS RECEIVER'S DEED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY CUSTOM OR PRACTICE TO THE CONTRARY, OR ANY STATUTORY, COMMON LAW, DECISIONAL, HISTORICAL, OR CUSTOMARY MEANING, IMPLICATION, SIGNIFICANCE, EFFECT, OR USE OF CONTRARY IMPORT OF ANY WORD, TERM, PHRASE OR PROVISION HEREIN. Page 3 of 8 OR 4641 PG 2166 Further, by its execution and acceptance of delivery of this Receiver's Deed, Grantee or anyone claiming by, through, or under Grantee hereby fully releases Grantor, its employees, officers, directors, representatives, and agents from any and all claims, costs, losses, liabilities, damages, expenses, demands, actions, or causes of action that it may now have or hereafter acquire, whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, liquidated or contingent, arising from or related to the Subject Property in any manner whatsoever. This covenant releasing Grantor shall be a covenant running with the Subject Property and shall be binding upon Grantee, its successors and assigns. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Subject Property together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any wise belonging, unto Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, without covenant, representation, or warranty whatsoever, subject, however, to the Permitted Encumbrances. The fact that certain encu � o ther matters or conditions may be mentioned, disclaimed, or exce any way herein, er specifically or generally, and whether in the body hereof o an exhibit hereto, shall n t b \a covenant, representation, or warrant o£ Grantor as to an en ` ces, y 1�'limitatf s, or y her matters or conditions not mentioned, disclaimed, or a cep a of t he in to the contrary, however, nothing herein shall be cons rue o d d rr i Gr ntor or Grantee to any third party of the existence, v li i , en rc a il' cope r 1 ion of any encumbrances, limitations, or other matters n as i dis e ce excepted in any way herein, and nothing shall be constru deemed as a wai by Gr or Grantee of its respective rights, if any, but without ation, to challeto agar rce the existence, validity, enforceability, scope, or locatio f5 e against third payt�pes � Grantee hereby assumes the pay+fLrl6MI eiOrem taxes, standby fees, and general and special assessments of whatever kind and character affecting the Subject Property which are due, or which may become due, for any tax year or assessment period prior or subsequent to the effective date of this Receiver's Deed, including, without limitation, taxes or assessments becoming due by reason of a change. in usage or ownership, or both, of the Subject Property. [SIGNATURE PAGES TO FOLLOW] Page 4 of 8 OR 4641 PG 2167 8A IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Receiver's Deed is executed by Grantor and Grantee on the dates set forth below their respective signatures herein below, but to be effective for all purposes, however, as of the date first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: STATE OF FLORIDA 1 7 COUNTY OF COLLIER e The foregoing instrum 2010, by Charles Tipton as Attc Receiver for Bank of Florida —Soi personally known to me, or _ has tCeT>I MMM FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, RECEIVER OF BANK OF FLORIDA— SOUTHWEST M Baymeadows Way West ;onville• FL 32256 acknowledged b� r = day of October, n,Fact of the Feder e d insurance Corporation, as .•.. °••••••••BE ANKN KOS7EN0•••• , #DD0873%6 a�w,.,, Comm 3 pres312?l2013 f -W' "Ii oration, which person is✓ license dentification. Notary Publi My Commission Expires: 4422-IZOIB Page 5 of 8 i r) OR 4641 PG 2168 Signed, sealed and delivered in the nrecenre of- STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER 8A.44d GRANTEE: EVERBANK By: arles Tipton Title: President �Z�F Address: 1185 Immokalee Road Naples, Florida 34110 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this IZ7%1 day of October, 2010, by Charles Tipton as President behalf of the bank, which person is personally known to me, or has d iiiT�icense as identification. Inc rf �� R:Oank ofFlorldnOmdfcrd SquareDommemalRecoNer's feed docx Expires:) /,Z2. /M2 3 Page 6 of 8 * ** OR 4641 PG 2169 * ** EXHIBIT A — LEGAL DESCRIPTION The SW '/4 of the SW '/4 of the SW '/, and the W %x of the W '/2 of the SE '/4 of the SW '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less the South 150 feet thereof. LESS AND EXCEPT: That portion described in Warranty Deed in Collier County, Florida, recorded in Official Records Book 3022, Page 1128, and that portion described in Order of taking recorded in Official Records Book 3599, Page 121, both of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. • • Page 7 of 8 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN authorize W �; + LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION of Agent(s)) to serve as my Agents in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified In this Application. Signed: Date. Nywv -e �O ! ?" 1) ripp Gulliford, is Pr ident of Everbank I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge, / —!at of Applicant Douglas W. Nelson, Vice President of Everbank Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF ( F• L ) COUNTY OF ( C.Olilff- ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this ip � day of 0-fl IA W � 2011 by G U Ctrl hi1tJ! MY COMMISSION EXPIRES. Notary Public _ ��.`.. V "fy GILLIAN FISHER Notary Public. Stale of Florida CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING My Comm. Expires Jul 6, 2011 Commission M EE 6330 ' � " " bonded ihmu h 6atlonal Notary Assn. who is personally known tome, g who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837,06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the Intent to mislead a public servant In the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and /or maximum of a sixty day Jail term." Page 8 of 8 LOT EXHIIIBIR VCAI ANWHORIZART ONI AND OWNERSHIP IIN►FO � � ATCIIONI • Unanimous Written Consent of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank December 15, 2010 (Appointing Officers) The undersigned, being all of the members of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank, a federally chartered stock savings bank (the "Bank "), do hereby adopt the following resolutions by unanimous written consent in lieu of a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors, and do hereby instruct the Secretary of the Bank to file this Unanimous Written Consent in the minute book of the Bank. RESOLVED, that Tripp Gulliford is hereby appointed to the position of Vice President of the Bank effective as of September 1, 2010; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Fabriena A. Dorgan is hereby appointed to the position of Vice President of the Bank effective as of November 29, 2010; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that any and all actions taken by each of Tripp Gulliford and Fabriena A. Dorgan relating to or within the terms of the foregoing resolutions before their adoption are hereby approved, ratified, and confirmed as the act and deed of the Bank. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being all of the members of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of EverBank, hereby execute this Unanimous Written Consent in lieu of a meeting of the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors, for the uses and purposes herein expressed, as of the 15th day of December, 2010, at Jacksonville, Florida. Robert M. Clements, Chatmman Gary A. r eks, Vice - haC irman W. Blake on; Director October 4. 2010 Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department RE: Authorization and Ownership of property in CP- 2010 -1 Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict To Whom It May Concern: The Florida Department of Revenue closed Bank of Florida on May 28, 2010. As a result all Bank of Florida assets were transferred to FDIC, as receiver for Bank of Florida. Simultaneously EverBank was approved by the FDIC to make a "whole asset acquisition" of the former Bank of Florida assets and therefore EverBank now owns the Bradford Square asset. In order to complete the deed transfer to show ownership, EverBank needs to transfer the deed from the FDIC, as receiver for Bank of Florida to EverBank. There is not an immediate timeframe required for the deed transfer. Typically this deed transfer is done as a double deed transfer at the time of sale from EverBank to buyer (FDIC to EverBank and then EverBank to buyer). In cases where the bank needs to show ownership or authorization for action on the asset prior to a sale, the deed transfer is completed as a stand alone action. EverBank is currently in the process of completing the deed transfer for the Bradford Square asset; however, it will not be complete for another week or so. Attached is the FDIC POA authorization for the deed transfer as reference. Thank you, uglas W. Nelson P Real Estate Sales Manager EverBank Commercial Loss Share Management Group 1185 Immokalee Rd. Naples, FL 34110 EverBank Customer Care Center • 11 Oval Drive ® Suite 107 ® Islandia, NY 11749 -1416 Exhibit VGa • Q Page 1 of 4 f, ff�L� , FDIQMU Ecoaroac Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Division of Resolutions and Receiverships East Coast Temporary Satellite Office, 7777 Baymeadows Way West, Jacksonville, Fl 32256 Attached you will find the Limited Power of Attorneys. In the event you require additional certified copies, you may request them directly from the Duval County Clerk's Office at the following address: Duval County Clerk's Office 330 East Bay Street Jacksonville, FL 32202 -2959 (904) 630 -2028 www.duvalclerk.com Sample wording you may use when endorsing the notes is detailed at the bottom of the first page of the Limited Power of Attorney. Regards, Exhibit VGa Page 2 of 4 Doc H 2010127876, OR SK 15264 Page 1390, Number Pages: 4, Recorded 06-/04/2010 at 12:59 PM, JIM FULLER CLERK CIRCUIT COURT DUVAL COUNTY RECORDING $35.50 1 8A A Prepared by: Renee Marie Araujo, Esq. FDIC East Coast Temporary Satellite Office 7777 Baymeadows Way West Jacksonville, FL 32256 (Lerve ]i Above 61, Lloe for Raording tof(ormedon) (Spice above Ihle Ito, murt be el leul 3lnebe.) LIMITED POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that the FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, a corporation organized and existing under an Act of Congress, hereafter called the "FDIC ", hereby designates the following individual(s) of EVERBANK, organized under the laws of the United States of America, as "Auonney(s) -in- Fact" for the sale purpose of executing the documents outlined below: TIIOMAS A. HAJDA JAMIE B. BUCKLAND PATRICK D. MCELHANEY RUTH A. OWEN GAYLE G. EDWARDS CHUCK R. IVY VINCENT F. AMATO KELLY GREEN KATHLEEN A. OTOCKI MARK G. BAUM CHARLES TIPTON WHEREAS, the undersigned has full authority to execute this instrument on behalf of the FDIC under applicable Resolutions of the FDIC's Board of Directors and redelegations thereof. NOW THEREFORE, the FDIC grants to the above -named Attorney(s) -in -Fact the authority, subject to the limitations herein, as follows: 1. To execute, acknowledge, seal and deliver on behalf of the FDIC as Receiver of BANK OF FLORIDA - SOUTHWEST, all instruments of transfer and conveyance, including but not limited to deeds, assignments, satisfactions, and lien releases, appropriately completed, with all ordinary or necessary endorsements, acknowledgments, affidavits and supporting documents as may be necessary or appropriate to evidence the sale and transfer of any asset of BANK OF FLORIDA - SOUTHWEST, including all loans held by BANK OF FLORIDA - SOUTHWEST Limited Power of Attamcy- EVERBANRBm4 of FlorldaS ulbwnt Page 1 of Exhibit VGa Page 3 of 4 OR HK 15264 PAGE 1391 to EVERBANK pursuant to that certain Purchase and Assumption Agreement, dated as of May 28, 2010 between FDIC as Receiver of BANK OF FLORIDA - SOUTHWEST and F,VERBANK. The form which the Attomey(s) -in -Fact shall use for endorsing promissory notes or preparing allonges to promissory notes is as follows: Pay to the order of Without Recourse FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION as Receiver for BANK OF FLORIDA - SOUTHWEST, Naples, Florida By: Name: - -- _ - -.. Title: Attomey -in -Fact All other documents of assignment, conveyance or transfer shall contain this sentence: "This - assignment is made without recourse, representation or warranty, express or implied, by the FDIC in its corporate capacity or as Receiver." 2. FDIC further grants to each Attomey -in -Fact full power and authority to do and perform all acts necessary to carry into effect the powers granted by this Limited Power of Attorney as fully as FDIC might or could do with the same validity as if all and every such act had been herein particularly stated, expressed and especially provided for. This Limited Power of Attorney shall be effective from May 28, 2010 and shall continue in full force and effect through May 28, 2011, unless otherwise terminated by an official of the FDIC authorized to do so by the Board of Directors ( "Revocation "). At such time this Limited Power of Attorney will be automatically revoked. Any third party may rely upon this document as the named individual(s)' authority to continue to exercise the powers herein granted unless a Revocation has been recorded in die public records of the jurisdiction where this Limited Power of At(amey has been recorded, or unless a third party has received actual notice of a Revocation. Limited Powe, of Anomey- EVERRANK)nuni, nt Hotlde Somhwat Peg, 2 of a • t Exhibit VGa Page 4 of 4 8A P RrEr-- APP L 11CU, AATF I 10 N MEE'r.-TFIING NOTES MEETING NOTES C01 JFR COUNTY COMPREHENSNE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34166 PHONE: 23,E - 2`52 -24ao DATE: '2-6- D TIME: 33:o- - -t'-" NOTES BY: TOPIC OF MEETING: Qea /i /yLr�l �er�uo�% Co Herr' SvbrQiJl+��f ATTENDANCE: �c�id 1v ( .(f�} /'11 t1 �t ��OS« SvH'i "W �}raovz %���v R ✓fSD rv„ pv i fo — p-il 1 l0 /JC KEY POINTSIUNDERSTANDINGS /CONCLUSIONS W"" ar L'7fr F w4 *'.i �,""ly„ ?r-07,o5 - 769 ;NUcajJ cap -F�11,• 5b"FFf�rarsr5 i r �� n c l to irA F� Jr'Jt li5e 4�s9ot ywf�� �' y.' �� sl> cGmuaE svS�iJ�r�K« S�GLI�{ic vfe3 J-F S ufL5 O, T will � cNMn W � IMG�Lit �. e vv TIf hG v' -ra(I i.•f. y,(- 5�b4Jjr,2.f n I n J /,li -c -r,.._ N..":..... NO HIF} h.r,P Nv_lc4 /v w1U 144 Ayi Gy JJ ,, V cQ¢ ft L Di5 — &,-2- //6,q,4. 7 6I D. •�P4 �� eC/l� /�i'�U D'I' �IYG� J- fh Su�H'r 'l'7<lLl. VV _ T me<nng now fim,xl� G, Como. David .s�6. BANKo FLORIDA �,....__ Your Xosyitality8ank `• Douglas W. Nelson via rasiCem Reel EAale 5ala Manager 1185 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL 34110-4806 Tel: 239.4155024 • Fax: 239.254.2194 - Cell: 239,3981939 dnelson ®bankolflonda.com • Nasdaq. BOFL Page 1 of 1 8A Iff, PUD 0 RtDI NiIANICE 2007w4l ORDINANCE No 07 4) AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUN "IY FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -0I, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR 'THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DFSCRMED RFAL PROPERTY FROM "[HE RURAL" AGRICULIURE (A) ZONING DISTRICT WIT H A CONDITIONAL USE. FOR A CHURCH TO MIXED USt; PLANNED UNTI' DEVELOPMENT (MI'UD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BRADFORD SQLfARE MPUD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 FAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.18 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN FFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Kerry Kuback-i for Livingston Village, LLC, and Tanuny Turner Kipp of Vanderbilt Holdings H, LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of hole Montes, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED By THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that SECTION ONE The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from the Agriculture (A) Zoning District and a conditional use for a church, Which has since expired to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for project known as the Bradford Square MPUD in accordance with the MPUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. "The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps as described in Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND [JULY ADOPTED by super - majority vote by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this Z.y day of LZ.� '2007 A TTESTc * Uc BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCR;, COLLIE "OUNT , PL ID A _ Q(. By, _ Sti if liQ'. my Clerk J S A AN ApjVoa&r, �s A f p rm`and legal sufficiency Manor, . Studen]t- Stirlin�>� �` d Assistant County Attorney This ,d000nce filod wfM it'. $pry o4 py ote's OHi -ho d fr, Syrry of , _Sam1 and nckj�ledgemen$,f tbq� flll.r,.g�.�s��a�wed M�lsp �11"^-2 ploy of Uad.a r�ts BY - Page t of 28 • BRADFORD SQUARE MPUD A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR: Livingston Village LLC 2055 Trade Center Way Naples, FL 34109 And Vanderbilt Holdings II, LLC 6625 New Haven Circle Naples, FL 34109 - 7220 PREPARED BY: Hole Monies, Inc. Robert Duane, AICP 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 (239) 254 -2000 And Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, PA Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 4001 Tamiami Trial North Suite 3D0 Naples, FL 34103 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC April 24, 2007 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2007 -41 AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL Exhibit A �, p8A TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE THE BRADFORD SQUARE MPUD SECTION I: STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION II: PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE, AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 2 -1 SECTION III: MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 3 -1 SECTION IV: PRESERVE SUBDISTRICT 4 -1 SECTION V: DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5 -1 LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES EXHIBIT "A" MPUD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT "B" LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC Paqe 3 of 28 JA SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 9.18 acres of property in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East as a Mixed Use Commercial Planned Unit Development (MPUD) will be in compliance with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The project will be consistent with all applicable provisions of the growth policies, land development regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for each of the elements of the GMP for the following reasons: The subject property is located in the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict and will provide neighborhood commercial development at a scale not typically found In the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. The intent is to provide commercial uses to serve the emerging residential development in close proximity to this Subdistrict. Allowable land uses are a variety of commercial mixed uses and residential uses. The Subdistrict includes two parcels and the subject property located at the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The project is allowed a maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area whether by right or by conditional use in the C -1 through C -3 Zoning District. The Subdistrict prohibits certain uses including gas stations and convenience stores. Residential densities are permitted up to sixteen dwelling units per acre. The proposed MPUD with ten residential dwelling units and up to 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area including the proposed uses can be found consistent with the GMP, FLUE, and the provisions set forth in the Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict. Therefore, consistency with the GMP can be established for this proposed MPUD. t -1 CADocuments and Settings\mclissazonc \Local Settingffemporary Intcmet Hes%OLK20D\Rcvised MPUD 423 -07 document Per MS 4 -9- 07 ccpc 04- 16- 07.doc Page.4et- 2$- _---- - - ---- • I SECTION II PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, SHORT TITLE AND STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 2.1 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject property is owned by Vanderbilt Holdings, LLC located at 6625 New Haven Circle, Naples, FL 34109 and is under contract for purchase by Livingston Village, LLC (Co- Applicants) at the time of rezoning. 2.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter and the west half of the west half of the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, less the south 150 feet thereof. Also less and except: That portion described in warranty deed to Collier County, Florida record in O.R. Book 3022, Page 1128, and that portion described in Order of Taking, recorded in O.R. Book 3599, Page 121, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is comprised of 9,18 acres, more or less, and is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach and Livingston Roads. The MPUD has approximately 820 feet of frontage on Vanderbilt Beach Road and approximately 470 feet of frontage on Livingston Road, Bradford Square is expected to develop with a mixture of office, retail, and residential uses, with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of floor area for office and retail uses. However, the maximum floor area for any commercial user shall not exceed 20,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. 2 -1 5 of 28 2.4 SHORT TITLE 8A This ordinance shall be known and cited as "BRADFORD SQUARE MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE ". 2.5 STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL This statement represents that the contract sellers, Vanderbilt Holdings, LLC, have the project or property under unified control for the purpose of obtaining MPUD zoning on the subject property. 2 -2 6 of 28 • 1 l,��IlC�7►tlll MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT 3.1 MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY AND NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS The maximum development intensity is 100,000 square feet of gross leasable office or retail area and a maximum of 10 dwelling units. 3.2 PERMITTED USES A. General Permitted Uses: Essential services as set forth under the Land Development Code (LDC) including but not limited to, gas lines, water lines, sewer lines, pump stations and wells. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 1 Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structurol bank treatments. 4. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 5. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer and developer's authorized contractors and consultants, Including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in the LDC. 6. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls. 7, Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses for this MPUD, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. (BZA) B. Principal Uses: 1. Mulfi- family dwellings. 2. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the BZA. 3 -1 Page 7 of 28 C. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this MPUD, including recreational facilities, such as swimming pool, and clubhouse, and maintenance facilities. The location of the recreational area is depicted on the MPUD Master Plan. 2. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the uses for this MPUD as determined by the BZA. D. Commercial and Residential Uses: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: Permitted Principal Uses and Structures (SIC Code) 1, Accounting services (group 8721); 2. Apparel and accessory stores (groups 5611 - 5699); 3. Architectural, engineering and surveying services (groups 0781, 8711 - 8713); 4. Attorney offices and legal services (group 8111); 5. Business services (groups 731 1 - 7313, 7322 - 7338, 7361 - 7379, 7384, 7389); 6. Child day care services (group 8351); 7. Depository (financial) institutions (groups 6011 - 6099); 8, Drinking places (group 5813); No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television) and no bar areas with outside seating shall be permitted. 9. Eating and drinking places (group 5812 only as outlined as follows: box lunch stands, cafes, coffee shops, dairy bars, diners, eating places), food bars, frozen custard stands, grills, (eating places), Ice cream stands, luncheonettes, oyster bars, pizza parlors, pizzerias, restaurants - carry-out, restaurants - sit -down, restaurant with drive- through window (limited to one only) sandwich bars or shops, snack shops, soda fountains, submarine sandwich shops, tea rooms, (See also Section 3.2.E.3); No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television) and no bar areas with outside seating shall be permitted. 3 -2 8q 10. Food stores (groups 5411 - 5499) "except as prohibited in Section 3 ,2.E of this Document;" 11. General merchandise stores (groups 5311 - 5399); 12. Governmental offices (groups 9111-9199); 13. Hardware stores (group 5251); 14. Health services (groups 8011 - 8049, 8082); 15. Home furniture, furnishings, equipment store (groups 5712 - 5736); 16. Home supply store (group 5531); 17. Insurance agencies, brokers, carriers (groups 6311 - 6399, 6411); 18. Large appliance repair service (group 7623); 19. Management and public relations (groups 8741 - 8743, 8748); 20. Membership organizations (groups 8611 - 8699); 21. Miscellaneous repair services (groups 7629 - 7699); 22. Miscellaneous retail services (groups 5912 - 5963); 23. Museums and art galleries (group 8412); 24. Non - depository credit institutions (groups 6111 - 6163); 25. Office machine repair service (groups 7629 - 7631); 26. Paint, glass, wallpaper store (group 5231); 27. Personal services (groups 7211, 7212, 7215, 7216, 7221 7251, 7291, 7299); 28. Photographic studios (group 7221); 29. Physical fitness facilities (group 7991); 30. Residential multi - family- maximum of 10 dwelling units 31. Real estate (groups 6531 - 6541); 32, Retail nurseries, lawn and garden (group 5261); 33. Security brokers, dealers, exchanges, services (groups 6211 - 6289); 34. Shoe repair shops or shoe shine parlors (group 7251); 35. Travel agencies (groups 4724); 36. Veterinarian's office (groups 0742, 0752) (except for outdoor kenneling); 37. Videotape rental (group 7841); 38. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses as determined by the BZA. E. Specifically prohibited uses: 1. Automotive service stations; 2. Convenience stores with or without gas pumps; 3. Fast food restaurants; 9 of 28 8q j4 4. No outdoor amplified entertainment shall be permitted for any restaurants (music or television). 5. No bar areas with outside seating shall be permitted. F. Development Standards for Commercial and Residential Uses: Table 1 below sets forth the development standards for land uses with this MPUD Ordinance. Standards in the LDC, not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in effect as of the date of approval of the site development plan (SDP) or subdivision plat. Table l: A. Principal Structures 1. Minimum lot width: One- hundred feet (100'). 2. Minimum lot area: Ten - thousand square feet (10,000 s.f.). 3. Front yard setback: Thirty-five feet (35') from both Livingston and Vanderbilt Beach Roads, 47 Rear yard setback: Seventy feet from north property line (70'). 57 Side yard setbacks: Seventy feet from east property line (70' each). b. Minimum distance between structures: One -half the sum of each building height but not less than twenty feet (20'). 7. Maximum building height: Thirty -five within three stories as zoned but not to exceed fifty (50') feet (actual height). 8, Minimum floor area: One - thousand square feet (1000 s.f.). 9. Minimum preserve area setback: Twenty-five feet (25') See also Subsection 5AG of this Ordinance. 3-4 MO 1 B. Accessory Structures: I Front setback: Side setback: Fifteen feet (15'). 2. Fifteen feet (15'). 3. Rear setback: Fifteen feet (15'). 4. Preserve setback: -t- - -- - -- Distance between principal structures: Maximum hoight: Ten feet (10'). _ - -- SPS. 5. 6 Fifteen feet (15') Notes: ' See also Subsection 5.6.G of this Ordinance. SPS- same as principal structures. Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth in the Table 1 above, shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcels or lot boundary lines. Condominium and /or residential dwelling unit boundary lines shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Size Limitations on Uses: A maximum of 20,000 square feet of floor area for any single commercial user. This is the only limit on the size of permitted uses within the 100,000 square foot maximum of gross leasable floor area allowed. Architectural Common Theme: Structures within this MPUD shall have a Mediterranean architectural theme, inclusive of common or compatible use of materials and colors. All buildings will be in the Mediterranean style, and all pitched roofs will be barrel the or similar material. 3- 11 of 28 Mixed Use Standards: Residential multi - family dwelling units shall be permitted above commercial structures and shall have a minimum floor area of 1000 square feet and shall be limited to a maximum of ten (10) units. 3.6 f • P age- 12- oi28---- ---.__ _.. 8A ,A SECTION IV PRESERVE SUBDISTRICT 4.1 USES PERMITTED A minimum of 15 percent of the native vegetation area or 1,38 acres of the MPUD shall be preserved and set aside as a preserve area. No building, structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following. A. Permitted Uses and Structures: 1. Principal Uses: a. Passive recreation areas. b. Water management and water management structures. c. Nature trails and boardwalks that do not reduce the amount of required preserve area to be retained. d. Mitigation areas. Pagel 3 of 28 - 8A SECTION V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 5.1 TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the transportation commitments of the project development, A. All traffic control devises, signs, pavement markings and design criteria shall be in accordance with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the LDC. B. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier County shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. C. If a gate is proposed at any /or all development entrance(s), the gate shall be designed so as not to cause vehicles to be backed up onto any adjacent roadway. To meet this requirement, the following shall be the minimum requirements to achieve that purpose: 1. The minimum throat depth from the nearest interconnecting roadway edge of pavement shall be no less than 100 feet to the key pad /phone box for the proposed gate. 2. A turn around area of sufficient width and with sufficient inside turning radii shall be provided between the aforementioned key pad /phone box and the proposed gate. D. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting must be in place prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy (CO). 5 -1 w ip 8A E. Access points and proposed streets shown on the MPUD Master Plan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy as it may be amended from time to time, and with the Collier County Long Range Transportation Plan. F. Site - related improvements (as apposed to system- related improvements) necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. G. Payment in lieu of construction of sidewalks and bike lanes for Vanderbitt Beach Road frontage shall be required. The amount shall be determined utilizing FDOT's 2004 Transportation Cost Manual estimates, as amended. Payment shall be required within 30 days of the zoning approval by the Board of County Commissioners. H. Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a right -in /right -out condition at any access point. Neither shall the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress, a median opening, nor the lack thereof, be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. I. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of any existing County rights -of -way or easements, compensating right - of -way shall be provided without cost to the County as a con - sequence of such improvement. J. A bus stop shall be incorporated into the Vanderbilt Beach Road right -of -way. The bus shelter location and design shall be coordinated with, and approved by, the Collier County ATM Department. A detailed plan of the shelter shall be included in the submittal of the first application for this project. The shelter shall be constructed by the applicant and shall be completed prior to issuance of the first CO. K. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or pavement marking improvement 5_, 15 of 28 84 within a public right -of -way or easement is determined to be necessary, the developer shall pay its proportional share of the cost of such improvement and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO. 5.2 UTILITY REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the utilities and engineering commitments of the project developer. A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and Interim water and /or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project shall be designed, constructed, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with applicable County ordinances, as amended, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All customers connecting to the water distribution and sewage collection facilities to be constructed will be customers of the County and will be billed by the County in accordance with the County's established rates. C. The development shall be subject to application for and conditions associated with a water and sewer availability letter from the Collier County Utilities Division. 5.3 EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES Easements, where required, shall be provided for water management areas, utilities and other purposes as may be required by Collier County. All necessary easements, dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and utilities in compliance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time SDP and plat approvals are requested. 5.4 ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS A. Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for review, No construction permits shall be issued unless detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans are submitted and until approval of the proposed construction, in accordance with the submitted plans, is granted by the Development Services Department. 5-3 Page_1£wf -73 - - -. 5.5 5.6 B. A copy of the SFWMD Surface Water Management Permit, if required, shall be reviewed by the Development Services Staff prior to any construction drawing approvals, WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the water management commitments of the project developer. A. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with the appropriate provisions of the LDC. B. An excavation permit shall be accordance with the LDC Management District rules. required where applicable, in and South Florida Water C. A surface water management permit shall be obtained from the (SFWMD) prior to any subdivision or SDP approval, if applicable. D. Any existing or proposed easements for Collier County storm water facilities shall be maintained free of landscaping berm, or any other kind of obstacle that could impede adequate access to maintenance crews and equipment. E. If 3.1 slopes are used in this MPUD, possible guardrail, fencing, outlet and gratings may be required in addition to plantings and ground cover plantings. ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the environmental commitments of the project developer. A. The MPUD shall be required to preserve 15% of native vegetation. The preservation plans shall rneet or exceed the requirements of the LDC, B. All approved agency SFWMD, United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), FWC) permits, as applicable, shall be submitted prior to final SDP/construction plan approval. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. s -a Page 17 of C. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/ preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat or SDP, whichever is applicable, with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. D, in the event the project does not require platting, all areas shall be recorded as conservation /preservation tracts or easements dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar to or as per Florida Statutes of the Section 704.06. E. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic -free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation /preservation areas, shall be submitted to Environmental Services Staff for review and approval prior to final SDP /construction plan approval. F. All Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, shall be removed from within preserve areas and subsequent annual removal of these plants in perpetuity shall be the responsibility of the property owner. This information shall be provided to Environmental Services Staff for review at the time development orders are requested. G. All principal structures shall have a minimum setback of 25 -feet from the boundary of any preserve. Accessory structures and all other site alterations shall have a minimum 10 -foot setback. H. The stormwater management system shall be monitored on an annual basis. If the stormwater management system negatively affects native vegetation in the Preserve Area, then the vegetation shall be recreated. A preserve management plan shall be provided to the Environmental Services Staff for approval prior to site construction approval identifying methods to address treatment of invasive species and fire management. 5 -5 Page 18 EXHIBIT "A" MASTER PLAN Page 19 of M ^___ a I 'nvz Y Cg YoE` Y IEG 8e8�ee Z Ff5 i Q W 0 _O oar W LL W Z ¢ 14 W 8 wa m e!\ ! 3 r Rw Q00 0 m w° Z' F- P jQ i a S B —] LU — C s s mf W t :I li ,I p 0.0 oq l j z —Utl Qil NOlS9N1AY1 _. — II __� -1_= _ I ------------------------------------------- _ —_� g • LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC The purpose of this section is to set forth the deviations to the LDC that governs the development of this MPUD. A. The Collier County Access Management Policy Resolution No, 01.247 requires a minimum spacing 1320 feet from the intersection of Livingston Road for access location. Due to the size of the parcel, the access onto Livingston Road is shown approximately 420 feet from the intersection of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. This access point was agreed to as part of a stipulated final judgment between Collier County, FL vs. Tiburon Golf Ventures L.P., et al, case # 04- 4678 -CA parcel # 15. B. The requirement for a wall between commercial and residential uses prescribed in Subsection 5.03.02 E 2 and 3 of the LDC shall be waived along the north and east property lines that are adjacent to residential development. The buffer areas shown on the MPUD Master Plan are presumed to provide sufficient screening and buffering and shall provide the same level of screening as to the LDC requirements after exotic removal. C.0ocmnents and Settings\mdlssa to ncALocal Settrigs \Temporary Inlemet FIIesVOLK20DARevised MPUD 4 -23 07 document per MS 4 -9. 07 ccpc 04-16-07 d,. Page 21 of 28 ___ .... . ... ........ / |\ |) mmmm q§ §J! ;! I� || I Page 2,2.oL2-8--... ` § ; � \A Z *a s!� \ \ ....... ........ � I Page 2,2.oL2-8--... S N W C N Q � f � Z O Q U U W J J W C) am oy �o am o � w m z O-- N or Q w O D w N W LL W 2 N r N w w m a wv v V Yi Y Q r a. a has I, wia \< �L a 4 I I I M N wv r s Q r a F pp� M ide O Q 0 S U a w m J_ m K W z Q w j II Q J ya q a Page 23 --of 28 ----- _.__.__ -_, r s Q I� a. a has I, wia \< �L a 4 I I O Q 0 S U a w m J_ m K W z Q w j II Q J ya q a Page 23 --of 28 ----- _.__.__ -_, I it Cit, I ow" WIN., .�i I OL Ala STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) • ►1 I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2007 -41 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 24th day of April, 2007, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 26th day of April, 2007. DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts and Clerk Ex- officio to Board'ot County Commissioners (j.k.AaA By: Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Page.25 of 2 -- CHARLIE CRIST Governor June 15, 2007 1 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT 0 S_ TATE SPATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES OF FLORIDA Honorable Dwight E. Brock Clerk of the Circuit Court Collier County Post Office Box 413044 Naples, Florida 34101 -3044 Attention: Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk KURT S. BROWNING Secretary of State Dear Mr. Brock: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your letters dated June 13, 2007, and copies of Exhibits F, -1 through E -4 of Collier County Ordinance No. 2007 -40 which was filed in this office on May 1, 2007 and Exhibit "A" of Collier County Ordinance No. 2007 -41, which was filed in this office on April 27, 2007. As requested, one date stamped copy of each is being returned for your records. Sincerely, Y4't5c" Liz Cloud Program Administrator LC /lbh Enclosure DIRECTOR'S OFFICE R.A. Gray EuBdiug 500 Sowh B..oFgh SVreC • Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0'_50 850.245.6600 • FAX 850245.6735 • TDD'. 850.9224085 • hItp:11d1N.desslaWfl.us COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STATE LIBRARY OF FLORIDA STATE ARCHIVES OF FLORIDA 850 - 245.6600 • FAX 850145 6643 85D.245 6600 • FAX: 856 245 6714 850345 6900 • FAX R50.488 -4894 LEGISLATIVE LIBRARY SERVICE 850.488.2812 • FAX 850.488.9879 RECORDS MANAOtMENT SERVICES 850.245.6750 • P: \X.850145.6795 AOMINIS I'RATI V L CODE AND WEEKLY 8502456270 . FAX 85D.245. 6282 - Ci! Coltnty of Collier CLERK OF' THE CIRCUIT COURT Dwight E. Brock COLLIER COUNTY LOUR Mot)SF. Clerk of Courts 3301 FAMfAMI TRAIL BAST P.O. 130X 413044 NAPLES, FLORIDA .l 1101 -3044 June 13, 2007 Ms. Karlyn Solis Department of State Bureau of Administrative Code RA Gray Building Room 101 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -0250 Re: Ordinance Number: 2007 -41 Dear Ms. Solis: � 1 Clerk of Courts Accountant Auditor Custodian of County FnndS Transmitted herewith for the record is Exhibit "A" Master Plan that was inadvertently omitted from Collier County Ordinance 2007 -41. The ordinance with the enclosed exhibit, was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on Tuesday, April 24, 2007, during Regular Session. Please place this exhibit with Ordinance 2007 -41 that was filed with your office on April 27, 2007. Thank you. Very truly yours, DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk Enclosure(s) This ordinance filed with the Secretary of State's Office the *' day of Aunt , :601 and acknowledgement of that filing received this .L day Of Jvr c oo�f By��"� Op yCk Phone - (239)732 -2646 Faix- ['39)775 -27j Website- www.clerk.collier.tl.us Lmail- collierclerk (dclerk.collier.tl.us Page 27 of 28 0 m soN C > m -- ----------- - -------- --- --------- LIVINGSTON ROAD wu II -------- - ------- -------- z� — - ------ ------ ----- -- --------------- 7JT777TUTUTTT, > F Z 1 Ili m —OF > 0 0 0 > O ji Imo fk 0 z mm co Z 0 Om rr 0> OZ c3 �A�. v p cn > , . v Page 28 of 28 OK LO, Ir ic > Cl m m M 0 m z m m m w 0 m > > Ia A z U Page 28 of 28 OK LO, RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 8905, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County staff has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: Ill Future Land Use Element, including the Future Land Use Map and Map Series, WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on December 16, 2010 and January 20, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section t Words underlined are added; Words seesk doeeo are deleted Row of asterisks (sss ss. .s.) denotes break in text. 8A ,A 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3164, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan amendment, must review and determine if the Plan amendment is in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Ad of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9.1-5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the text and map amendments to the proposed Growth Management Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and Incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan amendment, prior to final adoption and State determination of Words undcrJjp� ere addod: Words 2 are deleted Raw of asterisks(*** 4a• wrs) denotes break in text. compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9,15, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Govemment Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of _, 2011. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Planning Chief CPSP -2010-2 GJAP Trawm:lal Reaoktbw Belch amendments 3 Words widatin are added; Words swailf L-A a are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denacs break in text CPSP- 2010 -2 1, p EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 51: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.11, is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The foregoing notwithstanding, such commercial properties may be approved for the addition of residential uses, in accordance with the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, though an increase in overall intensity may result. A zoning change of such commercial -zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Future Land Use Element. b. For such industrially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. c. For such residentially -zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district. .1 F property deemed to be consistent m with the T~ e n4 n nt to One of more F polieies 5.9 through c 1 Z said n pe.ty may be .. mbined and developed ..,:th other pfopefty, whether such other propert..:s deemed a :.dent via those same , lieies or is deemed a intent with the Future Land Use Designat" Description Section For residents al and mixed e developments only, the aeecumulated density between these propeAies may be distfibuted thFoughout the project, ., provided fiar in the Density Rating System or the Commercial l Mixe.l fir^ -.. -oi r.n,�.or.a.r<,tc,cu. ,.c..cw v3evtmQ}Striet�o •,•.•Tappacu- . d Any property deemed consistent may be combined and developed with other abutting property provided the density and intensity of development derived from the property deemed consistent is not increased. e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Words underlined are added; words stfuek are deleted. Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * **) denotes break in text. CA -21a2A I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 5. Office and In -fill Commercial Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow low intensity office commercial or intll commercial development on small parcels within the Urban Mixed Use District located along arterial and collector roadways where residential development, as allowed by the Density Rating System, may not be compatible or appropriate. Lower intensity office commercial development attracts low traffic volumes on the abutting roadway(s) and is generally compatible with nearby residential and commercial development. The criteria listed below must be met for any project utilizing this Subdistrict. For purposes of this Subdistrict, "abuts" and "abutting" excludes intervening public street_ easement (other than utilities) or right -of -way, except for an intervening local street; and "commercial" refers to C -1 through C -5 zoning districts and commercial components of PUDs. a. The subject site is in the Urban -Mixed Use District. b. The subject site abuts a road classified as an arterial or collector on the Collier County Functional Class Map, as adopted in the Transportation Element. c. A rezone to commercial zoning is requested for the subject property in its entirety, up to a maximum of 12 acres. For a property greater than 12 acres in size, the balance of the property in excess of 12 acres is limited to an environmental conservation easement or open space. Under this provision, `open space" shall not include water management facilities unless said facilities are incorporated into a conservation or preservation area for the purpose of enhancement of the conservation or preservation area. d. The site abuts commercial zoning: (i) On one side and that abutting commercial site is not within an infill Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District or the Urban Commercial District nRn Pomffliereial , on the ather ^: , or, (ii) On both sides. e. The abutting commercial zoning may be in the unincorporated portion of Collier County or in a neighboring jurisdiction. f The depth of the subject property in its entirety, or up to 12 acres for parcels greater than 12 acres in size, for which commercial zoning is being requested, does not exceed the depth of the commercially zoned area on the abutting parcel(s). Where the subject site abuts commercial zoning on both sides, and the depth of the commercially zoned area is not the same on both abutting parcels, the Board of County Commissioners shall have discretion in determining how to interpret the depth of the commercially zoned area which cannot be exceeded, but in no case shall the depth exceed that on the abutting property with the greatest depth of commercial area. This discretion shall be applied on a case -by -case basis. g. Project uses are limited to office or low intensity commercial uses if the subject property abuts commercial zoning on one side only. For property abutting commercial zoning on both sides, the project uses may include those of the highest intensity abutting commercial zoning district. Words underlined are added; words sE_=rr-- k- kt?t -ks are deleted Row o` asterisks (" I 4ev otes break in text. 8A ceSN 2010 -2 h. The subject property in its entirety was not created to take advantage of this provision, evidenced by its creation prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on October 28, 1997. i. For those sites that have existing commercial zoning abutting one side only: (i) commercial zoning used pursuant to this Subdistrict shall only be applied one time and shall not be expanded, except for aggregation of additional properties so long as all other criteria under this Subdistrict are met; and, (ii) uses shall be limited so as to serve as a transitional use between the commercial zoning on one side and non - commercial zoning on the other side. j. For those sites that have existing commercial zoning abutting both sides, commercial zoning used pursuant to this Subdistrict shall only be applied one time and shall not be expanded, except for aggregation of additional properties so long as all other criteria under this Subdistrict are met. k. Lands zoned for support medical uses pursuant to the "1 /4 mile support medical uses" provision in the Urban designation shall not be deemed "commercial zoning" for purposes of this Subdistrict. 1. For props ticszoned eemxmereial pursuant to an), of th e -1 in fill Subdistriets -in the T 4has M*),o,l 17se District the Urban Commercial Distrie i 7 axc�roarrz�r}ncv vov District or .n out v oa. cvmuro�ma� vwc.croc, 3aia beeeme eligible for commercial zoning under this Office and Will rm 1_ Land adjacent to areas zoned C -I /T on the zoning atlas maps, or other commercial zoning obtained via the former Commercial Under Criteria provision in the FLUE, shall not be eligible for a rezone under the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, except through aggregation as provided in Paragraphs i. and j. above. t} m. For purposes of this Subdistrict, property abutting land zoned Industrial or Industrial PUD, or abutting lands zoned for Business Park uses pursuant to the Business Park Subdistrict, or abutting lands zoned for Research and Technology Park uses pursuant to the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict, shall also qualify for commercial zoning so long as all other criteria under the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict are met. e, n. At time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer. 13-.-o. The project will be compatible with existing land uses and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties. q, v. The maximum acreage eligible to be utilized for the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict within the Urban Mixed Use District is 250 acres. Words underlined are added; words st ac se}e are deleted Row of asterisks (*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. t) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section 4-.a) 7_a) through 5-.e) 7_e) such as the- feNewing: private wells and septic tanks; utility r:..,.. exeept se- of line°• sewer hn t, Essential Services as follows, necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural lYansition Water and Sewer District: utility lines, except sewer lines, se"cr lines and lift stations, onlv if located within non -NRPA Sendin; ]_,ands, and only if located within already cleared portions of existin❑ rights- of -wav or easements: and, water pumping stations and raw water wells. g) h) Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. hr i) Oil and gas exploration. Where practicable, directional - drilling techniques and /or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. II. CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The following uses are authorized in this Designation. h. Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section a through g above such as the f llo inn: private wells and septic tanks; utility lines except s e e lines� seNker lines -and lift qlalioos, only if located within non NRP'k Con,4ep',ali"p Lands, ,J and only :f loe-ai� y :il.:.. ..1 . ..1 I .,;.. !ions of ot:.. ffightS of,�Nay o easements, and ifnecessary to serve a publicly nee or privately owned central sewer stem providing s a to .rhan -and/or tht, Rural Trangil on li/.,t,�r and -Rreaq privately owned .. ., central water .t o.,, .,r.,.:.1:., ,...or.:,.� ., ;o -rhan rF-,ag ntilor the Y, Rural Tr..risition Water and Sewer District Words _underlined are added; words _. ±�ek t-s are deleted. 4 Row of aste.ris:�s (* I . . 1 " <ic-.^.c>tes bre,3k in text. (TSI1- 2010 -2 w�$A ❑. AGRICULTURAL /RURAL DESIGNATION B. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District 1. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), and Sending, Neutral, and Receiving Designations C) Sending Lands 7. Permitted Uses: t) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section 4-.a) 7_a) through 5-.e) 7_e) such as the- feNewing: private wells and septic tanks; utility r:..,.. exeept se- of line°• sewer hn t, Essential Services as follows, necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural lYansition Water and Sewer District: utility lines, except sewer lines, se"cr lines and lift stations, onlv if located within non -NRPA Sendin; ]_,ands, and only if located within already cleared portions of existin❑ rights- of -wav or easements: and, water pumping stations and raw water wells. g) h) Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. hr i) Oil and gas exploration. Where practicable, directional - drilling techniques and /or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. II. CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The following uses are authorized in this Designation. h. Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section a through g above such as the f llo inn: private wells and septic tanks; utility lines except s e e lines� seNker lines -and lift qlalioos, only if located within non NRP'k Con,4ep',ali"p Lands, ,J and only :f loe-ai� y :il.:.. ..1 . ..1 I .,;.. !ions of ot:.. ffightS of,�Nay o easements, and ifnecessary to serve a publicly nee or privately owned central sewer stem providing s a to .rhan -and/or tht, Rural Trangil on li/.,t,�r and -Rreaq privately owned .. ., central water .t o.,, .,r.,.:.1:., ,...or.:,.� ., ;o -rhan rF-,ag ntilor the Y, Rural Tr..risition Water and Sewer District Words _underlined are added; words _. ±�ek t-s are deleted. 4 Row of aste.ris:�s (* I . . 1 " <ic-.^.c>tes bre,3k in text. ('PSP- 2010 -2 i. Essential Services as follows, necessary to serve Urban areas or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District: utility lines, except sewer lines; sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within non -NRPA Conservation Lands, and onlv if located within already cleared portions of existing rights -of -way or easements, and if necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central sewer system providing service to urban areas and /or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District; and, water pumping stations and raw water wells necessary to serve a publicly owned or privately owned central watersystem providing service to urban areas and /or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District. 1 Essential Services necessary to ensure public safety. k. Oil extraction and related processing. Where practicable, directional - drilling techniques and /or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized to minimize impacts to native habitats. The following uses may be permitted as Conditional Uses: a) The following uses are conditionally permitted subject to approval through a public hearing process: (1) Essential services not identified above in Paragraph h., i. and i. j. Within one year, Collier County will review essential services currently allowed in the Land Development Code and will define those uses intended to be conditionally permitted in Conservation designated lands. During this one -year period or if necessary until a comprehensive plan amendment identifying conditionally permitted essential services, no conditional uses for essential services within Conservation designated lands shall be approved. F. Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay The Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, depicted on the Future Land Use Map, is within the boundaries of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on Mareh 44, 000 June 13, 2000. The intent of the redevelopment program is to encourage the revitalization of the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area by providing incentives that will encourage the private sector to invest in this urban area. This Overlay allows for additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property, or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections between properties and neighborhoods. The intent of this Overlay is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where urban services are available. One or more zoning overlays will be adopted into the Collier County band Development Code to aid in the implementation of this Overlay. The following provisions and restrictions apply to this Overlay: 1. Mixed -Use Development: Mix of residential and commercial uses are permitted. For such development, commercial uses are limited to C -1 through C -3 zoning district uses, plus hotel /motel use, theatrical producers (except motion picture), bands, orchestras, and entertainers; and, uses as may be allowed by applicable FLUE Words underlined are added; words st-�ek tl E a,fh are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. am c(>st'- zotoJP g A Policies. Mixed -use projects will be pedestrian oriented and are encouraged to provide access (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas. The intent is to encourage pedestrian use of the commercial area and to provide opportunity for nearby residents to access these commercial uses without traveling onto major roadways. Parking facilities are encouraged to be located in the rear of the buildings with the buildings oriented closer to the major roadway to promote traditional urban development. 2. Residential uses are allowed within this Overlay. Permitted density shall be as determined through application of the Density Rating System, and applicable FLUE Policies, except as provided below and except as may be limited by a zoning overlay. 3. Non - residential /non - commercial uses allowed within this Overlay include essential services; parks, recreation and open space uses; water - dependent and water- related uses; child care centers; community facility uses; safety service facilities; and utility and communication facilities. 4. Properties with access to US -41 East are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the project must be integrated into a mixed -use development with access to existing neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties and comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #8, below, except for mixed use projects developed within the "mini triangle" catalyst project site as identified on the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map_ The "mini triangle" project site is eligible for the maximum density of 12 units per acre, with development standards as contained in the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District zoning overlay, adopted February 28, 2006 (Ordinance No. 06 -08), and amended December 14. 2006 (Ordinance No. 06 -63). For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. 5. Properties with access to Bayshore Drive, are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the project must be integrated into a mixed -use development with access to existing neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties and must comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #8, below. For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. 6. For parcels currently within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #16, land uses will continue to be governed by the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. A zoning overlay may be developed for these properties within the Mixed Use Activity Center to provide specific development standards. 7. Existing zoning districts for some properties within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay allow uses, densities and development standards that are inconsistent with the uses, densities and development standards allowed within this Overlay. These properties are allowed to develop and redevelop in accordance with their existing zoning until such time as a zoning overlay is adopted which may limit such uses, densities and development standards. Words ❑nder.ined are added; wards et:- _� fh_h are deleted Row of asterisks (1 *1 "I ' °'i denotes break in tear. CPSP- 2010 -2 8. To qualify for 12 dwelling units per acre, as provided for in paragraphs 44 and #5 r Q above, mixed use projects within the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment V A Overlay must comply with the following standards: a. Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories. b. Buildings containing only residential uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories except such buildings are allowed a maximum height of four stories if said residential buildings are located in close proximity to US -41. c. Buildings containing mixed use (residential uses over commercial uses) are limited to a maximum height of four stories. d. Hotels /motels will be limited to a maximum height of four stories. e. For purposes of this Overlay, eaeh building stery may be up to 14 feet in height. € e. For mixed -use buildings, commercial uses are permitted on the first two stories only. g. f. Each building containing commercial uses only is limited to a maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet gross floor area. #,: g, One or more zoning overlays may be adopted which may include more restrictive standards than listed above in Paragraphs a--g a_f. 9. For all properties outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, any eligible density bonuses, as provided in the Density Rating System, are in addition to the eligible density provided herein. However, for properties within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), only the affordable- workforce housing density bonus, as provided in the Density Rating System, is allowed in addition to the eligible density provided herein. For all properties, the maximum density allowed is that specified under Density Conditions in the Density Rating System. 10. A maximum of 388 dwelling units are permitted to be utilized in this Overlay for density bonuses, as provided in paragraphs #4 and #5 above, for that portion of the Overlay lying within the CHHA only. This 388 dwelling unit density bonus pool corresponds with the number of dwelling units previously entitled to the botanical gardens sites prior to their rezone in 2003 to establish the Naples Botanical Gardens PUD. The "mini triangle" catalyst project is not subject to this density bonus pool. 11. The Botanical Garden, Inc. properties located in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, and shown on the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map, shall be limited to non - residential uses except for caretaker, dormitory, and other housing integrally related to the Botanical Garden or other institutional and /or recreational open space uses. FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent By Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11, 5_12) [no further changes] Words underlined are added; words s-;� "h are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 8 " FUTURE LAND USE MAP (countywide) • Expand Incorporated Areas to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; a portion of the Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. • Correct South Golden Gate Estates NRPA boundary at US41. Port of the Islands and at I -75: shift boundary north so it follows I -75. follows US41, and follows the south line of Sections 33, 34- 35, Township 51 South, Range 28 East (so is no longer over Port of the Islands Urban area). • Correct Agricultural /Rural boundary near US41 /CR29 /Everglades City: shift boundary to west to run along CR29, to follow ACSC boundary, and to follow west Section line of Sections 28 & 33, Township 52 South, Range 29 East; and, shift boundary to south to follow US41. • Correct Ag /Rural -RLSA- Conservation boundary along CR850: remove jog along common line for Sections 8 & 9, Township 46 South, Range 28 East - from near southeast corner of Section 7. boundary should run along CR850 to the northeast. • In map legend, add Interchange symbol under Overlays and Special Features and label: "Interchange." FUTURE LAND USE MAP — MAP SERIES Activity Center Index Map. Revise Activity Center #18 boundary to match the boundary on Activity Center #18 Map, to reflect prior expansion in southeast quadrant. Revise Activity Center # 14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole - in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport-Pulling Road. All Activity Center Maps. Revise to update underlying map features — zoning, loUparcel creation, street names, etc. — and to reflect parcel development and generalized building footprints. Activity Center #12 Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Moorings Park, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, a church zoned RSF-4, on south side of Seagate Drive. Activity Center #14 Map. Revise Activity Center #14 boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of the Bridges at Gordon River project, in southeast quadrant. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexation of a portion of Wilderness Country Club PUD commercial tract, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road. Words ,,nderI fined are added; words are deleted. 8 Row of asterisks ( "I 1" . > *) de ^o *_c nreak in text. CPSP- 2010 -2 to Map FLUE -10, Consistent by Policy Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway; a church zoned RSF -4, on south side of Seagate Drive; Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; and, Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road. Rivers and Floodplains Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Estuarine Bays Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Soils Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map. Revise City of Naples boundary to reflect City of Naples annexations of Hole -in- the -Wall Golf Club, on east side of Goodlette -Frank Road; Collier Park of Commerce, on west side of Airport- Pulling Road; and, the Bridges at Gordon River project, on south side of Golden Gate Parkway. Stewardship Overlay Map. Amend to add additional approved Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs 10 -15), as required by Policy 1.6 of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and to correct the boundaries of SSA 7. Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Replace existing map with proposed map that reflects the latest hydrologic modeling, as required by Objective 1 of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub - Element and subsequent policies, and Objective 3.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and subsequent policies. CPSP- 2010 -2 Exhibit A as approved by CCPC 1 -20 -11 GACorrprehensivelCOIAP PLANNING GMP DATAIComp Plan Amendments\2009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions\2010 Cycle Petitions \CPSP - 2010-2 batch \Exhibit A Transmittal CPSP- 2010 -2 dw77 -26 -10 & 9 -24 -10 & 11$ -10 & 11 -9 -10 Words underlined are added; words are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. 0 N d Z 0 F H w a x w T 46 S T 47 S T 40 -8 _. -. 5 d F yiyb pg Sg `� ! a S W 3 a (p q 'y 34 b 9 ■al_I ®I I Ell In As l IlAil� $Sq �n9 T i�" 3 5p. gyp S e a a g � gg pp MnnG PI 9I lull s s r LL BY 1 s Lt 1 T 49 S T T 60 S 1 T-161 S T fit S - a g I I t i I a4 I / tl s 0t 1 s st 1 3 09 1 S tS 1 5 Z5 1 J� 3� 23 5 Oi o g 33� u s � W d -. uj `o m LL !!5 i Z sew 0 EiY Q W U h J� � w H 5 r LL BY 1 s Lt 1 T 49 S T T 60 S 1 T-161 S T fit S - a g I I t i I a4 I / tl s 0t 1 s st 1 3 09 1 S tS 1 5 Z5 1 J� 3� 23 5 Oi o g 33� w a a E- w a a r N F S� F ?j O 'J C� ti O R 25 E R 26 E �n C.R. 864 MIXED USE & INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER INDEX MAP xi 0 I MI. 1 4i. J Mi. AMENDED (Ord. 61 AMENDED - JUNE J. 2005 (Ord No 2005 -25) AMENDED Ord. - OCTOBER 14, 2008 N. 2008 -59 ua w a uo QE 8 k1 . 9•,r 20 � � J 2 4 cR bnfi r.R. sas :� , 5 m ,m e , a o � C IL 862 , . _.. • M _8a _ � 12 rc _ _._ 13 10 f C R 896 C R. 096 iC „n n I m B s - �� „31 n 1 � C.R. 856 \9 SR. 84 , S.R. 84 r -� X18 \ �n C.R. 864 MIXED USE & INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER INDEX MAP xi 0 I MI. 1 4i. J Mi. AMENDED (Ord. - JANUARY 25, 2005 No 2005 -03) AMENDED - JUNE J. 2005 (Ord No 2005 -25) AMENDED Ord. - OCTOBER 14, 2008 N. 2008 -59 \ L 18 I lV "/III' S PREPARED GIS/CAO MAPPING SEC10N 'ROIIGU MANA GEME NT DIAStON PLANNING AND REGULATOR DATE 1 2/2010 FlIE ACCESS- INDE %- 2010pW R 25 6 R 26 6 1 N N 0 1- NI a e N O N N N I .a W f:f W @ Fi$ Y S U � t � A Trl Of O s A O � � s A Ns a� W u f r 2 O a W � 7 u I li I a /S E �I A. � g ¢ e" 8 A 14 of i J 1 8 l" ar I % t tQQµµ II�' TI v S � i1 p ^eyy! o I � Y k w � i S a Y k_ Y� �k- .� i A. Y /J 3 _ I a /k/ 7 . yy i , 3 m 2 N� w . W5�U gg 3 u� a e 1 rA r� a a e y� m WE § P7o aiP 4 e'Y n�a ,,u 1 �U`f - - -- - �z v ! ay i th p7aJEH�'k�1 mCalJ �' k U Q P i I wl a e 0 2 m W WE § P7o aiP 4 e'Y n�a ,,u 1 �U`f - - -- - �z v ! ay i th p7aJEH�'k�1 mCalJ �' k U Q P ;0k, tj t I I[ I- A Tl H F Ime, �i E}� v!! [)! r] <. ; m \\ d§ = �...........g � . ! I | ; m p it 9 €1� S¢of6 C k o ` — jI uaf3fee tp oil naa a - - - -- is o y i I Ills 4�i I 4 � ' • 2k o o g z €e yam_ gee I vi - 1 _ 1 9 o� R� W 5 r z� u� Yo� r <a r k � 6 e 77; y I s Y6 Y � C i a , re. r k � 6 e 77; y I 0 } i \\ §§ \ 2 � Im Ti i \\ \ Ti \ N : E .; G g % | \§ G ..._ ...... ... . .41 \ « \� |� §]! �) >. a.....�. � . . ... ��� - \ N : E .; G g % | \§ G ..._ ...... ... . .41 \ « \� 4 9Y9 m S s$ W � f Z u a s�f f >s J p — w a J $z rSI I , |� � )| §( : j. �.... �.. � � ( � R � J . . � ,» J < n .. � . � : � )- :\ } \ \ N ~ §F 2� 5 C� `a < `a J a 1111IJ � I TI 11 I T I -I I �Ilplllllll l C $$ w o 4 m$ a rc w f 6� .r, ' tl. M a ' rS e �S l $ -I a Im n lE�i° a I�- 0 9 0 7,v i .. F, ii •_� 'i id..a I D7,TTIH7 o { 1_ J {jII 3 / ��rrrri irr I i r // 4r, l_ IIL 111!1I I I iLI]1.1 1II7 f {l�� Lr11 roawn • � ayy W � si�l� N rIr qx rS I a iY ffW � hA` L GE 9 N � Ch T1I C 1 \ Si V � 5 W o ray\ i 4 i � a An o� N R C W F 2 U�J �Ya ua 3 � Y I Z � 8 A H p 0 2 W s W J �4 I �NlJlllllllllll in i nI I �11jj 1Ij I I T1n Tiu 4 [ ITTTTT] ` ulluilj i I I TITTP II, s li k8<' 4's aye oy� °SY a x N U 3 i4 !I {f a w is s i N N W N N 0 .�.. i s 9 N m 11: in p i i t ! 01 _ N u — J N fl G th s XLn m ip >. ON s i O LLW T t9 q tL = ? m g ! iii g IL I- o of i t Q 3UT W LL s I- OZ VI u3 l e z ru Z 1 ' t W LO in tY K e g j � FV � 9�3 iP n ❑ � ® 0 03p T 49 S na Em 56b1 Em � ]} z _\ �§2 /0 \ \\ �§\ m\ z '00 � O ; §..� §_.! ; ;!§ §,!!7: ( \ \ \ \\ / \ >( C�ER COUNTY COWER COUNW 2 = I r !! )\ \ ) \« � � ~ § §`; 4 :); \ \ \\ N e s N d. y a U r m o X W d � Q � � v W Q m 0 � � W T ozc _ D Q 0 J Q W -D W - ~ O cn U w V_ d O r r mm amo- ><m 'mwm'a ar mork��z�'�'zmmm ��m3z -o <inowm 1OOZQOd <6V CSyyp 10 a 1 JJ « w"o z 00ammaw..mZ� LU W > J a 'a <mmmmmmmm 0 owawmo>z�C aozozz wyarc 3�J 4iFYJ¢0 m K U m m U N [7 0 3 m BROWARO COUNT COWER COUNTY 6Z '2 s DwF MUNm COWER COUNtt h O W� ZO O u � N x O N <Q, p C C)V W oa � ' o � O D 5' J' O o W � < W 'v O 0y3 i/ y0� - QVr I � ° 3$� o S w ao m ywu_ V O N Jry on Uw < O g n0Q 0 dom O LEGEND SOILS Or EAS R'E .... AR oUNN,N.EO - UOO6NEWrs - �� ATIDN WUS OF THE MA_ AREAS eOOROW _ MLI£W! _ f AYtFH ASYCNIIpI x R650N - .NC6nE - PECRSN Asvxvr�w Mg OF 1 E $WARPS. PRAWIES AND FREWINATER YAR91E5 NAN. AAIXSNm ASSOCNIRM - wwwNO AssocNiwx WWOER - RNb.¢A CNCHE ASmrIATdY M. DE 11E FLAiWbOS SLGIOIS AND XANY.. W11.VIW£ -ON B. NNNO F - 6l5N - ttDSWN A40L PON xolrovW - flaswOP - wumw¢ usOCUiwI WW550 - W+MR - xucPw Asm¢nmry P. NOTE 11MT�MNSE M AN. A=,. EpERv oRUrs. uumn .R+usmENrs ME 1I1 BEfpQ R@{RA1 KK1. EXHIBIT "A" cPSP51A FUTURE LAND USE MAP SOILS Western Collier County, Florida R 61 8 � 10 B 6 6 41 0 0 10 rvLmm 9 10 6 R 649 cz U V 6 B 1 \/ 2 LEE COUNTY, B R 6 B o B J 5 5 9 CR 658 0 uB 1 9 8 CR 866 6 6 9 J ] 8 J 6 1 9 J 9 5 5 J 5 r___ -__ 9 $11 9 B J 9 9 6 ] G BIG 9 ¢rmer J 1 5 5 CYPRESS SWAMP 9 ] I n Cltt SR 94 9 I rvAPlrs 9 ] ] i 5 7 4 I N 0 rt 9 1 0 I r 5 ] IF 5 4 09 8 Al 5 mw� K 9 ] J 9 9 11 5 4 5 I 3 C'l r 2 m X 9 5� 4 al D b \ 5 4 4 tt 3 4 OF MAN. 6uND 3 O \__•. a a 4 3 SCALE 2 T- - - - - -� r� I 0 SML -� Icl �m 5 2 I I ADOPTED Y 25, 2GO7 f -� Crd. No 200 . 200J -18 I I AMENDED - OCTOBER 14. 2008 r 5 LCL J Ord. Nn l SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, JUNE 19BB EACH AREA OUTLINED ON THIS MAP CONSISTS OF PREPARED By: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION MORE THAN ONE KIND OF SOIL. THE MAP IS THUS GROMlRH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING AND REGULATION MEANT FOR GENERAL PLANNING RATHER THAN A BASIS DATE: 1112010 FILE: LU- 94- 2010.1)WG FOR DECISIONS ON THE USE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS. HENDRY =14TY 6 10 10 1 10 B 1 10 IMMONAIEE 6 6 CR 84 10 6 0 1 10 LEE COUNTY, B R 6 B o B J 5 5 9 CR 658 0 uB 1 9 8 CR 866 6 6 9 J ] 8 J 6 1 9 J 9 5 5 J 5 r___ -__ 9 $11 9 B J 9 9 6 ] G BIG 9 ¢rmer J 1 5 5 CYPRESS SWAMP 9 ] I n Cltt SR 94 9 I rvAPlrs 9 ] ] i 5 7 4 I N 0 rt 9 1 0 I r 5 ] IF 5 4 09 8 Al 5 mw� K 9 ] J 9 9 11 5 4 5 I 3 C'l r 2 m X 9 5� 4 al D b \ 5 4 4 tt 3 4 OF MAN. 6uND 3 O \__•. a a 4 3 SCALE 2 T- - - - - -� r� I 0 SML -� Icl �m 5 2 I I ADOPTED Y 25, 2GO7 f -� Crd. No 200 . 200J -18 I I AMENDED - OCTOBER 14. 2008 r 5 LCL J Ord. Nn l SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, JUNE 19BB EACH AREA OUTLINED ON THIS MAP CONSISTS OF PREPARED By: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION MORE THAN ONE KIND OF SOIL. THE MAP IS THUS GROMlRH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING AND REGULATION MEANT FOR GENERAL PLANNING RATHER THAN A BASIS DATE: 1112010 FILE: LU- 94- 2010.1)WG FOR DECISIONS ON THE USE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS. AMENDED - OCTOBER 14. 2008 r 5 LCL J Ord. Nn l SOURCE: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, JUNE 19BB EACH AREA OUTLINED ON THIS MAP CONSISTS OF PREPARED By: GIS /CAD MAPPING SECTION MORE THAN ONE KIND OF SOIL. THE MAP IS THUS GROMlRH MANAGEMENT DIVISION / PLANNING AND REGULATION MEANT FOR GENERAL PLANNING RATHER THAN A BASIS DATE: 1112010 FILE: LU- 94- 2010.1)WG FOR DECISIONS ON THE USE OF SPECIFIC TRACTS. N 0 O N J Q UK 2p J U WZQ U J Z 3 U I ZZOOI W az w z N d Q U) W O U Z F W Q n O N z Uz W Q O ~ O K U U 0 X `nm °vmlF a U ~ .� _ �r n6 vi pz z W O U Z 6 V/ ° X O W Q F y W � Y �d m ti r I RROWARO CWNtt COLDER CWNtt 6z 'H S 0 DADE OWNtt COWER CWNW Y �I2 °off oa� RR� P OV� Oq O �O 0 F UK 2p I U WZQ U J Z 3 U I ZZOOI az w N Q U Z F VI ' b D r a � N z xW� W W Y p W K J K J Z b Q ° X `nm °vmlF a W �r n6 vi pz Y �d m ti r I RROWARO CWNtt COLDER CWNtt 6z 'H S 0 DADE OWNtt COWER CWNW Y �I2 °off oa� RR� P OV� Oq O �O 0 rc a ° z a ° zz_ �z3 6 ° U \N O 2 QZM u E _ .71 pp Q o N � of yQ° Wi- k' o p z a wow ° na c�m • E=rvRT OQ p` I COLLIER COUNTY RURAL & AGRICULTURAL AREA ASSESSMENT 16 STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY MAP legend CL Wm AR-11 zme L �w mlWnal urveuww Rwver e ur Rxenfund -I. qs�s *e+rmngA -11SO � Cim wacornm -ry a uvy e.IM9AI uvewaN.h'y Rwavinu a+e 15M1 COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs v CITY OF NAPLES COASTAL RIDGE WELLFIELD �R% LIVINGSTON ROAD ASR (IRRIGATION QUALITY) CR 846 M t` � I V CITY OF \ NAPLES ASR (4 WELL PERMITS) MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES MARCO LAKES 0 SCALE 0 5M1. AMENDED — Ord. 8q EXHIBIT -K PETITION CPSP - 2010 -2 COLLIER COUNTY WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS, PROPOSED WELLFIELDS AND ASRs v CITY OF NAPLES COASTAL RIDGE WELLFIELD �R% LIVINGSTON ROAD ASR (IRRIGATION QUALITY) CR 846 M t` � I V CITY OF \ NAPLES ASR (4 WELL PERMITS) MARCO ISLAND UTILITIES MARCO LAKES 0 SCALE 0 5M1. AMENDED — Ord. SEPTEMBER 10. No. 2003 -44 2003 AMENDED Ord. — JANUARY 25, No. 2007 -18 2007 AMENDED Ord. — DECEMBER 4, No. 2007 -82 2007 f�G. BL COLLIER (�(', COUNTY UTILITIES GOLDEN GATE WELLFIELD m (MARCO A GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY GOLDEN CITY WELLFIELD H HAWTHORN ELO EXTENSION ISLAND S ASR L PERMITS) 47 MARO PREPARED BY GIS /LAD MAPPING SECTION GROWRI MANAGEMENT DINSION / PLANNING AND REGULATON SOURCE: COWER COUNTY POI-LUTON CONTROL AND PREVENTION DEPT. DAIS 1/2011 FlIE: 0. M12- 2010 -A.DNG LEGEND IMMOKALEE WELLFIELD CR 846 AVE MARIA / WELLFIELD R 858 POTENTIAL FUTURE COLLIER COUNTY WELLFIELD AREA N O CJ0 W PORT OF THE ISLANDS WELLFIELD is 4 PLANNED WATER SUPPLY WELLS ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFIELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD m N o' N CITY OF NAPLES EAST GOLDEN GATE WELLFIELD 1 -75 N O CJ0 W PORT OF THE ISLANDS WELLFIELD is 4 PLANNED WATER SUPPLY WELLS ASR = AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY SITE POTENTIAL FUTURE WELLFIELD AREA WELLFIELD AREA EVERGLADES CITY WELLFIELD m N o' N LO 1 CPSP- 2010 -5 RESOLUTION ALTERNATE #1 CHANGETO DAVIS BLVD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO CHANGE THE SUBDISTRICT FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT TO DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea. • Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 17, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and Words underlined are added; Words stmek "esg6 are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in test. WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of , 2011. 2 Words underlined are added; Words stmak tl+reugl3 are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. m ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Heidi Ashton- Cicko, Assistant County Attomey, Land Section Chief BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLDER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN Words underlined are added; Words stmek Owough are deleted Row of asterisks ( * ** * ** * * *) denotes break in teat. CPSP- 2010 -5 EXHIBIT "A" 8AFUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION- MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub - districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources, promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 14. Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential M xed Use Subdistrict 15. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 16. Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 17. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict I. URBAN DESIGNATION 8A CPSP- 2010 -5 Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non - residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities, population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non - residential uses including: 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict; and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston RoadNeterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. A. Urban Mixed Use District 14. Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential M xed I Ise Subdistrict This Subdistrict comprises approximately 22.83 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road intersection. The intent of the Subdistrict is to provide for residential a development at a density comparable to and compatible with nearbv developments. The maximum qross densitv shall not exceed five (5) dwellina units Der. This subdistrict is not subject to the provisions of the Density Rating System. Rezoning is CPSP- 2010 -5 encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. R a A CPSP- 2010 -5 FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9 ,5.10,5.11,5.12,5.13,5.14,5.15) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map ■_ _ le WIN _ _ _ _ •. ■_ • Mason WIN N ■_ °• Nag *1 Irm "M ;,1111111k1N1 ally FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9 ,5.10,5.11,5.12,5.13,5.14,5.15) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays Future Land Use Map Soils Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map CPSP - 2010 -5 8 e Copeland Urban Area Map Railhead Scrub Preserve — Conservation Designation Map Lely Mitigation Park — Conservation Designation Map Margood Park Conservation Designation Map Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Davis Boulevard /County Barn Road Residential Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Exhibit A text alt. 1 DRAFT GAMES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments\2009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions010 Cycle PetitionslCPSP- 2010 -5, Revamp Davis Blvd. -Co. Barn Rd. MU Sub dw112 -171 -0 0 s d n J O a r w< z m< v — "IT Ti w L ^If j -r 1 It I q Q W1��i l '�\LIIT4IlllllL�II" Y �[ If °k''o _ ` °ov F b p OtlOtl N tlV� O � U ✓p F�- I?T CL�I'FiJt " �� �.,� %lY �_ - _ _, __ _ lkj 11L'NCII J n� � I T, L'II-7,1=)[ C,,r7 f ) I I IR, ��� Tj �a}-I w `j ` � �T a y ��I� IBC �iT� �N 01 :TIJ1ThIf L -' L�, 'd LID �-.toa mum I��u�� �Du7 ��7[IOUI _- iY N �R�➢TL III �_ 1.11III�(- 1�iml f.IlTII �" I "II T ti a .v t4 } ` 1 TI - TI 'TT�._1 II -,j llP III 111 �,,v } 1' 1 \,I L_I T1.L1JIT I I'^ r , ' P1L1 :I�!��cll'lI j 1I lII �1. -;TIE �13Tir��u `i� '-� oi� T _ ] L rll I. Tt ,, i lIliili t � .j �• P u' � -[Wb I <7 T�IT�I 7TTi1f1T`n �\� L✓ /I'I lTl lily.. �affi Y 0 O gSo. U T 48 S T 41 S T 48 S i 5 P G� S 0 4 K � r t1 ��BP. ': iYr YPB CIO 1]El F1H El: : El 8 ry eg 9 5 >qp!K r y�P r 2 G dG S §5�w;e � 5 y99 pp 9QQ9 yyy $$��� 9 I� 6: � Qt�Y3tl �z��tl �$tl�6B �� � §�•!� W � � �� � ■f®, NI I Mf I § bb p P 'CA d X !& 1 € 11 g 1y rr §a ' a §4r ky s e uyBa � 4pw� i��dVYg p'�. `tl6�@ d�npl",Y SASE ■E3N�a UNWED ar Is r l ' ImmEWA Fir L, Flo" N v" sc:a W O E 9�pb w C LL a Z G a'giw cr � W h I pq §q 1 8 S1 1 T 48 S T 50 S T 51 8 T 52 � r 8g g y 5 g8 8 gepg p "nX m a g S ^j � L i S 89 1 9 09 1 8 l9 1 S Z9 1 / a N `^ A •q �t k CPSP- 2010 -5 RESOLUTION ALTERNATE #2 DELETE IN IT'S ENTIRETY DAVIS BLVD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. 11- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, TO REMOVE IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE DAVIS BOULEVARD /COUNTY BARN ROAD MIXED -USE SUBDISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, at sea. Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County has prepared plan amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: and Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 17, 2011, has considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and 1 Words underlined are added; Words mraskt wough are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. • WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier Countys proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety (90) days to review the proposed amendments and DCA must transmit, in writing, to Collier County, its comments along with any objections and any recommendations for modification, within said ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DCA must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, within sixty (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty -five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendments, must review and determine if the Plan Amendments are in compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropriate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J- 5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 and Rule 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code, Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of , 2011. 2 Words uncierhne d are added; Words shmek diFee are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** -**)denotes break in text. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: v Heidi Ashton - Cicko, Assistant County Attorney, Land Section Chief GPSP -20105 Transmittal Resdudon Davis BMVrG umy Sam Road Wed Use Suhd 0iM Words underlined are added; Words qtpaek thpatio are deleted Row of asterisks(*** * ** * * *) denotes break in text. CPSP - 2010 -5 EXHIBIT "A" 8 A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION - MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub - districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources, promote a sound economy, coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict 9. Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict 10. Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict 11. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict 12. Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict 13. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict 44 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15. Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 4-7- 16. Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict I. URBAN DESIGNATION (6 N CPSP- 2010 -5 Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non - residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development, patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources, water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi - family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non - residential uses including: 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed -Use Subdistrict, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, and, in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict, Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. A. Urban Mixed Use District C PSP -201 5 jV,1 A 5A010 -5 4 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays ■_ - - - - .•, - - • ME 14. Livingston /Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 15.Vanderbilt Bach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 16.Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Center Maps Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Maps Collier County Wetlands Map Collier County Wellhead Protection Areas and Proposed Wellfields and ASRs Map Future Land Use Map Rivers and Floodplains Future Land Use Map Estuarine Bays CPSP- 2010 -5 Future Land Use Map Soils Q Existing Commercial Mineral Extraction Sites Map v Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Stewardship Overlay Map Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Maps North Belle Meade Overlay Map Existing Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Future Schools and Ancillary Facilities Map Plantation Island Urban Area Map Copeland Urban Area Map Railhead Scrub Preserve — Conservation Designation Map Lely Mitigation Park — Conservation Designation Map Margood Park Conservation Designation Map Urban Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach /Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Map Goodlette /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Henderson Creek Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Buckley Mixed -Use Subdistrict Map Livingston /Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Livingston Road /Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict Livingston Road/Veteran's Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Map Collier Boulevard Community Facility Subdistrict Map Exhibit A text alt. 2 DRAFT G ICDES Planning ServioeslComprehensivelCOIP PLANNING GIP DATAIComp Plan Amendments12009 -2010 Combined Cycles petitions12010 Cycle PetilionslCPSP- 2010 -5, Revamp Davis Blvd. -Co. Bam Rd. MU Sub dw11 -10 -11 0 CL n O 'r a m w w< 'ma i rr F �IH 17 LL a F x- oil, I- IM o l co r co w , I W 0 �1�IL�`%� •4 _uLI� 1I 1 1 r }� $� z Z Tj o L Q �..moa Have jimmo E A P I ' UJIMUiI�� r r jTnL � ;� a Ip 1I r 'I➢11 1Ii -, �LILt. �� d - ui�,I��J'PP.GI; mu rrn l�<1i L r ],N'i ry4 1�Ell OIILT.I '= 1 Ir rTn1�iJ �� � � �! r )r r �� -- !r T- Nr F� �_rri T�- / a r T Ml _ . /N. L - .� Q f� F� �� / 1 lr `s < 1 Tli'�IJIIRI T111 Tl _ 1 �1i 7s lTE , S` { L'LI itt2 1I1,1Ji� 'rrriP t °s8 sW ay k T {B S T {T S T 49 S T 49 8 T b0 S T 61 8 T 69 8 T 53 ` '..... O P @ E P e( g 3 [ F9 3 e � 3 � ➢ 6 i oi H _I $$ a Y ^ Cb g 8 q dt au ;ill 8u ■o® m1-1 ■fl■ f l�■ Clit� p95 eM'4, . 4 }kp9 8.9 (4 dsS Sy 3�y� R 8 4 S9y' �b [e p i Sl' I $ w. F y 55 4 d w e 6L�6 1[ • • `ag s LU ~ S o U .r r"�?Jy� P O ° S 0:, .. ba. a .rd? r I¢ � s e SSP v 5ry P�Y. g c S at 1 j S Lt 1 9t 1 S Bt 1 909 1 S 19 1 S Z9 1 S 99 1 °-%� Lt-- Csuex..� DISCUSSION OF FINAL REPORT June 11, 2003 Background: As part of the process of closing out the Golden Gate area Master Plan Restudy process, staff is required to submit a "Final Report" on the Restudy Committee's activities to the Board of County Commissioners. The presentation of this report will include a PowerPoint slide presentation, as well as the preparation of a written document. In order to allow the members of the Restudy Committee to have a voice in this process, Comprehensive Planning staff is requesting that the Committee review this discussion paper and make recommendations as to the format and content of the Final Report. Staff is hoping to present the Final Report at the BCC's July 29, 2003 Regular Meeting. Staff's Suggested Format For The Final Report: Title Page: This page will feature the text box that Comprehensive Planning Staff has used for Restudy Committee Agenda Items (see above). After the words, "FINAL REPORT," the title page will list the active Committee members and current staff that have participated in the Restudy process. It could also be an opportunity for the Committee to acknowledge anyone else who they feel has contributed to the Restudy. Committee History: This section of the Final Report will attempt to provide, in capsule form, information on the number of meetings and variety of topics that the Restudy Committee has considered. The section will refer the Board to the Public Participation Schedule, which will then be attached. The text of this section will read as follows: "The Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Committee met on 31 occasions, between June 2001 and June 2003. During its tenure, the Committee considered a wide range of topics related to the Golden Gate Area, including commercial uses in the Estates and Golden Gate City, the proposed North Golden Gate Estates ROMA, other environmental matters, changes to conditional use criteria within the Estates, Ave Maria University, the County's Rural Fringe and Rural Lands Amendments, various matters related to County Codes and permitting processes, transportation issues, emergency management, the Community Character Plan and issues related to Rural Character and Design. The Restudy process resulted in two sets of amendments to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, constituting a virtual rewriting of that Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan." b--f 8q 8A Restudy Committee Tasks/Charges: The Final Report should reflect the fact that the Restudy Committee's responsibilities changed over time. Therefore, staff proposes the following wording for this section of the report: "The tasks and responsibilities of the Restudy Committee evolved during the Committee's two years of activity. Initially, in March of 2001, Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff, in recommending formation of an advisory committee, stated the following: "To assist in this restudy, staff requests that an advisory committee be formed to enable community input and provide recommendations. The committee will be responsible for addressing issues related to the Golden Gate Mobility Study, Commercial and Industrial Land Use Study, assessment of locational criteria for Conditional Uses /assessment of Conditional Use needs and the Golden Gate Parkway I -75 Interchange. The committee will also assist staff with the review and development of policy recommendations related to the Rural Fringe Committee and Community Character Plan findings, assist in the development of any necessary Requests for Proposals (RFP) for consulting services, and assist in the development of revised Goals, Objectives and Policies and Land Use Designation Descriptions." However, the actual wording of the Board of County Commissioners' Resolution creating the Committee vested the Restudy Committee with a slightly different set of responsibilities: "The functions, powers and duties of the Committee shall be to: a. Assist in the development of any necessary Request for Proposals (RFPs) for consulting services; b. Aid and assist in the restudy of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This would include assisting staff with the review and development of policy recommendations from the Rural Fringe Committee and the Community Character Plan findings relative to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; c. Identify and address issues relative to the Golden Gate Mobility Study, Commercial and Industrial Land Use Study, assessment of locational criteria for Conditional Uses /assessment of Conditional Use needs and the Golden Gate Parkway I -75 Interchange /adjacent land use plans; and d. Assist in the development of revised Goals, Objectives and Policies and Land Use Designation Descriptions for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan" During March of 2002, the Committee and staff began the development of possible treatment options for various topic areas within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This exercise resulted in the Committee assuming the responsibility to review the following broad general topics and management options: 2 8A "Maintain Rural and Natural Landscapes: • Cooperation with other(non-County) agencies. • Identify connected natural areas (corridors). • Identify habitats that are less developed (regulated/unregulated). • Identify alternatives for land conservation. • Increase lot setback requirements to maintain greenways. Provision of Commercial Services: • Establish locational and spacing criteria for low intensity commercial uses within Golden Gate Estates and redefine "convenience uses," especially for Golden Gate Estates. • Support higher intensity commercial uses on the outskirts of Golden Gate Estates. • Develop design criteria for commercial buildings. • Encourage the transition of commercially designated properties in Golden Gate City, along Golden Gate Parkway. • Provide a Sunset Provision for multifamily residential to convert to commercial along corridors in Golden Gate City. • Support allowing no additional commercial or conditional uses near the Golden Gate Parkway/I-75 Interchange. 3 We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Goden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address 8A 10 i S V,/ 1 a�tiA Lo Jar - a- 3r c_. VUZ r - b7a , e r17 l l rr 72'0 °'W �� rl� STG�C P MCOONRO �20 FIC-5T ST N.VJ 8A • We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community, and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address 1e -a.i- C7 Cia.aP.%�G lti 61166A) A- 1 /a o c-L AY_ 'L jI .3j2p .SY' /I /. �l / � I<S, RA (l 11OAA At pul, 16l N Th 54crer,k1117f(2i-S �< NIj k�t�iT)� ME We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address D dry ✓ airrr -614 'A L 67 �cU'a -,`t N ............................ We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature I Name Address I � ' Z5t 1 ' All 4,t_c - _ � _. a f_ � •� ll �)d 5 We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, ooaose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address zz i li i . M We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address t.��.. .. 3 y11J 7 �-W % 34-11q /i 1W 0 /c 111►1..y 1.... >��s_q�`} 1 �..:1.�1tr�........1.,y.�F'� 7 , {�k..1.1 ��.V..t� ............. t.��.. .. 3 y11J 7 �-W % 34-11q /i 1W 0 /c 111►1..y 1.... >��s_q�`} 1 �..:1.�1tr�........1.,y.�F'� {�k..1.1 ��.V..t� ............. r�,avC /J.�2 ���� �:f )fin "x ��`�`1 � . �ll:'ic4 t -- f ��t�J `., -( <,✓''7�L i.,.q; _ _� 81 A 1 We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oiDipose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents, the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community, and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. A84 We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise the quality of life and rural lifestyle of the surrounding neighbors. Signature 7 Name Address 7i % zz (GL� L,��l, l� 14-y �i �i (. -A, / // 11,7i C C' ff - i - i 7i % 8A !q We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise the quality of life and rural lifestyle of the surrounding neighbors. Signature Name Address C�Lb'Lck' no n) �eTc' Sc� l� � �I 7 �` s IV +k) IL ;d �l/ 1 8 „ A We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community, and it will compromise the quality of life and rural lifestyle of the surrounding neighbors. Signature Name Address 2 � r lG'rtLrnc +, Cr. d11o(.l�tx.l' .:a7 _1 .� a We, the undersigned, as residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents; the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community, and it will compromise the quality of life and rural lifestyle of the surrounding neighbors. Signature Name L . r e't( /' Iei'lf'- Address We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents, and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. Signature Name Address _J �1"A(vfwd d L tu c 0� ti C o/ • We, the undersigned as surrounding residents, oppose the proposed Estates Shopping Center at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard for the following reasons: it is inconsistent with and compromises the integrity, intent, and vision of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; it bypasses the process built on public input from all residents, the potential long -term repercussions and precedents(s) it will set will compromise the character of our rural community; and it will compromise our quality of life and rural lifestyle. 8A November R, 2010 FROM: EUGENE A. PAWELAK AND CAROLYN F. PAWELAK TO: WHOM IT MAY CONCERN RE: "E- MAIL" FIRST &THIRD(.iCOMCAST.NET' FIRST & THIRD UNITED GROUP WE ATTENDED A LOCAL COMMUNITY MEETING WHERE THE TOPIC OF A PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER ON GOLDEN GATE BLVD. BETWEEN 1sT AND 3RD STREETS WAS FIRST BROUGHT LIP. IT WAS AT THAT MEETING THAT WE WERE APPROACHED TO JOIN THE "FIRST and "THIRD STREET" GROUP, WHICH WE DID, IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT. AT ENSUING MEETINGS HELD BY THE DEVELOPER'S REPRESENTATIVES, ORGANIZERS AND MEMBERS OF THE I' AND 3RD GROUP VIGOROUSLY POINTED OUT MANY REASONS WHY THE PROJECT WAS DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY AS WELL AS BEING OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE `MASTER PLAN.' AFTER SEVERAL MEETINGS, WE LEARNED FROM A COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING THAT THE I ST AND 3RD GROUP HAD `AGREED TO AN ARRANGEMENT' WITH THE DEVELOPER AND HAD WITHDRAWN THEIR OPPOSITION. ]'HIS WAS TILE FIRST THAT WE HAD HEARD OF IT. THE LEADERS OF THE GROUP DID NOT INFORM US. WE ATTEMPTED TO FIND OUT THE PARTICULARS FROM THEIR WEBSITE ONLY TO FIND "CHAT THE SITE NO LONGER EXISTED. WE HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ITS LEADERS SINCE THE AGREEMENT. WHILE THE ARRANGMENT WAS BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL OR INDIVIDUALS OF THE FIRST /T'IIIRD GROUP, WE WERE EXCLUDED. THE 1ST /3RD STREET GROUP DOES NOT REPRESENT US, AND WE ARE STILL IN OPPOSITION TO THE PR,)JECT. i UnVIS RUULEV ANU "' 0 � !s C i � - _._-( p EXHIBIT A ve wn �r -moo- - - LEGEND M III, i � F WHITE BLVDINTERSTAic 0 I ID ES CFB lo. N�1 BIBR.,�o. .a �rce c r n A w YfAI} F p 4RD GOLDEN GATE AREA un[ si:ooa nu o .00x .,.c - I -- I2 26 H) R 27 C �w 0 ❑',; FUTURE LAND USE MAP „ ©... u.ea....ew vr�.-.• IMMOKAI.F.E ROAD ®en..a.......n.u.a... ..ou.... ". aw.a.... ao....vv w....... BY.w Ip `�`ia�nweian.. ar�.na '. ❑.i° wu`nic nr m..i.... am.a L6 ,......,... c« ru ?a .• n. is •.± _.. _:_ -_ Ili _. _ -.. _J -�- __ —__� li A I�LI� � J IMMOKALEF, ROAD Z,fl ANDALL BOULEVARD SUBJECT H 3 12ANDFRMT SITE jI m CP- 2008 -01 _e.. BEACH ROAD C m U GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD UnVIS RUULEV ANU "' 0 � !s C i � - _._-( p M i � N { WHITE BLVDINTERSTAic 0 I o O .a �rce c r n A w YfAI} F p 4RD os /o r v•.o�a u..o. O un[ si:ooa nu o .00x .,.c - I -- I2 26 H) R 27 C „ UnVIS RUULEV ANU "' 0 � !s C i � - _._-( p M i � N { 0 I o O .a �rce c r n A w YfAI} F p mm� os /o r v•.o�a u..o. O un[ si:ooa nu o .00x .,.c - I -- I2 26 H) R 27 C j p M i � m 0 o _ � I F p b O i� R 28 E 0 ,f m o _ b i� R 28 E 0 ,f ZK7 Pub Iix. Leann Goodson REAL E5IAIE DEPARTMrNT December 8, 2009 Jay Bishop Development Properties, Inc. 82 Fountain Circle Naples, Florida 34119 RE: Estates Shopping Center NWC Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard North Golden Gate Estates, Collier County, FL Dear Jay: Thank you for the update on your proposed site at the NWC of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. This site has been of interest to Publix for several years and I am pleased that you have elected to proceed with the rezone petition as well as the comprehensive plan amendment. Should you be successful in this endeavor, I would welcome a formal site submittal package. Once your site submittal has been received, I will commence evaluation of your site for consideration by the Real Estate Committee. In the meantime, I will continue to monitor the progress of your site and I look forward to working with you in the future. Thank you for considering Publix for this location. Sincerely, PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC. Leann Goodson Real Estate Manager LG /sd c: File V' H E H E S H 0 H e I N G i 5 A P 1. E a S u P E" V Election 2010 1 Golden Gate Estates shopping center Shopping center not worth ignoring area's master plan Staff Reports Saturday, October 9, 2010 Collier County commissioners oppose Florida constitutional Amendment 4, which would mandate referendums on projects at odds with established long -range comprehensive plans. It makes little sense then that the ultra -local issue of a 40 -acre shopping center for Golden Gate Estates at Golden Gate and Wilson boulevards should be up for voter review now -- whether the ballot is advisory or binding. At the same time, Estates voters are reminded that another shopping center anchored by a supermarket is scheduled for only four miles away at Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. Is the Wilson Boulevard project, much larger than the comp plan would routinely allow, really worth setting such precedent? Public input was the foundation of the Golden Gate master plan that the project developer seeks to set aside today. We suggest that effort has to be respected — and even used again if changes are desired. "Less is more" is a way of life for many people who choose to live in the Estates. We recommend a "no" vote on the Golden Gate Estates shopping center issue that will appear on ballots only in that area on Nov. 2; early voting starts Oct. 18. • • ,i x a N a m 0 v 3 0 v `v 6 4 N N O u 3 3 3 a s Q a 0 a`. c 0 U r w g $ z s a !� CO ` CL �X 00 V � 7 � ` w Z O � m 0 0 m K 0 0 N m a m m T 4 m P O O L a m Q 8A ro 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 LD 0 4. O z C z a m y a 0 u v rL C u � s m a a m 0 3 3 3 a v 0 O N IY K 0 X UI m m 16 p> > c ai 0 d O � m V o v •� � N W L n N d cn O � _ P m v O - N w n a x 0 m 0 O � x h � UpNy w a o Fc o x °.� d d Z N _ CL N`o � d m c N m N O N O L I� N I N O N 2 m N — c in N > a ° y m 6 d � z x m y> d aj W w d A O R J 0 O N IY K 0 X UI m m 16 p> > c ai 0 d O � m V o v •� � N W L n N d cn O � _ P m v O - N w n a x 0 m d z � x h � O w x d d r CL d d T 7 L I� 0 O > m in N > a m ry� v x m y> d aj W W d A O d O 0 I F II J 3 � 11 N J LL �H v w. o m w K d a a N 1w";J � LL Z w ❑ J E J (7 o Z 0 ¢: n x w �- z W N 7 v o c o Q O Z � H Y $. z❑ Orr.Q ° y z ¢ w W a J o O d y 6 _ w p _ N y d L u U N.9 Cl 8 o c 0 ce z L N' N � N e+ a IL` 0 O N IY K 0 X UI m m 16 p> > c ai 0 d O � m V o v •� � N W L n N d cn O � _ P m v O - N w n a x 0 m v N m 7 C N C F m a a 0 0 O P w 0 d z � x h � O w x d d d T 7 � 0 O > m > > a > ry� v x m y> aj W W d A O d 0 I F II J II 11 N v N m 7 C N C F m a a 0 0 O P w 0 0 0 r O O 0 0 0 4. O 7 cC F a A v a 0 v CG C 0 u a O s 3 3 pijl N w K a°o t a N w L- r C N 3 O z O „ w � C � y a a U � a O y a` u Y O N h M M 0 M IV pYp Y to ". Oro',.. Z <a N , N ❑'1Q � E >o 0 U U o', v° r o, Z M F u y' > Z a o t0 N OJ N C U M � N p N W F W m N J Z o y t0 = o n N a.0 m'eo r w Q -Sb r- z a r'IF O W W � N W ❑ m N d t Y Y N V 0 O 0 C9 L d 0 O a` Z Z w .z N ❑'1Q E _ U r o, F o x > Z a r r N d t Y Y N V 0 O 0 C9 L d 0 O a` 0 �x y� w N _ O Qi N 2 � C C aLL �L o" R V v U ° v d N � •� � N N a N > 3 r 6 U N � 1po O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a v v v n n n n n M 1R W M W N m V N N N N N m � w c t0 0 r N � N C O U O N r O m d > O u u � s x � O w m m at m 3 d L N v d m - ? o > v m a m E > > c v n o ry= m 3 m x m a ud m a > % m > r O > O p W N d 0 d v a N CO t 0 C • O O M, a` 0 a{ r x Z a r � Z W F W J Z r � ❑ r a m e Z' cl JO m Z y J 2 m � W N 7 I � 0 �x y� w N _ O Qi N 2 � C C aLL �L o" R V v U ° v d N � •� � N N a N > 3 r 6 U N � 1po O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a v v v n n n n n M 1R W M W N m V N N N N N m � w c t0 0 r N � N C O U O N r O m d > O u u � s x � O w m m at m 3 d L N v d m - ? o > v m a m E > > c v n o ry= m 3 m x m a ud m a > % m > r O > O p W N d 0 d v a N CO t 0 C • O O M, a` 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O L1. O d v G 0 v z 0 u a v 0 t ro v ❑ N M Ill, M O IM a CL O a` m N o Io N 0 Q F C HC N LL N i � O N n N G ry C ti •C {i � N N � N • L N c L x O w m d 2 0 > v p m M a d E ? > > c a p o g a a m g m x d > N a m @ an d> m K m P: 0 0 > O w N v 0 0 p n x ¢ E @ N E u 0 i v n dl O >O a d a O E `o F 1 to a &8A �. 0 O M 0 0 z ❑ LI. M,... d'm Q v 0 0 U � O p' z (n d J M O M d 2 O N Y N Z m N � d z r d a v.' d y' A CL O a` m N o Io N 0 Q F C HC N LL N i � O N n N G ry C ti •C {i � N N � N • L N c L x O w m d 2 0 > v p m M a d E ? > > c a p o g a a m g m x d > N a m @ an d> m K m P: 0 0 > O w N v 0 0 p n x ¢ E @ N E u 0 i v n dl O >O a d a O E `o F 1 to a &8A �. 0 O M 0 z ❑ d'm Q Z (n d J O LL N r d a m w'w z ❑ Q E Z o O O a >. Z � r N J Z r g � r ❑ ZNW Q r ¢ O M O J � M Y O ro O d ❑ h Z Z o O p d m L ce O 2 U CL O a` m N o Io N 0 Q F C HC N LL N i � O N n N G ry C ti •C {i � N N � N • L N c L x O w m d 2 0 > v p m M a d E ? > > c a p o g a a m g m x d > N a m @ an d> m K m P: 0 0 > O w N v 0 0 p n x ¢ E @ N E u 0 i v n dl O >O a d a O E `o F 1 to a &8A �. 0 O M 0 E C;Other C;a nuv WAt REPORT '4 forthe Board of County Commissioners FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION Prepared by: Michele R. Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner HEARING DATE: March 22, 2011 SUBJECT: 2010 CYCLE OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS, PETITION CP- 2008 -1 ONLY (Titansmittal Hearing) ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (GGAMP) ONLY - for this supplement CCPC TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATION and COMMENTS (10/19/09): No recommendation. Motion to Transmit failed by 4/4 vote. Motion was subject to staff alternative text in the Transmittal Staff Report, but revised to: 1) keep the list of allowable uses #1 -27 as proposed by petitioner, but delete #28 [this requires a re- lettering of paragraphs]; 2) revise paragraph "a.12" to reflect the correct SIC Code term; 3) revise paragraph "a." to add a "catchall' prohibited use #14; 4) revise paragraph "b." to reduce the total allowable building area from 225,000 sq. ft. to 210,000 sq. ft., as proposed by the petitioner at the hearing, and to modify the building floor area term; 5) revise paragraph "c." to recognize the potential for more than one grocery use; 6) revise paragraph "e.1." pertaining to the timing of right -of -way donation; and, 6) delete paragraph "n." pertaining to common architectural theme. BCC TRANSMITTAL ACTION and COMMENTS (01/19110): Motion to continue the petition indefinitely so as to allow the petitioner to place the proposal on the November 2, 2010 General Election ballot to determine community support. The following question was posed to voters within Precincts 551, 552, 554, 555, 590 and 591, the geographic area covering almost the entirety of the Estates designation and certain other surrounding areas (refer to attached Straw - ballot Resolution No. 2010 -28 and Precinct Map): Golden Gate Area Master Plan Amendment — Wilson Boulevard /Golden Gate Boulevard Shopping Center Should the Golden Gate Area Master Plan be amended to permit a +40 acre commercial shopping center, consisting of up to 190,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area in single story buildings located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard, that may include outparcels, inline stores, drive - through shopping services, and whose first occupant must be a minimum 27,000 square foot supermarket? Yes No m • j • • The allocation ratios (market factor of 1.25) for proposed commercial projects within the defined Estates market area are noted in the table below by year and Center type. COMMUNITY CENTER COMMERCIAL 2010 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 7.48 s . ft. /Person 249,443 301,422 372,564 441,290 612,216 Total Community Center Commercial Sq. Ft./ Supply 0 0 730,950 730,950 730,950 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (with Estates Sho in Center Subdistrict 0 0 1.96 1.66 1.19 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (without Estates Shopping Center Subd 1 0 0 1.45 1.23 .88 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER COMMERCIAL 2010 2015 2020 2025 Build -Out Estates 2 -miles east of 951 Population 33,348 40,297 49,808 58,996 81,847 Neighborhood Center Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand (7.48 s . ft. /Person 281,791 340,510 420,878 498,516 691,607 Total Neighborhood Center Commercial S. Ft/ Supply 0 300,000 0 0 0 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (with Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict) .88 0 0 0 1.25 Factor or 125% of demand (without Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict ) .59 0 0 0 The data in the above tables indicate that there is a present and future demand for Neighborhood Center commercial beyond the planning horizon of 2020 in the Comprehensive Plan. Conversely, there is no present demand or future demand through the planning horizon year of 2020 for Community Center commercial square feet. Other Factors: As previously noted, the Florida Senate Interim Report 2010 -07, provides that when the market factor ratio of 1.25 (125% of demand) is exceeded other factors can be considered such as, suitability of the property for change, locational criteria, community desires, job creation, etc. Based on the proposed uses and total square feet, staff views the proposal as a Community Center commercial project. Both staff's analysis of the Community Center commercial supply and demand and the petitioner's analysis of all commercial demand, yield that the 1.25 market factor is exceeded within the Plan's planning horizon (2020). Therefore, potentially the evaluation of those other factors could be used as a basis to approve this request. Staffs analysis of those other factors is provided below. ip, • Suitability for Change and Locational Criteria; (1)'The subject project includes 5 -acres presently designated Neighborhood Center Subdistrict, which allows C -1 through C -3 uses, and two other Tracts could be approved for conditional uses of the Estates designation, and the balance of the property could accommodate residential units. The subject property is suitable for development under its existing designation ,(2) The size of the site, size of the Center and use intensity proposed are out of character with the semi -rural development pattern of the surrounding area 4" ; •.:u(3) The site is located at the intersection of two rural collector roads with relatively high traffic volumes '(4) The site is centrally located for a large portion of Golden Gate Estates, east of C.R. 951 ji -;,(5) The site is only 3.5 road miles from the Randall Blvd. commercial center (approved for 401,950 sq. ft.) and 5.5 road miles from the Orange Blossom Ranch commercial center (approved for 200,000 sq. ft.). Community Desires The results of the referendum indicate the majority of those persons voting ( ±76 %) support this project. Additionally, the results of surveys conducted by the petitioner indicate the majority of respondents support the project. _- a Job Creation The petitioner indicates that the project will build out in the year 2020 with the oration of a approximately 269 jobs. Subdistrict Text: Text is as presented to the BCC at the Transmittal hearing, except that the square feet cap has been reduced from 210,000 sq. ft. to 190,000 sq. ft. subsequent to the November 2010 General Election. [page 35] 6. Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict — Recognizing the need to provide for centrally located basic goods and services within a portion Northern Golden Gate Estates. the Estates Shoppinq Center Subdistrict has been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Subdistrict is located at the NW corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard westward to V Street NW and extending northward to include the southern 180 feet of Tracts 142 and 106 of Unit 11 and the southern 255 feet of Tract 111 of Unit 11 of Golden Gate Estates, totaling approximately 41 acres. The Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict is intended to Drovide convenient shoDDin personal services and employment for the central areas of Northern Golden Gate Estates. Commercial development in this Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for manv residents. assist in minimizina the road network reouired. and reduce traffic impacts in this area of Collier Count All development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following requirements and limitations: a. Allowable Uses shall be limited to the following: 1. Amusement and recreation Groups 7911— Dance studios. schools and halls. excluding discotheaues 7991 — Physical fitness facilities 7993 — Coin - operated amusement devises 7999 — Amusement and recreation services, not elsewhere classified, including only day camps, gymnastics instruction judo /karate instruction, sporting goods rental and yoga instruction (excludes NEC Recreational Shooting Ranges, Waterslides, etc.) 10 • h. Development standards, including permitted uses and setbacks for principal buildings shall be established at the time of PUD rezoning. Any future PUD rezone shall include at a minimum: (1) Landscape buffers adjacent to external rights -of -way shall be: • 16`/3" Streets- Minimum 30' wide enhanced buffer • Wilson Boulevard- Minimum 25' wide enhanced buffer • Golden Gate Boulevard- Minimum 50' wide enhanced buffer (2) Except for the utility building, no commercial building may be constructed within 125 feet of the northern property boundary and within 300' of the 3rd Street NW boundary of this subdistrict. (3) Any portion of the Project directly abutting residential property (property zoned E- Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy -five (75) feet wide buffer, except the westernmost 330' of Tract 106, which shall provide a minimum 20' wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty -five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or re- planted native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The native vegetation retention area may consist of a perimeter berm and be used for water management detention. Any newly constructed berm shall be revegetated to meet subsection 3.05.07.1-1 of the LDC (native vegetation replanting requirements). Additionally, in order to be considered for approval, use of the native vegetation retention area for water management purposes shall meet the following criteria: a. There shall be no adverse impacts to the native vegetation being retained. The additional water directed to this area shall not increase the annual hydro- period unless it is proven that such would have no adverse impact to the existing vegetation. b. If the proiect requires permitting by the South Florida Water Management District the project shall provide a letter or official document from the District indicating that the native vegetation within the retention area will not have to be removed to comply with water management requirements. If the District cannot or will not supply such a letter, then the native vegetation retention area shall not be used for water management. c. If the project is reviewed by Collier County, the County engineer shall provide evidence that no removal of native vegetation is necessary to facilitate the necessary storage of water in the water management area. ;FINDMS AND CONCLUSIONS: • No present demand for Community Center commercial within the Comprehensive Plan's planning horizon of 2020 • Presently there is a greater deficit of Neighborhood Center commercial in Golden Gate Estates (no Neighborhood Centers approved, and there are two Community Centers approved for 540,950 sq. ft.) • The first project phase will likely develop as a Neighborhood Center • At build out, the project will be a Community Center but will function as both a Neighborhood Center and Community Center The project market area overlaps (13,196 persons in year 2015 — and 14,984 persons in year 2020) with the approved Randall Blvd. Commercial Center market area, which means 17 •t that households within this project's market area will be served by the Randall Blvd. Center, with the exception of households south and southeast of the proposed project • The data and analysis indicate the project will result in a reduction of vehicle miles traveled • This project, inclusive of transportation mitigation commitments, will not result in a reduction in level of service standard for any Category A public facilities • The proposed project size, and use and intensity are out of character with the surrounding semi -rural development pattern - •, Approval of this project at a Community sized center and use intensity may diminish the value of existing commercial properties and the need for other commercial in Golden Gate Estates • Project site is located within 3.5 and 5.5 road miles of approved Community Centers • The results of the November 2010 referendum indicate the majority of those persons voting (76 %) support the project STAFF'S CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the data and analysis submitted, the proposed site would be more appropriate for a neighborhood commercial sized center with the corresponding C -1 through C -3 commercial uses of the Land Development Code, with a limitation of a 20,000 square feet cap for individual users, with the exception that the grocery use may exceed the cap. Additionally, staff recommends eliminating the Conceptual Site Plan within the Master Plan as it is unprecedented to incorporate a site plan into the GMP, and the environmental data provided on the site plan is iL - inadequate to determine compliance with the Policies of the Conservation and Coastal `w.. Management Element. 7 The discrepancy between the petitioner's request and staff's recommendation was heard by the Board on January 19, 2010 at which time the Board directed staff to seek the community's desire through a straw -poll ballot. While staff continues to support a moderately sized commercial center, the public (via referendum) overwhelmingly supported a 190,000 square feet center. As noted previously herein, the Florida Senate Report provides that if the commercial ratio of 1.25 is exceeded, other factors, such as suitability of property for change, locational criteria, job creation, community desires, etc., may be considered. Accordingly, despite staff's finding that the technical Needs Analysis does not support the petition as proposed within the Comprehensive Plan planning horizon of 2020, the Board of County Commissioners may consider the following factors in reaching a decision to approve this petition. The petition does provide for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, local job creation and has community support. ��� c ��L) - �� 7-n v �r?Jst(rnac_ I 1010-7 outhwest Florida Regional Planning Council 926 Victoria Ave, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 -3414 (239) 338 2550 FAR (239) 338 2560 vrwwswlrpc.arg March 14, 2011 Mr. Mark'featers 140 Wilson Blvd. Naples, Florida 34117 Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment DCA 10 -1 (CP- 2008 -1) Clarification of Council Action Dear Mr. Teaters, We have received your request to clarify the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council's action relative to the Collier County requested Comprehensive Plan Amendment identified as part of the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) submittal identified as DCA 10 -1 and identified by the County as CP- 2008 -1. At the March 18, 2010 Council meeting, the members of the Council reviewed the Council staff report on the requested Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment. fhe staff report stated that the petition was requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, in order to allow the creation of the Estates Shopping Center in Golden Gates Estates. I he project was described in the County's submittal as a project that would contain a maximum of 210,000 square feet of commercial uses. The uses were those identified in the County's C -5 zoning district and included a requirement to construct a grocery store. The proposed site was identified in the report as being located on the Golden Gate Boulevard and extended from Wilson Boulevard on the west to 3`a Street Northwest on the cast. The subject site contained +/- 40.62 acres. Based on the County staff report, the proposed development went through some parameter changes as it was reviewed by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and the petitioner wo, ked with the County staff to resolve the required changes. During the public input portion of the CPCC meeting, the County staff report stated that several people related local concerns about the proposed development. These concerns dealt mostly with increased traffic in the area, consistency of the development with the rural character of' tile area, whether there was enough population present to support the level of proposed development, and whether there would be disruptions in the general quietness of the area. After the CCPC meeting, the petitioner agreed with the County to reduce the size of the proposed development frorn 225,000 square feet to 210,000 square feet, to increase the project's buffers, and to increase the project's building setbacks. In addition, the petitioner submitted additional i data and analyses that dealt with the ,need" for the proposed amendment and submitted additional data and analysis to address 1113 697, which pertained to energy conservation and efficiency of the proposed development. The Council staft report stated that based on the additional information, County staff concluded that the project would likely reduce vehicle trips traveled by providing commercial and employment opportunities proximate to the area's residents. Council staff agreed with the County staffs traffic observations. Given the information available in the County's submittal, Council staff reviewed the proposed amendment request and found it to be not regionally significant due to its sub -DRI threshold magnitude, its location away from jurisdictional lines and its character as a needed shopping facility in Golden Gate Estates. Council staff stated that given its location in the County, it world help provide employment opportunities and reduce vehicle trips into the urbanize portion of Collier County. Council staff also found that the proposed development, given the development parameter conditions being placed on the development by the petitioner and County was consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP). As we discussed in our meeting of March 8, 2011, Council staff does not agree with the statement shown on the developer's internet site that implies that the Council approved the proposed development. As we related to you, Council does not approve nor deny projects, but makes recommendations as to the consistency of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments with the SRPP. The Council is in fact one of several commenting agencies that makes recommendations to DCA. The Council, like the Water Management Districts, the Department of Transportation, or the Department of Environmental protection review projects and made recommendations to DCA based on their areas of expertise, in the Council's case Regional Issues, who then makes the final decision as to whether a requested amendment is either approved or denied. Only the DCA has the authority to make such decisions. With respect to the subject amendment identified above, the Council approved the staff recommendation made to DCA on March 3, 2010 that the request was not regionally significant and was consistent with the SRPP. DCA then used this recommendation with others to make the final approval or denial decision relative to the County's requested amendment. We hope this response provides the clarification that you requested. Should you have any additional questions concerning this Council action, please do not hesitate to contact David Crawford, Principle Planner with the Council. Sincerely, SOUTHW ST FLORIDA REGIONA PLANNING COUNCIL l k � Ken4th Heal erington i Executive Director DYB /DEC MINUTES OFTHE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL MARCH 18, 2010 The regular meeting of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council was held on March 18, 2010 at the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council - V Floor Coulereuce Room at 1926 Victoria Avenue in Fort Myers, Florida. Chair Mick Denham called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Commissioner Butch Jones led an invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. Senior Administrative Staff Nichole Cwinnettconducted the roll call. U u : t 7'iyy�f►YY Charlotte County: Councilman Don McCormick, Commissioner Tricia Duffy, Ms. Andrea Messina Collier County: Councilman Charles Kiester, Commissioner Jim Coletta, Councilwoman Teresa Heitmarm, Commissioner Frank Halas, Mr. Bob Mulhcrc Glades County: Commissioner Kenneth "Butch" Jones, Dr. Edward Elkowitz Hendry County: Commissioner Karson Turner, Mayor Paid Puletti Lee County: Commissioner Ray Duda h, Mayor Mick Denham, Councilman Forrest Banks, Mayor John Sullivan, Councilman Toni Babcock Sarasota County: Commissioner Jon Thaeton, Councilman Ernie Zavcdnyik Ex- Offiicio Members: Ms. Dianne Davies - SWFWMD, Mr. Jon Iglehart - FDEP, Mr. Phil Flood - SFWMD, Mr. Johnny Limbaugh - FDOT, Ms. Tainunie Nennecek - EDC of Collier County Charlotte Coun Collier County: Glades County: Hendry County: Lee County MEMBERS ABSENT Commissioner Robert Skidmore, Mr. Alan LcBeau None Councilman Michael Brantley, Commissioner Paul Beck Commissioner Tristan Chapman, Mr. Melvin Kar'au, Mayor Mali Chamncss Commissioner Taunmy Hall, Ms. Laura Holquist, Mr. Paul Pass, Councilman John Spear z Uri Sarasota County: Commissioner Carolyn Meson, Mr. George Marrarantauri, Commissioner - 1'ourJones, Mr. David Farley Ex- Officio Membership: None MOMENT OF SILENCE 'fhe Council held a moment of silence in memory of Lce County Coil uuissioner 13ob Jaues who also was a former Chair and member of the Council. Coil unissioner,)udah announced that there will be a celebration of Cornmissioncr Jancs' life held at the Hm-borside Event Center on March 22' "' at 4:00 par. Chair Denharn announced that the Council will be malting a ,fr 100 contribution to die Bob Janes memorial fund. INTRODUCTIONS Chair Denham introduced: Ms. Diana McGee, Regional Director from US Senator Bill Nelson's Office and Mr. Dick Keen from i1S Congessinan's Tom Rooney's Office. AGENDA ITEM #1 AGENDA Ms. Messina moved and Dr. Elkowitz seconded to approve the agenda as presented. The motion tamed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM #2 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 18, 2010 Councilman Kiester moved and Ms. Messina seconded to approve the minutes of February 18, 2010 as presented. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Denhaun announced that he would be pulling Consent Agenda Item #3(d) Collier County Comprehensive: Plan Amendments (DCA 10 -1) for discussion purposes. AGENDA ITEM #3(d) Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendments (DCA 10-1) Chair Denhain stalled that he is particularly interested in Amendment CP 2009 -1 where the continents which stadl' had written indicate this aniendment would be very detrimental to Everglades Restoration, cte. Mr. Crawford of stall explained that Amendment CP 2009 -1 of the Collier County Cornprehcusive Plan is a petition to change their fixture land use element and their future land use map and reap series to create the Dade- Collier Cypress Recreation District within the conservation designation. The site is located on the Dade - Collier County line, just north oft IS4 1. The property is owned by Dade County and it is really to mace a recreation area for a variety of uses that you would normally find in a recreational park. The most serious concern that stall had was the proposed ATV usage in the area. Collier County has been looking for an ATV park location for several years, This piece of property was decided upon and studied by Dade County as the most appropriate for that use, so Collier County is eying to amend their comprehensive plan in order to allow the ATV park in that, location. Still has concerns for basically two main reasons: there are environmental concerns when you bring ATV vehicles into that area (the Everglades); and, there is a canal oil die Everglades Restoration list, which is an approved project in the F.veglades Restoration (1,28), that is located just to cast of the property. The Everglades Restoration is proposing to fill that canal which is going to change tie sheet -flow in the Glades that will go over the site, so the water will be much more significant then what it is at the present time. Still has received comments from die SFWMD in agreement that the canal issue could cause a problem in future for the use of the park for the proposed activities on the site. Staff recommends that it is regionally significant and inconsistent with the SRPP in terms with the environmental impacts the Everglades Restoration. Chair Denham referred to Item 7 on Pages 64 and 65 of die item. He read staff's comments on the negative impacts. Commissioner Cole[ta explained that this has been a special project which he has been working oil very closely with Commissioner Peppe Diaz from Miami -Dade County. He noted that when the Picayune sorest was the south block of Golden Gate Estates, everyone had access to it for A'PVs and it was a tremendous recreation location for families. As time went along the Stale realized that they had to do something along a conservation effort than what has been clone in the past, so they cane to Collier County and said if you give its the roads in the proposed Picayune Forest we will give you a square mile (640 acres) for ATV recreation. Unfortunately, to this day that never happened, so Collier County has been working ever since trying to come up with something for ATV recreation. This project is a partnership with Miami -Dade County on airport laud which is already disturbed land and is fenced in. The property has man -made lakes arid when the airport was built they filled in the land around it. He doesn't feel that there are any environments impacts or endangered species on the property. As it is now the properly floods during die summer time so the recreation vehicles will not be able to use die property. Commissioner Coletta noted that the preserve next to the property was created with a combined effort of the emrironmentalists and the access community that likes to hunt and fish on the property. He then asked the Council that if they find ahh issue with the .amendment to continue Amendment. CP 2009 -1 so that a more formal presennhtion could be made and members of the community could be present. He noted that the Collier County 13OCC passed the amhemdment With it 5 -0 vote. Commissioner Halas asked where Council staff received their information from. Mr. Crawford explained that as far as the L28 information is concerned it carne directly from the SFWMD and die environmental information came from local knowledge. I Iola, Commissioner I-lalas stated that when this amendment cane before the Collier County BOCC lie had some questions at lie time and had asked staff and lie was assured that there wouldn't be army environmental impacts, but now that he has read Council stall's continents and lie now has some concerns once again. Couuhnissioner Judah said that lie applauds Council stall comments and bringing forth this sensitive issue and lie also respects and appreciates the position of the Collier County BOCC in reW,uds to Ilse promise that was made to die ATV recreational users. He then said that this was a holy war when this jetport landing strip was built and killed during the Nixon Administration, because of its impacts to the Everglades. It absolutely has a devastating impact to the Everglades Restoration and he welcomes to hear both sides of the issue and defer the item for that purpose. Mr. Mulherc stated that another consideration is one of the issues that has been dealt with in Collier County in the significant anouul of lands that are under state and federal ownership, where almost 80% of Collicr County are under state or federal ownership, was the illegal use of lands for ATVs and tlhe danage that was occurring as a result of that use (i.e. Big Cypress and Collier - Seminole State Park). This whole process was intended to lind a location where this specific type of recreation use could be properly controlled and managed, and the impacts associated with it could also he properly controlled and managed. Mr. Mulhere moved and Commissioner Judah seconded to continue Collier County Amendment CP 2009 -1 in order to have a presentation on the issue at the April Council meeting. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Coletta requested to approve the remaining six amendments that are within tie itern. Mr. Hutchinson of staff requested that Mr. Crawford give an overview of the DCA process. Mr. Crawford explained that DCA has a schedule for the ORC report which Council stafh has to also meet that schedule. DCA will be producing the ORC report within the next month, so what he will do is take the Council's comments from the meeting and send them to DCA. Commissioner Thaxton asked if DCA's tmehnc is set by rule. Mr. Crawford replied yes. Commissioner Thaxton stated then in essence the Council would be making no comments in reference to Amendment CP 2009 -1. Mr. Crawford explained that we would unless DCA decides to change it for this particular one and defer the ORC report. Commissioner'rhaixton asked if DCA has the legal authority to change it and give the Council the opportunity to submit comments at a later (late. Mr. Crawford replied that he has never seen it clone before. Commissioner Coletta explained that it is moving forward for trmsmittal and it has to come back through tie process again in Collier County for adoption. Mr. Crawford stated that after it is adopted it does come back for amothcr round of comments. Commissioner Thatirton slated that the time to get comments into the process is riot at die adoption hearing, it is during the transmittal period and that is why the process is set up the way ilia[ it is. Commissioner Judah asked for clarification that die Council is not to move (onward on the amendment. Mr. Crawford explained that he would write in the letter to DCA that Amendment CP 2009 -1 would be continued and pulled from the request. Mr. Mood asked if staff conumcmts are sent to DCA without the Council's blessing. Mr. Crawford explained that the comments are sent to DCA as stall comments with a letter stating that they are stall comments and they will be reviewed by the Council at die Council meeting and it there are any changes to the comments, staff will provide the Council's comments to DCA. Commissioner Judah stated that the CP 2009 -1 Amendment is not being moved forward at this tine, so die comments will be reserved regarding this amendment until after (lie April Council nneeting. Mr. Crawford explained that the Council is a commenting agency and the comments will state that Amendment CP 2009 -1 has been continued for one month for further review. Mr. Mulhere stated that lie doesn't believe that the Council has the authority to slop the amendment from moving forward, but Collier County could choose to withdraw this particular amendment, He does feel that it is important that the Council's comments move forward. Commissioner Judah stated that his assumption was that Collier County would withdraw Amendment CP 2009 -1 until the Council has time to review it. Commissioner Halas stated that he has a concern with what he read in the Council's staff report and lie was also surprised that it was on the consent agenda. He believes that tine issue needs to be discussed further. If there ac environmental and endangered species impacts and if the SFWMD has some concerns, even though they haven't met their obligations, Collier County also has to make sure they meet their obligations of their federal partner of the lands and what their intended use is and what trey are planning to do with the sheet -flow. These issues weren't brought out in the board meeting about them filling in a canal, which will create additional sheet -flow. Ms. Davies stated that Mr. Mulhere was correct in stating that Collier County could grant a continuance or extension to die petition to DCA. She then explained that it is her understanding that Amendment CP 2009 -1 is the only amendment among the amendment item, which has several anendments that are being proposed, the Council doesn't want to comment on and the rest of the amendment package will go through to DCA. She noted what she has seen happen is when die remainder of die amendment package goes through and Collier County receives the ORC Report, they will be able to address those comments through their review of the ORC Report. However, she has also seen DCA come back after an ORC Report has been addressed and pull specific petitions to be entered as out of compliance within that amendment package. So Collier County could end up with a Notice of Intent for Compliance In or Out of Compliance with the one specific petition being excluded. Mr. Mulhere explained that typically is what Collier County will do which is set it up under a separate resolution. He then said that if the Council can move the rest of the amendment package forward with pulling Amendment CP 2009 -1 and either make it recommendation today or defer making a recommendation which is die concern Commissioner Thaxton had expressed. ME1 • Mr. Mulhere and Commissioner Judah withdrew their motion. Chair Dcnhaun suggested to forward stall couunents as presented, but with additional comments as the Council has noted. Commissioner Coletta stated that he would like to hear from the opposition, not just have die Council base their decision on staffs report. He feels that what is written in stall's report is a distortion of die truth because the has been out to the site many times. He feels that it is unfair not to be able to have a presentation be made with all of the parties involved. Dr. hlkowitz stated that he agrees with the Chair's comments but they need to be stronger. 'fhe comments that are sent to DCA needs to be stronger in die way that the Council moves forward with die exception of this particular item which the Council wants to review and have a public hcaring and have a review by Collier County, Dadc County, and die Council. He said to move fon-ivard with die package, excluding this particular item until further investigation. Commissioner judah moved and Commissioner Thaxton seconded to move forward with stalls recommendations and also include Council's comments as noted. Commissioner Thaxton stated that the argument that was made was that there would be ahnple opportunity to review it at the adoption hcaring. He noted that the Council meeting was a duly advertised public hearing, so there was plenty of time for those individuals who wished to pull or to prepare comments on this item to attend this meeting and make their case, On the other haunt, staff is present, their comments are prepared, and are prepared to defend what they stated within die report. We lhire professional staff for the very reason of getting this sort of professional input. So, he feels that if there was some other input on the issue they should have been in attendance. This is why he supports transmitting staffs recommendations and then if there is additional professional input that should be heard by the Council, we will have (tic opportunity to do it at the adoption phase. Mr. Mulhere moved an amendment to the motion and Commissioner Judah seconded to include a recommendation from the Council to Collier County to voluntarily relieve the Council staff' from the 30 day comment period which would allow enough time for staff to come back to the Council and make a presentation in advance of providing ORC comments. Dr. Elkowitz stated that lie feels that the Council needs to spell out to DCA exactly what it wants. Mayor Pulctd asked for clarification in what is die definition of ATV recreation for die proposed site. Does it include inud holes, faunily picnics, etc. Commissioner Coletta replied that includes designated trails which there are a limited amount of them and there will be some picnic grounds. There are existng lakes with fish which will be available for fishing, camping areas available for family caunping, which is all during the appropriate season. Commissioner Turner noted that some of due wildlife management areas, Spirit of de Wild is 8,000 acres, Okee Slough is 34,000 acres, Dinuer Island Wildlife Management Area 2/1,000 acres, and currently Hendry County is 50% owned by the State of Florida and our residents have zero arctLs to drive an oll' road vehicles. He stated that he agrees with Commissioner Coletla thaL there needs to be places for families to go with their recreational vehicles. The amendment motion passed with three opposed. The main motion passed with four opposed. AGENDA ITEM #3 CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Judah moved and Councilman Banks seconded to approve the consent agenda as amended: Agenda Item #3(a) Intergovernmental Coordination and Review; Agenda Item #3(b) Financial Statement for February 28, 2010; Agenda Item #3(c) Estero Bay ABM Elections, Workplan & Bylaws; Agenda Item #3(e) Lee County Red Sox Stadium DRI - Development Order Review; Agenda Item #3(f) North Port Gardens DRI - Request for Extension; and Agenda Item #3(g) Florida Gulf Coast Technology & Research Park DRI - Request for Extension. The motion carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM #4 HARBORVIEW SUBSTANST]AL DEVIATION DRI - STAFF ASSESSMENT Mr. Dan Trescott of staff explained the distributed letter requesting a continuance of the DRI Staff Assessment until the Council's April meeting. Commissioner Judah moved and Commissioner Duffy seconded to approve the continuance of the Harborview Substantial Deviation DRI Staff Assessment to the April Council Meeting. ConunissionerJudaln stated that there is a issue because the proposed subject property is within the coastal high hazard area and flood way and FEMA just recently adopted changes to the FEMA tloodplain regulations which doesn't allow fill in flood ways. Mr. "Prescott explained that he is working on that issue with Charlotte County. He stated that he is not sure if there really is a flood way located within the subject property, there is dclinitely a coastal high hazard area issue which apparently the, county and applicant has worked out regarding the number of units that is allowed. There is a' V" zone and in terms of their regulations they have allowed no more dran one loot of 1-111 unless the applicant is going to fill die entire site and then they can actually request a map Change. Commissioner.ludah noted that Lee County's Comprehensive Plan calls for a reduction in density in coastal high hazard areas and not an increase in density. Mr. Trescott stated that the law states that you cannot increase the density within the coastal high hazard area, which is going to change pretty soon because we are working on the new storm surge maps for the coastal counties as soon as the model is completed for the hurricane center. 51 of 6518 A 2. Petition CP- 2007 -3 This petition is requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create the Mission Subdistrict to allow church and related uses, including schools, adult care and child care, and community outreach programs. The proposed development will contain a maximum of 90,000 square feet for the property located on the south side of Oil Well Road (CR 858), approximately '/4 mile west of Everglades Boulevard. The subject site contains +/- 21.72 acres. 3. Petition CP- 2008 -1 This petition is requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create an Estates Shopping Center a maximum of 210,000 square feet of commercial uses identified in the C -5 zoning district, with a requirement to construct a grocery store, for a site located on the north side of Golden Gate Boulevard extending from Wilson Boulevard west to 3rd Street Northwest. The subject site contains +/- 40.62 acres. 4. Petition CP- 2008 -2 This petition is requesting an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use May and Map Series, to expand and modify the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict to allow an additional 370,940 square feet of commercial uses identified in the C -4 zoning district, with exceptions. The property is located on the south side of Randall Boulevard, extending from 8'h Street Northeast and extends to the west to the canal on the west side of the Big Corkscrew Island Fire Station. 5. Petition CP- 2008 -4 This petition is requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to redesignate from the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands to Neutral Lands property located on the east and south sides of Washburn Avenue, east of the Naples landfill. The subject site contains +/- 28.76 acres. 6. Petition CP- 2008 -7 This petition is a staff requested amendment to the Future Land Use Element to add a new Policy 4.11 pertaining to aligning planning time frames in the County's Growth Management Plan. Petition CP- 2009 -1 This petition is requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series, to create the Dade - Collier Cypress Recreation District within the Conservation Designation for a site located along the Miami - Dade /Collier County border. The subject site consists of +/- 1,608 acres. 53 of 651 v A the County to require an amendment, Council staff has no objection to the requested amendment, however, based on the submitted information it appears that the petitioner has not completed the land use review process. Therefore, Council staff finds the petition procedural and not consistent with conditions with the SRPP. 3. Petition CP- 2008 -1 Based on the County staff report, this proposed development has gone thru some changing parameters as it was reviewed by the CCPC and the petitioner worked with the County. During the public input portion of the meeting, several people stated local concerns about the development, mostly dealing with increased traffic, consistency with the rural character of the area, whether there was enough population to support the development, and whether there would be disruptions in the quietness of the area. After the CCPC meeting, the petitioner reduced the size of the proposed development from 225,000 square feet to 210,000 square feet, increased buffers, and increased building setbacks. In addition, the petitioner submitted additional data and analyses that dealt with the "need" for the proposed amendment and submitted additional data and analysis to address HB 697, which pertains to energy conservation and efficiency. Based on the additional information, County staff concluded that the project would likely reduce vehicle trips traveled by providing commercial and employment opportunities proximate to the area's residents. Council staff agrees the County staff's observations. Given the information available in the County's submittal, Council staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request and finds it not regionally significant due to its sub- threshold magnitude, location and character. Council staff believes that given its location in the County, it would help provide employment opportunities and reduce traffic on the adjacent road network. Council staff also finds that the proposed development, given the development parameter conditions being placed on the development by the petitioner and County is consistent with the SRPP. 4. Petition CP- 2008 -2 At the CCPC meeting, the petitioner proposed changes to the requested amendment to reduce the size of the development from 431,950 square feet to 411,950 square feet (finally per the County summary document to 370,950 square feet), increase the Randall Boulevard Center PUD from 21,000 square feet to 31,000 square feet, and provided additional data and analyses. The CCPC recommended that County staff recommendations and text relating to the proposed project's allowable square feet figures, the C -4 zoning district, and the discontinuance of the of the Corkscrew Island Fire Station and Florida Division of Forestry Fire Tower be approved. Subsequent to the CCPC meeting, the petitioner provided additional data and analysis concerning the "need" for the commercial development and additional data concerning the requirements of HB 697. County staff expressed concerns about the "needs" information that was submitted, which dealt mainly with petitioner's conclusions reached 4 454 85T • about a grocery use as part of the development proposal, yet the proposed subdistrict text did not require a grocery store. The County staff was concerned because the petitioner claimed that the grocery store would reduce vehicle trips and provide employment opportunities for the area's residents. Based on the information submitted, the County staff expressed concerns as to its accuracy. Based on the County staff report, the proposed amendment would allow a development that would result in the following County findings: 1) The proposed site specific commercial amendment is a departure from the residents' established vision for Golden Gate Estates; 2) The Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) limits new commercial projects in the Estates to uses generally found in the C -1 through C -3 zoning districts of the Collier County LDC, which are intended to serve the basic shopping needs of the area's residents; 3) Approval of the proposed subdistrict circumvents the master planning process and limits public involvement; 4) The proposed development will most likely alter the semi -rural character of the Estates area by increasing noise, light, and traffic; 5) The intensity and scale of the proposed development is consistent with commercial intensities found in urban areas; 6) The project's Primary Trade Area (PTA) and Secondary Market Area (SMA) has been identified for a demand for community commercial serving uses in 2010 of about 8,714 square feet, increasing to approximately 195,034 square feet by 2030. (It should be noted that 210,000 square feet of community commercial land uses are proposed in CP 2008 -1 as seen above.); 7) The petitioner's market analysis identified that in the proposed project's PTA and SMA approximately 473,963 square feet of community center commercial land uses could be supported. However, the analysis did not less out the already approved community commercial supply of 200,000 square feet on 44 acres in the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD; 8) The CIGM identifies a deficit of community commercial land uses in the Estates and Rural Settlement Area will exist in year 2010 in the amount of 63,817 square feet and increase to 412,216 square feet by buildout. However, this deficit does not take into account the potential commercial square footage supply in the pending Big Cypress DRI, which is located approximately 6 miles from the proposed project site. The proposed DRI is likely to provide commercial and employment opportunities to residents residing in the eastern areas of the Estates; 9) No significant public facility impacts, except those related to the transportation network are expected to occur as a result of the approval of this amendment; 10) Approval of this request to add 390,959 square feet of commercial uses at the subject location may be deemed consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, if the mitigation is approved by the BoCC; 5 1* V A 55 of 651 II)The project consists of assembled properties that can accommodate community commercial uses. County staff is aware of no other assemblage in the Estates designated lands, except for land contained in the GMPA CP 2008 -1 and the Orange Blossom Ranch 200,000 square feet; 12) The project will be served by central water and sewer; 13) The site has access to Randall Boulevard, a collector road that will eventually become a 4 -laned divided highway; and 14) All development in this Subdistrict will be subject to lighting requirements found in Policy 5.1.1. Given the information available in the County's submittal, Council staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request and finds it not regionally significant due to the fact the proposed development allowed by this amendment is just below the DRI threshold and therefore does not have the magnitude, location and character to be significant. Council staff agrees with the County staff that this project is not consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and there is no "need" for a project of this size at the current time. Council staff finds that the proposed development, given the development location and character concerns of the project, is not consistent with the SRPP 5. Petition CP- 2008 -4 Based on the County staff report, the original Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District (RFMUD) designations were based upon landscape scale analysis. Since then, proposals for re- designation have relied on site - specific environmental findings in order to demonstrate different site characteristics. According to County staff this amendment petition provided data and analysis that the subject site's specific environmental conditions supports the redesignation and the impacts to the County's Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program will be minimal. The site will be subject to all growth management plan requirements and limitations of the Neutral Lands designation, including the native vegetation preservation/retention requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME). These requirements will be calculated at the time of any Conditional Use review by the County. The southerly property boundary coincides with the current boundary recommended by the Wilson/Benfield Corridor Study for future road rights -of -way, in accordance with the County's Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The site is recommended to be reserved for right -of -way at the time of Conditional Use review by the County. Given the information available in the County's submittal, Council staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request and finds it not regionally significant due to the fact the proposed change will have minimal environmental impacts to the area and does not have the magnitude, location and character to be significant. Council staff finds that the requested land use change is procedural and given the location and character of the site, the amendment is consistent with the SRPP 0 /, In reviewing the Staff Report, I note it contains comment and analysis throughout regarding petition CP- 2008 -1. This petition was NOT approved for Transmittal by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners, rather was continued indefinitely so may become part of a future amendment cycle. The approving Resolution does NOT include this petition and the amendment package does not include the Collier County Staff Report or application materials for petition CP- 2008 -1. For petitions that were approved for Transmittal, some County staff maps depicted multiple petition sites (several sites within same geographic area — Golden Gate Estates east of Collier Blvd. /CR 951), including CP- 2008 -1; perhaps that caused some confusion to the reviewer. I bring this to your attention as I wouldn't want the Council to needlessly spend time reviewing /discussing this non - Transmitted petition. Thank you. David David Weeks, AICP, (iinwh Plan Manager Collier County Government Community Development & Environmental Services Division (CDES) Engineering, Environmental, Comprehensive Planning and Zoning Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 phone: 239-252-2306 fax 239-252-6689 email: david week s _((dcolIiereov. net website: www.colliereov.net RPC Staff Report on Transmittal GMPAs for March 18 2010 RPC Meeting — emails 3 -11 -10 G: \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments \2007 -2008 Combined Cycle Petitions \Communications re 07 -08 GMPA Cycle dw /7 -12 -10 • 2 From: weeks_d Sent: Thursday, March 11, 20101:37 PM To: 'Ken Heatherington'; David Hutchinson; David Crawford Subject: RE: RPC Staff Report on Collier County GMP Amendments - March 18, 2010 RPC Meeting Thanks for your response, Ken. I am content to let it go through since you have already advised DCA, and I see no harm in letting it go through. (I would hope DCA would realize it themselves given there's no application or County staff report or Reso. Ex. A for that petition in the submittal received from us.) My concern was only that time might be wasted. By the way, Commissioner Coletta is very much aware of that petition — it is in his District, he has received a lot of communication about it from constituents, that petition and one other petition were specifically scheduled for hearing after S pm for convenience to public, there was considerable time spent on it at BCC hearing, (and at Planning Commission earlier), and the BCC took the unusual step of continuing it indefinitely — to allow the applicant to coordinate with Supv. of Elections to place a non - binding, straw vote referendum on this petition on the November 2010 ballot! David From: Ken Heatherington [ma iIto: kheatherington @swfrpc.org] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 1:17 PM To: weeks _d; David Hutchinson; David Crawford Subject: RE: RPC Staff Report on Collier County GMP Amendments - March 18, 2010 RPC Meeting Hi Dave: It is always nice to hear from an old friend and collogue - even if it has to do with a Comp Plan clarification. It is comforting that at least someone has read part of the agenda packet. Dave Crawford is actually the comp plan staff reviewer, I have forwarded your comments to Dave and DCA. As you noticed, the item is on the consent agenda which means the SWFRPC comments were forwarded to DCA. You can do two things: 1) notify the Collier County Commissioner (Commissioner Coletta or Commissioner Halas) to pull the Item and provide subsequent clarification and notice to DCA or 2) let it go through. Be apprised, by way of this email, the SWFRPC has notified DCA that CP- 2008 -1 was not approved for transmittal. Thank you for the notification. Ken From: weeks —d [ mailto :DavidWeeks @colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 12:46 PM To: David Hutchinson Cc: Ken Heatherington Subject: RPC Staff Report on Collier County GMP Amendments - March 18, 2010 RPC Meeting David, \ \ rd ± \� \ §/ \} - �\\ �2 \ }\ \\ cn / \ S� \ ; k \ \ \ _ § WIt :i ± \ \ / mk B ■ ,) ( ( \ G \ .\ ,( ri }/ » - � \\ \ \\\ ro t CD \{ �® \ \{ \\ \\ i } \ - % / In 5 5 tJ \2 J` j mk B ■ ,) ( ( \ G \ .\ ,( ri �O T d W m 7 �oo i. 0 q h M v z 0 .q� E� tl, O G K d v t) r :3 z L r :0 b .v r.i w am � v 0 � rp �: q b O a .5 si q G ❑'.� � d .0 v � w •;;� � � � 3 gcg o > y ❑ o •a O h o F v O v O WN G N b ❑ b0 ❑ y d q qi d '❑ NNp •rj V y �'1 y p�q o.8'c 3'o s i C v w w° aui 'o y o o � 'c ❑ b ° � ° a `❑° � ^� b a � ° w � `�' d � 0.0 o y� F v m � ❑ . d v o �Q❑ � A v d � .s a � � � � � 0. o °❑' `may°, a o g; o 5 >> v o. m v Z Q G N v a O q w° 7 0 u aw'O q u is y •`3 vv G 0 b9 tyd ❑ d v J too d o 0 v vWw� 'S o .q o o° o > �� F= y o G O y r 2 0 q ie A O o w .� .i > d q tO d y$ ❑ b ❑ 'O vqi O q O V ❑ u U y 0 WW v O p� � � •❑ Cd U Q u❑ ❑ g v O C q q v q q0.. vvi w C 0. C ri r ri w 0 r� vi c w u 8A = o q r. c .d o ro v ro. v •y� c �" ro ida o E �> �..% -. cy acroi �,+se%•ti o a m v p pp 4t q O « q v p� .� � v ifJ w o� d v ❑v❑ �O G b W ro � '� 7'3 .o G °.� :: av'o :d p�✓ a 'y G ro c��'.a c q s v v •o L � n u c °' o m=O c m q CC o a y 0 ME .� .c O �'� g '3 > U v b ❑ 'C ro c o C � awi aroi u .� O O L M Vj O N m N q' 12 r `� q 43 O .d Qvv Ny� v`dv a'r9rC O'ry`� vv'o�C�a 1J' b o O F .0 Z vv, a m F q o Q. M, ri w 0 r� J c u 8A a r. ri w 0 r� • 1 jmb transportation engineering, inc. traffic /transportation engineering & planning October 19, 2009 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center Located on the NW corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard Dear Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission: This letter is provided to the record for your consideration regarding the above referenced Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This letter is provided on behalf of the members of the la & 3`d Group, which is comprised of residents that live along 1st Street NW and 3rd Street NW within the Golden Gate Estates Community. Note: the P & 3'd Group does not represent all residents that live or own property along I" and 3'd Street NW. As you are aware, 1st and 3'd Streets are contiguous to the subject property for which the amendment is being requested. The 1" & 3`d Group was organized in opposition to the proposed plan amendment and forthcoming PUD that would permit 225,000 square feet of mixed commercial use. Several months ago, the 1st & 3`d Group retained the services of my firm (JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc.) to represent their interest in establishing numerous development conditions that would minimize or mitigate the commercial center's impact to the residents of 1st & 3`d Group. Numerous meetings and phone conferences have occurred with the Applicant's representative (Mr. Rich Yovanovich), which has resulted in significant changes to the forthcoming PUD. The Group greatly appreciates the Applicant's willingness to address all of their concerns. An example of some development restrictions and impact mitigation provisions are: increased landscape buffering, construction of bus stop shelters, lighting standards, restricted hours of operation, site layout, limitation on land uses, security measures, noise abatement, vehicular access limitations, dumpster locations, sewage treatment design, etc. Because the PUD has not been submitted as of to date, I have attached a more detailed outline of the terms and conditions (refer to 1st & 3`d Group /Applicant's Agreement, dated October 19, 2009) that have been agreed to by the Applicant. These terms and conditions are attached to this letter as "Exhibit A'. 76121" street nw, naples, florida 34120 phone: 239 -919 -2767 jmb In response to the Applicant's acceptance of these terms and conditions, the 1st & 3`d Group acknowledges that the forthcoming PUD will include the necessary elements in order to substantially minimize and mitigate potential impacts to the residents. As a result of the Applicant's commitment to minimize the project's impacts to the adjacent neighborhood, members of the 1't & 3rd Group do not object to the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP 2008 -1 Estates Shopping Center. If the Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission determine that the Comp Plan Amendment is appropriate and the terms and conditions of the forthcoming PUD will minimize the impacts to the residents, then the 1st & 3rd Group will support your decision to approve the plan amendment. We respectfully request that the terms of our agreement with the applicant be made a part of any approval or recommendation for approval that may be issued by the Plan Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. Thank you for your acceptance of this letter into the record, and as always, feel free to call upon me should you wish to discuss this matter in further detail. Engineering, Inc. E. No. 43860 Enclosure: Exhibit A- I" and 3rd Group /Applicant's Agreement, Dated October 19, 2009 WOK C N f0 v � � v V 3 a r x a C o x u n 00 m > vi m 7 `w C E 0 T U L E 0 n rn O m u C N 0 O al 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0%D 0 0 0 O n C y p M 1p M n 00 C T 0 C m > N a n v nLf Z d m K V y o 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 °v m o m v zi lf NNi N tV N V T u u i Q O O O O O O O O O LO 0 0 0 (D n n v�l V V V V�T ID V N O C N f0 � � v 3 a r x a C o x u C Q > > 7 7 7 u C 0 T U L n rn O m y C N 0 O al V m O y n ` v cu ) C T d C y > �% n c L Z Z d m K V y L d N 'ro L a R L m c U N R w fl. R J P g W W 7 � O N N y g� so ed aW a„ a '= v c E a o p VIVO M 9 N 2 p� O 6Ny Q Q d a �+ T W a J N U� N . = o U° N � a W m v 'a o c o a` o c 0 U o U � e 0 0 N i� 4. 0 V Y O V N a a v 0 3 3 t m r I a' a _aw L O n x C N N u a 3 p 19 a 4 u W b 7 p C z W w t N = E K a OY W � m ON O N � 10 IC aLL °' d p w O V n m L J �- Y X N •G H 3 .. G y o O �.4 2 2 2 n ~ r G O y N °o New 2 0 m F `� y � a °° z ¢ m N N y h q 0 J 6 al u a v � C N N C' Y D O I 6 I I V4i8 w w w cu Itl�i oo mllmpm N N N O IFo N N C IE w I N Ic @n@ U I° _ N J K N N j s, > X 01 N a ii N III O 4 � n k� N o _ t It N = "o cn x i a 8 E F FOOVA 1 a v v Q C G O Nr n f _ N L m w O w r 't0 VI to r J a 3 p 19 a 4 u W b 7 p C z W w t N = E K a OY W � m ON O N � 10 IC aLL °' d p w O V n m L J �- Y X N •G H 3 .. G y o O �.4 2 2 2 n ~ r G O y N °o New 2 0 m F `� y � a °° z ¢ m N N y h q 0 J 6 al u a v � C N N C' Y D O I 6 I I V4i8 w w w cu Itl�i oo mllmpm N N N O IFo N N C IE w I N Ic @n@ U I° _ N J K N N j s, > X 01 N a ii N III O 4 � n k� N o _ t It N = "o cn x i a 8 E F FOOVA 1 a v v Q C G O v a a m v 0 U N N L L Z g 4_:` 4 „� J` h;a_' w C7 _. \— m d V C VR �_ c �'.= °- o 2m n N O y �« � � t � p G U R ryT yN M OL N O QN 9N n9O o n a`v �� v `v = o Ua Y N N 4 n G d 3H d �� �� �. �3 a o �o o d c 0 UA `v_ o � V 3 v 0 0 N r 4 8A k c c c r N a a ro _m 0 u v. a m a ro J_. e� .T. g m v m 5 � o m � g� a a 5 pp 3m o ' � c m o � o m N m �a v a� k�k as 92 0 n a` v Ica J v_ V `m o U° m t N t w N m m c N N N t 3 0 �c �o 0 OR o m `m 0 o U � e 0 0 N � 1 a m a 0. Q U U. z a a m v 0 a t a c ;z vl .. Y W N U O Wp W ryt L_ C_ 0) N C V � j Q W 6 N O � Cy t U N q N N kW v Q T9 O O a W m � v U o Uo N N N £ m & n L y� 3v N R kN rot S 3 QW O p O O a` o iJ m m o U d e 0 0 N Q 8Ac y .� R a m `v 0 U N a L a ro W N C U � N '++ r � g� �N °- o o v nm 8 m a= x m m'� m g' �` kS `o Q d >. o r > 0 o � d m � m �o � �_ U N = o v 8i � y m 6 - � m N m c m �� ag $o a �� U � `N_ U d +r 0 0 N • � • i Q G r J �i g e U O N N v g€ $o Dp> Sm O a -- zs m o t U qN N 9 N L OO Y1 ad �a � v U 0 O V w N rl 4 x 3" "m ao `o o.� y `o o w U � W a O U d 7 R 0 0 N v N L, a a R v. N G U N a R c r.. r F N u�u U O qN Nt O m O N a '= �5 m O L U�NQ � V N N N L � r a �a � o o n o` m coo � v U� N o U$ v '^ m L y v v `v y v v t S 3 ag o a` 0 U `v 4 o U d e 0 0 OO IT a. a 0 U y L1. t a m 5 c r.. � pN� U m N m O A N B. n o ' o H c � m m W � o o n a`v cZo � m U� o U gi v $u L y� 3� d� m 0 �o a o y U � N 01 v 0 0 N .►8 A u C C C .i z• DISCUSSION OF FINAL REPORT June 11, 2003 Bach round: As part of the process of closing out the Golden Gate area Master flan Restudy process, staff is required to submit a "Final Report" on the Restudy Committee's activities to the Board of County Commissioners. The presentation of this report will include a PowerPoint slide presentation, as well as the preparation of a written document. In order to allow the members of the Restudy Committee to have a voice in this process, Comprehensive Planning staff is requesting that the Committee review this discussion paper and make recommendations as to the format and content of the Final Report. Staff is hoping to present the Final Report at the BCC's July 29, 2003 Regular Meeting. Staff's Suggested Format For The Final Report:_ Title Page: This page will feature the text box that Comprehensive Planning Staff has used for Restudy Committee Agenda Items (see above). After the words, "FINAL REPORT," the title page will list the active Committee members and current staff that have participated in the Restudy process. it could also be an opportunity for the Committee to acknowledge anyone else who they feel has contributed to the Restudy. Committee History: This section of the Final Report will attempt to provide, in capsule form, information on the number of meetings and variety of topics that the Restudy Committee has considered. The section will refer the Board to the Public Participation Schedule, which will then be attached. The text of this section will read as follows: "The Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Committee met on 31 occasions, between June 2001 and June 2003. During its tenure, the Committee considered a wide range of topics related to the Golden Gate Area, including commercial uses in the Estates and Golden Gate City, the proposed North Golden Gate Estates ROMA, other environmental matters, changes to conditional use criteria within the Estates, Ave Maria University, the County's Rural Fringe and Rural Lands Amendments, various matters related to County Codes and permitting processes, transportation issues, emergency management, the Community Character Plan and issues related to Rural Character and Design. The Restudy process resulted in two sets of amendments to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, constituting a virtual rewriting of that Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan." 1 • Restudy Conunittee Tasks /Chareges: The Final Report should reflect the fact that the Restudy Committee's responsibilities changed over time. Therefore, staff proposes the following wording for this section of the report: "The tasks and responsibilities of the Restudy Committee evolved during the Committee's two years of activity. Initially, in March of 2001, Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff, in recommending formation of an advisory committee, stated the following: "To assist in this restudy, staff requests that an advisory committee be formed to enable community input and provide recommendations. The committee will be responsible for addressing issues related to the Golden Gate Mobility Study, Commercial and Industrial Land Use Study, assessment of locational criteria for Conditional Uses/assessment of Conditional Use needs and the Golden Gate Parkway 1 -75 Interchange. The committee will also assist staff with the review and development of policy recommendations related to the Rural Fringe Committee and Community Character Plan findings, assist in the development of any necessary Requests for Proposals (RFP) for consulting services, and assist in the development of revised Goals, Objectives and Policies and Land Use Designation Descriptions." However, the actual wording of the Board of County Commissioners' Resolution creating the Committee vested the Restudy Committee with a slightly different set of responsibilities: "The functions, powers and duties of the Committee shall be to: a. Assist in the development of any necessary Request for Proposals (RFPs) for consulting services; b. Aid and assist in the restudy of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This would include assisting staff with the review and development of policy recommendations from the Rural Fringe Committee and the Community Character Plan findings relative to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; c. Identify and address issues relative to the Golden Gate Mobility Study, Commercial and Industrial Land Use Study, assessment of locational criteria for Conditional Uses /assessment of Conditional Use needs and the Golden Gate Parkway 1 -75 Interchange /adjacent land use plans; and d. Assist in the development of revised Goals, Objectives and Policies and Land Use Designation Descriptions for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan." During March of 2002, the Committee and staff began the development of possible treatment options for various topic areas within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This exercise resulted in the Committee assuming the responsibility to review the following broad general topics and management options: PJ "Maintain Rural and Natural Landscapes: • 1 • • Cooperation with other (non- County) agencies. • Identify connected natural areas (corridors). • Identify habitats that are less developed (regulated /unregulated). • Identify alternatives for land conservation. • Increase lot setback requirements to maintain greenways. Provision of Commercial Services • Establish locational and spacing criteria for low intensity commercial uses within Golden Gate Estates and redefine "convenience uses," especially for Golden Gate Estates. • Support higher intensity commercial uses on the outskirts of Golden Gate Estates. Develop design criteria for commercial buildings. Encourage the transition of commercially designated properties in Golden Gate City, along Golden Gate Parkway. Provide a Sunset Provision for multifamily residential to convert to commercial along corridors in Golden Gate City. • Support allowing no additional commercial or conditional uses near the Golden Gate Parkway/I -75 Interchange. E 0 @ a m E j 2 m ic § \ 0 k 0 § § a ƒ m ƒ § 0 \ 0 A M,o >z =CE 2 & y§% � / {\ z c�� a k\o m / > �t\ /G& § \ -0 9 )Cl > U) _. co X z M ° cn 10 Jy« a 00 § \\§ § > 2\) \E> DO % ±9 0 <6m \)} \co ,. \%5 \ m --I /3G /m >0 \{\ ffin M> /\ \ § 2 / d k � ( § q� / § 1010 a \ k ; � F / $ \ ; F § m O a m m r N 3 m m v O -i 2 x m m w W 3 N z C m m O X 0 c ncnn 3D0 3Fl-� �, m Wp 0-"O 0 Mmz vm:� z0 A DM H z �C) z �zm D z {O = CO mco W n u+ M n D T D U-) o -1z x o O ` 0 50 z -< OPO mpz 03 00 m >—IN O 0 Q � 3�0 z�:;Ln c3z (nM0 o N z 00 0 O V Mo- n 0 M p M ��. H M ozm M C) n 3 M > z 0 D —17r r OW T 03 nH O� zLn i r. rt S A N, N v _ ^1 J a v v � n 3 fD 1 � r(D_r, LO icy N V c n ti a � S 1 �v O0 CL io � m � rt 1 r M a� m ?i H 0l Z n a r m `1 tit `/ h a z uz L 0 rt i Q a M m m o a G) m v un un 3 m 3 � p m r. rt S A N, N v _ ^1 J a v v � n 3 fD 1 � r(D_r, LO icy N V c n ti a � S 1 �v O0 CL io � m � rt 1 r M a� m ?i H 0l Z n a r m `1 tit `/ h a z uz L 0 rt i Q /\? > _�[ 2> §o (a .. /C\ k - G j \\ m {)\ ( �l (// \ ; >I ()j/_= G / )\/ j/) \ X{ a )\( § \?\ E »), � 0 cn C w `r 9 j\0 k y \\\ \\\ e 9+G \m 37\ / § S \ \j {\m r- ; § 0 \ ; g ca ( } / § � [m e iz G) k ; �. � y � $ \ ; F § m I I J \ %-n / » 0 0 c D m m r 3 m m v 0 O 2 m m m W Z C m m T O 0 O c �1 n O 3 m m z CO) z z v D m O D v v m m V) O z x m n x D 0 m n 0 C r OD O M z pG�0 �Wc Z { COz 00 y r_ O O D m 0 C-) m 00z O D O co O O o O ti 0 M A A Cf) m m m O Z = M m A 0 � O D r > 00 0 A m � C r 0 Dam Im D ZI < C-) m 0 0 = -i K D Co z m m 0 z T W m O c (n m (n m p m z z G) D -j G) CD Z � = z � � -< Dm0 C) W D m D 0 n Z m < D fn � o O cn c> 0 T D r -i WE m v m m U) m z 1 z T m 1 O z m F 1 x m z D m m V D m \ m n O 3 v r m m m �v T rl3 In z fm 1 D v v m m 1 O T x rn v_ N z 1 x m O D v O O 3 T O 0 x m CA C W m 0 1 m m z O x m D P r m D m Z m D • O m Z v D m 3 9 O m z D m 3 Z c 3 v m o' b r D n m n O 3 r m v T O 3 O z -i S m a W r m r m T O -n S m v D z s m W O D v O 0 3 v X O X 0 S m c W m m n W m H z G) S m D v O c D X m r H 3 m m v O S m m m W 3 M z C m m m O z O c C) O 3 3 m z 1 D z v z- m m O D v v X m U) O z 1 S m n s D H tl in l; S r r R u'w� zoo rn z m m A rn D O 7 z n n m n A z rn 'vz TZ � O = w o mp�w it Vl m z 'w n T D In q D O i.., 3 y m =�z v w cch O1w >z< S z D rn z ww( ") O m D i N CD J O p 3 o z "' csz m J cn Div z O V M D C) 0 rTl Imo ncn U z m Frl T3 G to v 70 =z I m D rn 00 D >� 00 O w m w n U. O ) — c z cn d (D "O m m UD UD v m r'F rt 0 m 0 S fD \Il D O v rn m (A Ln 0 as In- r , Ic � m m z Q D mm 3 H r m 8A'� P m m z C) Ct D m rn �1 n m 3 m bJ 3 �n C i J(D 0) n C'+ 0 0 M W c m rt MO F� Z p� 1 i® !01 fpP \ a m � \ \ § 9 z % 2 0 / § ) a / \ a § 0 \ § » � =z 0 Z 0`m m ; ■ §§ .. \{ CM) z as K \\( 2 6 \§ q m z \_ (\f ; } \\/ {/_ \ \\ e0 00 / \/\ (A C 03 > \(c w(; g ,f o 2 r \m 7 / \/ w F ; {/\ \ \§ //2 y =2 , « � >M0 o CO \co m © \ \\ ° y+% M> ; § ; § § § a) rm } CA } K / d / \ \ % % \ k E / m � ± � q � � ■ � � \ \� � y \ 0 a § d j \ � § § / q 0 § { / \ a § / \ § n � /70 3 o mn ; / \y $ ter§ -q \\\ \ ( \§ q /«j & (0Z § \)\ /(� \ \\ 10 00 \0w ±/7 {\\ ®// %/s o ram 7 \\\ \(( C) m j/\ \m\ /\\ &+\ M> � � m r 1 § \J . G.A D r«.0 d'z § � m / § / ■ ■ � � / i b � � M, § ¥ } \ m \ / z \ 0 > ( y � a $ ¥ \ z k m ON I:> .2 / � � / � �IN � � � � � � / a X E j \ ■ � \ 0 @ 0 m ) a / -i a k 0 ( / / m /\? X Z EE( m m >e= \ {\ k \ \\ \ \ \§ q ° =Gj § \\z § mm\ {f= \\\ \. to « ®% a \ \( § \/§ Cl) & \7 }/ / �i w \> ,2 Q (/ m �(0 J \ §> C) /py \g> aef >M0 \§; >0 > 03 M> \\ � ( ) § § } � m 2 2 % / d -�. G / \ \ � 2 ¥ ; 9 m ;u � � O � y % I 0 O c D m m r 3 m m 0 O m m 3 z c m m N O 0 O C n O m m z D z v D m m O D v v m m co Ch O z _ m n 2 D O m n O w c r r 0 o A z z n O G) O zmc c � -q mZ o O A D r_ O D mo� m O O Z O D O cnoo o 0 v v M A C/) ;a m M L m ca -z m= o m m amp �o = r A � 00 D O O r O m D --I < 7 { cn � n cn Oz O 2 - 3 AC/) r z m O m Z m W m O c T F - n m ° M z Z G o � D O O 7m LZi m�z � = z { y m O n W D m { 7J Z �7o 0 > > D O -q r 7 � zm< D fn � o O co M D m A _ cl T D r-� X z m D 3 X ! I! N m z 1 z m m 1 -i O z m 1� v D m N N w O T _ m n T D m m n O 3 v r m m m v T O 3 O z _ m D W r m 1 J • 1. im O m z D m 3 r1 N a k� r D m m �b 2 1 � r 3 r m v im W m z D m 3 Z c 3 W m -J 0 a m E § 0 / � § \ 0 \ n m § » ƒ m ƒ k 0 \ § 7 a: :E 2 & = n > � �\ } z �\� m J /r3 --I d \\/ \j{ § \() {co 2b\ ol 9/m X\ a \ \( § \ ?§ $ &i {\\ >(( o :f o //m x . \ \} . \\\ rA \ \ C/) . j/\ /m \> / \}\ Fn M> f § 2 § ic \ } [ � � § 2 K m } d� C) n E $ ; z k m � _0 d ) O c D m m r 3 m m v O 2 m m m w 3 z c 1 m rn T O �1 0 c 11 n O 3 m m z 1 CA D z O m m O v v z m Cl) w O Z -G x m n x D m C-) O m co cc r '9 c m 770 Z A m o P 0 1 z m Z z Z m o O Cn -i A m D r ° 1 Z E: z T1 m Z O m o O Z m m 0 o Z X O D C/7 o C) 0 o V A _ 0 N A o > Cn A O O c z = A M m �W� m OD D r O > 0 O 00 D z < A cn cn Oz O = --� 3 D r � r mold O Az m CO m O A C A A C) Cl) m - ° A z z G) G7 � D O O ;u 0 m:Ez � = z y m O C7 W D m < A z x Q -- D O n Z m < D m � o O [n M D cn A 0 T D r� n Z 3 m � 5 n n O �5 3 r m 1 — m v T O 3 r— z 1 x m D W r m r m v o v m x m m CA v .. N Z 1 x m ao D � o O O v 7 c_ 1 C, O 1 x m c C- m 1 m �-" m z G) D ^' O r m m .'0 Z 1 n r m o O m z 0 D 1 m 3 iz C) m z D 1 m 3 Z c 9 W m z � k § I -4 § ( 2 k k j } § U) \ § \ j 2 ) j i k Li m 03 k & X k X k / 0 \ 2 / \ k k ) I j k k § X § \ § / Q M i A. \ / Cl { > / $ � � \ $ 2 § . LIn } m 0)0 Fji M \ \ k- \ LA / >/ } \ G .m » m /22 3 m,z %ep p � 2yCD CD \ se> \ z >e ' v /j\ : » /j/ > \ \ G// §. \ \G m \ \ M- CC 79 ® :\ � \ \} / m jj§ / D /�S //j �} m 'n //\ - \j\ m � 2 � 2}\ 2 > - j ®\ \ >( �G 0 c C: _ \^ \ � 0 c D z m r 3 m m O O x m m m z c m m ch T O A 0 O C 0 O m m 2 N a z O a m m O a v v m m U) O z m m 0 2 D m C o W P r ° ° m z ° � o m c c < Z o0 m r_ O y ° D M Z A ° m O O Z 0 D fn ° o 00 V m m N N A m 3 G) c _-A mm cn A co O ° D O p r � m r r O m 2 Z { Cl) OZ O = -i K n m C/) Z U _ Z M o rn X z m W m O C X M cn m o m A z Z m G) G D G) wmz C) G� mz C/) = z y m o �nco D m < D O n F � - 2: < Z m = D W m �u O cn S A O T y r� m z m m m z d z 4) T 1 -a O z m A z mm V� D O O S m CD L7 C 0 S � m L� D m m n O 3 v r m m m v T O A 3 O z 1 S m D W r m r m D m m z 0 r m D r KOIDT i0 O m z D 1 m 3 i G1 m z v D m 3 Z c 3 W m r D n m n O 3 v r m m rn v T O 3 O z S m a W r rn r m -mi O T 1 S m v a M z 2 m W O a Tv ry 0 O 3 H 0 O --I S m W m n -i m rn H z 2 m D X v 0 C a m m r 3 mm v O 1 2 m m m w 3 z C m m T O A 0 c n O 3 3 m z -i a z v a m m -i O a v O m m O z r S m n 2 a O S l j r D r- j r r- H -r m Cf,wF O-'O O A m z nrn z O > M m D G) o z cn z v m,z z m D z O O o rnW r- z w �nn T D N OI? < m =�oM rn m 0 ol > z < ono Boa =zn rnGlz w m m O c D -I No �zo z > m Cf) M m o N 0 z-lo p V M D-NP C7 r OOrn mp z m M G) U) 7U _ -E m � M w z O D n r O O m m w oC/) c -I z � N (D rD 3 �n 'O 0 3 m n D 3 m 7) S D v v z m N J W U o �I ru �1 Ic D m m z v D M m rn 3 1 r m CT) (T 2 o F m m z v D m m W I n 3 N ro 3 M v X to L L1 n n n E;, x 3 0 .D I W f c a m rf r V) m Wo X � ^ l J r m 1� D s� H rot m W sb 8 ( \ { \ 4 £ / m � m » \ / z n ) � \% m 2 z 2 / \ / 0 & � ] / ) §/ z j 0/ � j j 0 2 / > / # ) m /2\ m 0 2 � I� %> m 2 \ \ m m 2 \� > m x; : � w a \{ m 2 \n> ! m ] z >z ; O<m ) m /mm C§ § X \� 3 » o � t2 9 ° ~ ; § � ^® > ] n m \ } //z \ $ > �xz > § > ( q t e7u C) 00 m z 2 o 0 �ra j / f 9 / § o § G° If 2 e \ok 2 2 > o 0 / \ o <22 3 m 0 \u ` o /g/ m z / \\ / > § § ym> \ n > §s2 / 03 m » . =y 2 %5 / o x . \ _ \\ / ^ � D r D n m O 3 .9 r m m m v T O X 3 O z 1 S m a W r IM r m mn O T S IM v N D N z S m W O a X v 0 O 3 L X O O S m c W m m 1 W m N z ci S m D A V 0 c D m m r N 3 mm v O 1 S m m m I 3 N z c m En T O X O c n O 3 3 m z n z v D m m -i O a v v m m V/ O z S m n S D N r� v, C, O 1 C zyr r m `U) 7) T �00 c rn m z J) m z O M0� rn D �Ho �zz --I r z Azm m D c O 0 0 _ m o M m L., m z w 70 D 7z D U) -i q> O H 3 =<rn 1 z mrnm a cn ° O H W ooz P-) -l-ip° H H S D M- M @ n m OD o 7 z o ° O -P 0 G � p m cn m ° N D ° o z 0 rn D NA C')° 0 7a Fn m ,O N H °zm M Gl Un D 70 _ _L rn -q Z 0 D -I Dr Or O m T p7 OV) O --I z Cf) M (D 7 r-F v fD _r 0 3 m n O .t 5 m 7 z n D m 3 ^� m z v D N m 3 N ry m Fm D v v z m r vi 3 m m z ci v D m m n 'n m 3 (D m 3 to -i v V i � fD w m n >v' S 0 a W c a rD m rt • m VI m Mu X Fri r ym IT ro m ryCL q� iU H roll m 1 a m m C) O 3 v r m m m v O 3 O Z S m n W r m r m O T S m v a M Z X S m W O D A v X O O 3 X O A -i O 1 S m c W m m W m H Z S m D v O C D m m r H 3 mm v -i O 2 m m m W 3 M Z c 1 m U) T O X O c n O 3 m m Z Ln D Z v a X m O D v v X m LA O Z 1 S m n S D H n n C o � o rrF.. m N m O 0 c c z O m m z Iz z 70 > 0 � m D z ez f z m z O -i O o z W o mW� F- z w 7�D D (n 0 q 1 E G m m 0 W (m/) m OD W oho moo = z D rn O Glz W W n D m o O O C 3 6 �D m 'l O U) 0 0 O O V m D n o- O C 7 m ;)o ,O o(nc tnFn� O z rn �Gl (n D i m Z m > rn W z O D O O O W m W 0 Fn c -I z � CD f6 to M M K rt 0 m 7 rr s fD z D m D v v m m I� n L) m Z O n m 3 -i r m m m °i Z v D 1 m i \ I� n n_ �0 m M M to �e v m N c �J a rD n a E1 O 0 O n a 1:11 r a m ma X H Z n m a X r a H IY 3 Itt \ a m E m 2 \ @ ■ k § 0 R § § ) a ƒ m 0 m 0 f / 2 7 /7? § =PE X ;§m (a �\ } j \ \\ / ( \) ] }»/ § (j / \�\ {/� })\ up .0\ 00 \?§ > \\( .a /± ,£ Q ( \m x //) k \) W§§ /ay &?y }\\ \ \) /j\ //\ M> o co \\ a § m m i I § M a ) ; 2 im 2 n ; a) m » � \ a § ■ d / \ � -n \ @ § § § a ƒ m 2 � m U) 0 ( 2 § / : 0 z =rE 7 & }\ \ z m� <rc y®) ] R 9j o 2 \ \§ q =G}B §/ z m * 3 >9 m ƒ \_ \\\ \ ® �� ( ' a \\( § \// ca $ Ii » 2/a \ \\ 2 m£ 0 w \( m \)} m \// } »// \ {/ 9 292 j §\ \m /j\ \}\ M> Fn / 0 § 0 § g § m f K I 0 � � : K, � / \ 3 k Q k 2 / m M c 0 a m E d 0 @ m � k \ 0 q 0 k Cl) a m 0 § m 9 j § » � � § 0 a § 2 m � MOO, F:R. / \ ; } Q-) D � .� � p m k % P E § / � Nil § \ ; / \ � � / 0 m m X00° j z@/ ®® R \(( m 2\§ ] }G\ U a § / § d §>� f /G) {\\ / 2E§ . 6 j \$ \ 0\ a \ \ ( m \?\ ; ±99 2/) _ \\/ :t o \ <(m 7 / \}\ / U) } }\ y \ \/ /AG \{\ /j\ &+\ M> o co \\ � § 0 a § 2 m � MOO, F:R. / \ ; } Q-) D � .� � p m k % P E § / � Nil § \ ; / \ � � O c D X m r 3 m m O O S m m m z c m m CA T O .ZI O C n O 3 m m z N z 2 0 77 m O D 0 0 X m cn N 0 z --I x m n x a �- 00 =zo W r r p co m D z 7J O o m c c z c < mz o O D r_ O D moo n m O O Z ;u ° O D O Cn O Co Q O J 7J ( A m O Z 2 A m WM m O D r 0 > 00 o D O m D 1 ;] { 3 n co z O = cn - D r A N r z m 0 m A Z m W m o A cn m Im � r X z zoc� � D � o om� z � = z y m O �nm D m { 1 D D O O r = < Z M Fn D c O rD M m z � 3 z m � m r m z m i 0 c� z O M r O V m 0 z m 0 p 3 �s O 1 m a w F r m • , im C) m z D m m 3 SP F H im O m z D m m 3 z c 3 m m X r` Qr 1 (0 1� 0 0 m m CD y 2 co 2 z —i � 1 n `,j m m Q W z 0 0 4 F H im O m z D m m 3 z c 3 m m X r` Qr 1 (0 1� O V r- m -i m O 0 z m m 0 m z m ci 0 O O O O m m co m z C) x m 0 X m m 0 m m I Lo z c --i m m 0 0 0 m z z m --I 0 M m W U) 0 z m c) 0 (D C) C- m M G > > o -i0(Z) a, o RAW m (") > > cn �71 e > - 0 11 -- M 1 < -T -1 , m M n CJ 0 p c > C) c FT] T C) CD 0 > iri (f). rn > C) m C7 Im Im U) C7. (f) C/) p7� 7j m FF c) w u > u .-4 r - oj > ri 0 C) m ai cn (D rT z > C) > x m m :z 0 > m rn el m m z L) m 7J m Ti) x fD (D M (D (D 0 X, 0 'a W r_ rL (n (D m m m X z m X CD CL rot m m fD (D M rt -C) F U3 0 ro M (D (D 0 X, 0 'a W r_ rL (n (D m m m X z m X CD CL rot m 0 @ a m E \ \ § ■ k m \ 0 $ 0 z / ƒ § a § m 0 \ § A : z 0 =rE 2 ; ; §9 @ k \ :z \\\ \ jD $E§ ] / )2 z j -0 /\) {gym / \\ \ 10 « ®« a \ \( § \/§ $ > {\\ a){ C Lem ( 9 ; CO {g kz! \\\ ® 0 0 \// f \/\ \/§ e &f6 \(\ \\\ (n co � § Q h § § j k 'U K 'U / M � G) k m } Q \ ; E m � L 21 � � / j G � � O c D m m r 3 mm 0 0 O -I S A m m I z c m m CA O ;u 0 O C m n O 3 3 m z CO CO D z v D m m O D v O m ch v O z -I m m n S D A C) m no W r r c 0 o m z o c 0 CZ �Wz Z { Z m o O CO -'1 A D r_ O i,- D m o 0 m o oz D O cn 0 O C) 0 V u M Aug z m p— M -zi m =m Cf) A 0 T m O D r 0 > O 0 D O O r A m r r O m 2 z { D � F A < � � C) Co OZ 0 = -� � D A � Z C2 CO m O m z m W m O ;Q A cn m r m Z M z M _ ) D 0 omc mz cDn = z y m O co D m < A D D O C) F � z m 7i � o cmn D - O T D r� z m D � 3 m m m m z z � O M 0 z _ m I� O X m (/) Cl) �i O 1 m A k: r r� D m m 0 O 3 v r m m m v 0 O z 3 O z 1 S m D W r m � I • O m z D m m 3 r-,) r D m m S o � 2 n r m D .ZI D O m z D mm 3 z 3 W -1 m z I ' 0 c a m m r 3 mm v 0 0 2 A m m w 3 z c m m ti O 0 c A n O 3 m m Z y a z v a 77 m 0 O 0 v m m ca ch O z —I 2 m n 2 D m () o co C C m OD Z A ° - o M c c z c Z m o O cf) - A y r_ ° ° � D moc m 00Z A- O ° D n ° o A 0 M A �cnA m 0 O Z = A M M m O D 00 0 A m r O m D Z { A < � 0 C7 O zz O = - a A cf) Z cf) m O m A z m W m O c A A -CO m r ° m A z z m 0 D CA) -i 0 wmz O A 0 m�z C = z D m o C-) m D M { � � 0 D O 0 J Z m =i D W m �uO cn ° rD M 0 10 m co M z Z O m 1 0 z m A X 1 2 m Z mm � D m 0 O � 3 m C v TO N 0 O IN z -a 2 m D N W r � m r D 0 0 v X 2 m m m v_ D y Z X J m WO D � v °( O 0 3 0 o 1 2 m O m z O 2 D 0 v 684 0 m z D mm 3 r a CO) m Z 0 m D .'O A < I d m m Z Cc mm 3 Z C/ 1 /� 3 m m r