Bayshore Gateway CRA Advisory Agenda 10/11/2018 S Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Area
LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Naples Botanical Garden FGCU Buehler Auditorium,
4940 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112
Date: October 11, 2018
Time: 6:00 PM
Chairman Maurice Gutierrez
Karen Beatty, Peter Dvorak, Larry Ingram, Dwight Oakley,
Steve Main, Shane Shadis, Michael Sherman,Steve Rigsbee
1. Call to order and Roll Call
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Adoption of Agenda
4. Old Business
A. Draft Redevelopment Plan Update - Review and Discussion
• Draft Plan is available at: www.bayshorecra.com
5. Communication and Correspondence
6. Public Comment
7. Staff Comments
8. Advisory Board General Communications
9. Next meetings: NOTE DATE CHANGE: November 14, 2018@ 6 p.m.
10. Adjournment
Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)
Master Plan
DraŌ
October 2018 DRAFT
Prepared for
Prepared by
DRAFT
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ...................................................................................... E-1
1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Vision .............................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Process ............................................................................................ 1-1
1.3 Plan Organization ............................................................................ 1-2
2.0 Background ............................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 Creation of a CRA Area ................................................................... 2-1
2.2 2000 Redevelopment Plan Goals and Projects ............................... 2-1
2.3 Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA 2018 Perspective ........................ 2-3
3.0 Planning, Framework & Elements .......................................................... 3-1
3.1 Conceptual Plan Framework & Diagram ......................................... 3-1
3.2 Land Use & Urban Design ............................................................... 3-2
3.3 Public Space, Parks, & Open Space ................................................. 3-11
3.4 Development .................................................................................. 3-14
3.5 Transportation, Connectivity & Walkability .................................... 3-21
3.6 Infrastructure .................................................................................. 3-31
3.7 Process ............................................................................................ 3-34
3.8 Character Areas .............................................................................. 3-35
4.0 Prioritization Plan ................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Prioritization of Projects & Initiatives ............................................. 4-1
4.2 Financing Planning .......................................................................... 4-1
4.3 Projects & Initiatives Prioritization ................................................. 4-5
4.6 Coordination & Partnerships .......................................................... 4-16
5.0 General Requirements ........................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Overview of Relevant Statutes ........................................................ 5-1
5.2 Consistency with the County’s Comprehensive Plan ...................... 5-1
5.3 Acquisition, Demolition/Clearance, & Improvement ...................... 5-1
5.4 Zoning & Comprehensive Plan Changes ......................................... 5-1
5.5 Land Use, Densities, & Building Requirements ............................... 5-1
5.6 Neighborhood Impact ..................................................................... 5-1
5.7 Safeguards, Controls, Restrictions, & Assurances ........................... 5-3
5.8 Extending the Duration of the CRA, Time Certain ........................... 5-4
Appendices
DRAFT
DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E-1
Executive Summary
The 2018 Redevelopment Plan provides an updated
vision and approach for the redevelopment of the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area in Collier County (see
Map 1-1).
The Plan brings together information gathered from
technical analysis, fieldwork observation, and public
and agency outreach. From these efforts and the
resulting themes identified, an overarching vision
emerged for the future of the CRA area:
This Redevelopment Plan provides a Concept Plan to
illustrate elements of the vision with Future Land Use,
key capital projects, and character images (see Figure
ES-1).
Promote quality of life and economic vitality
with a mixed-income, urban,
multi-modal community that welcomes visitors,
cultivates the area’s artistic and cultural
identity, uplifts unique local destinations, and
finds balance with the natural environment. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐2
Map 1‐1: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA Study Area DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐3
Conceptual Plan
Framework & Diagram
The planning framework and elements cover a
broad range of themes that make up the
overall redevelopment approach. Figure 3‐1
provides a concept diagram that summarizes
the overall vision from these themes in graphic
form. The remaining secƟons of this chapter
provide more detail on specific exisƟng
condiƟons, goals, objecƟves, and strategies for
each themaƟc element.
Figure ES‐1: Redevelopment Concept
BAYSHOR
AIRPORT PULLING RD
1b
2E
6B
4A DAVIS BLVD 6A
Complete Streets & Trail (Neighb
Jeepers Dr.
Complete Streets (Major)
Linwood Ave
M
1a
2F
2G
2C
7A DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐4
Concept Map
Focus Corri‐
Gateway Design
Improvements
Major Corridor
2G 2F
2a THOMASSON DR RE DR 1c
2d 2D
3A
4b
4c 2E
5d
5b
5A
2H
5c N 1d
5E
borhood)
Complete Streets (Major)
Bayshore Dr. ‐ US 41 to Thomasson Dr.
Monument Sign for Gateway IntersecƟon
US 41 and Bayshore Dr. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐5
Project Type Project Name
Complete Streets (Major)
A. Linwood Ave—Phase I
B. Shadowlawn Ave
C. Bayshore Dr—Us 41/Thomasson Dr
D. Thomasson Dr
E. Commercial Dr
F. Kirkwood Ave
G. Pine St ConnecƟon
Complete Streets & Trails
(Neighborhood)
A. Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail
B. Jeepers Dr
C. Linwood Ave—Phase II
D. Republic Dr
E. Hamilton Ave
F. Danford St
G. Bay St
H. Bayshore Dr—Thomasson Dr/Holly Ave
Major IntersecƟon Improvements A. Thomasson Dr/Bayshore Dr roundabout
Parking
A. Surface/garage parking—Mini Triangle area
B. Surface/garage parking—Bayshore area
C. Car/boat parking—Bayview Park area
General Road Engineering Standard
Improvements
A. Pine Tree Dr
B. Andrews Ave
C. Woodside Ave
D. Holly Ave
E. PalmeƩo Ct
Public Space, Parks, & Open Space A. Haldeman Creek Dredge
B. Triangle retenƟon pond improvements
Infrastructure A. Underground/Relocate Overhead UƟlity Lines—Linwood Ave and
Commercial Dr
LocaƟon‐Specific Capital Projects
6
1
2
3
4
5
Project Type Project Name
Other Bike/Pedestrian
Improvements
A. Sidewalk Gap Improvements
B. Bicycle Infrastructure
C. Street Sign/Wayfinding Improvements
Public Space, Parks, & Open Space
A. Pocket Park Land AcquisiƟon & Development
Infrastructure
A. Water Main Upgrades
B. Stormwater Improvements
C. Upgrade Sanitary Sewer Lines
Non‐LocaƟon Specific Capital Projects
7 DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐6
This concept is further developed with a framework of
goals, objecƟves, and strategies to achieve the overall
vision:
Land Use & Urban Design
ObjecƟve 1: Promote urban‐style
development.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Growth
Management and Zoning Divisions to pilot
innovaƟve land use and zoning approaches to
promote more urban‐style development in the
LDC. These approaches might include:
Increasing mixed use designaƟons
Focus increased densiƟes/intensiƟes along
improved roadways (with consideraƟon of
Coastal High Hazard Area restricƟons)
Roadway design standards to support
mulƟ‐modal transportaƟon (see
TransportaƟon, ConnecƟvity, & Walkability
secƟon)
Reduced building setbacks
Zoning for live/work spaces
Zoning and incenƟves for accessory
dwelling units
Flexible parking regulaƟons
Strategy 2: In awarding density pool units, establish
eligibility requirements and/or performance
metrics that promote these urban approaches.
ObjecƟve 2: Achieve consistent land uses
in the CRA area and sub‐areas.
Strategy 1: Use sub‐area (“Character Area”)
characterisƟcs (see Map ES‐1) to guide land use
vision in the CRA area.
Strategy 2: Amend the LDC to limit heavy
commercial and manufacturing/warehouse/
storage uses throughout the CRA area.
Strategy 3: IdenƟfy elements in the LDC to create
clear transiƟonal areas and land use buffers
between uses that are incompaƟble; coordinate
buffers with related improvements, such as
landscaping improvements via the Bayshore
BeauƟficaƟon MSTU.
Strategy 4: Provide funding through CRA‐funded
grant programs for transiƟonal structures (e.g.,
walls and fences) between incompaƟble uses.
Provide guidance in the program guidelines to
coordinate with related elements, such as design
standards and Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU
improvements.
Strategy 5: Provide clear guidance in the LDC for
new and emerging uses to ensure consistency with
the respecƟve Character Areas.
Strategy 6: Evaluate opportuniƟes for arts‐oriented
code flexibility that will incorporate exisƟng arts
acƟvity such as gallery space.
Promote a defined, harmonious, and urban
visual and land use character tailored to the CRA
area, culƟvaƟng its unique arƟsƟc and cultural
idenƟty.
Urban‐style mulƟ‐family housing in Naples. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐7
ObjecƟve 3: Achieve a consistent design
character in the CRA area and sub‐areas
that culƟvates the area’s unique arƟsƟc
and cultural idenƟty.
Strategy 1: As part of a CRA‐specific Arts and
Culture Plan (see Development secƟon, ObjecƟve
1, Strategy 5), develop a comprehensive design
approach for the public realm with reference to
specific Character Areas. The approach might
consider:
Architectural styles, including resilient
designs that beƩer manage natural
hazards such as flooding
TransiƟonal elements between Character
Area designs, building mass types, etc.
Design consideraƟons for gateway/focus
intersecƟons
Design consideraƟons for public art
IdenƟficaƟon of public art opportuniƟes
and incenƟves
Design consideraƟons for streetscape
improvements in coordinaƟon with the
Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU Master
Plan
Design consideraƟons for CRA‐funded
grants for façade and other exterior
improvements
IncorporaƟon of urban‐style
development design standards (see Land
Use & Urban Design secƟon, ObjecƟve 1)
Airport Zone height restricƟons
Strategy 2: Fund a commercial façade grant
program for exterior improvements to
commercial buildings not targeted for major
redevelopment.
Public Space, Parks, &
Open Space
ObjecƟve 1: Increase access to parks and
public gathering places in the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Road
Maintenance Division and Parks & RecreaƟon
Division to increase the number and quality of
bicycle and pedestrian connecƟons 1) between
the Bayshore Dr area and neighboring County
parks, including Bayview Park, East Naples
Community Park, and Sugden Regional Park and
2) running north/south from neighboring County
parks to increase accessibility to the Triangle area
(see TransportaƟon, ConnecƟvity, & Walkability
secƟon, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 6).
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Road
Maintenance Division and Parks & RecreaƟon
Division in conjuncƟon with Thomasson Ave and
Hamilton Ave MSTU improvements to evaluate
opportuniƟes for 1) transiƟoning from on‐street
Hamilton Ave parking, including boat parking, to
parking sites idenƟfied by Parks & RecreaƟon to
serve Bayview Park and 2) operaƟonal
maintenance at Bayview Park.
Strategy 3: Coordinate with Collier County Public
Services Department to evaluate opportuniƟes
for a park and/or public meeƟng space (e.g.,
library) in the CRA area.
Ensure accessible, acƟvated, and well‐
maintained public spaces, parks, and open
space. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐8
Strategy 4: Create a site‐specific park plan for the
exisƟng retenƟon pond in the Triangle area.
Strategy 5: Evaluate opportuniƟes for “pocket
parks” (very small neighborhood park spaces).
ObjecƟve 2: Support events in park
spaces geared towards the CRA
community.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Parks &
RecreaƟon Division to promote park spaces as
venues for CRA community events.
ObjecƟve 3: Ensure a clean and well
maintained public realm.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with the Collier County
Sheriff’s Office, Collier County Code Enforcement
Division, service providers in the CRA area, and
residents and business owners in the CRA area to
develop a proacƟve community safety and clean‐
up strategy (inclusive of private property along the
canal network) with an aim at reducing reliance on
case‐by‐case enforcement.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy and document a strategy for
canal maintenance in the right‐of way, including
seawalls and mangroves, in coordinaƟon with the
Haldeman Creek MSTU Advisory Board.
Pedestrian connecƟon between Bayshore neighborhood and Sugden
Regional Park that can serve as an example for addiƟonal
connecƟons DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐9
Development
ObjecƟve 1: Improve the markeƟng,
branding, and communicaƟon approach
for the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Create a branding strategy for the CRA
area to establish a community vision and character.
This strategy should coordinate with the Arts and
Culture Plan and the Market Study for the CRA (see
SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 4 and SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟve 3, Strategy 1).
Strategy 2: Create a markeƟng and communicaƟon
strategy for the CRA area to communicate vision
and character with effecƟve tools (e.g., website,
social media, branding materials). This strategy
should coordinate with the comprehensive design
approach developed for the CRA area (see SecƟon
3.2, ObjecƟve 3, Strategy 1), as well as improved
communicaƟon efforts between the CRA and the
community (see SecƟon 3.7, ObjecƟve 1).
Strategy 3: Provide CRA administraƟve materials
(e.g., Advisory Board agendas, budgets, annual
reports) in an accessible and easy‐to‐understand
way.
Strategy 4: Coordinate with the Collier County
Tourist Development Council, Collier County Parks
& RecreaƟon Division, and other jurisdicƟons to
promote the CRA area and its local business and
commercial establishments as part of tourism
development efforts in the area. This should
include coordinaƟon with Collier County Parks &
RecreaƟon related to East Naples Community Park
master planning and pickleball sports tourism.
Strategy 5: Create an Arts and Culture Plan for the
CRA area to incorporate into the overall CRA area
vision. This effort should:
Foster and guide private development to
enhance community character and provide
increased stability and prosperity for community
members.
US Open Pickleball Championships at East Naples Community Park.
Source: Collier County Parks & RecreaƟon Division, hƩps://
www.facebook.com/CollierParks/photos/
a.852037184807466.1073741827.118036328207559/19606389606
13944/?type=3&theater DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐10
ObjecƟve 2: Streamline and clarify the
development process
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Zoning
Division to clarify LDC requirements related to
development in the CRA area, parƟcularly related
to:
RelaƟonship of overlay zoning to base
zoning
RelaƟonship of various applicable codes to
each other (e.g., LDC, fire code, building
code)
Allowable uses
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Zoning
Division to evaluate approaches to streamline and
shorten the development review process.
Approaches might include:
DedicaƟng County staff to review projects
within the CRA area and expedite them
through the development process.
Improving coordinaƟon and
communicaƟon between enƟƟes
overseeing applicable codes (e.g., Zoning,
Fire Marshall).
IdenƟfying opportuniƟes to increase
reliance on defined criteria for
development approval (as opposed to
discreƟonary approval)
Encouraging design‐build approaches.
Strategy 3: Establish a formal role for the CRA in
the development review process to facilitate
development of projects in the CRA area.
ObjecƟve 3: IncenƟvize desired types of
development.
Strategy 1: Conduct a market study, including
informaƟon on owners of second homes, which is
not captured in typical data sets, to determine
what development will be supported in the CRA
area.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy incenƟves and targeted
assistance (see Development Assistance and
IncenƟves Examples) for a range of development
and redevelopment, including consideraƟon of the
following types of development and addiƟonal
desirable development supported by the market
study:
Local neighborhood commercial
establishments
Social enterprises and business
opportuniƟes for those with tenuous
livelihoods
Larger catalyst development projects
Arts‐oriented development
Strategy 3: Evaluate and amend as needed current
grant program offerings to reflect new incenƟves
and assistance approaches from SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟve 3, Strategy 2.
Clearer guidance in LDC would be helpful for new uses such as
microbreweries DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐11
ObjecƟve 4: Capitalize on current and
potenƟal real estate and development
opportuniƟes.
Strategy 1: Facilitate tenancy, development, and
redevelopment, parƟcularly for opportuniƟes
along US 41, Linwood Ave and neighboring non‐
residenƟal areas, and Bayshore Dr, through
incenƟves and communicaƟon efforts (see
Development Assistance and IncenƟves
Examples).
Strategy 2: ConƟnue to facilitate exisƟng catalyst
project opportuniƟes on the Mini Triangle and 17‐
Acre sites (see Development & Real Estate
OpportuniƟes Map) to strengthen and solidify
development interest in the CRA area. Efforts
might include assisƟng with coordinaƟon of
property owners in target areas, negoƟaƟng
desired ameniƟes to be incorporated into
proposed development, and providing incenƟves
(see Development Assistance and IncenƟves
examples).
Strategy 3: Evaluate alternaƟve funding
opportuniƟes, such as private funding and
donaƟons, for capital projects.
Strategy 4: Assess development opportuniƟes for
the AcƟvity Center area, including the Courthouse
Shadows site.
Strategy 5: Evaluate concepts to expand the CRA
boundaries to include new development
opportuniƟes, such as areas along Thomasson Dr.
ObjecƟve 5: Incorporate protecƟons in
development efforts to enhance exisƟng
community character and support
exisƟng CRA area residents.
Strategy 1: Establish assistance programs and
incenƟves to protect and enhance exisƟng
community‐oriented uses and local neighborhood
commercial and single‐family neighborhoods off
the main corridors. Assistance and incenƟve
distribuƟon might account for building age,
structural quality, and means of property owners.
Strategy 2: In coordinaƟon with the Collier County
Affordable Housing Advisory CommiƩee, promote
strategies to maintain current affordable housing
availability in the CRA while improving baseline
quality condiƟons. Strategies to consider include:
Community land trust (see ArƟst‐Oriented
Community Land Trust example for
SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 4)
CoordinaƟng with Collier County
Community & Human Services Division for
mobile home upgrades (see Housing
Assistance and IncenƟves Examples)
ResidenƟal renovaƟon loan/grant
program (see Housing Assistance and
IncenƟves Examples)
Encouraging use of Collier County’s
impact fee deferral program for income‐
restricted units (see Housing Assistance
and IncenƟves Examples)
DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐12
TransportaƟon,
ConnecƟvity & Walkability
ObjecƟve 1: Increase safety, comfort,
and connecƟvity for acƟve
transportaƟon modes (e.g., walking and
biking).
Strategy 1: Create a strategy to implement
discrete transportaƟon improvements and more
comprehensive Complete Streets corridor
improvements.
Strategy 2: The effort undertaken for Strategy 1
should include development of a sidewalk master
plan with inclusion of the following:
Visibility assessment related to
landscaping
ConsideraƟon of connecƟons to
neighboring parks (see SecƟon 3.3,
ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 and Strategy 6 in
this secƟon)
CoordinaƟon with roadway and
infrastructure improvements
Strategy 3: IdenƟfy opportuniƟes to coordinate
transportaƟon capital improvements with
County/MPO improvements along major
arterials.
Strategy 4: Pilot transportaƟon improvements,
such as elements of Complete Streets corridor
improvements, elements of Bayshore Dr road
diet (traffic lane consolidaƟon), reduced turning
radii at intersecƟons to slow traffic, and
addiƟonal pedestrian crossings, with temporary
installaƟons. These efforts should incorporate
community input and feedback to gauge
response to more urban‐style development and
any parƟcular concerns to address or
opportuniƟes on which to capitalize. These
installaƟons can be incorporated into community
events that include educaƟonal elements on, for
example, Complete Streets, the Vision Zero effort
to eliminate bicycle and pedestrian fataliƟes, and
roundabouts.
Strategy 5: Based on input from temporary
installaƟons from Strategy 4, move forward with
veƫng of Bayshore Dr road diet concept
scenarios and traffic analysis.
Strategy 6: Evaluate opportuniƟes for a north/
south bicycle and pedestrian connector in the
eastern Bayshore area with connecƟons to
Sugden Park and East Naples Community Park
(see SecƟon 3.3, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1).
ObjecƟve 2: Increase and enhance
alternaƟve vehicle mode opƟons within
and connecƟng with the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Evaluate opportuniƟes for alternaƟve
vehicles (e.g., golf carts, electric shuƩles) and
bikesharing, including partnerships with
neighboring communiƟes.
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Public
Transit & Neighborhood Enhancement
Department for transit service and faciliƟes
improvements.
Ensure safety, comfort, and convenience for
various modes within and connecƟng with the
CRA area. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐13
ObjecƟve 3: Improve parking opƟons in
commercial areas.
Strategy 1: Evaluate parking concepts for the
Bayshore Dr and Mini Triangle/Linwood Ave
commercial areas, which may include:
Shared parking with shuƩle service,
parƟcularly to meet peak‐season demand
Reduced design requirements for parking
On‐street parking as part of the Bayshore
Dr road diet
Parking garages
Parking miƟgaƟon fee (development pays
for construcƟon of public parking in lieu of
providing parking spaces)
ObjecƟve 4: Improve transportaƟon
connecƟons with Downtown Naples.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with the City of Naples to
explore and partner on transportaƟon
improvements and approaches serving both
Downtown Naples and the CRA area noted in
ObjecƟve 2, Strategy 1 of this secƟon.
Slidr operaƟng in Naples area (Source: Paradise Coast,
hƩps://www.paradisecoast.com/profile/slidr/1726) DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐14
Infrastructure
ObjecƟve 1: Ensure that infrastructure
provided will effecƟvely achieve its
primary purpose without significantly
compromising environmental and
neighborhood design quality.
Strategy 1: Develop a Stormwater Master Plan for
comprehensive infrastructure improvements that
incorporates consideraƟon for the following:
Flood plain designaƟons, including FEMA
flood designaƟons and Coastal High
Hazard requirements
Building and site plan design to respond
to flooding
Primary, secondary, and terƟary
infrastructure improvements (both short‐
and long‐term)
PotenƟal for a bicycle and pedestrian
pathway in easement of north/south
drainage ditch along Sugden Regional Park
Shared maintenance and maintenance
funding between County and CRA
Water quality
Use/design of right‐of‐way areas on local
streets
InnovaƟve techniques to pilot in CRA area,
including green infrastructure
Strategy 2: Coordinate stormwater infrastructure
planning with design of new parks (see SecƟon
3.3, ObjecƟve 1).
Strategy 3: Integrate green infrastructure
improvements into landscaping and drainage
improvements, including those funded by the
Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU.
ObjecƟve 2: Coordinate with other
jurisdicƟons and government enƟƟes for
infrastructure planning and funding.
Strategy 1: Create a CRA‐specific Capital
Improvement Plan to idenƟfy and prioriƟze
transportaƟon, stormwater, water, and other
infrastructure improvements. Incorporate MSTU
funds operaƟng in the CRA area for relevant
capital improvement projects.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy addiƟonal funding
opportuniƟes to supplement capital
improvements funds (e.g., grants).
Strategy 3: Document the project prioriƟzaƟon
strategy to upgrade water lines in coordinaƟon
with the City of Naples.
Provide effecƟve infrastructure that preserves
environmental and neighborhood design quality
through coordinated improvement planning and
funding.
Kissimmee Lakefront Park rain gardens (Source: City of Kissimmee,
hƩps://www.kissimmee.org/Home/Components/News/
News/2208/263?backlist=%2F) DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐15
Strategy 4: As part of the Stormwater Master Plan
(ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 of this secƟon), coordinate
with Collier County Stormwater Management to
integrate CRA stormwater infrastructure planning
with County stormwater planning efforts.
Strategy 5: As part of the Stormwater Master Plan
effort (ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 of this secƟon),
coordinate with Collier County Zoning Division to
create right‐of‐way design guidelines for
development that coordinate with Complete
Streets concepts for neighborhood streets.
Strategy 6: Coordinate with Collier County agencies
to idenƟfy and improve other infrastructure
including sanitary sewer lines, roadways that fail
to meet minimum standards, and electrical
uƟliƟes idenƟfied to be placed underground or
relocated.
DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐16
Process
ObjecƟve 1: Improve approaches and
tools for communicaƟng with
communiƟes in the CRA area and the
general public.
Strategy 1: As part of the markeƟng and
communicaƟon strategy (see SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 2), evaluate communicaƟon
mechanisms and tools that will most effecƟvely
communicate with the various communiƟes in the
CRA area.
Strategy 2: Coordinate with schools and other
community partners to improve outreach and
communicaƟon between the CRA and harder‐to‐
reach populaƟons.
Strategy 3: Provide mulƟ‐lingual communicaƟons
and materials.
ObjecƟve 2: Ensure a balanced
distribuƟon of CRA planning and
implementaƟon efforts.
Strategy 1: Account for both need‐based and
geographic consideraƟons in the distribuƟon of
planning and implementaƟon efforts.
Strategy 2: Update rules and procedures for the
CRA Advisory Board for legal consistency and with
consideraƟon given to a balanced distribuƟon of
planning/implementaƟon efforts and diverse
representaƟon.
This framework can be tailored to different sub‐areas
depending on their specific character, needs, and
opportuniƟes. Map ES‐1 lays out these different sub‐
areas, or “Character Areas”.
Carry out CRA area planning and
implementaƟon efforts to engage and serve the
various communiƟes within the CRA area. DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐17
1 2
3 4
5 6
7
Focus Corridor
Focus Development Node/IntersecƟon
Mini Triangle/Davis
The Mini Triangle, including CRA‐owned
parcel, is a major commercial redevelopment
opportunity and Focus Development Node
Corridor commercial along Davis
Linwood Avenue another potenƟal area for
Shadowlawn
Primarily a residenƟal neighborhood with mix
of apartments/duplexes and single‐family
homes around Shadowlawn Elementary
Borders US 41/Bayshore Drive Focus
IntersecƟon (asterisk), a gateway between
Airport Pulling
Mix of corridor commercial, larger big‐box
style retail, and County Center
Part of area currently designated as an
AcƟvity Center in Future Land Use Map
Tamiami
Corridor commercial and residences,
including two major malls, Gulfgate Plaza and
Courthouse Shadows)
Borders US 41/Bayshore Drive Focus
IntersecƟon (asterisk), a gateway between
Windstar
ResidenƟal is primarily condos and single‐
family homes in gated communiƟes
Includes golf course designated as a
commercial use
North Bayshore
Focus Corridor along Bayshore Drive with
neighborhood commercial
Mix of mulƟ‐ and single‐family residenƟal
Focus IntersecƟon at Bayshore/Thomasson
with planned roundabout
South Bayshore
Primarily single‐family residenƟal
neighborhood with Naples Botanical Garden
Wetland consideraƟons for development DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐18
Character Areas
2
3
4
5
6
7 BAYSHORE DR LINWOOD AVE 1 DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐19
Focus of Redevelopment
The following provides a focus of redevelopment for
each Character Area based on the specific
characterisƟcs described in the Character Area
DefiniƟon Map and the most relevant strategies.
Mini Triangle/Davis
Urban‐style mixed use commercial
redevelopment, including capitalizaƟon on the
Mini Triangle as a catalyst development site and
urban‐style parking soluƟons
Park development at retenƟon pond site
Complete Streets design along Linwood Ave and
pedestrian scale street design between Mini
Triangle, Linwood Ave, and the proposed
retenƟon pond park
Improved access to Mini Triangle development
from US 41, Davis Blvd, and Linwood Ave
MulƟ‐modal connecƟvity:
Across Davis Blvd
Between Mini Triangle, Linwood Ave,
proposed retenƟon pond park, and
eastern Triangle neighborhood
To Downtown Naples potenƟally via Davis
Blvd, US 41, and Gordon River Bridge
improvements
AddiƟonal infrastructure improvements: sanitary
sewers, electrical, stormwater
Shadowlawn
ResidenƟal structural enhancement and upgrades
Avoidance of incompaƟble uses
TransiƟonal elements between different uses
Infill development on vacant residenƟal lots
Flooding and drainage on neighborhood streets
Airport Pulling
TransiƟons between residenƟal neighborhoods
and commercial development
Eventual street enhancements, parƟcularly
connecƟvity across Airport Pulling Rd
Commercial façade improvements
Tamiami
ConnecƟvity to Downtown Naples via US 41
Redevelopment of Courthouse Shadows
Tenant opportunity at Gulfgate Plaza
Windstar
Complete Streets and MSTU improvements along
major community roadways, including Bayshore
Drive, Thomasson Drive, and Hamilton Avenue
Access to Bayview Park
North Bayshore
Corridor commercial development along Bayshore
Drive, including creaƟve parking soluƟons
Larger redevelopment opportuniƟes of 17‐Acre
Site and Del’s 24 property
Arts‐ and culture‐oriented development
TransiƟonal elements between corridor
commercial and residenƟal areas in along
Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive
Development of vacant residenƟal lots
Complete Street design along Bayshore Drive,
including Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Drive
roundabout
Neighborhood Complete Street pilots (Jeepers
Drive, North Street, Short Street)
ConnecƟons between Sugden Regional Park and DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐20
CRA area
Water main upgrades
Flooding and drainage on neighborhood streets
South Bayshore
Mobile home and single‐family home residenƟal
improvements, upgrades, affordability
Development of vacant residenƟal lots
Access to Bayview Park
ConnecƟons between CRA and uses to the east,
including East Naples Community Park
Wetland, flooding, and site preparaƟon
consideraƟons for development
Roadway improvements to meet County
engineering standards
The Redevelopment Plan also provides a list of capital
projects and non‐capital iniƟaƟves in support of the
vision with a prioriƟzaƟon plan and recommendaƟon
for allocated funding (Tables ES‐1 through ES‐5).
Table ES‐1: Summary of Projected Revenue EsƟmates DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐21
Table ES‐2: Capital Improvements Project Matrix—North of US 41 (Triangle) DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐22
Table ES‐3: Capital Improvements South of US 41 (Bayshore) DRAFT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA E‐23
Table ES‐4: Non Capital Expenditures DRAFT
DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 1‐1
1.0
1.1 Vision
The 2018 Redevelopment Plan provides an updated
vision and approach for the redevelopment of the
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area in Collier County (see
Map 1‐1). The Plan brings together informaƟon
gathered from technical analysis, fieldwork
observaƟon, and public and agency outreach. From
these efforts and the resulƟng themes idenƟfied, an
overarching vision emerged for the future of the CRA
area:
This vision provides the guidance for the overall
framework, projects, and iniƟaƟves laid out in this
Redevelopment Plan for furthering the revitalizaƟon of
the CRA area.
1.2 Process
The technical analysis involved in the Redevelopment
Plan process included a review of the exisƟng plans
related to the CRA area, as well as spaƟal and
quanƟtaƟve analysis of data related to the CRA area.
The study team also conducted fieldwork to collect
addiƟonal informaƟon and “ground‐truth” findings in
the data. The public and agency outreach consisted of
stakeholder and agency meeƟngs and calls, two public
workshops, and a boat tour of Haldeman Creek and
adjacent canal areas. Figure 1‐1 illustrates the
complete planning process and Appendix A provides
more detailed findings.
1.3 Plan OrganizaƟon
The remaining secƟons of this Plan cover the following
topics:
Chapter 2: Background – historical overview of the
CRA area, including the original 2000 CRA Master
Plan and status update
Chapter 3: Plan Framework & Elements –
framework of goals, objecƟves, and strategies
related to redevelopment in the CRA area, with
supporƟng informaƟon on exisƟng condiƟons,
opportuniƟes, and approaches for carrying out
strategies
Chapter 4: PrioriƟzaƟon Plan – informaƟon on
revenues; capital project funding and phasing; and
planning, administraƟve, and regulatory iniƟaƟves
Chapter 5: General Requirements – informaƟon on
addiƟonal regulatory requirements for the CRA
Plan and conclusion
Promote quality of life and economic vitality
with a mixed‐income, urban,
mulƟ‐modal community that welcomes visitors,
culƟvates the area’s arƟsƟc and cultural
idenƟty, upliŌs unique local desƟnaƟons, and
finds balance with the natural environment. DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 1‐2
1.0
Map 1‐1: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA Study Area DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 1‐3
1.0
Figure 1‐1: Planning Process DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 1‐4
1.0 DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐1
2.0
2.1 CreaƟon of the CRA
Area
The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA area is located
primarily in unincorporated Collier County to the
southeast of the city of Naples (a small porƟon of the
area is in the city of Naples; see Map 1‐1). It is near
the popular desƟnaƟons of Downtown Naples and
coastal beaches and is bisected by US 41, a major
access thoroughfare. This corridor defines two major
sub‐areas within the larger CRA boundary–—the
Gateway Triangle community north of US 41 and the
Bayshore community south of US 41 (see Map 1‐1 for
CRA area and Appendix B for a legal descripƟon of the
CRA boundary).
The CRA was created in 2000 under the jurisdicƟon of
Collier County to facilitate the physical and economic
revitalizaƟon and enhancement of the community. Its
creaƟon was based on documenƟng condiƟons of
blight in a Finding of Necessity study, as required by
Florida Statute 163.340. Table 2‐1 provides an
overview of the findings.
2.2 2000 Redevelopment
Plan Goals and Projects
The 2000 Master Plan laid out visual concept goals
and corresponding redevelopment projects to
improve condiƟons in the CRA area. Map 2‐1 shows
the overall Land Use Plan illustraƟng general land uses
and significant acƟvity centers. The Land Use Plan
suggested a basic regulatory framework that would
guide Future Land Use Map and zoning amendments
to support the redevelopment of the CRA area.
In addiƟon to the Land Use Plan, the 2000 Master Plan
provided an Urban Design Framework to illustrate the
following:
1. Primary areas anƟcipated to undergo significant
change via redevelopment or infill development,
receive improvements via neighborhood
improvement strategies, or remain as stable and
planned development areas
2. Basic site design condiƟons recommended to
implement the vision defined in the public
outreach process
3. Primary corridors and areas recommended for
landscape/streetscape improvements in support
of the vision defined in the public outreach
The primary areas anƟcipated to undergo significant
change included:
Triangle area approximately defined by US 41,
Davis Blvd, and a line based on the projected
alignment of Pine St to the north of US 41
Naples Plaza (southwest of Davis Blvd and US 41
intersecƟon) and adjacent properƟes
Gulfgate Plaza as a Town Center
Commercial uses on Naples Steel properƟes
(along US 41) and other properƟes on Gulfgate
ResidenƟal uses south and west of Gulfgate
Infill:
MulƟ‐ and single‐family residenƟal in
Shadowlawn neighborhood
Commercial uses for Haldeman Creek
entertainment center
Mixed mulƟ‐family and commercial uses
along Bayshore Drive north of Lake View
(Lakeview) Dr
ResidenƟal and commercial at Bay Center
area (Bayshore and Thomasson)
Other opportuniƟes in the Medium
Intensity residenƟal area of Land Use Plan DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐2
2.0
Main Issue Sub‐Issue Specific LocaƟons MenƟoned
Predominance of defecƟve or
inadequate street layout
Inadequate street layout and
design (including sub‐standard
street widths)
Shadowlawn Dr
Thomasson Dr
Most local streets
Commercial parking problems
Davis Blvd
Airport Rd
Bayshore Rd
US 41
Lack of streetlights along major
arterial and most local streets
Major arterials
Most local streets
Davis Blvd
Lack of sidewalks
Shadowlawn Dr
Bayshore Rd south of
Thomasson Rd
Most local streets
Lack of neighborhood connecƟons ResidenƟal neighborhoods
Faulty lot layout in relaƟon to size,
adequacy, accessibility, or
usefulness
Commercial lots
US 41
Davis Blvd
Between Pine St and US 41
Built density far below approved
density
RMF‐6 residences in Gateway
Triangle area
Not meeƟng lot standards in at
least one respect
RMF‐6 residenƟal properƟes
Bayshore area residences
Unsanitary or unsafe condiƟons
DisproporƟonate lack of plumbing
DisproporƟonate overcrowding
2 unsafe structures
Lack of sidewalks and streetlights
DeterioraƟon of site or other
improvements
Poor drainage of local roads,
surface water management
problems
Other problems
Lack of right‐of‐way for
improvements along Shadowlawn
Dr
No public transportaƟon provided
in CRA area
Housing affordability noted as an
issue in the county and as an issue
that could get worse in the CRA
area
Table 2‐1: Findings of Blighted CondiƟons in CRA Area DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐3
2.0
The public outreach of the 2000 Master Plan defined
the establishment of a Neighborhood Focus IniƟaƟve
as a programmaƟc objecƟve. The aim of such a
program was “to coordinate the direcƟon of a variety
of public and quasi‐public services to enhance major
residenƟal porƟons of the project area.” The primary
neighborhoods for improvements specified on pages
91 and 92 of the 2000 Master Plan included:
Bayshore
Shadowlawn
The primary areas for stability and planned
development with low‐intensity residenƟal included:
Windstar
Sabal Bay (Hamilton Bay) development
Site design standards included:
Roof paƩerns reflecƟve of Old Florida
architectural style
Placement of buildings close to street to support
pedestrian acƟvity
Use of recƟlinear block paƩern to strengthen
predominant established character of area
Placement of parking to rear of development sites
The following lays out items covered by the visual
preference statement from the public outreach effort
of the 2000 Master Plan (p. 70), which supported the
design standards:
Buildings – represenƟng an “Old Florida” or
“Cracker” style with covered porches, metal roof,
and dormers
Signage – represenƟng low, monument‐style sign
with business logogram (representaƟve sign or
character) suppressed to design of sign’s
background and surrounding landscape planƟng
Pathways – represenƟng sidewalk set back from
curb by distance greater than width of walk and
with planƟng materials and low pedestrian
lighƟng provided between walk and curb
On‐Street Parking – represenƟng street with
narrow planted median and use of angle parking
interspersed with planƟng areas on both sides of
street
Landscaping – represenƟng street with
landscaped median and landscaping and
decoraƟve lighƟng fixtures on edges
Public Spaces – represenƟng pedestrian area with
palms and large pool with water jet fountain
In terms of landscape and streetscape improvements,
the design framework focused on:
Treatments for major roadways, including:
Davis Blvd
Airport Pulling Rd
US 41
Bayshore Dr
Thomasson Dr
Significant gateway intersecƟon designs at
intersecƟons of the above streets as well as:
Shadowlawn Dr south of Davis and North of US 41
Linwood Ave at Airport Pulling Rd
Pelton Ave north of US 41
IntersecƟon proposed at Ɵme of Sabal Bay’s main
east/west street with Bayshore Dr
Table 2‐2 provides a status update for the various DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐4
2.0
Map 2‐1: Land Use Plan from 2000 CRA Master Plan
Note: AddiƟonal labels have been added to clarify locaƟon of certain sites and neighborhoods.
Shadowlawn
Neighborhood
Bayshore
Neighborhood
Bayshore
Neighborhood
Windstar
Sabal Bay
Naples
Steel Site DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐5
2.0
Projects Status
Catalyst Redevelopment Projects
Triangle‐ Hotel/Restaurant/
Office
Parcel at apex currently vacant; CRA‐owned property under contract for sale and received
PUD zoning for Mixed‐Use project (see Table 7‐2 of Assessment Memo in Appendix A for
more informaƟon).
Triangle – Flex Office/
Warehouse Current mix of commercial and industrial uses.
Town Center
(Gulfgate Plaza)
Gulfgate Plaza currently has tenants; consideraƟon needs to be given to type of
establishments desired for this space. A small business incubator might be a good use for
vacant office on second floor.
Entertainment Center
(Haldeman Creek)
Three60 Market has been established west of bridge and south of creek; food truck is
planned on north side of creek under same ownership as Three60 Market. Need for
commercial parking has emerged as an issue in this area.
AddiƟonal Redevelopment Projects
Naples Plaza Property Current Naples Bay Club and CoƩages at Naples Bay Resort.
Naples Steel Property WoodSpring Suites currently being developed at 2600 Tamiami Trail.
Neighborhood Focus IniƟaƟve
Shadowlawn
Shadowlawn improvements delayed due to recession, warranƟng prioriƟzaƟon of current
study and improvement implementaƟon approach for area. However, some stormwater
planning and improvements completed for area (see General Infrastructure Improvements
secƟon below).
Bayshore
Roundabout will be put in at Bayshore and Thomasson as a Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon
MSTU project.
AddiƟonal beauƟficaƟon and roadway improvements planned for Hamilton Ave and
Thomasson Dr, funded by the Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU. Bayshore Dr needs to be
considered for streetscape and roadway updates via the Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU.
CRA‐owned site of 17.89 acres (“17‐Acre Site”) west of Sugden Regional Park currently
targeted for development as catalyst site.
AddiƟonal stormwater planning and improvements completed for area (see General
Infrastructure Improvements secƟon below).
General Infrastructure Improvements
Triangle Stormwater
Management Plan
Need for stormwater improvements idenƟfied for enƟre CRA area, so planning and
improvement efforts have included both Triangle and Bayshore neighborhoods,
including the following:
Stormwater plan created for Gateway Triangle residenƟal area in 2009 and for
Bayshore MSTU area in 2011.
Karen Dr stormwater improvements completed in 2017.
Pineland Ave stormwater improvements completed.
CRA will likely want to create updated stormwater management plan for area; see
SecƟon 3.6 of Redevelopment Plan further discussion.
Haldeman Creek and Canal
System Dredging Plan
Last major dredging project was in 2006. Depth assessment will be conducted for creek, and
capital reserves currently being accumulated for future maintenance or dredge efforts.
Advisory Board voted to increase millage rate to create dredging plan when major dredge
will be needed; approved at final budget hearing on September 20, 2018 for increase to 1
mil.
Table 2‐2: Status of Key Land Use Areas and IniƟaƟves of the 2000 Master Plan DRAFT
BACKGROUND
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 2‐6
2.0
TransiƟon between higher‐density mulƟ‐family housing and
lower‐density single‐family housing
ArƟsƟc and cultural elements of the CRA area include murals
areas and iniƟaƟves idenƟfied in the Land Use Plan and
2000 Master Plan more generally.
2.3 Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle CRA 2018
PerspecƟve
Many of the challenges and efforts idenƟfied in the
2000 Master Plan are sƟll relevant today. The
Assessment Memo in Appendix A provides a detailed
discussion of current condiƟons and issues in the CRA
area. The following are some of the major themes
emerging from the Redevelopment Plan update process,
which provided the basis for the goals, objecƟves, and
strategies underlying the framework (see Chapter 3.0)
for this Redevelopment Plan:
Improving the compaƟbility of uses and appearance
of the public realm
TransiƟoning between suburban and urban
development style
Balancing regional vs. local transportaƟon needs
and related transportaƟon safety concerns along
major roadways
Developing in the context of natural condiƟons and
hazards (wetlands, Coastal High Hazard Area,
flooding), including how to address the community’s
desire for increased density/intensity
Capitalizing on the valuable assets of the area or
nearby, including parks, natural areas such as the
canal system and Naples beaches, proximity to
Downtown Naples, and tourism while also creaƟng
public spaces that can be claimed by the community
SƟmulaƟng investment and capitalizing on
development opportuniƟes while also providing
support and protecƟons for exisƟng residents
NavigaƟng various percepƟons of and visions for the
area and incorporaƟng arts and cultural idenƟty
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐1
3.0
3.1 Conceptual Plan
Framework & Diagram
The planning framework and elements cover a
broad range of themes that make up the
overall redevelopment approach. Figure 3‐1
provides a concept diagram that summarizes
the overall vision from these themes in graphic
form. The remaining secƟons of this chapter
provide more detail on specific exisƟng
condiƟons, goals, objecƟves, and strategies for
each themaƟc element.
Figure 3‐1: Redevelopment Concept
BAYS
AIRPORT PULLING RD
1b
2E
6
4A DAVIS BLVD 6A
Complete Streets & Trail (Ne
Jeepers Dr.
Complete Streets (Major)
Linwood Ave
Public Space, Parks, & Open Space
Triangle RetenƟon Pond Improvements
1a
2F
2G
2C
7A DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐2
3.0
Concept Map
Focus Corri‐
Gateway Design
Improvements
Major Corridor
2G 2F
2a THOMASSON DR SHORE DR 1c
2d 2D
3A
6B
4b
4c 2E
5d
5b
5A
2H
5c N 1d
5E
eighborhood)
Complete Streets (Major)
Bayshore Dr. ‐ US 41 to Thomasson Dr.
Monument Sign for Gateway IntersecƟon
US 41 and Bayshore Dr.
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐3
3.0
Project Type Project Name
Complete Streets (Major)
A. Linwood Ave—Phase I
B. Shadowlawn Ave
C. Bayshore Dr—Us 41/Thomasson Dr
D. Thomasson Dr
E. Commercial Dr
F. Kirkwood Ave
G. Pine St ConnecƟon
Complete Streets & Trails
(Neighborhood)
A. Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail
B. Jeepers Dr
C. Linwood Ave—Phase II
D. Republic Dr
E. Hamilton Ave
F. Danford St
G. Bay St
H. Bayshore Dr—Thomasson Dr/Holly Ave
Major IntersecƟon Improvements A. Thomasson Dr/Bayshore Dr roundabout
Parking
A. Surface/garage parking—Mini Triangle area
B. Surface/garage parking—Bayshore area
C. Car/boat parking—Bayview Park area
General Road Engineering Standard
Improvements
A. Pine Tree Dr
B. Andrews Ave
C. Woodside Ave
D. Holly Ave
E. PalmeƩo Ct
Public Space, Parks, & Open Space A. Haldeman Creek Dredge
B. Triangle retenƟon pond improvements
Infrastructure A. Underground/Relocate Overhead UƟlity Lines—Linwood Ave and
Commercial Dr
LocaƟon‐Specific Capital Projects
6
1
2
3
4
5
Project Type Project Name
Other Bike/Pedestrian
Improvements
A. Sidewalk Gap Improvements
B. Bicycle Infrastructure
C. Street Sign/Wayfinding Improvements
Public Space, Parks, & Open Space
A. Pocket Park Land AcquisiƟon & Development
Infrastructure
A. Water Main Upgrades
B. Stormwater Improvements
C. Upgrade Sanitary Sewer Lines
Non‐LocaƟon Specific Capital Projects
7 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐4
3.0
3.2 Land Use & Urban Design
The Growth Management Plan and Land Development
Code (LDC) provide tools to shape land use and urban
design, which have a direct impact on the built
environment of an area. This secƟon highlights exisƟng
condiƟons related to various land use types, as well as
ways to promote a defined, harmonious, and urban
visual and land use character tailored to the CRA area,
culƟvaƟng its unique arƟsƟc and cultural idenƟty.
Promote a defined, harmonious, and urban
visual and land use character tailored to the CRA
area, culƟvaƟng its unique arƟsƟc and cultural
idenƟty. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐5
3.0
Mobile home
Small single‐family near large new single‐family with guest house
Small mulƟ‐family housing
Single‐family housing
Gated community housing
MulƟ‐family housing
ExisƟng ResidenƟal Land Use CharacterisƟcs
The CRA area has 3,814, dwelling units according to Florida Department of Revenue 2017 data. These units include a
range of housing types from mobile to larger single‐family to mulƟ‐family homes (see Map 3‐2 and corresponding
images). This diversity of types, when coupled with a range of price points, can accommodate a diversity of residents
living in the community. Currently, streets such as Jeepers Drive (picture 3 below) show areas of transiƟon between
larger residenƟal and smaller residenƟal, as well as between smaller single‐family residenƟal and mulƟ‐family on
nearby streets. The vision set forth in the Redevelopment Plan aims to guide these transiƟons towards the desired built
environment character laid out for different character areas.
1 2
3 4
5 6 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐6
3.0
1
4
3
6
5
2
Map 3‐2: ExisƟng ResidenƟal Land Use CharacterisƟcs; Data source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐7
3.0
ExisƟng Commercial & Industrial Land Use CharacterisƟcs
As with housing types, there are a range of commercial types in the CRA area (see Map 3‐3 and corresponding images).
Many commercial sites include on‐site, street‐facing surface parking. The area contains two major mall‐style
commercial spaces, Gulfgate Plaza and Courthouse Shadows. Uses range from restaurants and retail stores to heavier
uses such as auto services. Industrial uses are also present in the Triangle area and northwest of Sugden Park.
New neighborhood commercial on Bayshore Drive— Three60 Market
Mall commercial—Courthouse Shadows
MulƟ‐story strip commercial
Mall commercial—Gulfgate Plaza
Linwood Avenue commercial
VerƟcal mixed‐use
1 2
3 4
5 6 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐8
3.0
1
2
3
5
6
LINWOOD AVE BAYSHORE DR 4
Map 3‐3: Commercial & Industrial Land Use CharacterisƟcs with Non‐ResidenƟal ExisƟng Land Use; Data source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐9
3.0
ExisƟng Community‐Oriented Uses
Community‐oriented uses support community‐building and provide services via government, faith‐based, non‐profit,
and other enƟƟes. The Redevelopment Plan aims to preserve and enhance these uses. Government establishments in
the area include the CRA office, a Naples Fire Rescue staƟon, and the County Center (see Map 3‐4 and corresponding
images). Schools in and near the area include Avalon Elementary, Shadowlawn Elementary, and The Garden School of
Naples (a Montessori school). There are also various arts‐oriented spaces, places of worship, and non‐profit service
providers. EvaluaƟng locaƟons for a library or other public meeƟng space can also facilitate the addiƟon of community
services and spaces.
Bayshore Gateway CRA Office
1
Avalon Elementary School
2
Opera Naples
3
East Naples BapƟst Church
4
Greater Naples Fire Rescue—StaƟon #22
5
SalvaƟon Army
6 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐10
3.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Map 3‐4: Community Oriented Land Use CharacterisƟcs with Non‐ResidenƟal ExisƟng Land Use; Data source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐11
3.0
ObjecƟve 1: Promote urban‐style
development.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Growth
Management and Zoning Divisions to pilot
innovaƟve land use and zoning approaches to
promote more urban‐style development in the
LDC. These approaches might include:
Increasing mixed use designaƟons
Focus increased densiƟes/intensiƟes
along improved roadways (with
consideraƟon of Coastal High Hazard Area
restricƟons)
Roadway design standards to support
mulƟ‐modal transportaƟon (see SecƟon
3.5)
Reduced building setbacks
Zoning for live/work spaces
Zoning and incenƟves for accessory
dwelling units
Flexible parking regulaƟons
Strategy 2: In awarding density pool units, establish
eligibility requirements and/or performance
metrics that promote these urban approaches.
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐12
3.0
Local Mix Use
Promote use of guest houses (shown here in back of main house) as a
way to provide addiƟonal density and potenƟally address
affordability
Local mulƟ‐family housing styles
Character Images DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐13
3.0
ObjecƟve 2: Achieve consistent land uses in the
CRA area and sub‐areas.
Strategy 1: Use sub‐area (“Character Area”) characterisƟcs
(see SecƟon 3.8) to guide land use vision in the CRA area.
Strategy 2: Amend the LDC to limit heavy commercial and
manufacturing/warehouse/storage uses throughout the CRA
area.
Strategy 3: IdenƟfy elements in the LDC to create clear
transiƟonal areas and land use buffers between uses that are
incompaƟble (see Figure 3‐2); coordinate buffers with
related improvements, such as landscaping improvements
via the Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU.
Strategy 4: Provide funding through CRA‐funded grant
programs for transiƟonal structures (e.g., walls and fences)
between incompaƟble uses. Provide guidance in the
program guidelines to coordinate with related elements,
such as design standards and Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU
improvements.
Strategy 5: Provide clear guidance in the LDC for new and
emerging uses to ensure consistency with the respecƟve
Character Areas.
Strategy 6: Evaluate opportuniƟes for arts‐oriented code
flexibility that will incorporate exisƟng arts acƟvity such as
gallery space. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐14
3.0
Land Use TransiƟon Types
There are four main types of land use strategies to transiƟon between differing land use types (Figure 3‐2).
Factors affecƟng use of any given type might include characterisƟcs of the parƟcular site or the general Character Area.
Figure 3‐2: Land Use TransiƟon Types
Building
Parking Lot/Landscape
Intensity of Use
Green/Open Space DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐15
3.0
Focus: transiƟon from interior residenƟal area of Triangle to the major commercial corridors
surrounding it
Strategies:
Put in place land use transiƟon areas of lighter commercial or mulƟ‐family residenƟal near single‐
family residenƟal areas
Promote use of physical barriers between heavier commercial uses and residenƟal uses
Phase out heavier industrial and commercial uses in the Triangle area
Focus: transiƟon from commercial to residenƟal and between different residenƟal densiƟes
Strategies:
Establish land use transiƟon areas to transiƟon from commercial and denser mulƟ‐family along
Bayshore Drive to moderately dense mulƟ‐family residenƟal to single‐family residenƟal
Focus: put in place transiƟon strategies to mesh new development coming online with exisƟng uses
Strategies:
Establish land use transiƟon areas
Needed Land Use TransiƟons
The areas highlighted on Map 3‐5 can benefit from strategies to help transiƟon between dissimilar uses, built forms, or
development styles. Strategies range from land use buffers (e.g., gradual transiƟon in density/intensity, open space buffers;
see Figure 3‐2), physical barriers (e.g, walls, fences, landscaping), or the eventual phasing out of uses incompaƟble with the
area’s other uses.
1
2
3 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐16
3.0
1
2
3
Map 3‐5: Needed Land Use TransiƟons with Zoning DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐17
3.0
ObjecƟve 3: Achieve a consistent design
character in the CRA area and sub‐areas
that culƟvates the area’s unique arƟsƟc
and cultural idenƟty.
Strategy 1: As part of a CRA‐specific Arts and
Culture Plan (see SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy
5), develop a comprehensive design approach for
the public realm with reference to specific
Character Areas. The approach might consider:
Architectural styles, including resilient
designs that beƩer manage natural
hazards such as flooding
TransiƟonal elements between Character
Area designs, building mass types, etc.
Design consideraƟons for gateway/focus
intersecƟons
Design consideraƟons for public art
IdenƟficaƟon of public art opportuniƟes
and incenƟves
Design consideraƟons for streetscape
improvements in coordinaƟon with the
Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU Master Plan
Design consideraƟons for CRA‐funded
grants for façade and other exterior
improvements
IncorporaƟon of urban‐style development
design standards (see SecƟon 3.2,
ObjecƟve 1)
Airport Zone height restricƟons
Strategy 2: Fund a commercial façade grant
program for exterior improvements to commercial
buildings not targeted for major redevelopment.
Character Images for Design Style
A number of buildings in the CRA establish a modern
architectural style that the CRA can promote in public
realm design; there are a number of residences with a
more tradiƟonal Florida style that the CRA can also
promote (see the character photos on the facing
page). In addiƟon to architectural style, sign styles can
be considered as part of public realm design. Figure 3‐
3 provides potenƟal sign design opƟons for the
Bayshore neighborhood of the CRA area, reflecƟng the
style of exisƟng infrastructure. The CRA could promote
a more modern design for the Triangle area in the
commercial areas targeted for redevelopment.
Funding TransiƟonal Structures
The CRA’s grant programs can provide funding for
transiƟonal elements such as fences and landscaping to
promote buffers between incompaƟble uses. Tampa’s
Drew Park CRA, for example, provides up to 50% of
project costs up to $5,000 for decoraƟve fencing
meeƟng certain design standards on commercial
properƟes. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐18
3.0
Local residence with modern design style
Opera Naples with modern design style
Modern design of Ankrolab Brewing Co. (Source: Hlevel
Architects, hƩp://hlevel.info/project/ankrolab_bre)
wing_co/)
Local residenƟal design
Local residenƟal design Local residenƟal design
Modern design of The Garden School (Source: Corban
Architecture/Planning/Sustainability, hƩp://
www.davidcorban.com/the‐garden‐school/)
Character Images for Design Style
Figure 3‐3: Sign Design Examples
Local residenƟal design DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐19
3.0
ExisƟng gateway design near US 41 and Bayshore Drive
Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Dr iveroundabout rendering
Bayshore Drive mural
Bayshore Drive flag, lighƟng, bike land, landscaping, pavement
treatments
Design Treatments & AƩributes
Public realm design in the area is important given the emphasis on arts‐oriented development and input from public outreach
efforts indicaƟng architectural style as a way of building a sense of place and community. The Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU has
contributed significantly to the design of the southern porƟon of the area with streetscape improvements including lighƟng,
flags, landscaping, and the design of the Bayshore/Thomasson roundabout. Other design features include architectural styles
and the Bayshore murals. Major gateway intersecƟons provide addiƟonal opportuniƟes for innovaƟve design and public art. See
Map 3‐6 for featured items.
Mural MSTU Improvements Gateway Design OpportuniƟes
1
3
2
4 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐20
3.0
4
1 BAYSHORE DR HAMILTON AVE THOMASSON DR
2
3
Map 3‐6: Design Treatments & AƩributes DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐21
3.0
3.3 Public Space, Parks,
& Open Space
Public space, parks, and open space types of land use
that serve an important community‐building purpose
with parƟcular design consideraƟons given the variety
of acƟvity they can support. This secƟon focuses on
how to ensure accessible, acƟvated, and well‐
maintained public spaces, parks, and open space.
Ensure accessible, acƟvated, and well‐
maintained public spaces, parks, and open
space.
ObjecƟve 1: Increase access to parks and
public gathering places in the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Road
Maintenance Division and Parks & RecreaƟon
Division to increase the number and quality of
bicycle and pedestrian connecƟons 1) between
the Bayshore Dr area and neighboring County
parks, including Bayview Park, East Naples
Community Park, and Sugden Regional Park and 2)
running north/south from neighboring County
parks to increase accessibility to the Triangle area
(see SecƟon 3.5, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 6).
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Road
Maintenance Division and Parks & RecreaƟon
Division in conjuncƟon with Thomasson Ave and
Hamilton Ave MSTU improvements to evaluate
opportuniƟes for 1) transiƟoning from on‐street
Hamilton Ave parking, including boat parking, to
parking sites idenƟfied by Parks & RecreaƟon to
serve Bayview Park and 2) operaƟonal
maintenance at Bayview Park.
Strategy 3: Coordinate with Collier County Public
Services Department to evaluate opportuniƟes for
a park and/or public meeƟng space (e.g., library)
in the CRA area.
Strategy 4: Create a site‐specific park plan for the
exisƟng retenƟon pond in the Triangle area.
Strategy 5: Evaluate opportuniƟes for “pocket
parks” (very small neighborhood park spaces).
ObjecƟve 2: Support events in park
spaces geared towards the CRA
community.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Parks &
RecreaƟon Division to promote park spaces as
venues for CRA community events.
Pedestrian connecƟon between Bayshore neighborhood and Sugden
Regional Park that can serve as an example for addiƟonal
connecƟons DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐22
3.0
Park and ConnecƟvity Design
Concepts
The potenƟal park design concept
shown in Figure 3‐4 for the Triangle
stormwater retenƟon pond is based on
previous planning and design efforts for
the pond, with more consideraƟon
given to increasing visibility to enhance
safety in the pond area (a concern
menƟoned during public outreach).
The rendering includes a consideraƟon
for idenƟfying sites for consolidated
public parking, which may take the form
of a garage.
Figure 3‐4: PotenƟal Triangle Stormwater Pond Design Concept DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐23
3.0
Sugden Regional Park: County park that provides inland water access
and water recreaƟon programming. Image source: Collier County
Parks & RecreaƟon Division
Bayview Park: County park that provides access to Haldeman Creek,
the local canals, and the Gulf of Mexico.
Park Opportunity at Stormwater Pond: potenƟal for design, traffic
flow, safety, and flood management improvements.
East Naples Community Park: County park that houses 38 pickleball courts for
sports tourism and local recreaƟonal use; hosts the annual US Open Pickelball
Championship and other pickleball tournaments. Image source: Collier
County Parks & RecreaƟon Division
Naples Botanical Garden: a non‐profit 170‐acre botanical garden with
over 220,000 visitors per year. Also includes meeƟng spaces.
Parks & Open Space
The Redevelopment Plan update process idenƟfied parks and open spaces as important community assets, providing
event spaces and opportuniƟes to build a sense of place and community. Park access can be improved by providing
beƩer connecƟons to parks and capitalizing on opportuniƟes for new parks (such as at the Triangle retenƟon pond and
small pocket parks). Expansion of the CRA area to include the parks to the east should also be evaluated since it may
facilitate making connecƟons and other improvements. See Map 3‐7 for exisƟng parks and opportuniƟes.
1 2
3 4
6
Haldeman Creek and Canals: provide access to the Bayshore Drive
commercial area and the Gulf of Mexico. The Haldeman Creek MSTU
funds periodic dredging and maintenance.
5 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐24
3.0
1
2
3
4
6
5
Map 3‐7: Parks & Open Space DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐25
3.0
ObjecƟve 3: Ensure a clean and well maintained public realm.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with the Collier County Sheriff’s Office, Collier County Code Enforcement Division,
service providers in the CRA area, and residents and business owners in the CRA area to develop a proacƟve
community safety and clean‐up strategy (inclusive of private property along the canal network) with an aim
at reducing reliance on case‐by‐case enforcement.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy and document a strategy for canal maintenance in the right‐of way, including seawalls
and mangroves, in coordinaƟon with the Haldeman Creek MSTU Advisory Board.
Table 3‐1 indicates the amount of parks and open space that are in and bordering the CRA area.
DesignaƟon LocaƟon Acreage EsƟmate
Total publicly‐owned
open space within CRA
area
RetenƟon pond site
(northern Triangle area)
6.48
(includes pond)
AddiƟonal open space or
green space in the CRA
area
Botanical Garden
(non‐profit owned) 168
Total open space/green
space in CRA area 174.48
Park space adjacent to
CRA area
Bayview Park
East Naples Community Park
Sugden Regional Park
6.27
120
173.27
Total park, open, or
green space within or
adjacent to CRA area
347.75
Table 3‐1: Amount of Parks and Open Space.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue and Google Earth calculaƟon DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐26
3.0
3.4 Development
Development and redevelopment can improve the
quality and aestheƟcs of the built environment, as well
as generate tax revenue and benefits to property
owners through increased property values. This
development and redevelopment acƟvity also needs to
include protecƟons for exisƟng community members
who may face burdens from the increase in property
values, such as increased costs for renters. This secƟon
provides an approach to foster and guide private
development to enhance community character and
provide increased stability and prosperity for
community members. Also documented are more
specific planning and visioning efforts for two key
development opportuniƟes, at the Mini Triangle and 17‐
Acre sites.
Foster and guide private development to
enhance community character and provide
increased stability and prosperity for community
members.
ObjecƟve 1: Improve the markeƟng,
branding, and communicaƟon approach
for the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Create a branding strategy for the CRA
area to establish a community vision and
character. This strategy should coordinate with
the Arts and Culture Plan and the Market Study
for the CRA (see SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 1,
Strategy 5 and SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 3, Strategy
1).
Strategy 2: Create a markeƟng and
communicaƟon strategy for the CRA area to
communicate vision and character with effecƟve
tools (e.g., website, social media, branding
materials). This strategy should coordinate with
the comprehensive design approach developed
for the CRA area (see SecƟon 3.2, ObjecƟve 3,
Strategy 1), as well as improved communicaƟon
efforts between the CRA and the community
(see SecƟon 3.7, ObjecƟve 1).
Strategy 3: Provide CRA administraƟve materials
(e.g., Advisory Board agendas, budgets, annual
reports) in an accessible and easy‐to‐understand
way.
Strategy 4: Coordinate with the Collier County
Tourist Development Council, Collier County
Parks & RecreaƟon Division, and other
jurisdicƟons to promote the CRA area and its
local business and commercial establishments as
part of tourism development efforts in the area.
This should include coordinaƟon with Collier
County Parks & RecreaƟon related to East Naples
Community Park master planning and pickleball
sports tourism.
Strategy 5: Create an Arts and Culture Plan for the
CRA area to incorporate into the overall CRA
area vision. This effort should: DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐27
3.0
Consider prior arts and culture planning
efforts, such as those related to the
Bayshore Cultural District (ResoluƟon No
2008‐60).
Incorporate an inventory of exisƟng
arƟsƟc and cultural features of the
community to elevate.
Include a comprehensive public realm
design approach for the CRA area and sub
‐areas (see SecƟon 3.2, ObjecƟve 3,
Strategy 1).
Consider housing needs and economic
incenƟves related to arts‐ and culture‐
oriented development (see SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟves 3 and 5).
Include administraƟve needs of
implemenƟng the plan.
Coordinate with countywide arts and
culture strategic planning efforts.
ArƟst Housing Example
ArƟst‐Oriented Community Land Trust
A key component of the vision for the CRA area is to foster
arts and culture. One aspect of this effort would be to
include providing affordable housing for arƟsts, with a
primary focus on for‐purchase units. Community land trusts
are a tool that can provide more affordable for‐purchase
unit prices over the long term. Typically, a non‐profit
corporaƟon holds the Ɵtle of the land and provides a long‐
term lease to a homebuyer with qualifying income; the
price of the housing for the homebuyer is reduced because
he/she is not purchasing the land where the property is
located. The now owner of the home can then resell the
property to a new buyer with qualifying income, with a
price based on a formula that allows the seller to build
equity but sƟll maintains affordability for the new buyer. In
this way, the subsidized land costs serve mulƟple
homebuyers. Examples of community land trusts in Florida
that have overseen for‐purchase units include the South
Florida Community Land Trust and the Bright Community
Trust in Pinellas County.
Indianapolis provides an example of how a land trust can
cater to arƟsts with its ArƟst and Public Life Residency
program in Garfield Park. The program was created through
a partnership between the Big Car CollaboraƟve (an arts
organizaƟon) and Riley Area Development CorporaƟon with
support from the Indianapolis Neighborhood Housing
Partnership. The partners bought and rehabilitated 10
vacant houses to sell to arƟsts who apply to buy (part of the
applicaƟon focuses on how their creaƟve pracƟce will
contribute to the community). Big Car and partners retain
51% ownership of the house, and the arƟsts retain 49%.
When an arƟst is ready to sell, Big Car and partners buy
them out and sell the house to another arƟst at a subsidized
price. ArƟsts also are required to engage in certain
community service acƟviƟes as part of the agreement.
US Open Pickleball Championships at East Naples Community Park.
Source: Collier County Parks & RecreaƟon Division, hƩps://
www.facebook.com/CollierParks/photos/
a.852037184807466.1073741827.118036328207559/19606389606
13944/?type=3&theater
Case InformaƟon Source: Big Car CollaboraƟve (2018) APLR Affordable
ArƟst Housing, hƩp://www.bigcar.org/project/aplr/; Jen Kinney, Next City
(April 13, 2017), Indianapolis Land Trust Specializes in Affordable Housing
for ArƟsts, hƩps://nextcity.org/daily/entry/land‐trusts‐indianapolis‐housing
‐arƟsts. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐28
3.0
MarkeƟng, Branding, & CommunicaƟon Examples
The following examples highlight different types of informaƟon, structuring of informaƟon, and communicaƟon tools that
can be applied to an updated markeƟng, branding, and informaƟon‐sharing strategy for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
CRA area.
City of Port St. Lucie
The City of Port St. Lucie was recently recognized by
numerous enƟƟes for its efforts in markeƟng and
communicaƟon and received an award from the Public
RelaƟons Society of America, Sunshine District, for its new
website redesign. The new website includes strong use of
visuals and major events, meeƟngs, news, and highlights
embedded directly on its landing page and links directly to
social media accounts for the City. For the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle CRA, the use of newer technologies should be
weighed with the most effecƟve communicaƟon tools for
reaching various communiƟes within the CRA. For example,
the public outreach process indicated that some members of
the community may respond beƩer to flyers than to social
media.
AddiƟonally, the City of Port St. Lucie has been recognized for
its brochure graphics and publicaƟons such as “Budget in
Brief,” highlighƟng how graphics and visuals can be used to
more effecƟvely communicate technical informaƟon about
the jurisdicƟon.
The City of Port St. Lucie’s website includes major events, meeƟngs,
news, and highlights embedded directly on its landing page.
(Source: hƩp://www.cityofpsl.com/home)
Graphic representaƟon of budget informaƟon in the City of Port St.
Lucie’s “Budget in Brief.” (Source: City of Port St. Lucie, hƩp://
www.cityofpsl.com/home/showdocument?id=3986)
Case InformaƟon Source: City of Port St. Lucie (July 18, 2018), City of Port St.
Lucie’s CommunicaƟons Efforts Win MulƟple State, NaƟonal Awards, hƩp://
www.cityofpsl.com/Home/Components/News/News/3400/1749. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐29
3.0
Gainesville CRA
The Gainesville CRA Annual Report includes highly‐visual
representaƟons of projects using maps and photos as well
as informaƟon on how projects Ɵe back to overall CRA
principles (“layers”) and broader themes of connecƟvity,
scale, authenƟcity, partnerships, and health and safety. The
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA could adopt a similar
visually‐driven approach to its communicaƟons and show
how projects and development Ɵe back to overall CRA
goals in documents such as an annual report.
Atlanta Beltline
The Atlanta Beltline website
(hƩps://beltline.org/) provides an example of how an
interacƟve map can be used to communicate informaƟon.
The Beltline’s map includes layers for events and acƟviƟes,
future projects, landmarks, access points, completed parks,
completed trails, and planning areas. A similar approach
could be used by the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA to
highlight events, recent or forthcoming major
developments and projects, and character areas.
FiŌh Ave/Pleasant Street Heritage Trail descripƟon from Gainesville CRA
2017 Annual Report (pp. 18‐19). (Source: Gainesville CRA hƩps://
www.gainesvillecra.com/images/annual‐reports/docs/FY2017.pdf)
InteracƟve map of Atlanta Beltline website.
(Source: Atlanta Beltline hƩps://beltline.org/) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐30
3.0
Arts Grants Examples
Tampa Downtown Partnership Space AcƟvaƟon
Grant Program
The CRA‐funded grant programs could fund murals and
other public art, with consideraƟon given to what
principles or guidelines will be used to award funding.
This approach has been taken in other jurisdicƟons.
For example, the Tampa Downtown Partnership has a
Public Space AcƟvaƟon Grant Program that provides funds
for projects that enhance “the public realm through
sensory experiences (i.e., art, color, sound, food, play,
texture, engagement)”.
Projects must meet one of more of the following criteria:
RelaƟonship to the arts
Originality/creaƟvity
Mission/purpose (of the Partnership)
RelaƟonship to Downtown Tampa
Accessibility
Playfulness
Environmental impact
ApplicaƟons are reviewed by the agency staff and a review
commiƩee. Criteria for the grant would need to account
for code criteria to ensure that the efforts of the CRA and
Code Enforcement are coordinated and working at cross
purposes.
Tapestries – Lakeland, an Un‐Mural Art ExhibiƟon
This exhibiƟon, which will run from November 2018 to
January 2020, is commissioning local arƟsts to create 60
painƟngs on large canvases (up to 10x12 Ō) to display on
walls as a temporary alternaƟve to murals. Artwork is not
required to have a specific theme, but it must fit the urban
environment and be poliƟcally and ideologically neutral.
ArƟsts will be paid $10 per square foot, with canvas
tapestry and approved paint provided. The exhibiƟon
budget is $50,000, with $10,000 commiƩed by the
Lakeland CRA, $10,000 commiƩed by the Lakeland
Downtown Development Authority, and $5,000 commiƩed
by Citrus ConnecƟon–Lakeland Area Mass Transit District
as part of “Arts in Transit.” ExhibiƟon organizers are
seeking $25,000 in addiƟonal funding through corporate
sponsorship and crowdfunding. The Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle CRA could fund similar types of public art events
through a public art grant program.
Maven Mural funded by
the Tampa Downtown
Partnership’s AcƟvaƟon
Grant Program.
(Source: Tampa
Downtown Partnership,
hƩp://
www.tampasdowntown.
com/wp‐content/
uploads/2016/12/
AcƟvaƟon_Grant
Cut_Sheet_CDCA.pdf)
Case InformaƟon Source: Tampa Downtown Partnership (2018), 2018 Tam‐
pa Downtown Special Service District Grant: Public Space AcƟvaƟon Grant
Program, hƩps://www.tampasdowntown.com/about‐us/program‐details/
grant‐program/.
Case InformaƟon Source: The Working ArƟst Studio/Gallery, Lakeland
ArƟsts Will Paint Sixty Un‐Murals That Will be Installed on Buildings in
Lakeland, hƩps://davidnelsoncollins.com/tapestries‐lakeland‐an‐un‐mural‐
art‐exhibiƟon/. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐31
3.0
ObjecƟve 2: Streamline and clarify the
development process
Strategy 1: Coordinate with Collier County Zoning
Division to clarify LDC requirements related to
development in the CRA area, parƟcularly related
to:
RelaƟonship of overlay zoning to base
zoning
RelaƟonship of various applicable codes
to each other (e.g., LDC, fire code,
building code)
Allowable uses
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Zoning
Division to evaluate approaches to streamline and
shorten the development review process.
Approaches might include:
DedicaƟng County staff to review projects
within the CRA area and expedite them
through the development process.
Improving coordinaƟon and
communicaƟon between enƟƟes
overseeing applicable codes (e.g., Zoning,
Fire Marshall).
IdenƟfying opportuniƟes to increase
reliance on defined criteria for
development approval (as opposed to
discreƟonary approval)
Encouraging design‐build approaches.
Strategy 3: Establish a formal role for the CRA in
the development review process to facilitate
development of projects in the CRA area.
ObjecƟve 3: IncenƟvize desired types of
development.
Strategy 1: Conduct a market study, including
informaƟon on owners of second homes, which is
not captured in typical data sets, to determine
what development will be supported in the CRA
area.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy incenƟves and targeted
assistance (see Development Assistance and
IncenƟves Examples) for a range of development
and redevelopment, including consideraƟon of
the following types of development and addiƟonal
desirable development supported by the market
study:
Local neighborhood commercial
establishments
Social enterprises and business
opportuniƟes for those with tenuous
livelihoods
Larger catalyst development projects
Arts‐oriented development
Strategy 3: Evaluate and amend as needed current
grant program offerings to reflect new incenƟves
and assistance approaches from SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟve 3, Strategy 2.
Clearer guidance in LDC would be helpful for new uses such as
microbreweries DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐32
3.0
Development Assistance and IncenƟves
Examples
Density/intensity increases
Impact fee offsets or payment over Ɵme
TIF rebates and TIF money for infrastructure
Land acquisiƟon through CRA for targeted needs
such as parking and stormwater infrastructure
Tenant aƩracƟon and relocaƟon support
Micro‐enterprise incubator and technical assistance
support in partnership with other local enƟƟes (see
PotenƟal Partnership OpportuniƟes for Micro‐
Enterprise Incubator).
PotenƟal Partnership OpportuniƟes for
Micro‐Enterprise Incubator
Incubators can provide workspace and assistance to
micro‐enterprises, parƟcularly small businesses, looking
to get their start in the CRA area. The CRA could
potenƟally partner with exisƟng efforts or collaborate on
new efforts to support the work of incubators. For
example, the Naples Accelerator
(hƩps://naplesaccelerator.com/) provides office space
and ameniƟes and connecƟons to local economic
resources to assist its member businesses. There may
also be interest from other local enƟƟes, such as St.
MaƩhew’s House, in partnering to start a new
incubator. Such partnerships can bring together
organizaƟons to pool capacity and funding to carry out
incubator efforts and can also be used to support arƟsts
and arts‐oriented development, a key aspect of the
CRA’s vision.
ObjecƟve 4: Capitalize on current and
potenƟal real estate and development
opportuniƟes.
Strategy 1: Facilitate tenancy, development, and
redevelopment, parƟcularly for opportuniƟes along
US 41, Linwood Ave and neighboring non‐residenƟal
areas, and Bayshore Dr, through incenƟves and
communicaƟon efforts (see Development Assistance
and IncenƟves Examples).
Strategy 2: ConƟnue to facilitate exisƟng catalyst
project opportuniƟes on the Mini Triangle and 17‐
Acre sites (see Development & Real Estate
OpportuniƟes Map) to strengthen and solidify
development interest in the CRA area. Efforts might
include assisƟng with coordinaƟon of property
owners in target areas, negoƟaƟng desired
ameniƟes to be incorporated into proposed
development, and providing incenƟves (see
Development Assistance and IncenƟves examples).
Strategy 3: Evaluate alternaƟve funding
opportuniƟes, such as private funding and
donaƟons, for capital projects.
Strategy 4: Assess development opportuniƟes for the
AcƟvity Center area, including the Courthouse
Shadows site.
Strategy 5: Evaluate concepts to expand the CRA
boundaries to include new development
opportuniƟes, such as areas along Thomasson Dr.
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐33
3.0
General Development and Redevelopment PotenƟal
Figure 3‐5 provides a general indicaƟon of the development opportuniƟes in the CRA area, showing vacant land acreage
and the corresponding number of vacant parcels by land use type that could potenƟally be developed and indicaƟng that
most of the vacant acreage is residenƟal. Map 3‐8 indicates where these parcels are located. As the map and addiƟonal
informaƟon in the Assessment Memo (Appendix A) indicate, the parcel sizes can run fairly small, so assembly may be a
consideraƟon for developers. The Assessment Memo also indicates a sizable number of parcels with structures, parƟcularly
single‐family and mobile homes, that might parƟcularly benefit from upgrades to improve their structural condiƟon.
These efforts should take into account any potenƟal increases in prices and costs when units are upgraded to avoid pricing
out residents who find the new price and cost points unaffordable.
Total Vacant Acreage: 186
Figure 3‐5: Vacant Land Acreage DistribuƟon by Land Use Type .
*Note: A 32.5‐acre parcel northwest of the Bayshore/Thomasson intersecƟon is coded as Vacant InsƟtuƟonal but is owned by MaƩamy Naples
LLC. (Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐34
3.0
Map 3‐8: Vacant Land Parcels in CRA Area . Note: Vacant insƟtuƟonal land northwest of Bayshore Dr/Thomasson Dr intersecƟon is coded as Vacant
InsƟtuƟonal but it owned by MaƩamy Naples LLC. (Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐35
3.0
Development & Real Estate OpportuniƟes
The CRA can facilitate development, redevelopment, and tenancy of vacant spaces through incenƟves and
improvements to the surrounding areas. Map 3‐9 and corresponding images show some of the key
opportuniƟes in the CRA area; note that the Mini Triangle site and the 17‐Acre Site contain parcels currently
owned by the CRA.
Linwood Avenue commercial corridor redevelopment
Gulfgate Plaza office tenant opportunity
Del’s 24 redevelopment opportunity
Bayshore Drive commercial corridor redevelopment
Courthouse Shadows redevelopment
1
4 3
2
5 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐36
3.0
3
2
Map 3‐9: Development & Real Estate OpportuniƟes with Non‐ResidenƟal ExisƟng Land Use; Data source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
LINWOOD AVE BAYSHORE DR 4
5
1 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐37
3.0
CoordinaƟng with Collier County Communi‐
ty & Human Services Division for mobile
home upgrades (see Housing Assistance
and IncenƟves Examples)
ResidenƟal renovaƟon loan/grant program
(see Housing Assistance and IncenƟves Ex‐
amples)
Encouraging use of Collier County’s impact
fee deferral program for income‐restricted
units (see Housing Assistance and Incen‐
Ɵves Examples)
Housing Assistance and IncenƟves Examples
ResidenƟal RenovaƟon Grant
As noted in the Assessent Memo (Appendix A), the use with
the greatest number and share of structures most in need of
upgrades in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA area are
single‐family residenƟal units. One form of assistance for im‐
proving these structures as an alternaƟve to redevelopment
is to provide funds for structural improvements. Many CRAs
in Florida offer grants, matching grants, or loans for structural
improvements of residences. Examples include the following:
Miami‐Dade County, West Perrine CRA, ResidenƟal Reha‐
bilitaƟon Program – financial assistance to qualified resi‐
dent‐owners of detached single‐family homes, town‐
homes, and duplexes in the CRA area for certain home
repairs, including roof and guƩer repairs, kitchen and
bathroom repairs, etc.; grants are available in amounts
up to $15,000; applicants are expected to provide a
match of 50% of the cost of improvement. Payments are
made as reimbursements.
Lakeland CRA, Downtown and Midtown Areas, Fix‐It‐Up
Program – grants geared towards home repairs for own‐
ers of single‐family homes, townhomes, and duplexes.
Repairs include exterior structure improvements such as
repair of eaves, fences, guƩers, etc. Grants are $5,000–
Catalyst Site CharreƩe Highlights
ObjecƟve 5: Incorporate protecƟons in
development efforts to enhance exisƟng
community character and support ex‐
isƟng CRA area residents.
Strategy 1: Establish assistance programs and in‐
cenƟves to protect and enhance exisƟng commu‐
nity‐oriented uses and local neighborhood com‐
mercial and single‐family neighborhoods off the
main corridors. Assistance and incenƟve distribu‐
Ɵon might account for building age, structural
quality, and means of property owners.
Strategy 2: In coordinaƟon with the Collier County
Affordable Housing Advisory CommiƩee, pro‐
mote strategies to maintain current affordable
housing availability in the CRA while improving
baseline quality condiƟons. Strategies to consider
include:
Community land trust (see ArƟst‐
Oriented Community Land Trust example
for SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 5) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐38
3.0
$25,000, depending on the level of repair.
City of Ft. Lauderdale CRA, Northwest‐Progresso‐Flagler
Heights Area, ResidenƟal RehabilitaƟon Forgivable Loan
– loans for owners of single‐family residences valued at
less than $300,000 and with a household income of
160% of area median income or less. Loans can be used
to for repairs to correct code violaƟons and address
health and safety, including repairs related to electrical,
plumbing, roofing, windows, AC/heaƟng, and structural
elements. The maximum award is $75,000, and a cash
contribuƟon by the owner of 10% of the repair cost is
required if costs exceed $55,000 (based on costs ex‐
ceeding that amount).
In the case of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA, it is rec‐
ommended that a program target structural improvements
for single‐family homes and include income as an eligibility
consideraƟon to ensure that lower income households are
prioriƟzed in receiving support.
Collier County Mobile Home Upgrade Program
Collier County Community & Human Services Division cur‐
rently oversees a program that uses State Housing IniƟa‐
Ɵves Partnership (SHIP) program funds to replace mobile
homes with more sturdy single‐family modular homes in
response to hurricane damage. In Everglades City, these
homes are elevated on sƟlts. The Bayshore/Gateway Trian‐
gle CRA may be able to capitalize on this program, in which
the approach has already been determined and tested by
coordinaƟng and partnering with this County agency.
Impact Fee Deferral for Income‐Restricted Units
Several ciƟes and counƟes in Florida, including Collier Coun‐
ty, offer impact fee incenƟves for affordable and/or work‐
force housing. In Collier County, for‐purchase and rental
units for households with incomes less than 120% of medi‐
an income in the county qualify for impact fee deferrals.
Deferrals are equivalent to up to 3% of the prior year’s total
impact fee collecƟons, a cap insƟtuted to minimize revenue
lost through the program. The County also limits to 225 the
number of rental units receiving deferrals. Impact fees are
deferred for owner‐occupied units unƟl the owner sells,
refinances, or moves out of the home, at which Ɵme fees
are due with interest. Rental unit fees are deferred for a 10‐
year period. Historically, this level of deferral has allowed
the program to defer impact fees on approximately 100
homes per year. A pilot program for payment of impact fees
by installments collected through property tax bills (as an
alternaƟve to making the enƟre payment upfront) was also
planned for the Immokalee area. The Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle CRA could support or replicate the County’s pro‐
gram to defer fees in the CRA area; this approach could also
be used to incenƟvize other types of desired development,
as well.
Case InformaƟon Source:
West Perrine Community Redevelopment Agency (June 7,
2011), Board Memorandum: Commercial and ResidenƟal
RehabilitaƟon Grant Programs, hƩp://www.miamidade.gov/
govacƟon/legistarfiles/MaƩers/Y2011/110723.pdf.
Lakeland CRA, Fix‐It‐Up Program (Downtwon & Midtown),
hƩps://staƟc1.squarespace.com/
staƟc/5930d7bce4fcb5becc66acb5/
t/5b901fdd03ce64e07d718c56/1536172165990/Fix‐
It+Up+Program+Rev+9‐04‐18.pdf.
City of Fort Lauderdale CRA, Northwest‐Progresso‐Flagler
Heights Community Redevelopment Area, IncenƟves Modifi‐
caƟon, hƩps://www.fortlauderdale.gov/home/
showdocument?id=29743.
Case InformaƟon Source: Tindale Oliver (August 2017), Impact
Fee IncenƟves for Affordable/Workforce Housing. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐39
3.0
3.5 TransportaƟon,
ConnecƟvity & Walkability
Having a variety of transportaƟon opƟons that are
easy and desirable to use are important for all who
live and work in the CRA area. TransportaƟon systems
not only cater to local needs between the CRA area
and places such as Downtown Naples and local
workplaces, but also to more regional traffic moving
through the CRA area on major roadways. In light of
the various needs, this secƟon aims to ensure safety,
comfort, and convenience for various modes within
and connecƟng with the CRA area.
Ensure safety, comfort, and convenience for
various modes within and connecƟng with the
CRA area.
ObjecƟve 1: Increase safety, comfort, and
connecƟvity for acƟve transportaƟon
modes (e.g., walking and biking).
Strategy 1: Create a strategy to implement discrete
transportaƟon improvements and more
comprehensive Complete Streets corridor
improvements.
Strategy 2: The effort undertaken for Strategy 1
should include development of a sidewalk master
plan with inclusion of the following:
Visibility assessment related to
landscaping
ConsideraƟon of connecƟons to
neighboring parks (see SecƟon 3.3,
ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 and Strategy 6 in
this secƟon)
CoordinaƟon with roadway and
infrastructure improvements
Strategy 3: IdenƟfy opportuniƟes to coordinate
transportaƟon capital improvements with County/
MPO improvements along major arterials.
Strategy 4: Pilot transportaƟon improvements,
such as elements of Complete Streets corridor
improvements, elements of Bayshore Dr road diet
(traffic lane consolidaƟon), reduced turning radii
at intersecƟons to slow traffic, and addiƟonal
pedestrian crossings, with temporary installaƟons.
These efforts should incorporate community input
and feedback to gauge response to more urban‐
style development and any parƟcular concerns to
address or opportuniƟes on which to capitalize.
These installaƟons can be incorporated into
community events that include educaƟonal
elements on, for example, Complete Streets, the
Vision Zero effort to eliminate bicycle and
pedestrian fataliƟes, and roundabouts. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐40
3.0
Strategy 5: Based on input from temporary
installaƟons from Strategy 4, move forward with
veƫng of Bayshore Dr road diet concept scenarios
and traffic analysis.
Strategy 6: Evaluate opportuniƟes for a north/south
bicycle and pedestrian connector in the eastern
Bayshore area with connecƟons to Sugden Park and
East Naples Community Park (see SecƟon 3.3,
ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1).
What are Complete Streets?
FDOT defines Complete Streets as streets that “serve
the transportaƟon needs of transportaƟon system
users of all ages and abiliƟes, including pedestrians,
bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and freight
handlers. A transportaƟon system based on
Complete Streets principles can help to promote
safety, quality of life, and economic development.”
Source: FDOT, CompleƟng Florida’s Streets, hƩp://
www.flcompletestreets.com/files/FDOT‐CompleteStreets‐
Brochure.pdf. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐41
3.0
ExisƟng TransportaƟon CondiƟons
Map 3‐10 highlights exisƟng transportaƟon condiƟons idenƟfied by fieldwork. Roadways in the CRA area range from large
arterials carrying regional traffic to small neighborhood streets, many of which dead‐end throughout the CRA area. During
fieldwork, cyclists were noted on the sidewalks of larger arterials such as Davis Boulevard and Airport Pulling Road, and
many bikes were parked at Gulfgate Plaza off of US 41. The MPO and FDOT also idenƟfied Airport Pulling Road and US 41 as
high bike/pedestrian crash corridors. RelaƟve to other streets, Bayshore Drive has a number of improvements, including
bike lanes, sidewalks, and transit shelters, yet it sƟll experiences a lack of parking. There are limited pedestrian connecƟons
to parks from streets off Bayshore Drive; one connecƟon is at Republic Drive.
Divided arterial with street‐fronƟng parking
Bayshore Drive with sdewalks and bike lanes
Dead‐end neighborhood street
Cyclist on sidewalk of arterial
Bus shelter at Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive
Pedestrian bridge to East Naples Community Park
1
3
2
4
5 6 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐42
3.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Map 3‐10: ExisƟng TransportaƟon CondiƟons with Roadway ClassificaƟons DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐43
3.0
Specific TransportaƟon Needs & ConsideraƟons
Fieldwork, discussions with CRA staff, public outreach, and specific project recommendaƟons from the 2018 East
Naples Discovery Report informed locaƟon‐specific, discrete transportaƟon needs and consideraƟons in the CRA area
(Map 3‐11). These needs and intervenƟons are shown on the map on the facing page. Many of these needs and
consideraƟons will be addressed through Complete Streets projects recommended in this redevelopment plan. Other
transportaƟon improvements such as addressing sidewalk and bike infrastructure gaps, providing parking
infrastructure, and providing wayfinding sings will be addressed through separate project recommendaƟons.
1
2
3
1
2
Parking
Commercial parking
Parking including boat parking
Major Corridor Needs Corridor
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Bicycle & Pedestrian
Curb extensions
General bike accessibility
Pedestrian crossing(s)
Bike lanes
General connecƟvity, walkability
North/south connecƟvity
East/west connecƟvity
Sidewalk(s)
Wayfinding
LighƟng
Road diet (lane reducƟon)
Traffic
Traffic circulaƟon along corridor, including
intersecƟons
Traffic calming
Connect street DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐44
3.0
4 8
3
2
2
8
DAVIS BLVD BAYSHORE DR 7
THOMASSON DR HAMILTON AVE 2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
3
1
2
1
2
1 10
2
7
7
7
6
7
6
9
5
2
1
11
10 AIRPORT RD S Map 3‐11: TransportaƟon Needs & ConsideraƟons DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐45
3.0
Regional & County TransportaƟon Projects
The projects shown in Map 3‐12 are those idenƟfied in the Collier Metropolitan Planning OrganizaƟon’s Fiscal Year
2017/18 to 2021/22 TransportaƟon Improvement Program (which also features the Collier County five‐year program)
and the trail recommendaƟons from the Comprehensive Pathways Plan update process. These projects will thus be
overseen by regional and county transportaƟon agencies. The full set of recommendaƟons from the Comprehensive
Pathways Plan, once finalized, should also be considered in conjuncƟon with transportaƟon planning and improvements
led by the CRA.
Major Corridor
FDOT TIP Projects
US 41 resurfacing
US 41 signal Ɵming improvements
Davis Boulevard resurfacing
1
3 MPO Pathways Plan Proposed Trail Improvements
Naples Bay Greenway (Sun Trail)
2 County TIP Projects
Davis Boulevard/Airport Pulling Road
intersecƟon improvement DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐46
3.0
DAVIS BLVD BAYSHORE DR THOMASSON DR NAPLES BAY GREENWAY (SUN 3
Regional & County
TransportaƟon Projects 1 2 AIRPORT PULLING RD Map 3‐12: Regional & County TransportaƟon Projects DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐47
3.0
PotenƟal CRA Complete Streets Projects & Trails
Complete Streets is an approach to comprehensive corridor improvements tailored to the size and land use context of the
corridor. This approach can address many of the major needs and consideraƟons idenƟfied in Map 3‐12, including traffic
calming, sidewalks, bike lanes, lighƟng, wayfinding, on‐street parking, and landscaping. Complete streets improvements can
also be coordinated with other infrastructure improvements, such as water main and drainage upgrades. The CRA can take
the lead on Complete Streets projects, focusing on the streets listed below categorized. Fieldwork, staff discussions, public
outreach, and recommendaƟons from the 2018 East Naples Discovery Report informed which streets were targeted for
these improvements. Map 3‐13 shows recommended projects for neighborhood streets and busier corridors.
Major Corridor
Major Complete Streets
Linwood Avenue—Phase I
Shadowlawn Drive
Bayshore Drive (northern secƟon)
Thomasson Drive
Commercial Drive
Kirkwood Ave
Pine Street ConnecƟon
2 Neighborhood Complete Streets & Trails
Bay Street
Linwood—Phase II
Danford Street
Hamilton Avenue
Jeepers Drive
Republic Drive
Bayshore Drive (southern secƟon)
Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail
1 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐48
3.0 HAMILTON BAY ST
JEEPERS
LINWOOD AVE SHADOWLAWN DR 1
DAVIS BLVD
2 BAYSHORE DR THOMASSON DR
2 COMMERCIAL DR 2 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN 1 AIRPORT PULLING RD DANFORD
REPUBLIC DR
KIRKWOOD AVE PINE ST 2
Map 3‐13: PotenƟal Complete Streets Projects DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐49
3.0
Character Images for Complete Streets Improvements and ConnecƟons
The following images illustrate Complete Streets elements from prior planning efforts for Bayshore Dr and Complete Streets
improvements elsewhere.
These efforts and examples inspired the renderings of possible transformaƟons for Linwood Ave, Bayshore Dr, and Jeepers
Dr shown in Figures 3‐6 through 3‐9. As corridors for potenƟal commercial redevelopment, the Linwood Ave and Bayshore
Dr renderings highlight an emphasis on ample sidewalk space along the landscaping and storefronts. Linwood Ave might
promote a more modern design look, whereas Bayshore Dr might retain the exisƟng style of streetscape elements in the
lighƟng and signs.
As a less traveled residenƟal street type, Jeepers Dr shows how people biking, walking, and playing can share the street
space with cars accessing residences. Given that many streets dead‐end and do not allow for through traffic, more
simplified pedestrian infrastructure may be promoted over formal sidewalks. For example, the pedestrian space in the
rendering might be indicated with road paint. The swales have also been retained for water quality consideraƟons, but
incorporate vegetaƟon to improve the visual appearance of swales. LighƟng in provided on one side given the limited road
space, similar to improvements made on Lunar St in the CRA area.
PotenƟal cross secƟon for Bayshore Dr road diet, as proposed in Trebilcock’s 2017 Parking Needs Analysis. ExisƟng cross secƟon is four‐lane
road with bike lanes and sidewalks
Complete Streets improvement
examples (LeŌ image source:
Wikimedia Commons) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐50
3.0
Figure 3‐6: PotenƟal Cross SecƟon of Linwood Ave
Figure 3‐7: PotenƟal Cross SecƟon for Bayshore Dr DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐51
3.0
Figure 3‐8: PotenƟal Cross SecƟon for Jeepers Dr DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐52
3.0
Figure 3‐9: PotenƟal Aerial Rendering for Jeepers Dr DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐53
3.0
Examples of Engagement in Temporary and TacƟcal Urbanism Events
“TacƟcal urbanism” is a term used to describe temporary installaƟons of built environment improvements as a means of
piloƟng and raising awareness around the improvements. These types of projects and other temporary events can be used
to pilot improvements desired in the CRA area. Engagement with the community to seek feedback is an important aspect to
understand what elements of a temporary improvement did or did not work to inform any permanent improvements.
The following are examples of installaƟons, events, and outreach methods.
Islington Street Lab Project – Portsmouth , NH
Portsmouth Smart Growth for the 21st Century led this five‐
week tacƟcal urbanism project in coordinaƟon with the City
of Portsmouth, the West End Business AssociaƟon, Mike
Lydon (tacƟcal urbanism expert), and several other partners.
The project focused on a temporary transformaƟon of a
secƟon of Islington St, which included the following
elements (numbers correspond to image to the right):
1. Crosswalk
2. Parklet
3. Curb extension
4. Sidewalk boundary definiƟon
5. On‐street parking spaces
6. Other elements – signs, greenery, banners, crosswalk
striping across curb cuts, markings for cars to share the
road with bicycles (“sharrows”)
Public outreach for the project included public informaƟonal
meeƟngs and workshops in preparaƟon with Mike Lydon, an
online and paper survey to collect feedback, and meeƟngs
and materials to share results of the temporary installaƟon.
The survey indicated support for more temporary
demonstraƟons of this type in the city and for making some
or all of the temporary changes permanent, with support for
follow‐up low‐cost interim installaƟons.
The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA potenƟally could use a
similar approach in piloƟng and building awareness around
Complete Street elements (e.g., buffers and on‐street
parking).
Los Angeles County Metro Open Streets Program
Open Streets events temporarily close streets to auto
traffic, allowing for non‐motorized transportaƟon such
as biking and walking. Los Angeles County Metro’s
Open Streets Grant Program has funded 21 events
since 2014 in the greater Los Angeles area. Metro
incorporates surveys to gather feedback from
parƟcipants, businesses, and volunteers. In the case of
a West Hollywood Open Streets event, a City Council
report explains:
As part of the grant processes, Metro is surveying
parƟcipants, businesses and volunteers at Cycle Two Open
Street events. This data will be used to analyze how Open
Street events affect:
Islington St Lab Elements and Design Plan
(Source: Portsmouth Smart Growth for the 21st Century,
hƩp://ps21.info/wp‐content/uploads/2016/07/PS21TU‐
report_update160714.pdf)
Case InformaƟon Source: Portsmouth Smart Growth for the 21st
Century (July 2016), Islington Street Lab: A TacƟcal Urbanism
Project in Portsmouth, NH, hƩp://ps21.info/wp‐content/
uploads/2016/07/PS21TU‐report_update160714.pdf. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐54
3.0
ParƟcipants’ and businesses percepƟons about non‐
auto oriented transportaƟon
Transit ridership and percepƟons
Business sales as compared to a “typical” weekend day
Survey materials that will be used during the events include:
Business Anecdotal Interview (administered on day of
event)
Business Owner Economic Benefits Interview
(administered within one week of the event)
ParƟcipants/Volunteer Anecdotal Interview
(administered on day of event)
ParƟcipant Metro Rail Survey (administered on day of
event)
These types of surveys can be adapted to informaƟon the
CRA hopes to gather on its temporary improvements and
can also be adapted to online plaƞorms and promoted
through regular CRA meeƟngs.
City of West Palm Beach Community Redevelopment
Agency Sunset Lounge Project
The West Palm Beach CRA worked with the organizaƟons
880 CiƟes and BeƩer Block to reimagine the local Sunset
Jazz Lounge venue and a nearby vacant lot. The
engagement process included:
MeeƟng with prominent community members to
understand concerns about the site and neighborhood
to inform public engagement materials
Including a cultural anthropologist with Ɵes to the
community to act as a liaison between the CRA and
community members, building relaƟonships.
Finding opportuniƟes to engage community members
where people already gather and at sponsored
community concerts and block parƟes at the site.
During these sponsored events, event organizers
talked with aƩendees and also set up engaging visuals
and interacƟve displays to gather feedback (such as
voƟng on items with dot sƟckers).
Following up with the community to report back
findings.
The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA could incorporate
interacƟve displays and discussion approaches to gather
feedback when temporary road improvements are in place,
which may include a special concert or event to draw more
people.
Metro Open Streets (Source: Los Angeles County Metro,
hƩps://www.metro.net/projects/acƟve‐transportaƟon/
metro‐open‐streets‐grant‐program/)
Sunset Lounge Project (Source: 880 CiƟes, hƩps://
www.880ciƟes.org/building‐community‐trust‐tacƟcal‐
urbanism‐lessons‐west‐palm‐beach‐fl/)
Case InformaƟon Source: West Hollywood City Council (April
16, 2018), Update on West Hollywood’s Ciclavia Open
Streets Event (City Council Consent Calendar Report), p. 5,
hƩp://weho.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?
view_id=16&event_id=1032&meta_id=147108.
Case InformaƟon Source: Rossana Tudo (May 18, 2017),
Building Community Trust through TacƟcal Urbanism – Les‐
sons from West Palm Beach, FL, hƩps://www.880ciƟes.org/
building‐community‐trust‐tacƟcal‐urbanism‐lessons‐west‐
palm‐beach‐fl/. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐55
3.0
ObjecƟve 2: Increase and enhance alternaƟve vehicle mode opƟons within and
connecƟng with the CRA area.
Strategy 1: Evaluate opportuniƟes for alternaƟve vehicles (e.g., golf carts, electric shuƩles) and bikesharing,
including partnerships with neighboring communiƟes.
Strategy 2: Coordinate with Collier County Public Transit & Neighborhood Enhancement Department for
transit service and faciliƟes improvements (e.g., more frequent service and transit stop shelters).
AlternaƟve Vehicle Examples
Electric ShuƩles
Tampa, Sarasota, and Naples are examples of jurisdicƟons
that have started using low‐speed electric shuƩle systems.
Slidr in Naples (hƩps://www.rideslidr.com/) is an electric
shuƩle service that provides on‐demand service with the
use of an app. Rides are free of charge to riders, and costs
are offset by adverƟsing opportuniƟes associated with the
service. Note that shuƩle vehicles with top speeds of 20–25
miles per hour (mph) are classified as low‐speed vehicles in
Florida Statutes, which limits them to roads with speed
limits at or below 35 miles per hour under SecƟon 316.2122
F.S.
Golf Carts
The use of golf carts (motor vehicles created for use on golf
courses and not exceeding speeds of 20 mph) on roadways
is governed by SecƟon 316.212, F.S. This statute places
limitaƟons on areas and roadways where golf carts may be
operated (with strict limitaƟons for operaƟon on State
roads), allowable Ɵmes of operaƟon, and age of operator,
among other items. It also indicates the necessary
equipment needed to operate a golf cart legally.
SecƟon 130.4 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances
designates the specific areas in Collier County where golf
carts may be operated, including Goodland and Ave Maria,
with addiƟonal parameters laid out. A golf cart study and
ordinance are opƟons to pursue in support of golf cart use
in the CRA area.
Slidr operaƟng in Naples area (Source: Paradise Coast,
hƩps://www.paradisecoast.com/profile/slidr/1726) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐56
3.0
Parking Example
Downtown Naples
Naples provides free garage parking in its Downtown area.
Some garage spaces are sold through an in‐lieu fee system
through which Downtown establishments can pay a fee
instead of building required parking spaces.
Downtown Naples parking garage (Source: NaplesDowntown.com,
hƩps://www.naplesdowntown.com/transportaƟon.htm)
ObjecƟve 3: Improve parking opƟons in
commercial areas.
Strategy 1: Evaluate parking concepts for the
Bayshore Dr and Mini Triangle/Linwood Ave
commercial areas, which may include:
Shared parking with shuƩle service,
parƟcularly to meet peak‐season demand
Reduced design requirements for parking
On‐street parking as part of the Bayshore Dr
road diet
Parking garages
Parking miƟgaƟon fee (development pays
for construcƟon of public parking in lieu of
providing parking spaces)
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐57
3.0
Downtown Naples Mobility and ConnecƟvity Study
This study, completed in 2017, included a recommendaƟon for an improved bicycle and pedestrian pathway on the Gordon
River Bridge (5th Avenue/US 41) that connects Downtown Naples and the Triangle area. The proposed design calls for
narrower travel lanes and removal of the road shoulder to increase the bicycle and pedestrian pathway to 14 feet on either
side of the bridge. If implemented, the responsibility for carrying out the project would be FDOT (state level).
Proposed typical secƟon for Gordon River Bridge bicycle and pedestrian improvement from 2017 Downtown Naples Mobility and ConnecƟvity Study (Source:
City of Naples, hƩps://www.naplesgov.com/sites/default/files/fileaƩachments/streets_amp_stormwater/project/3351
city_council_presentaƟon_201710_final_revisions.pdf)
ObjecƟve 4: Improve transportaƟon
connecƟons with Downtown Naples.
Strategy 1: Coordinate with the City of Naples to
explore and partner on transportaƟon
improvements and approaches serving both
Downtown Naples and the CRA area noted in
ObjecƟve 2, Strategy 1 of this secƟon. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐58
3.0
3.6 Infrastructure
Infrastructure can be key to facilitaƟng development,
providing the services communiƟes need to funcƟon.
Certain infrastructure, such as for stormwater
management, is parƟcularly important in the CRA
area, which grapples with natural environmental
factors including storms and flooding but also benefits
from a healthy natural environment due to quality of
life factors and tourism. As a result, the framework for
this secƟon aims to provide effecƟve infrastructure
that preserves environmental and neighborhood
design quality through coordinated improvement
planning and funding.
Provide effecƟve infrastructure that preserves
environmental and neighborhood design quality
through coordinated improvement planning and
funding.
ObjecƟve 1: Ensure that infrastructure
provided will effecƟvely achieve its
primary purpose without significantly
compromising environmental and
neighborhood design quality.
Strategy 1: Develop a Stormwater Master Plan for
comprehensive infrastructure improvements that
incorporates consideraƟon for the following:
Flood plain designaƟons, including FEMA
flood designaƟons and Coastal High
Hazard requirements
Building and site plan design to respond
to flooding
Primary, secondary, and terƟary
infrastructure improvements (both short‐
and long‐term)
PotenƟal for a bicycle and pedestrian
pathway in easement of north/south
drainage ditch along Sugden Regional Park
Shared maintenance and maintenance
funding between County and CRA
Water quality
Use/design of right‐of‐way areas on local
streets
InnovaƟve techniques to pilot in CRA area,
including green infrastructure
Strategy 2: Coordinate stormwater infrastructure
planning with design of new parks (see SecƟon
3.3, ObjecƟve 1).
Strategy 3: Integrate green infrastructure
improvements into landscaping and drainage
improvements, including those funded by the
Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU.
DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐59
3.0
Green Infrastructure Examples
Green infrastructure aims to reduce stormwater runoff and
treat it closer to its source while providing environmental,
social, and economic benefits. The following examples create
surfaces or collecƟon structures that allow stormwater to
infiltrate the underlying or surrounding ground. They also can
help manage stormwater flows and improve water quality of
runoff and oŌen can be combined with vegetaƟon and
landscaping.
InfiltraƟon basin/retenƟon pond – shallow basins or
ponds that collect stormwater and can allow it to
infiltrate the underlying ground
Permeable pavement – pavement that allows water to
flow through and infiltrate the underlying ground
Rain garden – shallow planted basins that allow water to
infiltrate the ground
Bioswales – vegetated or soŌ‐lined channels that collect
and convey, slow, and clean water and let it infiltrate into
the ground
Vegetated planter boxes and bulb‐outs– infiltraƟon areas
with raised edges that can be incorporated into roadway
design features
Tree planƟngs
Vegetated infiltraƟon area in roadway bulb‐out in PalmeƩo, FL at
10th Ave W and 5th St W (Source: Google Maps, hƩps://
www.google.com/maps/@27.5151522,‐
82.575633,3a,60y,118.29h,75.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!
1slahgGjvzSzLDetQ43h5HQg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Kissimmee Lakefront Park rain gardens (Source: City of Kissimmee,
hƩps://www.kissimmee.org/Home/Components/News/
News/2208/263?backlist=%2F)
RetenƟon pond ameniƟes in Tampa at E Dr MarƟn Luther King Jr. Blvd and N 19th St (Source: Google Maps, hƩps://www.google.com/maps/@27.9815571,
‐82.4391844,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQJ3uI3LDTatc2Vr7pkfflg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐60
3.0
ObjecƟve 2: Coordinate with other
jurisdicƟons and government enƟƟes for
infrastructure planning and funding.
Strategy 1: Create a CRA‐specific Capital
Improvement Plan to idenƟfy and prioriƟze
transportaƟon, stormwater, water, and other
infrastructure improvements. Incorporate MSTU
funds operaƟng in the CRA area for relevant
capital improvement projects.
Strategy 2: IdenƟfy addiƟonal funding
opportuniƟes to supplement capital
improvements funds (e.g., grants).
Strategy 3: Document the project prioriƟzaƟon
strategy to upgrade water lines in coordinaƟon
with the City of Naples.
Strategy 4: As part of the Stormwater Master Plan
(ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 of this secƟon),
coordinate with Collier County Stormwater
Management to integrate CRA stormwater
infrastructure planning with County stormwater
planning efforts.
Strategy 5: As part of the Stormwater Master Plan
effort (ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 1 of this secƟon),
coordinate with Collier County Zoning Division to
create right‐of‐way design guidelines for
development that coordinate with Complete
Streets concepts for neighborhood streets.
Strategy 6: Coordinate with Collier County agencies
to idenƟfy and improve other infrastructure
including sanitary sewer lines, roadways that fail
to meet minimum standards, and electrical
uƟliƟes idenƟfied to be placed underground or
relocated. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐61
3.0
Need for culverts for flooding,
RetenƟon pond area improvements needed—lighƟng, security, barriers/gates to direct car traffic,
pump improvements for flooding issues
Flooding issues and need for drainage
Flooding issues and need for drainage on side streets off of Bayshore Drive. Note that Pine Tree
Drive, Andrews Avenue, and Woodside Avenue have been idenƟfied as below County standards
(involving for example sufficient right‐of‐way, drainage, paving, or similar elements) in ResoluƟon
2011‐097. These streets should be a focus in stormwater and infrastructure planning to bring
them up to standards.
Flooding issues and need for drainage on Holly Avenue. Holly Avenue also idenƟfied as below
County standards and in need of road engineering improvements (see Item 4 above).
PalmeƩo Court idenƟfied as below County standards and in need of road engineering
improvements (see item 4 above).
Upgrades needed to sanitary sewer capacity in the Triangle area to support new development.
OpportuniƟes to place overhead electric uƟliƟes on Linwood Avenue and Commercial Drive
underground or relocate them.
Infrastructure—Stormwater, Roadway Engineering, Sanitary Sewer, Electric
Stormwater and flooding are major challenges in the CRA area, requiring special aƩenƟon be paid to stormwater
management projects. The CRA has already overseen a successful drainage improvement project on Karen Drive, and
moving forward, will coordinate with the County Stormwater Management SecƟon. The map on the facing page
shows where further stormwater management improvements are needed based on public outreach. AddiƟonal needs
should be idenƟfied through an updated stormwater master plan for the area. Other idenƟfied infrastructure needs
include upgrading certain roads to meet County standards, upgrading capacity of sanitary sewer infrastructure in
certain areas, and placing underground or relocaƟng overhead electric uƟliƟes in certain areas. See Map 3‐14 for
highlighted needs.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐62
3.0
6
7
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Map 3‐14: Infrastructure Needs—Stormwater, Roadway Engineering, Sanitary Sewer, Electric DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐63
3.0
Water Infrastructure
The City of Naples provides water and water infrastructure for the CRA area, which also supports fire suppression
systems such as fire hydrants. The fire suppression infrastructure can influence the insurance raƟngs for an area. On a
scale of 1 to 10 (with 1 being the best), the CRA area currently has an Insurance Service Office (ISO) raƟng of 4.
according to the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District.
The City is currently in the process of upgrading neighborhood water lines to support hydrants for fire suppression.
Areas highlighted in red on Map 3‐15 indicate water mains that do not meet the standard fire flow requirements
determined by the City of Naples’ potable water model. These mains have potenƟal for replacement to upgrade for fire
flow improvements. However, note that most of the water mains in the CRA area are older and will need to be replaced
eventually. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐64
3.0
Map 3‐15: Water Infrastructure DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐65
3.0
3.7 Process
The substance of the CRA’s planning and
implementaƟon is important, as is the way it carries
out this planning and implementaƟon. In view of the
diversity of communiƟes living and working in the CRA
area, this secƟon lays out a framework to carry out
CRA area planning and implementaƟon efforts to
engage and serve the various communiƟes within the
CRA area.
Carry out CRA area planning and
implementaƟon efforts to engage and serve the
various communiƟes within the CRA area.
ObjecƟve 1: Improve approaches and
tools for communicaƟng with
communiƟes in the CRA area and the
general public.
Strategy 1: As part of the markeƟng and
communicaƟon strategy (see SecƟon 3.4,
ObjecƟve 1, Strategy 2), evaluate communicaƟon
mechanisms and tools that will most effecƟvely
communicate with the various communiƟes in the
CRA area.
Strategy 2: Coordinate with schools and other
community partners to improve outreach and
communicaƟon between the CRA and harder‐to‐
reach populaƟons.
Strategy 3: Provide mulƟ‐lingual communicaƟons
and materials.
ObjecƟve 2: Ensure a balanced
distribuƟon of CRA planning and
implementaƟon efforts.
Strategy 1: Account for both need‐based and
geographic consideraƟons in the distribuƟon of
planning and implementaƟon efforts.
Strategy 2: Update rules and procedures for the
CRA Advisory Board for legal consistency and with
consideraƟon given to a balanced distribuƟon of
planning/implementaƟon efforts and diverse
representaƟon. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐66
3.0
3.8 Character Areas
In addiƟon to a diversity of communiƟes in the CRA
area, there is also a diversity of built character.
This secƟon tailors the themaƟc goals, objecƟves, and
strategies of the previous secƟons to specific character
areas within the CRA area as a whole.
The character areas numbered on the Map 3‐16 are
defined by the land use characterisƟcs discussed in the
preceding maps. Key focus nodes, intersecƟons, and
corridors within the character areas that have potenƟal
for redevelopment are noted on the map with the
asterisks and doƩed lines.
For each Character Area, a brief descripƟon is provided
as well as a focus for redevelopment efforts to prioriƟze
framework elements for each area. DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐67
3.0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7
Focus Corridor
Focus Development Node/IntersecƟon
Mini Triangle/Davis
The Mini Triangle, including CRA‐owned
parcel, is a major commercial redevelopment
opportunity and Focus Development Node
Corridor commercial along Davis
Linwood Avenue another potenƟal area for
Shadowlawn
Primarily a residenƟal neighborhood with mix
of apartments/duplexes and single‐family
homes around Shadowlawn Elementary
Borders US 41/Bayshore Drive Focus
IntersecƟon (asterisk), a gateway between
Airport Pulling
Mix of corridor commercial, larger big‐box
style retail, and County Center
Part of area currently designated as an
AcƟvity Center in Future Land Use Map
Tamiami
Corridor commercial and residences,
including two major malls, Gulfgate Plaza and
Courthouse Shadows)
Borders US 41/Bayshore Drive Focus
IntersecƟon (asterisk), a gateway between
Windstar
ResidenƟal is primarily condos and single‐
family homes in gated communiƟes
Includes golf course designated as a
commercial use
North Bayshore
Focus Corridor along Bayshore Drive with
neighborhood commercial
Mix of mulƟ‐ and single‐family residenƟal
Focus IntersecƟon at Bayshore/Thomasson
with planned roundabout
South Bayshore
Primarily single‐family residenƟal
neighborhood with Naples Botanical Garden
Wetland consideraƟons for development DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐68
3.0
Character Areas
2
3
4
5
6
7 BAYSHORE DR LINWOOD AVE 1
Map 3‐16: Character Areas DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐69
3.0
Focus of Redevelopment
The following provides a focus of redevelopment for
each Character Area based on the specific characteris‐
Ɵcs described in the Character Area DefiniƟon
Map and the most relevant strategies.
Mini Triangle/Davis
Urban‐style mixed use commercial redevelop‐
ment, including capitalizaƟon on the Mini Triangle
as a catalyst development site and urban‐style
parking soluƟons
Park development at retenƟon pond site
Complete Streets design along Linwood Ave and
pedestrian scale street design between Mini Tri‐
angle, Linwood Ave, and the proposed retenƟon
pond park
Improved access to Mini Triangle development
from US 41, Davis Blvd, and Linwood Ave
MulƟ‐modal connecƟvity:
Across Davis Blvd
Between Mini Triangle, Linwood Ave, pro‐
posed retenƟon pond park, and eastern
Triangle neighborhood
To Downtown Naples potenƟally via Davis
Blvd, US 41, and Gordon River Bridge im‐
provements
AddiƟonal infrastructure improvements: sanitary
sewers, electrical, stormwater
Shadowlawn
ResidenƟal structural enhancement and upgrades
Avoidance of incompaƟble uses
TransiƟonal elements between different uses
Infill development on vacant residenƟal lots
Flooding and drainage on neighborhood streets
Airport Pulling
TransiƟons between residenƟal neighborhoods
and commercial development
Eventual street enhancements, parƟcularly con‐
necƟvity across Airport Pulling Rd
Commercial façade improvements
Tamiami
ConnecƟvity to Downtown Naples via US 41
Redevelopment of Courthouse Shadows
Tenant opportunity at Gulfgate Plaza
Windstar
Complete Streets and MSTU improvements along
major community roadways, including Bayshore
Drive, Thomasson Drive, and Hamilton Avenue
Access to Bayview Park
North Bayshore
Corridor commercial development along Bayshore
Drive, including creaƟve parking soluƟons
Larger redevelopment opportuniƟes of 17‐Acre
Site and Del’s 24 property
Arts‐ and culture‐oriented development
TransiƟonal elements between corridor commer‐
cial and residenƟal areas in along Bayshore Drive
and Thomasson Drive
Development of vacant residenƟal lots
Complete Street design along Bayshore Drive, in‐
cluding Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Drive rounda‐
bout
Neighborhood Complete Street pilots (Jeepers
Drive, North Street, Short Street)
ConnecƟons between Sugden Regional Park and
CRA area DRAFT
PLANNING, FRAMEWORKS & ELEMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 3‐70
3.0
Water main upgrades
Flooding and drainage on neighborhood streets
South Bayshore
Mobile home and single‐family home residenƟal
improvements, upgrades, affordability
Development of vacant residenƟal lots
Access to Bayview Park
ConnecƟons between CRA and uses to the east,
including East Naples Community Park
Wetland, flooding, and site preparaƟon considera‐
Ɵons for development
Roadway improvements to meet County engineer‐
ing standards DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐1
4.0
4.1 PrioriƟzaƟon of Projects
& IniƟaƟves
The CRA will need to implement or coordinate on a
number of capital improvement projects and planning,
administraƟve, and regulatory iniƟaƟves to carry out
the framework of goals, objecƟves, and strategies
presented in Chapter 3.0. Since these projects and
iniƟaƟves cannot be carried out all at once, this
chapter presents a prioriƟzaƟon plan in terms of
amount of funds programmed and project/iniƟaƟve
Ɵming. A key consideraƟon for prioriƟzaƟon is the
amount of funding available for these projects and
iniƟaƟves, discussed more in SecƟon 4.2. Other
prioriƟzaƟon criteria to consider that were primarily
highlighted in the public outreach process (see
Appendix B) include:
Funding availability from dedicated or outside
sources (aside from CRA funds)
Magnitude of anƟcipated impact and mulƟplier
effects
Whether planning has already been undertaken or
completed
Other consideraƟons that received sizable posiƟve
responses during the public outreach process
included:
Project Ɵming consideraƟons independent of
prioriƟzaƟon (e.g., Haldeman Creek dredging
should account for Ɵmeframe of sediment build‐
up, a stormwater master plan should be
completed before stormwater improvement
projects)
Ability to address health/safety concerns
AddiƟonal consideraƟons recommended by the
project team based on the Redevelopment Plan
update process include:
Degree of need
Geographic distribuƟon of projects in the CRA
area
PrioriƟes idenƟfied during the Community Forum
for the Redevelopment Plan (see Appendix B)
4.2 Financing Plan
The primary funding source for the CRA is Tax
Increment Financing (TIF) revenue generated by the
within the CRA area. The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
CRA is able to use County ad valorem tax revenues
generated above the base‐year amount in the CRA
area to apply to projects and iniƟaƟves idenƟfied in
this Redevelopment Plan.
Figure 4‐1 shows the historic revenue trends and
projected revenues through 2045 based on a low
growth scenario that follows the County’s historic
growth trends with a 4.8% assumed growth rate, a
medium growth scenario that assumes a 5.2% growth
rate, and a high growth scenario that assumes a 5.7%
growth rate. For more informaƟon on the
development of growth scenarios, methods of
revenue calculaƟon, and detailed revenue tables, see
Appendix D.
Certain parts of the CRA area are also designated as
Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs), which uƟlize
an addiƟonal ad valorem tax for specific purposes. The
Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU, created in 1997,
applies to the CRA area south of US 41 (see Map 4‐1);
revenues from this tax are focused on streetscape and
right‐of‐way improvements (including right‐of‐way
maintenance), with some addiƟonal provisions for use
of funds on other public realm improvements in the
MSTU area. Figure 4‐2 shows projected revenues
through 2045 using the same growth scenarios
developed for the TIF revenue calculaƟons (see
Appendix D for more informaƟon and detailed
revenue tables).
A Haldeman Creek MSTU (see Map 4‐2) was also
created in 2006 for maintenance dredging and
navigaƟonal marker maintenance within the MSTU
boundary. Figure 4‐3 shows projected revenues
through 2045 using the same growth scenarios
developed for the TIF revenue calculaƟons (see
Appendix D for more informaƟon and detailed
revenue tables).
Other potenƟal funding sources that may be idenƟfied
to supplement the funds above include grants and
funding from partnerships (other agencies and private
funders). There may also be opportuniƟes in the
future to take on addiƟonal debt to pay for capital
projects with a plan for repayment. DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐2
4.0
Map 4‐1: Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU Area
Note: includes a boundary extension on Thomasson east of the CRA boundary that was pending approval during the development of this Redevelopment
Plan. DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐3
4.0
Figure 4‐1: CRA TIF Revenue Scenarios
Figure 4‐2: Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU Revenue Scenarios
Figure 4‐3: Haldeman Creek MSTU Revenue Scenarios DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐4
4.0
Map 4‐2: Haldeman Creek MSTU Area DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐5
4.0
4.3 Projects & IniƟaƟves
PrioriƟzaƟon
Based on available funding and prioriƟzaƟon
consideraƟons, the following sets out the phasing for
recommended projects and iniƟaƟves with
descripƟons. Note that the CRA proposed sunset date
extension is for 2060 (in 42 years ). Tables 4‐1 through
4‐5 summarize the available funding and the
prioriƟzaƟon plan with recommended funding
amounts and sources.
Short Term (1‐5 years)
Capital Projects
Thomasson Dr and Hamilton Ave Improvements –
this project is expected to be implemented with
exisƟng Bayshore BeauƟficaƟon MSTU funds, but
there may potenƟally be a need for addiƟonal
capital funding that has been accounted for in th
capital plan.
Republic Dr Complete Streets Improvements –
neighborhood‐level Complete Streets
improvements between Bayshore Dr and East
Naples Community Park, including lighƟng,
possible sidewalk expansion, any necessary
drainage improvements, and an improved
pedestrian bridge connecƟon to East Naples
Community Park
Danford St Complete Streets Improvements –
neighborhood‐level Complete Streets
improvements between the end of the roadway
and Hamilton Ave, including lighƟng, sidewalks,
water line upgrades, and any necessary drainage
improvements
Bayview Car and Boat Parking Improvements–
coordinaƟon with Parks & RecreaƟon Division to
transiƟon from on‐street parking on Hamilton Ave
to parking at sites idenƟfied by the Parks &
RecreaƟon Division
Bay St Complete Street Improvements –
neighborhood‐level Complete Streets
improvements between Hamilton Ave and the
end of the roadway, including lighƟng, pedestrian
walk lane striping, and any necessary drainage
improvements
Surface Parking Lot in Bayshore Dr Area – to
increase available commercial parking
General Road Engineering Improvements on Pine
Tree Dr and Andrews Dr – to bring these roadways
up to minimum County standards
Jeepers Dr Complete Street Improvements –
neighborhood Complete Streets improvements
between Bayshore Dr and Sugden Regional Park,
including walk lane striping, upgraded bioswales,
lighƟng, and a pedestrian connecƟon to Sugden
Regional Park
Gateway IntersecƟon Design Improvements at US
41/Shadowlawn Dr/Bayshore Dr – sign
improvements in the right‐of‐way and median
areas with an opportunity to showcase public art
Street Sign/Wayfinding Improvements in CRA area
– signs to address branding and bicycle/pedestrian
movement
Sidewalk/Bicycle Infrastructure Program –
program to address gaps in the pedestrian and
bicycle infrastructure networks that are not
addressed through Complete Streets
improvements
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades/
Improvements
Wastewater Upgrades in Triangle Area – to
increase capacity
Non‐Capital Expenditures
Ongoing OperaƟng Expenses for CRA
Process Improvements – updated bylaws for CRA
Advisory Board
Process Improvements – establish a formal role
for the CRA in development review process DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐6
4.0
Staff and AdministraƟon Costs
Land Development Code Updates‐ based on
recommendaƟons from CRA Plan Update
Mini Triangle Development – funding for incenƟves
and other needed support for the development of
the Mini Triangle
Gateway Property Development – funding for
potenƟal incenƟve in support of the project.
Stormwater Master Plan Update – idenƟfy primary,
secondary, and terƟary improvements needed in
the CRA area with a prioriƟzaƟon plan
Arts and Culture Plan for CRA Area
Complete Streets ImplementaƟon Plan
Bayview Parking Study – concepts and outreach in
coordinaƟon with Parks & RecreaƟon Division
Community Safety & Cleanup Strategy – strategy to
address code enforcement issues and community
safety
Branding Strategy
MarkeƟng and CommunicaƟon Strategy –
strategies to communicate outcomes from the
branding effort and connect with the various
communiƟes in the CRA area (including hard‐to‐
reach groups) with updated tools including the
website, e‐blast templates, markeƟng materials,
etc.
Market Study/Economic Profile
Bayshore Dr Technical Feasibility Study – for
Complete Street implementaƟon
Bayshore Dr Pilot project – for Complete Street
implementaƟon
Community Land Trust Strategy
Mobile Home Upgrade Strategy – coordinaƟon
with the Collier County Community &
Human Services Division to upgrade mobile homes
using established County program
Water & Fire Update Strategy – documentaƟon of
what mains and hydrants will be updated and
phasing
Triangle RetenƟon Pond Feasibility Study – finalized
design and engineering for passive park
improvements
Grants
ResidenƟal Grant/Loan Programs – for
structural improvements to single‐family
homes
Mobile Home Upgrade Program ‐ for
transiƟon of mobile homes to modular
homes
Commercial Façade Program – for areas
that are not a major focus for commercial
redevelopment but that can be enhanced
with exterior façade and structural
improvements
Wall & Fence Funding – for transiƟonal
structures between incompaƟble uses
Public Art Funding –for public art pieces
and events
Economic Development IncenƟves
Program –for economic development
incenƟves related to SecƟon 3.4 of the
Redevelopment Plan
Mid Term (6‐15 years)
Capital Projects
Triangle RetenƟon Pond Improvements ‐
implementaƟon of passive park improvements at
the pond site with any necessary drainage and
connecƟvity improvements
Surface Parking Lot in the Mini Triangle area to
support commercial uses
Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail ‐ along Sugden
Regional Park Drainage Ditch to provide north/
south connecƟvity
Commercial Parking Garage on Bayshore Dr ‐
possibly on surface lot included in short‐term
capital projects for commercial parking
Bayshore Dr Complete Street – major Complete
Street improvement between US 41 and DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐7
4.0
Thomasson Dr, including possible lane reducƟon,
on‐street parking, and any addiƟonal needed
infrastructure improvements
Linwood Ave Complete Street – major Complete
Street improvement between Commercial Dr and
Wild Pines Ln including on‐street parking, lighƟng,
sidewalk widening, and any addiƟonal needed
infrastructure improvements
Shadowlawn Dr Complete Street – major Complete
Street improvement between Davis Blvd and US
41, including lighƟng and any addiƟonal needed
infrastructure improvements
Gateway IntersecƟon Design Improvements –
signage and potenƟal public art opportuniƟes for:
Davis Blvd/Airport‐Pulling Rd
Davis Blvd/Shadowlawn Dr
Davis Blvd/US 41
Thomasson Dr/Dominion Dr
US 41/Osceola Ave
Haldeman Creek Dredging
General Road Engineering Improvements – to bring
the following roads up to minimum County
standards:
Woodside Ave
Holly Ave
PalmeƩo Ct
Sidewalk/Bicycle Infrastructure Program
Priority Water Upgrades – for mains that require
upgrades for fire suppression
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades/
Improvements
Underground/relocate overhead uƟlity lines in
Mini Triangle Area and Linwood
Non‐Capital Expenditures
Ongoing OperaƟng Expenses for CRA
Bayshore Bicycle/Pedestrian Trail Feasibility Study
–for trail along Sugden Regional Park drainage
ditch, assuming an iniƟal level of feasibility as
deemed by County staff
Micro‐enterprise Incubator Study ‐ for concepts
and implementaƟon
Grants
ResidenƟal Grant/Loan Programs – for
structural improvements to single‐family
homes
Mobile Home Upgrade Program ‐ for
transiƟon of mobile homes to modular
homes
Commercial Façade Program – for areas
that are not a major focus for commercial
redevelopment but that can be enhanced
with exterior façade and structural
improvements
Wall & Fence Funding – for transiƟonal
structures between incompaƟble uses
Public Art Funding –for public art pieces
and events
Economic Development IncenƟves
Program –for economic development
incenƟves related to SecƟon 3.4 of the
Redevelopment Plan
Long Term (16+ years)
Capital Projects
Bayshore Dr Complete Street Improvement
between Thomasson Dr and Holly Ave –
neighborhood‐level Complete Street, including any
drainage improvements and connecƟons to
potenƟal Naples Bay Greenway Sun Trail
improvements
Commercial Parking Garage in Mini Triangle Area
possibly on Surface Lot included in Mid‐Term
Capital Projects– to address commercial parking
needs DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐8
4.0
Sidewalk/Bicycle Infrastructure Program
Future Phase Water Upgrades – all remaining non‐
priority mains
Stormwater Infrastructure Upgrades/
Improvements
Underground/relocate overhead uƟlity lines in
Mini Triangle Area and Linwood
Non‐Capital Expenditures
Ongoing OperaƟng Expenses for CRA
Grants
ResidenƟal Grant/Loan Programs – for
structural improvements to single‐family
homes
Mobile Home Upgrade Program ‐ for
transiƟon of mobile homes to modular
homes
Commercial Façade Program – for areas
that are not a major focus for commercial
redevelopment but that can be enhanced
with exterior façade and structural
improvements
Wall & Fence Funding – for transiƟonal
structures between incompaƟble uses
Public Art Funding –for public art pieces
and events
Economic Development IncenƟves
Program –for economic development
incenƟves related to SecƟon 3.4 of the
Redevelopment Plan DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐9
4.0
Table 4‐1: Summary of Projected Revenue EsƟmates DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐10
4.0
Table 4‐2: Capital Improvements Project Matrix—North of US 41 (Triangle) DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐11
4.0
Table 4‐3: Capital Improvements South of US 41 (Bayshore) DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐12
4.0
Table 4‐4: Non Capital Expenditures DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐13
4.0
Table 4‐5: Summary of all Revenues and Expenditures DRAFT
PRIORITIZATION PLAN
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 4‐14
4.0
4.6 CoordinaƟon &
Partnerships
Many of the items listed in the Chapter 3.0 framework
require the CRA to coordinate with other agencies and
enƟƟes as opposed to overseeing a project or iniƟaƟve
directly. Examples of inter‐agency coordinaƟon
include coordinaƟon with the Collier MPO to share
local needs that might inform a state roadway
improvement, as well as coordinaƟng with other
Collier County agencies on topics such as Land
Development Code changes, park access, community
safety, transit, and stormwater. The CRA also has
opportuniƟes to coordinate with the City of Naples on
transportaƟon planning and water main upgrades.
This type of coordinaƟon might involve seƫng up
regular meeƟngs coinciding with planning and project
cycles prior to finalized design phases. Key planning
cycles for coordinaƟon include the TransportaƟon
Improvement Program planning by the MPO and
capital improvement planning for Collier County.
Aside from government agencies, the CRA may also
have opportuniƟes to partner with local enƟƟes such
as private firms and non‐profits to realize some of its
objecƟves. Examples include potenƟally partnering
with the Naples Accelerator or St. MaƩhew’s House
on a business incubator idea. There may also be
opportuniƟes to partner with companies such as Slidr
for alternaƟve vehicle transportaƟon in the area. DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 5‐1
5.0
5.1 Overview of Relevant
Statutes
SecƟons 163.360 and 163.362 of Florida Statutes
contain specific requirements for community
redevelopment plans. Table 5‐1 provides an overview
of the requirements from these statutes and the
locaƟon in this Redevelopment Plan where the
relevant informaƟon can be found to saƟsfy these
requirements.
5.2 Consistency with the
County’s Comprehensive Plan
This Redevelopment Plan sets forth a vision for the
CRA area centered on fostering more urban‐style
development, including mulƟ‐modal corridors, mixed
use projects, and building out to allowable densiƟes.
The Collier County Growth Management Plan largely
supports this vision with the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle Redevelopment Overlay provisions and the
AcƟvity Center designaƟon. The Mixed Use overlays
provided in the Land Development Code further
support these efforts. Development and
redevelopment are thus largely intended to be
completed within the provisions of the Growth
Management Plan as they exist now or indicate where
future amendments may be needed in order to carry
out implementaƟon of acƟon items.
5.3 AcquisiƟon, DemoliƟon/
Clearance, & Improvement
In the future, the Redevelopment Agency may choose
to pursue a program of property acquisiƟon and/or
consolidaƟon to realize the redevelopment objecƟves.
These objecƟves might relate to facilitaƟng private
development and providing idenƟfied needed public
uses. If a property is designated for acquisiƟon, the
process must comply with County requirements and/
or State statutes.
The Redevelopment Agency is authorized to demolish,
clear, or move buildings, structures, and other
improvements from any real property acquired in the
redevelopment project area, subject to obtaining
necessary permits.
The CRA may also engage in or assist in site
preparaƟon improvements on properƟes it already
owns or properƟes it acquires in the future to
facilitate development. Other improvements include
general infrastructure and streetscape improvements
that indirectly support development. See SecƟon 4.0
for those improvements that are planned for the CRA
to fund. All of these improvements are subject to
obtaining necessary permits.
5.4 Zoning & Comprehensive
Plan Changes
No Growth Management Plan or Land Development
Code changes were brought through an approval
process as part of this planning effort, and no Land
Development Code or Comprehensive Plan changes
are being adopted with the adopƟon of this
Redevelopment Plan. However, recommended
changes will be brought for iniƟal consistency review
by Collier County staff and the Collier County Planning
Commission following adopƟon of this plan.
5.5 Land Use, DensiƟes, &
Building Requirements
As noted in SecƟon 5.4, no Land Development Code or
Comprehensive Plan changes are being adopted with
the adopƟon of this Redevelopment Plan.
Consequently, the Redevelopment Plan will follow the
land uses, densiƟes, and building requirements
provided in the Growth Management Plan and the
Land Development Code for the Ɵme being. However,
recommended changes will be brought forth for iniƟal
consistency review by Collier County staff and the
Collier County Planning Commission.
5.6 Neighborhood Impact
The Redevelopment Plan focuses on improving
structural quality of buildings, compaƟbility of uses,
and urban design, as well as promoƟng more urban‐
style development and mulƟ‐modal transportaƟon. As
of right now, there is housing available at lower
income levels, yet this may be due to lower structural
quality based on findings from the Assessment Memo
(Appendix A). As improvements are made in the area,
there is a potenƟal risk of property values rising to DRAFT
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 5‐2
5.0
SecƟon 163.360, F.S. Requirements Relevant Redevelopment Plan
SecƟon
Conformity to the Growth Management Plan 5.2, Appendix E
Zoning and planning changes 5.4
Land uses, maximum densiƟes, and building requirements
5.5; for general consideraƟons
to guide these requirements,
see 3.2
Land acquisiƟon, demoliƟon, clearance and site preparaƟon, redevelopment,
improvements, and rehabilitaƟon proposed to carry out the Redevelopment Plan 4.3, 5.3
Affordable housing provision 3.4‐ ObjecƟve 5
SecƟon 163.362, F.S. Requirements Relevant Redevelopment Plan
SecƟon
Legal descripƟon of CRA area boundaries and reason behind establishing such
boundaries Appendix C
Approximate amount of open space to be provided shown by diagram and in general
terms
SecƟon 3.3‐Table 3‐1 and Map
3‐7
Property intended for parks and recreaƟon space shown by diagram and in general
terms SecƟon 3.3‐Map 3‐7
Street layout and property intended for streets shown by diagram and in general terms 3.5‐Map 3‐13
LimitaƟons on the type, size, height, number, and proposed use of buildings shown by
diagram and in general terms 5.5
The approximate number of dwelling units shown by diagram and in general terms 3.2‐Map 3‐2
Replacement housing and relocaƟon 3.4‐ObjecƟve 5 examples
Property intended for public uƟliƟes shown by diagram and in general terms 3.6‐Maps 3‐14 and 3‐15
Property for public improvements of any nature shown by diagram and in general
terms
3.1‐Map 3‐1 , 4.2; addiƟonal
details in 3.2‐Map 3‐6, 3.3‐Map
3‐7, 3.4‐Map 3‐9, 3.5‐Maps 3‐
11 and 3‐13, 3.6‐Maps 3‐14 and
3‐15
Neighborhood impact element describing impacts on residents of CRA area and
surrounding areas in terms of relocaƟon, traffic circulaƟon, environmental quality,
availability of community faciliƟes and services, effect on school populaƟon, and other
maƩers affecƟng the physical and social quality of the neighborhood
5.6
Publicly funded capital improvements to be undertaken in the CRA area 4.2
Safeguards, controls, restricƟons/covenants 5.7
Replacement housing for relocaƟon of displaced persons from housing faciliƟes 3.4‐ObjecƟve 5 examples
ResidenƟal use element 3.2, 3.4‐ObjecƟve 5
Projected costs of redevelopment 4.3
Redevelopment Plan duraƟon and Ɵme certain for redevelopment financed by
increment revenues 5.8
Table 5‐1: Statutory Requirements for Redevelopment Plan DRAFT
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 5‐3
5.0
make housing substanƟally less affordable.
Consequently, protecƟve measures are being
considered to maintain the affordability of these units
while improving their quality (see SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve
5). Temporary relocaƟon of residents in lower quality
units may be required to make building improvements.
An addiƟonal consideraƟon for lower income
households with improvements to the CRA area is the
availability of community faciliƟes and services. These
uses may also risk displacement if property values
increase rapidly or dramaƟcally. This Redevelopment
Plan includes provisions to support community‐
oriented uses that include these faciliƟes and services
so that they can remain a part of the community (see
SecƟon 3.4, ObjecƟve 3, Strategy 2).
With more urban‐style development and mulƟ‐modal
improvements, traffic circulaƟon may change. There
may be increased congesƟon on roadways and at major
state road intersecƟons in making them safer for non‐
automobile modes and pursuing catalyst development
opportuniƟes. Any development would need to go
through the exisƟng Collier County process to assess
and miƟgate for Level of Service changes on roadways.
Ensuring low‐cost transportaƟon alternaƟves may also
support affordable mobility for lower income
households and community members.
Regarding impacts on other faciliƟes, such as schools,
any new development would need to go through the
exisƟng Collier County process to assess and miƟgate
for Level of Service changes.
Regarding environmental quality, water quality is a key
consideraƟon for stormwater management
improvements. Water quality impacts can be evaluated
through exisƟng Collier County processes. AddiƟonally,
this Redevelopment Plan encourages green
infrastructure techniques that may help provide certain
levels of localized water treatment and ground
infiltraƟon prior to arriving at major collector sites.
5.7 Safeguards, Controls,
RestricƟons, & Assurances
Redevelopment acƟviƟes idenƟfied in this
Redevelopment Plan will not be iniƟated unƟl they are
found to be consistent with the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and applicable land development
regulaƟons. The Redevelopment Agency, working
collaboraƟvely with County agencies, may propose
amendments to the Growth Management Plan and the
Land Use Development Code, including design criteria,
building heights, land coverage, setback requirements,
special excepƟons, traffic circulaƟon, traffic access, and
other development and design controls necessary for
proper development of public and private projects.
To leverage the increment revenues, Collier County
may consider non‐ad valorem assessments. For
example, during the Redevelopment Plan update
process, the County was working on a stormwater
uƟlity fee that, if adopted, would apply to the CRA area.
The imposiƟon of special assessments for capital
improvements and essenƟal services is covered by well
seƩled case law and specific statutory provisions
authorizing collecƟon of non‐ad valorem assessments
on the same bill as ad valorem taxes. Such provisions
require extraordinary noƟce to all affected property
owners.
Issues concerning restricƟons on any property acquired
for community redevelopment purposes and then
returned to use by the private sector will be addressed
on a case‐by‐case basis to ensure all acƟviƟes
necessary to perpetuate the redevelopment iniƟaƟve
are advanced in a manner consistent with this CRA Plan
and any amendment to it. Such restricƟons or controls
would be expected in the form of covenants on any
land sold or leased for private use as provided for in
the Community Redevelopment Act, SecƟon 163.380,
F.S.
To assure that redevelopment will take place in
conformance with the projects, objecƟves and
strategies expressed in this CRA Plan, the
Redevelopment Agency will uƟlize the regulatory
mechanisms used by the County to permit DRAFT
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA 5‐4
5.0
development and redevelopment within its
jurisdicƟon. These mechanisms include but are not
limited to the Growth Management Plan; the Land
Development Code; adopted design guidelines;
performance standards; and County‐authorized
development review, permiƫng, and approval
processes and any other adopted codes, standards,
and policies.
5.8 Extending the DuraƟon of
the CRA, Time Certain
Consistent with the provisions of the Community
Redevelopment Act, SecƟon 163.362(10), F.S., all
redevelopment acƟviƟes financed by increment
revenues from the Redevelopment Trust Fund must
occur within 30 years aŌer the fiscal year in which the
2018 CRA Plan Update is approved or adopted. The
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA has selected the
maximum 30 years for the duraƟon of this
Redevelopment Plan. While the CRA believes that it will
take the full 30 years for implementaƟon, economic
condiƟons may improve from those assumed in the
financial scenarios or addiƟonal funding sources may
be idenƟfied to expedite the process.
Conclusion
With the recovery from the recession of 2008, the CRA
area is poised for revitalizaƟon via investment,
development, and redevelopment. With this update,
the CRA will be able to conƟnue the general mission of
redevelopment that it set out when the Bayshore/
Gateway Triangle redevelopment area was first created
in 2000.
The CRA can move forward with the vision and
implementaƟon items of this Redevelopment Plan in a
guided way, allowing for change and also protecƟng
and enhancing what defines the area and makes it
unique. DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
GREAT INSIGHTS. GREATER OUTCOMES.
www.tindaleoliver.com
TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
To: Debrah Forester, Director, Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment
Agency
From: Evan Johnson, AICP, LEED AP, Project Manager, Tindale Oliver
Subject: Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA Plan Update, Assessment Memo (Task 1)
Date: REVISED DRAFT October 2, 2018
1.0 Project Overview
1.1 Scope of Work
This Assessment Memo is the deliverable for Task 1 of the update to the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
CRA Redevelopment Plan (Redevelopment Plan). The major tasks and sub-tasks of this update effort,
detailed below, build on each other to ultimately arrive at an updated CRA Plan:
• Task 1: This task generally involves an assessment of the existing conditions and opportunities in
the CRA through technical analysis, observation, and public and agency outreach. The Task 1
deliverable documents the existing conditions and opportunities, proposes updated objectives
and principles to guide the CRA Plan, provides an outline and framework for the CRA Plan, and
provides recommendations related to the following themes:
o Transportation connectivity
o Parking assessment and strategies
o Infrastructure needs
o Land use and urban design strategies
o Vacant parcel strategies and identification of catalyst project sites
o Streetscape, parks, and aesthetic improvements
o Development incentives and other strategies
• Task 2: This task focuses on the development of the CRA Plan, including tax increment finance
projections, capital improvement planning and funding, proposed comprehensive plan and
zoning changes, and development of the draft and final CRA Plan document.
1.2 Assessment Memo Overview
As noted in the Scope of Work section, the findings of this Assessment Memo are based primarily on
technical analysis, observation, and public and agency outreach. The remaining sections of this memo
describe these efforts in more detail, covering the following information: DRAFT
Page 2 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Section 2.0 Preliminary Recommendations and Next Steps: provides recommendations related
to themes listed in Section 1.1 and next steps in the project.
• Section 3.0 Study Area Overview and Context: summarizes high-level demographic, economic,
and environmental conditions within the CRA area and trends at the county level that
contextualize and influence CRA planning efforts.
• Section 4.0 Plan, Policy, and Program Assessment: documents the planning, policies, and
programs undertaken by the CRA and/or Collier County to promote redevelopment in the CRA
area, as well as planning efforts by other jurisdictions whose actions influence the CRA. This
section includes a review of land use and zoning, existing plans, capital improvement efforts,
and CRA grant programs.
• Section 5.0 Fiscal Trends and Property Assessment: analyzes structural age and improvement
levels to indicate which sections of the CRA area may have a more particular need for
enhancement/redevelopment. Also highlights the connection between these findings and
taxable value for the CRA area, followed by budget and revenue trends over time for the CRA
area funds (including the Municipal Service Taxing Units – MSTUs) stemming from the taxable
value.
• Section 6.0 Public Outreach: summarizes conditions, issues, and opportunities identified from
meetings and calls with agency representatives and stakeholders, the public workshop, and the
boat tour of the canals.
• Section 7.0 Built Environment Assessment and Needs: highlights existing conditions and needs
related to the built environment that were identified through fieldwork, public and agency
outreach, and technical analysis. Findings are categorized by the following themes: land use,
parks and open space, design treatments and attributes, needed land use transitions, character
areas, transportation, and other infrastructure.
DRAFT
Page 3 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
2.0 Preliminary Recommendations and Next Steps
2.1 Preliminary Recommendations
The following are the preliminary recommendations based on findings of the initial assessment (detailed
in the remainder of this memo). These recommendations will serve as the basis for the Goals,
Objectives, and Policies framework of the final Redevelopment Plan.
Land Use & Urban Design
• Amend the LDC to limit heavy commercial and manufacturing/warehouse/storage uses in the
CRA area and provide clear guidance for new uses, particularly on relationship of overlay zoning
to base zoning.
• Identify elements in the LDC to institute transitional areas and buffers between uses that are
less compatible.
• Identify areas appropriate for accessory dwelling units and live/work designations.
• Identify incentives or technical assistance to promote more urban-style development, such as
mixed use projects and accessory dwelling unit development.
• Evaluate opportunities for arts-oriented code flexibility that will incorporate existing arts activity
such as murals and gallery space.
• Create approach for design of the public realm, architectural styles, and gateway/focus
intersections, including public art opportunities.
• Build on existing Bayshore MSTU funded improvements and re-evaluate any visibility issues
posed by landscaping and design to promote transportation and community safety.
• Use sub-area characteristics (see proposed Character Areas section of the final Redevelopment
Plan) to inform land use vision and strategies for sections of the CRA area.
Public Realm, Parks, & Open Space
• Coordinate with Collier County Parks & Recreation Division to evaluate opportunities for
additional parking and operational maintenance at Bayview Park, which is just outside the CRA
area to the west.
• Identify opportunities for community programming and events, including coordination with
County Parks and Recreation Division for event space in parks just outside the CRA boundaries.
• Create site-specific parks plan for retention pond in Triangle area.
• Identify and document a strategy for canal maintenance in right-of way, including seawalls and
mangroves, in coordination with the Haldeman Creek MSTU Advisory Board.
• Coordinate with Collier County Sheriff, Collier County Code Enforcement, service providers in
CRA area, and residents/business owners in CRA area for a community safety and clean-up
strategy (inclusive of private property in the canal network) that reduces reliance on case-by-
case enforcement.
DRAFT
Page 4 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Development Strategies
• Coordinate with County Growth Management and Zoning Divisions to pilot innovative land uses
and zoning techniques to promote more urban-style development (e.g., mixed-use, multi-
modal, reduced setbacks, live/work spaces). See related recommendations in preceding Land
Use & Urban Design section.
• Evaluate the addition of eligibility requirements/performance metrics in awarding density pool
units.
• Identify ways to streamline the review process, including dedicated staffing in the review
process, better coordination between applicable codes and entities involved, code clarification
(see preceding Land Use & Urban Design section), increased reliance on defined criteria for
development approval, and encouragement of design-build approaches.
• Incorporate CRA as formal entity in the development review process.
• Coordinate with Collier County Tourist Development Council and Parks and Recreation Division
to promote local business and commercial establishments in the CRA area as part of tourism
development in the area. A specific effort will be to coordinate as part of the East Naples
Community Park pickleball planning process.
• Create an Arts and Culture Plan for the CRA area, in coordination with county-wide efforts.
• Identify incentives for a range of development and redevelopment, including small, local
commercial, social enterprises and business opportunities for those with tenuous livelihoods,
and larger development projects; consider incentives for land assembly, tenant attraction and
re-location expenses, and tax breaks, among others. These efforts can be used to revise current
grant program offerings.
• Identify incentives for target tenants along US 41 Bayshore and capitalize on vacancies.
• Create marketing and branding strategy for CRA to communicate vision and improve approaches
and tools for communicating with public (website, social media, branding materials); this
strategy should coordinate with design concepts developed for public realm and private
development.
• Explore current tenancy and redevelopment opportunities, including those at Del's 24, in the
office space at Gulfgate Plaza, along Linwood Ave, along Bayshore Drive, and in Courthouse
Shadows.
• Protect and enhance existing community-oriented uses and single-family neighborhoods off of
the main corridors. These considerations can inform current grant program offerings for home
enhancements, which may consider building age, structural quality, and means of the property
owners.
• Capitalize on opportunities for Activity Center, including the redevelopment of the Courthouse
Shadows site.
• Evaluate concepts to expand the CRA boundaries, which may include Sugden Regional Park, East
Naples Community Park, Bayview Park or areas along Thomasson Drive. A formal process
(Finding of Necessity) is required as an initial step in expanding CRA area boundaries.
• Maintain current housing affordability in CRA while improving baseline quality conditions. DRAFT
Page 5 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Coordinate with schools to enhance outreach and communication.
• Conduct a market study, including information on owners of second homes that is not captured
in typical data sets, to determine what development will be supported in the CRA area.
Vacant Parcels and Catalyst Site Opportunities
• Continue to move forward with existing catalyst projects to strengthen and solidify development
interest in the CRA area. CRA can assist with coordination of property owners in target areas and
can play a role in negotiating desired amenities to be incorporated in the development.
• Identify alternative funding opportunities for capital projects.
Transportation
• Create an implementation strategy for discrete transportation improvements and more
comprehensive Complete Streets corridor improvements. This effort should include
development of a sidewalk master plan, including visibility assessment with landscaping and
connections to neighboring parks. Prioritization of projects should consider the priorities of the
Collier County Comprehensive Pathways Plan (currently being updated) related to the local CRA
area.
• Identify opportunities to coordinate transportation capital improvements with FDOT
improvements along major arterials (e.g., the US 41 connection between the CRA area and
Downtown Naples).
• Temporary installations can be used to vet bike/pedestrian improvements, such as "Home"
streets pilots on neighborhood streets, elements of Bayshore Drive road diet, turning radii, and
additional pedestrian crossings. These efforts should incorporate community input and feedback
to gauge response to more urban-style development and any particular concerns to address or
opportunities on which to capitalize. These installations can be incorporated into community
events that include educational elements on, for example, Complete Streets, Vision Zero, and
roundabouts.
• Based on input from temporary installations, move forward with vetting of Bayshore Drive road
diet concept scenarios and traffic analysis.
• Evaluate opportunities to improve local transportation options, including considerations for
improving access to Downtown Naples, improving commuting options, and coordinating with
the City of Naples. Options to explore further include alternative vehicles (e.g., golf carts,
electric shuttles), bikeshare, transit, and active transportation improvements (e.g., enhanced
pedestrian infrastructure along Us 41/5th Ave between Downtown Naples and the Triangle area
contained within Davis Boulevard, US 41, and Airport Pulling Road).
• Evaluate opportunities for a north/south neighborhood connector in Bayshore area with
connections to Sugden Park and East Naples Community Park.
DRAFT
Page 6 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Evaluate parking opportunities in the Bayshore area, including shared parking, reduced design
requirements for parking, and parking garage. Based on this initial evaluation, vet creative
parking concepts with public outreach and technical feasibility study.
Infrastructure
• Create CRA-specific Capital Improvement Plan to identify and prioritize transportation,
stormwater, water, and other infrastructure improvements. Incorporate MSTU funds where
appropriate.
• Document the strategy to upgrade water lines in coordination with the City of Naples.
• Develop a Stormwater Master Plan in coordination with Collier County Stormwater
Management to comprehensively document stormwater needs and integrate with general
capital improvements planning (see below). Include considerations for water quality and
use/design of right-of-way areas. Coordinate with Collier County Zoning Division to create Right-
of-Way design guidelines for development that coordinate with "Home" streets concepts.
General
• CRA area improvements/projects should be based on degree of need and geographic
distribution throughout the district.
2.2 Next Steps for Plan
Based on a review of the existing 2000 Master Plan, it was been determined that the existing plan
should be deleted and replaced with a new Redevelopment Plan (as opposed to an approach of
amending the existing plan). A draft framework of goals, objectives, and strategies will be developed
based on these preliminary recommendations to provide a guiding organizational structure for the final
Redevelopment Plan. The final Plan will also include revenue projections for the CRA redevelopment
fund and a capital improvement plan and implementation strategy for the five years following the Plan’s
adoption. With these draft components in place, the draft final plan will be brought back to the public
for comment prior to entering the formal approval process. A formal approval process will also take
place for any accompanying LDC amendments. DRAFT
Page 7 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
3.0 Study Area Overview and Context
3.1 Demographic Considerations
This section lays out information on population, age, and income trends to understand characteristics of
the residents of the CRA area in the context of broader county-wide trends. Note that maps and tables
from the recent Collier County Parks and Recreation Master Plan update are used to contextualize the
data from the CRA area, which accounts for why 2015 data is referenced for countywide trends while
2016 data is referenced for the CRA area.
Existing Population
Map 3-1 shows the existing population in the CRA area based on 2016 ACS data. There is a higher
concentration of population in the northeast portion of the CRA to the east of Airport Pulling Road,
which is likely due to a large apartment complex outside of the CRA area boundary as opposed to the
County Center within the CRA area. While this higher concentration of development may not be directly
in the CRA’s jurisdiction, the higher concentration may affect local traffic and commercial traffic in the
CRA area generated by these residents. The southern portion of the CRA shows elevated population, yet
this finding may be due to the size of the census block group that contains that section of the CRA (see
Population Density section below).
ESRI’s Community Analyst tool uses ACS-derived data and other ESRI data to calculate descriptive
statistics for the demographics of special areas (those that are different from the typical geographies of
block group, census tract, etc.). For the CRA area, Community Analyst calculated a population estimate
of 6,495 people.
Population Growth
Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) data was used to understand expected population growth for the
CRA area. Map 3-2 indicates that more significant growth is expected for the area including the southern
portion of the CRA, yet note again that this finding corresponds to a larger area of measurement
(including the Isles of Collier Preserves) the size of which may influence how much absolute growth it
can expect (see Population Density section below). Figure 3-1 and Map 3-3 place this information in
context by showing population growth projected for Collier County. Figure 3-1 indicates that the county
has historically experienced a higher rate of growth than Florida as a whole, although the difference in
growth rate is showing signs of lessening currently and through 2030. Growth rates are also expected to
stabilize through this time period. Map 3-3 shows the distribution of this projected growth, which is
moderate in most parts of the county, yet there is the slightly heightened area of growth intersecting
the southern portion of the CRA area.
DRAFT
Page 8 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-1: Existing Population within the CRA Area (2016)
Source: 2016 ACS
DRAFT
Page 9 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-2: Projected Population within the CRA Area (2017-2040)
Note: the base year of 2017 was extrapolated from the TAZ data with an original base year of 2010.
Source: 2040 Collier County LRTP TAZ data
DRAFT
Page 10 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 3-1: Historical and Projected Population Growth Rate Trends for Collier County and Florida
(2000-2030)
Source: Bureau and Economic and Business Research
2.8%
1.8%
1.5%
1.8%
1.4%1.3%
2000-2010 2010-2020 2020-2030
Collier County Florida
DRAFT
Page 11 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-3: Projected Population within Collier County (2015-2040)
Source: 2040 Collier County LRTP TAZ data
Population Density
Population density shows population concentrations while also helping control for sizes of land area by
showing population by per unit of land. Map 3-4 shows that the population density as population per
acre is higher in the northern section than the southern section of the CRA area. Using Community
Analyst, the population density for the entire CRA area is estimated at 3.9 people per acre. Map 3-5 puts
this density in context by showing how density in the county has progressed over time from 1990 to
2015. Although density has increased in the county, progressing further east from the urbanized coastal
area over time, it has generally stayed at lower to moderate density levels. While the CRA has one of the
spots with elevated densities, it is also near the edge of the dense area where it borders environmental
lands and low-density areas.
At the county level, the density increases trending east are expected to continue, and the CRA area is
expected to contain or border some of the pockets of mid- to high-level density in the county (Map 3-6),
although note that density is limited by policies such as those related to inundation zones discussed in
Section 3.3.
Contains
CRA area DRAFT
Page 12 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-4: Population Density within the CRA Area (2017)
Source: 2040 Collier County LRTP TAZ data
DRAFT
Page 13 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-5: Population Density Trend within Collier County (1990-2015)
Sources: 1990, 2000, and 2010 US Census; 2015 ACS
Orange arrows show increase in
higher-density land inside the
urbanized area as population growth
has moved east over time.
CRA
area DRAFT
Page 14 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-6: Population Density Projection within Collier County (2040)
Source: 2040 Collier County LRTP TAZ data
Median Age
Map 3-7 indicates that the median ages of most sections of the CRA area are relatively low (under 50),
except for a section immediately south of US 41 and west of Bayshore Drive which is relatively high (60-
67). Community Analyst estimates the median age for the entire CRA area at approximately 42.
Reviewing age at the county level indicates that the county as a whole is relatively older than the state
population and is increasing over time (Figure 3-2). The aging of the population is distributed throughout
the county, as the census tracts showing elevations of concentrations of residents over 65 between
2000 and 2015 are dispersed both in urbanized and more rural areas (Map 3-8). Despite these larger
trends, the CRA area generally has a median age approximately at or below the County’s median age.
Contains
CRA area DRAFT
Page 15 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Ma p 3-7: Median Age within the CRA Area (2016)
Source: 2016 ACS
DRAFT
Page 16 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 3-2: Median Age Trends for Collier County and Florida (1990-2015)
Sources: 1990, 2000, 2010 US Census; 2015 ACS
40.6
44.1
46.9
48.5
36.3
38.6
40.7
41.4
1990 2000 2010 2015
Collier County Florida
DRAFT
Page 17 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-8: Distribution of Age within Collier County (2000 and 2015)
Sources: 2000 US Census, 2015 ACS DRAFT
Page 18 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Median Household Income
The median income information presented in this section is based on incomes of permanent residents
(so incomes associated with seasonal residents in non-homesteaded properties are not counted). The
median incomes for this population within the CRA area are moderate to low in relative terms
(approximately $60,000 or below) with the exception of residents along the eastern boundary of the
CRA area just south of US 41 (Maps 3-9 and 3-10). Community Analyst estimates the median disposable
income for the entire CRA area at $38,382.
For comparison, Figure 3-3 indicates that the median income for the county as a whole was just under
$60,000 in 2015 and for the state was just under $50,000. Sizable sections of the CRA area fall below
these median measures. Yet the taxable value analysis and fieldwork review (see Sections 5.1 and 7.1)
indicate that sections to the west of the CRA area, including Windstar, have high value properties with
high structural quality, despite the fact that these sections do not show up as high-income in this
particular analysis. These findings suggest the possibility of the presence of second homes that are not
counted in the median income calculations.
DRAFT
Page 19 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-9: Median Income within the CRA Area (2016)
Source: 2016 ACS
DRAFT
Page 20 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-10: Median Household Income within Collier County (2015)
Source: 2015 ACS
Contains
CRA area DRAFT
Page 21 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 3-3: Median Household Income Trends for Collier County and Florida (1990-2015)
Sources: 1990, 2000, 2010 US Census; 2015 ACS
3.2 Economic Activity
The following section focuses on characteristics of workers in the CRA area to provide a basis of
understanding in support of the workforce and related industries. The second part of this section
analyzes development trends in the CRA area relative to the county to illustrate how the CRA area is
capturing development activity.
Worker Characteristics
Evaluating worker characteristics including wages, employment industries, and commuting patterns
helps inform:
• What land uses and industries should be encouraged within the CRA
• How to facilitate commutes for workers commuting into and out of the CRA
• Affordability considerations for workers in terms of housing and transportation
Map 3-11 shows the anticipated growth in employment from 2010 to 2040. Several of the growth areas
are near government property or activity, including the Mini Triangle development with the CRA-owned
parcel and the County Center. Relatively high absolute growth is also anticipated along Kirkwood and
Linwood Avenues, suggesting an opportunity to promote economic development. An additional growth
area is noted in a TAZ that overlaps with the southern portion of the CRA area, possibly due in part to
the size of that particular TAZ.
$34,001
$48,289
$52,998 $57,452
$27,483
$38,819
$44,736
$47,507
1990 2000 2010 2015
Collier County Florida
DRAFT
Page 22 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-11: Employment Projection within CRA Area (2040)
Source: 2040 Collier County LRTP TAZ data
Currently, the CRA area as a whole has more workers commuting in than out, with only a small number
of residents who both live and work in the CRA area (Figure 3-4). This finding suggests that
transportation connections between the CRA area and outside employment and residential areas is an
important consideration. Residential locations for workers in the CRA are spread amongst several zip
codes, but the zip code with the greatest percentage of worker residences is the one containing the CRA
area (34112), housing 11% of workers according to the US Census Bureau’s OnTheMap tool (Map 3-12).
As for workers who reside in the CRA area and work elsewhere, the zip code receiving the greatest
percentage of workers is 34102 (containing Naples) at 17%, followed by the zip code containing the CRA
area (34112) at 12% (Map 3-13). These findings indicate that notable amounts of workers and residents
are commuting among areas near the CRA area, yet commuting patterns overall are somewhat
dispersed among zip codes.
Mini
Triangle
County
Center DRAFT
Page 23 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 3-4: Inflow/Outflow Commuter Analysis for the CRA Area (2015)
Source: 2015 US Census Bureau OnTheMap
DRAFT
Page 24 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-12: Residence Location for Those Who Work in CRA Area, by Zip Code
Source: 2015 US Census Bureau OnTheMap
DRAFT
Page 25 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-13: Workplace Locations for Residents of the CRA Area, by Zip Code
Source: 2015 US Census Bureau OnTheMap
When looking at the top industries in which those working in the CRA area are employed, Public
Administration clearly stands out with 62% of workers, according to the US Census Bureau’s OnTheMap
tool. This finding is likely due to the location of the County Center and other County offices within the
CRA area. The next highest employment sectors are Accommodation and Food Services and Arts,
Entertainment, and Recreation, employing 6% and 5% of workers, respectively. For comparison,
industries making up the regional economy as identified in the 2018 Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council include historically
agriculture, construction, and tourism; possible future industries include these historic industries as well
as global trade and logistics, health care, manufacturing, emerging technologies, and finance and DRAFT
Page 26 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
professional services. The CRA has opportunities to capitalize on opportunities related to these regional
industries, such as employment tied to the pickleball sports tourism occurring at East Naples Community
Park just east of the CRA area and beach tourism (see Sections 4.2 and 6.1 for a more detailed
discussion).
A final point on worker characteristics is worker wages. The US Census Bureau’s OnTheMap tool indicates that
46% of those working in the CRA earn less than $3,333 per month, equivalent to nearly $40,000 annually in
earnings (Table 3-1). For comparison, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) cites a
Median Family Income (MFI) for a household of one at $46,600 for the Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island area in
2015.
Table 3-1: Monthly Wages for Those Working in CRA Area (2015)
Wage Limits Wage Limit Annual
Equivalents Count Share
$1,250/month or less $15,012 628 15%
$1,251 to $3,333/month $15,012 - $39,996 1,350 31%
More than $3,333/month $39,996 2,315 54%
Source: 2015 US Census Bureau OnTheMap
Development Trends
An additional way to gauge general economic activity is to look at development trends in terms of
square footage built. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 compare total square footage built in Collier County over time
to square footage built in the CRA area, which can provide an indication of how the CRA area is
capturing overall development in the county. When looking at the square footage built from before the
1960’s to 2016 by decade, the county and CRA area show a similar trend up through the 1990’s and
2000’s where the amount of square footage peaks, yet the CRA area square footage drops more
severely after the 2000’s relative to its initial building amounts (Figure 3-5). Figure 3-6 takes a closer look
at the period surrounding the 2008 recession from 2006 to 2016. The county has nearly returned back
to square footage levels experienced just prior to the recession (in 2015, only 4% below where it was in
2007 in terms of square footage built), while the CRA has been slower to recover (in 2015, 84% below
where it was in 2007 in terms of square footage built). Since development rates in general were
extremely high just prior to the recession, it is important to consider how to identify a healthy but not
overly inflated recovery target for these areas.
DRAFT
Page 27 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 3-5: Square Footage Built within Collier County and the CRA Area by Decade
Note: The 2010’s data runs through 2016.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Figure 3-6: Square Footage Built in Collier County and the CRA Area (2006-2016)
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
DRAFT
Page 28 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
3.3 Environmental Considerations
Flood Zones and Coastal Zone Areas
Map 3-14 shows the flood zone designations within the CRA area; most notably, the map indicates that
the entire CRA area lies in flood zone AE that would be inundated if a flood with a one-percent chance of
occurring takes place. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is currently updating the
flood zone map (a process that could take a couple of years), so the CRA will need to take this into
consideration as planning and implementation efforts move forward. Additionally, the CRA area is
completely in the Coastal High Hazard Area (defined in Florida statute 163.3178(2)(h) as the area below
the elevation of the category 1 storm surge line as established by the Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges
from Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm surge model) as shown in the corresponding map from
the Collier County Growth Management Plan (Map 3-15). Due to this designation, the area is subject to
a reduction of one dwelling unit per gross acre from the base residential density allowed, according to
the County’s Growth Management Plan.
DRAFT
Page 29 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-14: FEMA Flood Zone Designations within the CRA Area (2017)
Source: 2017 FEMA
DRAFT
Page 30 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 3-15: Collier County Coastal High Hazard Area
Source: Collier County Growth Management Future Land Use Element Maps
DRAFT
Page 31 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
3.4 Study Area Overview and Context Takeaways
• There is heightened population density east of Airport Pulling, likely due to development that is
just outside the CRA area boundary but that may affect traffic and visits to commercial
establishments within the CRA area.
• Growth in the county is expected to stabilize, and not much absolute growth is anticipated
generally in the CRA area.
• The CRA area is near the transition between the denser urban area and rural/environmental
lands, which may signal an opportunity for more urban-style development
• The CRA area generally has a lower median age (approximately 42) than the surrounding areas
(50+ for many areas) and the County as a whole (approximately 49).
• The median income for the CRA area is relatively moderate to low when compared to the
county (approximately $60,000 or below in most areas), yet this measure does not account for
incomes for non-homesteaded households which may be present in sections of the CRA area
such as the Windstar community.
• Employment growth for the area is projected for the Triangle area.
• More workers commuting into or out of the area as opposed to both living and working in the
area, so providing job access via transportation is important. A sizable number of workers and
residents commute within the zip codes containing the CRA and Naples, so focusing on local
connections may be an initial step. There may also be some opportunities to provide housing
near employment.
• Most of the workers in the CRA area work in Public Administration, likely due to the presence of
the County Center.
• Wages for 46% of workers in the CRA amount to less than $40,000 annually as of 2015. The MFI
for a household of one in the Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island area in 2015 was $46,600
according to HUD.
• The CRA area has experienced a pronounced drop in development measured by square footage
built and a relatively slow recovery post-recession when compared to the county.
• The CRA area’s location in the CHHA restricts allowable density by a reduction of one dwelling
unit per gross acre from the base residential density allowed, according to the County’s Growth
Management Plan. DRAFT
Page 32 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
4.0 Plan, Policy, and Program Assessment
4.1 Land Use and Zoning
Land use and zoning guidelines and policies are an important way for jurisdictions to guide development
in their area and lay out a vision and incentives for desired development. The following section analyzes
what the County has currently laid out for development now and in the future.
Existing Land Use
Map 4-1 shows that commercial land uses cover sizable parts of the western section of the CRA area
where the Windstar community is located, as well as the major corridor areas of the northern Triangle
section of the CRA area. Note that some of the commercial land in the Windstar community is a golf
course, which makes up about 36% of the total commercial land in the CRA area based on the Collier
County Property Appraiser’s acreage estimate for that parcel. Bayshore Drive also has a small area of
commercial use to the north. A mix of multi-family and single-family residential covers much of the area
off of Bayshore Drive and the area in the center of the northern Triangle section surrounded by corridor
commercial. To the south of the CRA area, utility and other uses not belonging to the major categories
shown are primary uses in addition to residential. Figure 4-1 illustrates that by acreage, commercial is
the largest land use, followed by the utilities and other uses, multi-family uses, and single-family uses.
Note that the “Other” designation includes land that currently has an existing use code of “acreage not
zoned agricultural”. This designation means that the land is largely vacant wetland, but is not formally
designated as conservation or agricultural land (allowing it to be developed in the future).
DRAFT
Page 33 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-1: Existing Land Use Map
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
DRAFT
Page 34 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 4-1: Existing Land Use Acreage Distribution
*Note that the “Other” designation includes land that currently has an existing use code of “acreage not zoned agricultural”. This designation
means that the land is largely vacant wetland, but is not formally designated as conservation or agricultural land (allowing it to be developed in
the future).
**A portion of the commercial land in the CRA area is used as a golf course in the Windstar community. The Collier County property appraiser
estimates the acreage at approximately 119 acres, which is 36% of the total commercial acreage.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Figure 4-2 takes a closer look at the land that is currently vacant, which is an important asset for
development. The data show that vacant land is roughly 11% of the total acreage calculated using the
land use data, highlighting the importance of redevelopment in the area. The land use type with the
greatest amount of vacant land is residential, yet Table 4-1 shows that the average parcel size is small
(0.3 acres). This circumstance may present challenges in trying to develop vacant residential land, and
assembly efforts will likely need to be considered in development efforts. Additionally, Map 4-2 shows
that these vacant residential parcels are fairly dispersed around the CRA area. Commercial parcels are
mainly in the Triangle and northern Bayshore Drive area. Note that the large vacant institutional parcel
northwest of the Bayshore/Thomasson intersection is coded as vacant institutional by the Property
Appraiser, but is owned by Mattamy Naples LLC.
332**
306*
265
223
187
168
90
62
27
17
2
1
Commercial
Utility/Other
Multi-Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Vacant
Botanical Garden
County
Institutional
Mobile Home
Industrial
Municipal
State
Total Acreage: 1,679 DRAFT
Page 35 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 4-2: Vacant Land Acreage Distribution by Land Use Type
*Note: A 32.5-acre parcel northwest of the Bayshore/Thomasson intersection is coded as vacant institutional, but is owned by Mattamy Naples
LLC.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Table 4-1: Average Vacant Parcel Size by Land use Type
Use Type Average Vacant
Parcel Size
Residential 0.3
Commercial 0.7
Institutional 9.0
Industrial N/A
Governmental N/A
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
109
41 36*
0 0
Residential Commercial Institutional Industrial Governmental
Total Vacant Acreage: 186 DRAFT
Page 36 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-2: Vacant Land by Land Use Type
Note: The vacant institutional land northwest of the Bayshore Drive/Thomasson Drive intersection is coded as vacant institutional, but it owned
by Mattamy Naples LLC.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Aside from vacant land, government-owned land can be an asset for a CRA area in that the government
can play a greater role in how that land is used. The largest piece of land owned by the government is
the County Center to the east of Airport Pulling Road and north of US 41 (Map 4-3). The CRA owns two
key pieces of land that are intended for catalyst development projects, a property in the Mini Triangle
and the 17-Acre Site west of Sugden Park. Development efforts for these two sites are discussed in
greater detail in the Section7.4. DRAFT
Page 37 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-3: Government-Owned Land
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Zoning
The base zoning for the CRA area (shown in Map 4-4) reinforces many of the findings from the existing
land use analysis, although it is important to note that much of the base zoning for the CRA area is in the
form of Planned Unit Development (PUD), as shown in Figure 4-3. This zoning provides for a more
comprehensive planning approach to a particular area. In terms of vacant land, the most common
zoning is commercial (Figure 4-4). The base zoning for much of the CRA area is made more complex due
to the fact that there are mixed-use zoning overlay districts, as shown in Map 4-5.
Mini
Triangle
County
Center
17 –Acre Site DRAFT
Page 38 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-4: Base Zoning
Source: Collier County
DRAFT
Page 39 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 4-3: Zoning Acreage Distribution
*The discrepancy between total zoning acreage and total land use acreage presented later in this section is due to discrepancies in the GIS files.
There is slight overlap of areas in the future land use spatial files, including overlap of future land use areas with the canal and river to the west,
which explains why the total acreage for future land use is slightly higher than that of zoning.
Source: Collier County
Figure 4-4: Vacant Parcel Acreage Distribution by Zoning Type
Source: Collier County
846
448
309
143
58 29 17
PUD Multi-Family Commercial Single Family Mobile Home Village
Residential
Naples
63
40
22 20
6 3
Multi-Family Commercial PUD Single Family Village
Residential
Mobile Home
Total Acreage: 1850*
Total Acreage: 154 DRAFT
Page 40 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-5: Zoning Overlay Districts
Source: Collier County
Future Land Use
The future land use for the CRA area shows an overlay district for the eastern section and the Triangle
section of the CRA area (Map 4-6). This overlay allows for more intense development and also contains
an Activity Center which is an additional measure for targeted development. While a large section of this
sub-area is taken up by the County government center, another sizable portion south of US 41 is taken
up by the Courthouse Shadows retail center that provides an important redevelopment opportunity.
Figure 4-5 indicates that the majority of the CRA area is designated as the Urban Coastal Fringe District.
DRAFT
Page 41 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 4-6: Future Land Use
Source: Collier County
DRAFT
Page 42 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 4-5: Future Land Use Acreage Distribution
* The discrepancy between total land use acreage and total zoning acreage presented previously in this section is due to discrepancies in the GIS
files There is slight overlap of areas in the future land use spatial files, including overlap of future land use areas with the canal and river to the
west, which explains why the total acreage for future land use is slightly higher than that of zoning.
Source: Collier County
4.2 Plan Document Assessment
A review of existing planning documents related to or influencing the CRA area illustrates what planning
efforts have already been undertaken so as not to duplicate what has come before, but evaluate and
build on it. The findings from this document review also provided guidance as to what other analysis
need to be completed as part of the Redevelopment Plan update. Figure 4-6 provides an overview of key
takeaways from each individual document, and a summary of overarching takeaways is provided here:
Growth:
• The northern Triangle section of the CRA area was identified as a residential and employment
growth area based on engagement exercises with MPO Board members in the 2040 LRTP.
Growth projections are further explored in Sections 3.1 and 3.2 of this memo.
Development and Redevelopment:
• The 2000 Master Plan identified projects and targeted areas to advance redevelopment in the
CRA area. Section 2.2of the final Redevelopment Plan provides a status update on these items.
• Development density and intensity aims are an important consideration for the Redevelopment
Plan particularly given the Future Land Use Redevelopment Overlay, the mixed-use overlays,
and the CHHA density restrictions.
1409
346
142
17
Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict
Urban Residential
Subdistrict
Mixed Use Activity
Center Subdistrict 2
Incorporated Area
Total Acreage: 1,913* DRAFT
Page 43 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• The CRA area contains or is near a number of notable parks/recreation assets on which the CRA
can capitalize as it plans for improvements and new development/redevelopment:
o Sugden Park is a regional destination just east of the CRA area with inland beach/water
access with proposed connections to nearby development and parks.
o East Naples Community Park is a pickleball tournament and sports tourism hub just east
of the CRA area that creates sizable economic impact for the area.
o Bayview Park, just west of the CRA area, provides access to Haldeman Creek, local
canals, and Naples Bay.
o The Naples Botanical Garden provides not only gardens, but also educational
opportunities and meeting rooms.
• Arts and culture is a focus of development, particularly along Bayshore Drive where a cultural
district was adopted by the CRA Board. A parallel parking/road diet was recommended to
promote the community character and allow additional on-site parking access for
establishments along the roadway. These concepts are explored more as a part of this memo,
particularly in Section 6.1.
Affordable Housing:
• Plans and studies reviewed below identified the CRA, including its Activity Center, as an area to
increase density and the supply of subsidized or mixed-income housing. The area can also
supplement density with mechanisms like the Affordable-Workforce Housing Bonus. Affordable
housing came up further during stakeholder outreach, detailed in Section 6.4.
Transportation:
• Sections of Tamiami Trail and Airport Pulling in the northern Triangle area were identified as
high crash areas in a Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) safety study with follow-
up Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Audit, highlighting
the importance of transportation safety as a consideration for the Redevelopment Plan update.
Transportation safety issues were discussed further as part of public outreach, detailed in
Sections 6.1 and 6.2. FDOT projects are documented in Section 4.3 of this memo.
• The East Naples Discovery Report provided additional bicycle and pedestrian improvement
recommendations for Bayshore Drive, and the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Master Plan
includes vision concepts, goals, and objectives related to streetscape and bike/pedestrian
improvements. Specific recommendations are considered further in Section 7.1 of this memo.
• The CRA area has existing transit service. Transit improvements that intersect with the CRA are
identified in the Collier MPO 2040 LRTP. Transit and other transportation modes were discussed
further as part of public outreach, detailed in Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of this memo. DRAFT
Page 44 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 4-6: Plan Review Matrix
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
Collier County
Growth
Management Plan
Includes various elements with
provisions to manage growth in the
County; Elements of particular
relevancy are Future Land Use,
Housing, and Transportation.
Future Land Use Element:
• There is a specific Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay
designation.
• This overlay area overlaps with Mixed Use Activity Center #16 US 41
and Airport Pulling Road (additional provisions for Mixed Use Activity
Center Subdistricts are included in the Future Land Use element)
• Provisions for the overlay also reference additional Density Rating
System provisions in the Future Land Use element, which include an
Affordable-Workforce Housing Bonus with reference to the
Affordable-Workforce Housing Density Bonus Ordinance (Section
2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as
amended, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004).
Transportation Element:
• The South US 41 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA)
overlaps with the CRA area.
2000 CRA Master
Plan
Primarily provides goals and objectives
to meet to address problems laid out
in the blight findings
See Section 2.2 of the final Redevelopment Plan for an overview of key
takeaways from this document. DRAFT
Page 45 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Parking Needs
Analysis for
Bayshore Drive
(from US 41 to
Thomasson Drive)
February 2017
Analyzes parking and roadway
conditions and needs to:
• determine how the current
and future parking supply can
best serve growing
development and
redevelopment in the
Bayshore CRA area.
• evaluate whether there is an
opportunity for on-street
parking
• evaluate the possibility of a
reduction in road section from
4 lanes to 2 (“road diet”).
Noted Existing Conditions for Parking:
• The total number of existing parking spaces (including private) is 511.
• On-street parking along Bayshore Drive or any of the side streets is not
provided.
• Some businesses have overcrowded parking within their properties
and spillover parking is occurring on grass shoulders of side streets.
• Rear parking is identified as “Auxiliary Parking Zone” in the Bayshore
CRA Master Plan. These areas can be acquired by either the CRA or
business owners in the future.
Conclusions:
• 131 additional on-site parking spaces are needed to service current
demand.
• A road diet from 4 to 2 lanes is feasible along Bayshore Drive (LOS D
will be maintained through 2040). Such a project would improve
overall safety and conditions for all road users.
• The existing typical section on Bayshore Drive can accommodate
parallel parking, one traffic lane, and one bike lane in each direction.
This typical section would accommodate 178 parallel parking space on
Bayshore between Thomasson and Weeks. Additional parallel spaces
can be added if shared driveways are coordinated.
Recommendations:
• Implement the road diet and reduce speed limit to 30 mph.
• Complement on-site parking with on-street parking; possibly create a
parking bank for developers to purchase parking credits for on-site
needs that would pay for project construction costs.
• Complement on-street parking with additional options (e.g. auxiliary
parking and site parking)
• Arrange to have driveways eliminated, modified, or shared for DRAFT
Page 46 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
additional parking. Pursue crediting system to interconnect.
• Increase future parking availability with additional pubic and/or
private lots identified in the Bayshore CRA Master Plan; consider
shared parking and an incentive program to eliminate driveways.
• Improve bus stops.
• Evaluate existing and expected through and turning volumes; pursue
left-turning lane or traffic calming opportunities.
• Consider additional traffic calming measures such as one-lane
roundabouts and other intersection improvements.
• Create final engineering drawings for the project.
Collier MPO
Comprehensive
Pathways Plan (A
Technical Guide)
2012
Provides a prioritized list of bicycle
and pedestrian needs and
improvements, as well as general
policy and program recommendations
to guide project selection and
accommodation of bicycle and
pedestrian modes.
The plan identifies some high priority bicycle infrastructure improvement
projects and major pathways that intersect with the CRA area:
• Two high priority bike facility projects lie within or intersect with the
northern part of the CRA area: bike lanes on both sides of Davis
Boulevard between Tamiami Trail E and Airport Pulling Road S; and
bike lanes on both sides of Airport Pulling Road S between Radio Road
and Tamiami Trail E
• Tamiami Trail, Davis Boulevard, and Airport Pulling Road are identified
as significant corridors in the plan and intersect with the CRA area.
• Naples Bay Greenway passes through the southern section of the CRA
up Bayshore Drive
Note that this plan is currently being updated. DRAFT
Page 47 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
Collier County
Community
Housing Plan
2017
Plan documenting housing conditions
and needs, a vision for the future of
housing in Collier County, and
recommendations and
implementation guidance to move
towards that vision.
• The Housing Plan provides an implementation plan to create new or
continue/strengthen existing strategies to facilitate the provision of
affordable housing.
• A notable recommendation is to increase density in the CRA area, as
well as require residential units and allow higher densities in Activity
Centers and Strategic Opportunity Sites (a section of the CRA overlaps
with an Activity Center). According to the Plan, current density limits
are 16 units/acre. A target maximum density for Activity Centers and
Strategic Opportunity Sites is 20-25 units/acre, while suggested
maximum densities from the referenced ULI study range from 30-35
units/acre.
• An additional recommendation noted is the continuation of the use of
CRA funds to “correct deteriorating physical and economic conditions,
including housing affordability issues…”
• Affordable housing opportunities and allowable densities should thus
be evaluated for the Activity Center overlapping the CRA.
On April 24, 2018, the Board of County Commissioners voted to have staff
follow up on the following items related to the Community Housing Plan and
bring them forward for future discussion:
• Amendments to the Impact Fee Deferral Program
• Establishment of a new or superseding local housing trust fund with
guidelines to use the money with the understanding that ad valorem
and linkage fees would not be used as funding sources
• Process to establish a community land trust
• “Housing that is affordable” marketing, public relations, and
communications plan. DRAFT
Page 48 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
Urban Land
Institute Advisory
Services
Collier County
Florida: Expanding
Housing
Affordability, 2017
Provides a strategy and basis for
implementation for Collier County to
meet housing affordability needs
The report affirms that the housing affordability problem continues in Collier
County since being identified in the 2000 CRA Master Plan. In 2015, an
estimated 40% of households in the County were cost-burdened (spending
more than 30% of gross income on housing). This information suggests that
housing affordability remains an issue for CRA redevelopment, and the report
notes that the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA might serve as an opportunity
site for increased density and mixed-income housing.
The report also provides recommendations for County action, which may
influence or provide a model for redevelopment at the CRA-level. Those that
the CRA might incorporate in its own planning efforts include:
• Creating a vision for the future community
• Recognizing that housing affordability affects all segments of the
community
• Increasing the supply of affordable housing by adding to the current
supply and maintaining existing affordable units
• Developing solutions that link housing with access to transportation
options
• Establishing transportation corridors to target mixed-income,
multifamily housing development
• Raising public awareness, educate, and communicate with the
community about housing affordability
Additional recommendations that may affect affordable housing as part of CRA
redevelopment if the County acts on them include:
• Adopting a smart code to distinguish between urban and rural parts of
the county
• Reactivating and using the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
• Consider establishing an enhanced minimum wage ordinance DRAFT
Page 49 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
Collier MPO
Pedestrian and
Bicycle Safety
Study
2014
Analyzes bicycle and pedestrian crash
data so the MPO and jurisdictions can
identify future pathway improvement
projects and other initiatives to
improve pedestrian and bicycle safety
One of three street corridors identified as having the highest volume (more
than 10 crashes) and highest severity (more than 25% of crashes are fatal or
incapacitating) of crashes in a cluster lies in the northeast corner of the CRA
area along Airport Pulling Road between Great Blue Drive and Estey Avenue.
One of two street corridors with the highest volume of crashes and moderate
severity of crashes (1-25% of crashes are fatal or incapacitating) was on
Tamiami Trail E between Commercial Drive and Seminole Avenue. A follow-up
Road Safety Audit with more detailed analysis and identification of safety
issues with corresponding short-, mid- and long-term suggestions was
completed. DRAFT
Page 50 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Collier MPO
Connecting Our
Neighborhoods:
Walkable
Community Study
2010
Evaluates bicycle and pedestrian
mobility issues and overall walkability
of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU
and Bayshore Triangle Redevelopment
Agency areas.
The Study split the area into the Bayshore neighborhood (roughly
corresponding to the CRA area south of US 41) and the Gateway Triangle
neighborhood (roughly corresponding to the CRA area along and north of US
41) and rated walkability from A to F based on five pedestrian measures
(directness, continuity, street crossing, visual interests and amenities, and
security). Overall, the combined areas received a C rating, with highest
priorities along Shadowlawn and Thomasson Drive because of their close
proximity to elementary schools.
Findings for the Bayshore neighborhood include:
The Bayshore neighborhood received a D rating, with the highest priority
needs for bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Bayshore Drive and
Thomasson Drive due to the amount of bicycle and pedestrian use. Additional
needs for the Bayshore neighborhood include:
• 3 additional East/West pedestrian crossings on Bayshore Drive
• Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive wayfinding signs
• A public event (such as a 5k) to raise awareness about and encourage
a bicycle and pedestrian friendly atmosphere
• Shelters at bus/school bus stops
• A study to identify locations for lighting improvements
• A pedestrian connection to Sugden Park, along with an intra-park
pathway network linking Sugden Park, East Naples Community Park,
Bayview Park, and 17-acre site.
• Evaluate function of bridge in relation to transportation corridor
• Pedestrian improvements at Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive
• A west side crosswalk at Bayshore Drive and US 41
• Colorized, skid-resistant bike lanes
• A greenway at Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue DRAFT
Page 51 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
• Evaluate pedestrian crossing at Thomasson Drive and Hamilton
Avenue due to visibility
• Pedestrian improvements near Avalon Elementary
The Gateway Triangle neighborhood received a C rating, with highest priority
needs along Shadowlawn Drive and Linwood Avenue due to amount of bicycle
and pedestrian use. Additional needs for the neighborhood include:
• “Bayshore Drive” type lighted crosswalk at Shadowlawn Drive and
Francis Avenue intersection
• Crosswalk on US 41 on NW side of Shadowlawn Drive to SW side of
Bayshore Drive
• Neighborhood traffic calming features at Linwood Avenue and
Linwood Way to separate residential from commercial sections
• Thermoplastic, high visibility crosswalks
• Gateway triangle logo on sidewalks
• Speed limit and pedestrian caution signage
• Survey to determine location of lighting improvements
• Evaluate future CAT bus routes
• Bus shelters and signage
• Gateway Triangle pathway around storm water pond to connect
Linwood Way and Francis Avenue/Lee Street; link this pathway to the
Bayshore Drive pathway network and the Gordon River Greenway
project DRAFT
Page 52 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
2018 East Naples
Discovery Report
(PowerPoint
presentation)
An analysis of the Bayshore Drive
corridor area between Weeks Avenue
and North Street using the Blue Zones
health and longevity lens to support
walking, biking, and retail
The study found that adding the median, slimming lanes to 10 feet, and
creating bike lanes in 2012 has improved walking and bicycling along Bayshore
Drive. Opportunities to further enhance the corridor include:
Marquee projects
• Advance Bayshore Drive road diet and use curb extensions
• Create a link trail to Sugden Regional Park
• Trial a “home street” (more walking, biking, street play) on Jeepers
Drive, N Road, or Short Road
• Plan an urban village for East Naples
Capacity-building opportunities
• Have schools lead work with Safe Routes to School coordinator
(involve youth in planning)
• Develop a complete streets outreach and education plan
Policy opportunities
• Reduce speeds in school zones to 20 mph
• Choose a “roundabouts first” intersection policy
• Adopt a Vision Zero policy DRAFT
Page 53 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
2011 Bayshore
Beautification
MSTU Master Plan
Master Plan based on identified vision,
goals and objectives; public
participation; and research and
analysis
Lists vision concepts, goals, and objectives related to positive marketing of the
area, promotion of artists, Smart Growth approaches to design, “green”
principles in streetscape design, and cleanliness/safety. A list of focus
preferences include:
• Gateways and sense of place. Major gateways include US 41/Bayshore
Dr, Thomasson Dr/Bayshore Dr, Thomasson Dr/Us 41
• Branding
• Neighborhood Development Identity
• Connectivity to regional attractors
• Public art
Primary streets identified include: US 41, Bayshore Dr, Thomasson Dr,
Hamilton Ave. The Plan also includes a concept map of proposed alternative
transportation that includes a greenway. DRAFT
Page 54 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Collier MPO 2040
Long Range
Transportation
Plan
Includes growth analysis, long range
transportation goals and objectives, a
transportation needs assessment, a
financial plan, and a list of cost
feasible projects for the MPO area.
The following summarizes findings that provide insights on the CRA area or
may influence redevelopment efforts in the area. Findings are categorized by
growth analysis, where population, dwelling units, and jobs are projected to
increase; corridor characteristics that identify key information for roadways
intersecting the CRA area; and project findings, including projects in general
that are identified and projects that are designated as cost feasible based on
anticipated funding.
Relevant growth analysis findings:
• The Davis Boulevard/Tamiami Trail East/Airport Pulling Road Triangle
(in the northern part of the CRA area) is identified as an area of
residential and employment growth based on engagement exercises
with MPO Board members.
Committed highway projects for 2020:
• Intersection improvement of added turn lanes at Airport Pulling Road
and Davis Boulevard.
Relevant findings for corridor characteristics in the CRA:
• As part of the freight corridor network, Davis Boulevard is identified as
regional freight mobility corridor, and Tamiami Trail is identified as a
freight distribution route for sections intersecting the CRA area.
• Tamiami Trail and Airport Pulling Road are identified as high crash
corridors, including corridor sections that intersect with the CRA area.
Relevant cost feasible project findings (not including unfunded projects):
• A partially funded highway improvement (add 2 lanes with sidewalk,
bike lane, curb and gutter, and inside shoulder paved) is identified for
SR 84/Davis Boulevard just east of the intersection with Airport Pulling
Road. DRAFT
Page 55 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
• The plan of cost feasible projects includes improvements related to
certain transit routes in the CRA area: Route 19 realignment via Ave
Maria (runs along portion of Airport Pulling Road in CRA area), express
services between Collier Government Center and SWF Airport (runs
along portion of Airport Pulling Road in CRA area), and the Collier-Lee
County Connector (runs along portion of Tamiami Trail in CRA area)
Other projects identified as needs:
• A Congestion Management System/Intelligent Transportation System
(CMS/ITS) project is identified for Airport Road where it intersects with
Tamiami Trail E
• New local transit service connecting Collier County Government
Center and CAT Operations Center along Radio Road and Davis
Boulevard, with a loop on County Barn Road and Santa Barbara
Boulevard.
2018 Collier County
Parks and
Recreation Master
Plan
Assesses current and projected
conditions to optimize the County’s
parks and recreation resources and
assets, as well as strategically plan for
the future.
• Parks near the CRA include Sugden Regional Park, East Naples
Community Park and Bayview Regional Park.
• Sugden and Bayview Regional Parks provide water access.
• East Naples Community Park has become a sports tourism venue for
pickleball in hosting the US Open Pickleball Championship. The first
Championship was held at the park in 2016 and contributed $2.5
million worth of direct economic impact through hotels, restaurants,
attractions, and local businesses. The park also hosted the 2017
Championship, with plans to host the 2018 Championship as well. A
master plan will be created for the park to plan for its future in light of
this tournament activity. DRAFT
Page 56 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
CRA Resolution No.
08-60: Cultural
District
Resolution related to creating a
cultural district in the CRA area.
Includes a proposed boundary for a cultural district along Bayshore
Drive and on the Gulf Gate Plaza, 17-acre development, arboretum, and
Naples Botanical Garden sites. The CRA Board accepted the boundary,
as well as a mission and vision. The CRA Board recommended that the
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) use the boundary to create a
Cultural District and Plan by ordinance. The resolution references a
Cultural Needs Assessment Report identifying next steps which include:
• Performance/exhibition venue proposals for 17-acre site
• A detailed master plan for the district
• A specific study of the individual artist market for live, live-work, and
studio-exhibit space
• A Marketing and Promotion Plan for the district
• A management and funding source for continued research, planning,
and implementation items for the district. DRAFT
Page 57 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Southwest Florida
Regional Planning
Council 2018
Comprehensive
Economic
Development
Strategy
Provides a framework by which
economic development projects in the
region qualify for grant funding from
the US Economic Development
Administration; it includes existing
regional conditions, strengths and
weaknesses, regional industry
clusters, goals and objectives with an
implementation plan, and priority
projects
Historic industries important to the regional economy included:
• Agriculture
• Construction
• Tourism
Future industries on which to focus to diversify the economy might include:
• Global Trade and Logistics
• Manufacturing
• Emerging Technologies
• Health Care
• Finance and Professional Services
A few key goals that may be particularly relevant for the role of the CRA in
supporting regional economic development include:
• Protect natural resources to support quality environment and eco-
tourism.
• Develop projects that improve the region’s quality of life.
• Increase the supply of workforce housing in the region.
• Expand arts and cultural identity.
• Develop transportation systems to support a prosperous, globally
competitive economy while minimizing impacts to the natural
environment.
• Promote available ready-sites and buildings.
• Develop projects and programs that support existing and new
business.
• Increase investment in business development and placement in the
Region. DRAFT
Page 58 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Existing Plan
Documents
Plan/Study Overview Key CRA Redevelopment Plan Implications
• Provide funding for ongoing economic development activities.
• Provide technical assistance and use new technology to promote job
growth.
• Brand the region as a hub to attract and retain entrepreneurs.
DRAFT
Page 59 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
4.3 Capital Improvements Plans
The funds operating in the CRA area could potentially support significant capital upgrades. These funds
include:
• Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: funds the redevelopment of the CRA area and
implementation of the CRA redevelopment plan; created in 2000.
• Bayshore Beautification MSTU: funds right-of-way and streetscape improvements in the
Bayshore area south of US 41, as well as other public areas within the MSTU as recommended
by the MSTU’s Advisory Committee; created in 1997
• Haldeman Creek MSTU: funds maintenance dredging and maintenance of navigational channel
markers within the MSTU boundary; created in 2006
• Bayshore CRA Grant and Grant Match: all grants to the CRA are presented to the Board of
County Commissioners; the budget amendment process allocates funds and expenditures.
The following specific improvement projects have been noted in the past five adopted budgets for
Collier County. They consist primarily of streetscape and stormwater improvements. The CRA area
would benefit from a regularly updated capital improvement plan specific to the area in conjunction
with the MSTU plans.
• Bayshore Beautification MSTU Fund:
o Thomasson Drive Streetscape improvements
o Hamilton Avenue improvements
o Bayview and Lunar Street projects
• Bayshore CRA Grant and Grant Match Fund: The CRA is considered a priority area of Collier
County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement funds. The CRA participates in
the annual grant process and competes with other agencies. The CRA applies for other grant
funds as they are identified to leverage funding of capital projects. CDBG has funded:
o Pineland tertiary stormwater projects
o Fire suppression infrastructure
o Karen Drive stormwater Improvements
Transportation Improvement Program
The following projects from the FY 2017/18 to 2021/22 Transportation Improvement Program are
planned for the CRA area. Notable projects provide basic maintenance and congestion management.
Highway Projects
• Resurfacing Davis Boulevard from US 41 to Airport Pulling
• Resurfacing US 41 between Davis and Courthouse Shadows
Congestion Management System and Intelligent Transportation System (CMS/ITS) Projects
• Signal Timing US 41 from SR 951 to Old US 41
Aviation Projects DRAFT
Page 60 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Naples Municipal ARPT Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Facility (on Airport Pulling Road)
The County Transportation Improvement Program includes the following project:
• Intersection improvement at Airport Road and Davis Boulevard
4.4 Grant Program Assessment
The following is a list of CRA Grant Programs. These programs will need to be re-evaluated in light of the
recommendations from the final Redevelopment Plan. It is also advisable to remove these programs
from the LDC to provide more flexibility in adjusting the programs as needs evolve.
• Site Improvement Grant
• Impact Fee Assistance Grant
• Modified Sweat Equity Improvement Grant
• Shoreline Stabilization Grant
• Landscape Improvement Grant
• Commercial Building Improvement Grant
• Community Event Grant
4.5 Plan and Policy Takeaways
• The top existing land uses are commercial, utility/other, multi-family residential, and single-
family residential. Note that approximately 36% of commercial land in the CRA area is used as a
golf course in the Windstar community.
• Roughly 11% of the land is vacant, which highlights a primary focus on redevelopment.
• Most vacant land is residential, but the parcels are smaller in size (0.3 acres on average), which
might present some challenges in terms of assembling land for larger development.
• The CRA owns key parcels that already have plans for catalyst development.
• Much of the CRA area has PUD zoning allowing for comprehensive site planning. Zoning for the
remaining areas is complicated by relationship of base zoning to overlay districts.
• The Courthouse Shadows site may be able to capitalize on the Activity Center designation as
part of a redevelopment plan.
• The northern part of the CRA is identified as an opportunity area for residential and
employment growth in the Collier MPO 2040 LRTP based on engagement exercises with MPO
Board members. This finding mirrors findings from the TAZ data indicating projected growth for
the Triangle, but contrasts with TAZ projections for limited population growth in the Triangle.
• The CRA should also continue its neighborhood improvement efforts generally, and can re-
evaluate specific goals as a part of the Redevelopment Plan update, including affordable
housing. See Section 6.0 of this assessment memo in particular for further discussion.
DRAFT
Page 61 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• The CRA area would benefit from an updated stormwater master plan to coordinate systematic
and comprehensive improvements. See Sections 6.4 and 6.5 for further discussion.
• The CRA would also benefit from a dredging and canal maintenance plan in conjunction with
capital improvement planning.
• The CRA area contains or is near a number of notable parks/recreation destinations:
o Sugden Park is a regional destination just east of the CRA area with inland beach/water
access with proposed connections to nearby development and parks.
o East Naples Community Park is a pickleball hub just east of the CRA area that creates
sizable economic impact for the area.
o Bayview Park, just west of the CRA area, provides water access to Haldeman Creek, local
canals, and Naples Bay.
o The Naples Botanical Garden provides not only gardens, but also educational
opportunities and meeting rooms.
• Arts and culture is a focus of development, particularly along Bayshore Drive where an arts and
culture district was adopted by the CRA Board. A parallel parking/road diet was recommended
to promote the community character and allow additional on-site parking access for
establishments along the roadway.
• The CRA area, including its Activity Center, are identified in existing plans as an area in which to
increase density and the supply of subsidized or mixed-income housing. The area can also
supplement density with mechanisms like the Affordable-Workforce Housing Bonus. The area is
somewhat limited, however, by its CHHA designation discussed in Section 1.0.
• Sections of Tamiami Trail and Airport Pulling in the northern Triangle area were identified as
high crash areas in the existing plan review, highlighting transportation safety as an important
consideration as part of the Redevelopment Plan update.
• The MPO’s Pathways Plan update, the East Naples Discovery Report, and the Bayshore
Beautification MSTU Master Plan include discrete streetscape and bike/pedestrian
improvements that can provide a basis for specific recommendations.
• Transit improvements that intersect with the CRA area are identified in the Collier MPO 2040
LRTP. These projects should be considered in conjunction with improvements to other
transportation modes (walking, biking, and CRA-specific transit options), housing provisions, and
new development.
• Significant capital upgrades for the CRA area, documented in the five most recent County
budgets, consist primarily of streetscape and stormwater improvements. The CRA area would
benefit from a regularly updated capital improvement plan specific to the area in conjunction
with the MSTU plans. The grant programs will need to be re-evaluated in light of the final
Redevelopment Plan recommendations; it is advisable to remove the grant programs from the
LDC so that they can be more easily adjusted as needs evolve. DRAFT
Page 62 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
5.0 Property and Fiscal Trends Assessment
5.1 Property
Analyzing the properties in the CRA area provides insights on a number of factors important for the
community. First, looking at building ages and improvement levels helps indicate where investment or
other assistance that the CRA can provide may be needed to improve the structural conditions in which
people are living and working. In this way, building upgrades and improvements can enhance quality of
life and aesthetics. This information is also helpful in providing a foundation to understand property
values, which contribute to equity for property owners and the ability of the CRA area to generate tax
increment for further improvements. An important consideration in addition to the benefits of
structural improvements and increasing property values is also a consideration of protections for
residents who rent or who may have difficulty paying increased costs of property taxes. Increased values
may create a heightened burden on these residents which could affect their ability to remain in the
community (aside from those property owners who wish to sell and relocate). These factors are
important to keep in mind for the following discussion of building age and improvement levels.
Building Age
Looking at the age of buildings, including when they last had major improvements, can indicate which
areas of the CRA may have greater need of reinvestment. Map 5-1 indicates that many of the older
structures that have not been renovated recently (measured as “effective year built”) are clustered in
the residential area of the Triangle to the north and are also found on many of the smaller lots
throughout the Bayshore Drive area. There is also a sizable amount of relatively newer development
throughout the CRA area, with a major cluster in the Windstar area to the west.
In terms of structural age, Figure 5-1 shows how commercial, single-family residential, and particularly
multi-family residential square footage building increased from pre-1960 until the 1990’s and 2000’s.
While the 2010’s data only represent years 2010 to 2016, the square footage has severely dropped off
from the 1990’s and 2000’s, likely due to the 2008 recession. Figure 5-2, which looks at the effective
year built of structures by parcel, shows a similar trend for multi-family residential. Single-family
residential structure effective building peaked in the pre-1960 period, mobile homes in the 1960’s, and
commercial slightly in the 1990’s. These trends indicate that the structures built later on these types of
parcels may have been larger, which may explain why the square footage built had much more
pronounced peaks for these use types in the 1990’s and 2000’s in comparison to the effective year built
by parcel. Additionally, a further break-down of the residential square footage built by decade indicates
that the surge of multi-family square footage built from the 1980’s through the 2000’s was largely
driven by condominium square footage (Figure 5-3).
DRAFT
Page 63 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 5-1: Effective Year Built
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
DRAFT
Page 64 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-1: Square Footage Built in CRA Area by Decade
Note: Government square footage was not included due to outlier amounts for the 1970’s and 2000’s (over 7 million and 2 million, respectively).
The 2010’s data runs through 2016.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Figure 5-2: Number of Parcels with Effective Year Built by Decade
Note: The 2010’s data runs through 2016.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Pre 1960 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
Commercial
SF Residential
MF Residential
Mobile Home
IndustrialDRAFT
Page 65 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-3: Residential Square Footage Built in CRA Area by Decade
Note: The 2010’s data runs through 2016.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Improvement Levels
Similar to building age, the improvement level of a structure can indicate which structures might benefit
most from reinvestment and upgrades. The Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR) collects data from
local property appraisers on the structural conditions of buildings. Figure 5-4 shows that, according to
the FDOR data, many of the parcels with structures having lower improvements levels are designated as
single-family residential. Note that some of the other parcel types may be larger than the single-family
parcels (noted as small in size in section 3.0), so they may have larger structures that could benefit from
reinvestment and upgrades. The percentages associated with each land use type show the share of
parcels with below-average improvement for that type compared to the total number of parcels with
that land use type. The percentage associated with total parcels with structure having below average
improvement levels is the share of these parcels when compared to the total number of parcels in the
entire CRA area.
DRAFT
Page 66 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-4: Parcels and Multi-Family Units with Structures having Below Average Improvement Levels
Note: multi-family (MF) residential is based on parcel counts for condominiums (which captures individual units) and unit counts for other multi-
family. Single-family (SF) residential, mobile home, commercial, and industrial are based on parcels counts. Percentages for each parcel type are
based on number of parcels with below average improvement levels for the corresponding land use type as a percentage of the total number of
parcels of that type. The percentage for total parcels is based on total parcels/units with below average improvement levels as a percentage of
the total number of parcels/units.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
Taxable Value
As noted in the introduction of this section, property improvements play a role in property values that
serve as a taxing base. Map 5-2 shows the taxable values for parcels in the CRA area. Note that for
condominium parcels where multiples units are represented by one geographic unit, an average taxable
value was calculated using property appraiser information; this value is represented for these parcels on
the map. Properties with higher taxable values are located in the Windstar area to the west, along the
northern section of Bayshore Drive on the west side, and among the parcels in the Triangle area. Other
parcels in the Triangle area, particularly along the corridors, show moderate taxable value levels. Large
segments of the low property value areas are public or non-profit land, such as Shadowlawn Elementary
School, the County Center, and the Naples Botanical Garden. The remaining parcels of the CRA area
show a mix of relatively moderate to low property values. The lower to moderate value commercial and
residential properties, as well as publicly owned properties (particularly those owned by the CRA), may
provide important redevelopment opportunities.
Figure 5-5 indicates that the land use type with the highest average values are designated multi-family
residential.
702
(80% of all
SFR parcels)
464
(19% of all MFR
parcels/units)
70
(42% of all MH
units)
12
(4% of all
Commercial
parcels)0
SF Residential MF Residential Mobile Home Commercial Industrial
Total Below Average Parcels/Units: 1,248
(33% of all parcels/units) DRAFT
Page 67 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 5-2: Taxable Value within the CRA Area
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
DRAFT
Page 68 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-5: Average Taxable Value per Acre within CRA Area by Land Use Type
*Note: Parcel 29280960006 appeared in the Florida Department of Revenue data as county-owned with an average taxable value, yet public
land is not typically taxable. The Collier County Property Appraiser indicates that this parcel is owned by an LLC entity. Consequently, this parcel
was treated as a miscode and taxable value is shown as zero.
**Note that the golf course in the Windstar Community highly influences the commercial taxable value since it makes up approximately 36% of
commercial land. Excluding this golf course, the average taxable value per acre is approximately $658,033.
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
5.2 Fiscal Trends
The taxable values reviewed in the previous section are the major driver of revenues for certain funds
operating in the CRA area, including the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment fund, the Bayshore
Beautification MSTU fund, and the Haldeman Creek MSTU fund. The most recent adopted budgets for
the funds and revenue trends over time are analyzed here to understand the funds available moving
forward. This information will also provide an initial basis for revenue projections that will be featured in
the final Redevelopment Plan.
$1,180,083
$708,729
$564,063
$440,570 **
$244,272
$203,383
$57,961
$29,376
$10,364
- *
-
-
Multi-Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Industrial
Commercial
Mobile Home
Vacant
State
Institutional
Utility/Other
County
Botanical Garden
Municipal
DRAFT
Page 69 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Budget Overview
Figures 5-6 through 5-8 show the latest adopted budget for the three funds operating in the CRA area.
The charts indicate that a majority of the budget for each fund is dedicated towards reserves, transfers,
and/or interest or capital improvements. Note that the spending ability for the Redevelopment Fund is
limited by the need to maintain a certain amount of reserves as coverage for loan debt for land
purchases within the CRA, the largest of which is the Mini Triangle catalyst site; once the lot is sold, the
CRA will be able to pay off this loan. As noted in the FY 2018 Adopted Budget, the reserves in the
Haldeman Creek MSTU fund can be used towards the next major dredging project (the last dredge was
completed in 2006). MSTU funds will be used to enhance Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue
including the construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Bayshore Drive and Thomasson Drive.
The final Redevelopment Plan will thus provide a more detailed program of capital expenditures with
corresponding funding estimates, which will also help indicate what funds will remain for other projects.
Figure 5-6: 2018 Adopted Budget for Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Fund
Source: FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budget
Figure 5-7: 2018 Adopted Budget for Bayshore Beautification MSTU Fund
CRA
Implementation,
$815,100 , 25%
Project &
MSTU
Management,
$136,800 , 4%
Transfers for
Debt Service,
$631,000 ,
19%
Reserves,
$1,735,900 ,
52%DRAFT
Page 70 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Source: FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budget
Figure 5-8: 2018 Adopted Budget for Haldeman Creek MSTU Fund
Source: FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budget
Revenue Overview
The following figures provide information on the primary revenue sources for each of the three funds
operating in the CRA. Note that since these fund revenues are based on property values, they are
generally limited by the Florida Save Our Homes statute that caps property value assessment increases
to 3% of the assessed value of the property for the prior year or the percent change in the Consumer
Price Index (whichever is lower). Figure 5-9 shows tax increment finance (TIF) revenues for CRA
redevelopment from 2001 to 2018. The trend has generally followed the rise and fall of the economy,
but an important observation to note is that the TIF revenues have been steadily trending upwards since
2013 despite the lag in square footage built noted for the CRA between 2011 and 2016 in Section 2.0.
MSTU Operations
& Maintenance,
$637,200 , 12%
MSTU Capital
Improvements,
$4,400,000 , 82%
Reserves/Transfers/Interest,
$349,700 , 6%
MSTU Operating Costs,
$39,700 , 10%
Improvements
& Consulting,
$20,000 , 5%
Reserves/Transfers/Interest,
$349,500 , 85%DRAFT
Page 71 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
This finding suggests that assessed values are still increasing.
The Bayshore Beautification MSTU ad valorem revenues have remained fairly consistent for roughly the
past ten years (Figure 5-10). Note that the amount for 2017 is the forecasted amount, and the amount
for 2018 is the adopted amount.
The Haldeman Creek MSTU ad valorem revenues increased in the first few years after the MSTU’s
creation in 2006, and have remained steady through 2014, followed by an increase in revenues through
2018 (Figure 5-11). Note that the amount for 2017 is the forecasted amount, and the amount for 2018 is
the adopted amount.
DRAFT
Page 72 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-9: TIF Revenue Trend (2001-2018)
Source: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA
Figure 5-10: Bayshore Beautification MSTU Ad Valorem Revenue Trend (2007-2018)
Note: the 2017 amount is the forecasted amount and the 2018 amount is the adopted amount in the FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted
Budget.
Source: FY 2007/2008 to FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budgets
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018DRAFT
Page 73 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 5-11: Haldeman Creek MSTU Ad Valorem Revenue Trend (2008-2018)
Note: the 2017 amount is the forecasted amount and the 2018 amount is the adopted amount in the FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted
Budget.
Source: FY 2007/2008 to FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budgets
Figure 5-12 compares the 2018 revenues for each fund. The CRA TIF and Bayshore Beautification MSTU
ad valorem make up the majority of revenues. These revenues are a primary focus for CRA are
investment, particularly since the Haldeman Creek MSTU revenues have a more specific dedicated
purpose to dredging and other Haldeman Creek maintenance.
Figure 5-12: 2018 TIF/Ad Valorem MSTU Revenues for Funds in CRA Area
Note: the MSTU revenue amounts are the adopted 2018 amounts from the 2018 Collier County Adopted Budget.
Source: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA, FY 2017/2018 Collier County Adopted Budget
$-
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1,562,600
1,051,100
78,900
CRA TIF Beautification MSTU
Ad Valorem
Haldeman Creek MSTU
Ad ValoremDRAFT
Page 74 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
5.3 Property and Fiscal Trends Takeaways
• Important considerations for analyzing properties in the CRA area include:
o How investment in areas with structures that are older or have lower improvement
levels can enhance living conditions and aesthetics for existing residents, improve equity
for property owners through property value increases, and increase TIF revenues due to
property value increases.
o How to support and protect residents, workers, and property owners who may rent
their spaces or have difficulty paying increased costs of property taxes so they can
remain a part of the community.
• Many of the older structures that have not been renovated recently are clustered in the
residential area of the Triangle to the north and are also found on many of the smaller lots
throughout the Bayshore Drive area.
• Many parcels with single-family homes and mobile homes have not seen major re-builds or
improvements since the 1960’s or prior, and the majority of parcels with lower improvement
levels are those with single-family homes. As a result, these residential parcels may experience
heightened benefit from investment for improvements or possibly redevelopment.
• Parcels with commercial have mainly had structures built or improved from the 1970’s to
1990’s, so they too may significantly benefit from such investment.
• Parcels with multi-family residential tend to have the newest or most recently improved
structures, primarily ranging in age from the 1980’s through the 2000’s. Square footage trends
indicate that building during this time was primarily for condominiums and large multi-family
residential (ten or more units).
• Multi-family residential tends to have the highest taxable value per acre. Higher tax values are
found in the Windstar community, in the northern section of Bayshore Drive to the west, and
along the corridors in the Triangle area. The lower to moderate value commercial and
residential properties, as well as publicly owned properties (particularly those owned by the
CRA), may provide important redevelopment opportunities.
• The budgets for the three funds in the CRA area (CRA redevelopment fund, Bayshore
Beautification MSTU, and Haldeman Creek MSTU) have high appropriations for reserves,
transfers, and interest or capital improvements. These portions of the budget may eventually
provide funds for major projects in the area, such as the dredging of Haldeman Creek and the
roundabout at Thomasson Drive and Bayshore Drive. Documenting planned projects, their
funding needs, and their timing (or tentative timing) will be an important follow-up step for
creating the Capital Improvement Plan as part of the final Redevelopment Plan. Much of the
funds remaining for discretionary spending will likely be focused in the CRA redevelopment
funds and Bayshore Beautification MSTU fund given the specific purpose of the Haldeman Creek
MSTU.
DRAFT
Page 75 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• TIF revenues for CRA redevelopment have tracked the economic boom and recession around
2008; despite the finding in Section 3.2 that building has been slow to recover in the CRA area,
TIF revenues have recovered in a relatively steady way likely due to assessed values.
• Ad valorem revenues for the two MSTUs have been relatively stable in recent years (Haldeman
Creek took a couple of years to stabilize just after its establishment in 2006).
DRAFT
Page 76 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
6.0 Public Outreach
6.1 Agency and Community Stakeholder Meetings Summary
Nine agency and community stakeholder meetings were held for more focused discussions on issues
and opportunities related to redevelopment in the CRA area. The following provides a list with meeting
date and focus:
April 25th, 2018
• Advisory Board Members – CRA, Bayshore Beautification MSTU, Haldeman Creek MSTU
• Commercial, Business, Real Estate Professionals
April 26th, 2018
• County Agencies- Transportation, Stormwater
• City of Naples- Utilities, Streets, Stormwater
• Gateway Triangle Property Owners and Businesses
• Public Art and Tourism
• Design and Placement
April 27th, 2018
• County Agencies- Growth Management, Zoning, Code Enforcement
• County Agencies – Public Services, Parks and Recreation
Key issues and opportunities distilled from these discussions are presented for each of the major themes
below, which include transportation, stormwater, water, growth and development, parks and open
space, the Gateway Triangle neighborhood, and general issues and opportunities.
Advisory Board Stakeholder Meeting
DRAFT
Page 77 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Transportation
Issues
• The CRA is in an area of transition between urban and suburban with both local and regional
transportation activity; there is a need to consider this transition in the redevelopment process
and get buy-in if more urban multi-modal transportation approaches are pursued.
• ROW constraints can make transit improvements difficult, and requiring amenities to be
provided by private developers needs to be weighed in light of impact fee amounts.
• There are concerns over the growth impacts of the county on Naples; traffic and transportation
are the number one issues (one example is events in parks that generate traffic).
• Major corridors and intersections, such as the US 41 corridor with intersections at Sandpiper
Street/Davis Boulevard and Bayshore Drive, can create a challenge for all modes in terms of
safety, connectivity, and circulation. Impacts of roadway changes, such as accommodating
traffic on alternative routes, need to be identified and considered.
• Parking on Bayshore Drive is limited.
Opportunities
• Comprehensive Plan and code changes can promote new urban approaches in the CRA area.
Political framing of urbanization of CRA area is important.
• Transit in the CRA connecting to Naples has relatively good ridership; improved frequency is a
general transit focus to attract more riders.
• There may be opportunities to coordinate with the City of Naples in creating and improving
transportation connections between the CRA area and the city (examples: the pedestrian bridge
on US 41/5th Avenue; alternative vehicle coordination such as Slidr electric shuttles, golf cart
pathways, and bikeshare). Naples may also provide an example of approaches to urban
transportation (example: downtown parking garages)
• FDOT is facilitating safety improvements on US 41, which might consider crosswalks and signals;
other safety improvements the County might consider are evaluating landscaping for visibility
and turning radii at intersections and driveways
• Evaluate an easement to allow the CRA area to connect to parks.
• Evaluate parking ideas (shared parking, parking garages, parallel parking, design requirement
adjustments)
DRAFT
Page 78 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Stormwater
Issues
• Approaches are needed to manage stormwater effectively with water quality and use of right-
of-way considerations.
• Any changes to flood designations within the CRA area that may arise due to FEMA’s current
reevaluation effort need to be considered for CRA area redevelopment efforts.
• Pond space is needed for streets to connect for drainage.
Opportunities
• There is need for a follow-up effort as part of the Redevelopment Plan update to identify
general flooding issue areas, outfall capacity (places where stormwater empties after being
drained), and areas with curb and pipe infrastructure versus ditches and swales. This
information can provide a basis for a broader systematic plan for managing stormwater (even a
comprehensive stormwater master plan) for the CRA area, including capital improvements.
• A clarified and pre-approved process for design, management, and use of the road right-of-way
can promote a shared understanding between agency staff, developers, and property owners on
this issue.
Water
Issues
• Many neighborhood side-streets need upgrades to their water lines to support the installation
of fire hydrants.
Opportunities
• The CRA is coordinating with the City of Naples (who oversees the water infrastructure) to
complete the water infrastructure improvements in conjunction with the installation of
sidewalks
• Grants, such as Community Development Block Grants, were used in the latest round of water
line upgrades, along with funding from the City of Naples. Becca Avenue and Pine Street will also
soon receive upgrades.
• New Mattamy development is “looping” the main water line on Thomasson Drive and Bayshore
Drive.
DRAFT
Page 79 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Growth & Development
Issues
• The current development process takes time and is complex, particularly for small developers
and developers seeking to build infill, redevelopment projects, or new types of projects.
Developers, consultants, and the County are not always on the same page.
• It can be difficult to assemble individual lots to promote a more significant development
opportunity.
• Infill or redevelopment in CRA is competing with corporate development nearby (e.g., Isles of
Collier Preserve), other urban infill opportunities (Naples, Downtown Fort Meyers), a lack of
large parcels, and the ability of some landlords to make returns on sub-standard properties.
• There’s still a risk in developing and whether it will pay off; construction costs are high – land
costs, wetland mitigation (which is a complex determination), and flood requirements
contribute to these costs.
• The current circumstances of the development process may result in possibility of pockets of
wealth and only spotty successes elsewhere (uneven successful development).
• There is a lack of infrastructure to support big development.
• There is a possible discrepancy in perception and vision for the CRA area between traditional
development being built and funky, artistic efforts. There is a question of whether generational
differences might contribute to different perceptions of the area.
• Bayshore Drive acts as a dividing line between “better” schools in Naples and those elsewhere.
• There are density restriction in the CRA area due to the Coastal High Hazard Area designation.
Development numbers do not work well without density or mixed use.
• There are limited live/work possibilities.
• The area is not affordable to younger people.
• Dumping and general site appearance/cleanliness create a negative perception of the area for
some.
• There is a need for ownership of homes instead of rental.
• There is a need for consistent zoning (example: not having residential near warehouses)
• Murals create a highly subjective and discretionary code issue.
• Consideration is needed of how to accommodate service providers, their clients and residential
neighborhoods, particularly north of US 41.
• The CRA area is in a transitional area between urban and suburban development; consideration
needs to be given to what kind of development to aim for moving forward in terms of building
set-backs, placement of parking, etc.
• There is concern over county growth impacts on traffic and public facilities (e.g., parks and
beaches) in Naples.
DRAFT
Page 80 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Opportunities
• People with money are interested in investing/developing in the CRA area.
• There is an opportunity to make infrastructure improvements before values go up (if land
purchase is required).
• Arts and cultural development provides a possible image for the CRA area and a means of
guiding development; this development may be broader than affordable housing for artists to
include serving artist not living in the area, fostering art-supportive businesses, and serving
customers who are interested in the funky/arts feel as opposed to the traditional gated
communities. This idea might also be broadened to include arts aside from the visual arts.
Marketing of the area in this way is already happening on social media as the “Bayshore Arts
District”.
• The CRA area is close to Downtown Naples and may receive some of the growth/market from
that area.
• There are temporary lodging opportunities such as for bed and breakfasts and AirBnB.
• Rental housing may help development numbers pencil out.
• The CRA area has good amenities on which to build, including Botanical Garden, Sugden
Regional Park, East Naples Community Park, the golf course, Bayview Park, and the Hamilton
Harbor Social Club.
Public Art and Tourism Stakeholder Meeting DRAFT
Page 81 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Opportunities for the County and the CRA to help include:
o Establish a vision with an aim to keep the area “funky” and avoid a rapid shift in
affordability and character that may undermine this vision.
o Provide public space for display and events.
o Establish a strategic arts program at the county level.
o Require development to include art.
o Provide effective development incentives for those ready to invest, which might include
impact fee incentives; attract a better anchor to Gulfgate Plaza.
o Use land use and code authority to address development concerns, including
affordability considerations:
Establish Neighborhood Commercial zoning for live/work spaces.
Allow for smaller units or two units on a lot (e.g., guest houses) or incentivize
accessory units where they are permitted. Evaluate what any concerns might be
among lenders, insurers, or those interested in single-family homes and how to
successfully implement accessory units.
Reduce building set-back requirements.
Evaluate opportunities for vertical mixed-use of residential over commercial.
Evaluate opportunities to streamline and update land uses; eliminate those that
are not needed or that are too heavy.
Include Standard Industrial Classification codes (SIC) directly in the Land
Development Code (LDC) to identify allowable uses.
Provide more clarity on what areas are wetlands.
Evaluate whether a person can turn consecutive lots into commercial if they
own the head lot and it is commercial.
Streamline rules between zoning, building, and fire codes.
Pilot new development approaches and codes that better support urban
development, infill, and redevelopment in the CRA.
o Place on-site water retention underground.
o Promote catalyst projects to change perception that it is risky to develop in the CRA
area; use limited funds to focus on major nodes, such as Thomasson Drive/Bayshore
Drive and US 41 and the River. Capture and direct spillover effects.
o CRA can advocate for desired development in the County process and build
relationships with existing property owners to discuss and guide future redevelopment.
The CRA might aim to become part of the development review process.
o Assess code enforcement and community policing ability and capacity to handle code
issues and crime. Address landlords who charge high rents on low quality property. Use
proactive planning to help reduce reliance on code enforcement. DRAFT
Page 82 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
o Evaluate opportunities to have some utilities needs met (e.g. stormwater) ahead of time
by government to reduce needs that must be met by developers of new, larger
developments.
o Evaluate opportunities to streamline and facilitate better development in the CRA area:
Rely more on criteria where possible to make decisions as opposed to
discretionary political processes (example: Mixed Use Project process).
Evaluate the opportunity to have dedicated staff for CRA area developments
(this might depend on the volume of applications) or a single point of contact
within the process.
Establish time limits for processing applications or pay back fees when process
takes too long.
Increase coordination of schedules for developers, consultants, and the County
agencies in the development process.
Encourage the design-build concept which may streamline the more detailed
decision-making while still retaining final approval power for the Board of
County Commissioners.
o Expand the CRA area boundaries to include Thomasson to US 41 to assist County on US
41 commercial corridor development.
Parks and Open Space
Issues
• There is limited public access to Haldeman Creek.
• Bayview Park neighborhoods are concerned about trash and speeding.
• There is limited connectivity to parks.
Opportunities
• Incorporating parks into the CRA area might help give people a sense of having a public space as
part of the community and would help facilitate connections between parks and the CRA area
(in terms of pathways, stormwater infrastructure, parks amenities provided by CRA, etc.).
• Evaluate connections between parks and CRA, including with Bayshore Drive.
• Hours of operation might be adjusted for parks with electronic gates to allow for earlier/later
hours.
• There may be an opportunity for land acquisition from the School District near East Naples
Community Park.
• In conjunction with Bayshore MSTU improvements along Hamilton Avenue, the County can
evaluate how to use its additional Danford neighborhood parcels for potential parking and
neighborhood park opportunities. A next step might include possible conceptual plans.
DRAFT
Page 83 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Evaluate the possibility to increase user fees/have an additional charge to ensure that trash is
picked up.
• Evaluate how to encourage visitors of East Naples Community
Park and Sugden Park to also visit commercial/retail
establishments in the CRA area. Evaluate how these parks
with national and international draws can continue to serve
local residents, as well. On opportunity to do so is the East
Naples Community Park Master Plan process.
• Evaluate event opportunities at the parks.
• Evaluate the opportunity for a library on the Del’s 24
property and sponsorship opportunities for funding.
Gateway Triangle Neighborhood
Issues
• There are concerns about crime, drugs, and informal dwelling situations in the area. Specific
topics noted include maintaining visibility with landscaping, a lack of police presence, efforts to
create park space in which people feel comfortable, and the relationship between service
providers and surrounding neighborhoods.
• Some desire code enforcement for items out in front of properties.
• There is a need for more consistency and harmony among uses to support the neighborhood
feel. This effort might involve removing heavy industrial uses and the use of buffers (e.g., trees,
fences).
• The value of residential properties needs to be considered as well as commercial properties.
• There is a lack of communication between the CRA and residents.
• There are flooding and stormwater infrastructure problems and a desire for pipe infrastructure
to allow for covering the culverts. There was concern over red tide in the retention pond.
• There is a particular transitional challenge between the residential neighborhoods of the area
and the surrounding commercial along the major arterials without much depth.
Opportunities
• The Triangle area is close to Downtown Naples.
• There is not a need to overhaul the area necessarily, but to have a nicer neighborhood vibe
without heavy uses.
• The retention pond might serve as a green space.
• Evaluate if there are older commercial buildings that might benefit from redevelopment (along
Davis Boulevard, Avondale Street, Kirkwood Avenue, and Linwood Avenue).
• Evaluate opportunities to combine lots.
Del’s 24 Property DRAFT
Page 84 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure may be needed in the future along with businesses for
people to visit.
General
Issues
• There is concern over people paying into the CRA but not seeing improvements (example: Van
Buren).
6.2 Community Outreach Forum Summary
A community outreach forum open to the general public was held on April 26, 2018 from 6:00 to 8:00
pm at the Naples Botanical Garden. There were over 30 attendees. The forum began with an
introductory presentation by the consulting team that included polling questions about the attendees
and aspects of the CRA area. The attendees then completed a mapping exercise in small groups to
respond to issues and opportunities identified by staff and the consulting team, as well as identify new
issues and opportunities. The forum ended with time for attendees to fill out comment forms. The
remainder of this section summarizes key findings from each of these activities.
Polling Questions Summary
Questions regarding characteristics of the attendees indicated that the many attendees:
• Were between the ages of 50 and 71 (66%)
• Did not own a business in the CRA area (77%)
• Owned property in the CRA (78%)1
Note that the percentages above reflect percentage of respondents to each question, yet these
questions had high response rates (27 or more). The number of those living inside or outside the CRA
area was more evenly split, with 53% of the 32 respondents living inside the CRA area. A sizable number
of attendees also lived in a two-person household.
The primary assets identified in the CRA area included:
• Parks, recreation facilities, gardens
• Neighborhood commercial, restaurants
The primary challenges identified in the CRA area included:
• Poor walkability
• Limited economic development/employment
• Flooding or other infrastructure issues
• Crime/safety
1 A question was asked more specifically about homeownership in the CRA area; while all of the
question respondents indicated they owned a home in the CRA area, only 19 attendees answered this
question. So at least roughly 60% of attendees owned a home in the CRA area. DRAFT
Page 85 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
In terms of land use, single-family homes were the primary residential type desired by attendees. The
primary types of commercial/non-residential uses included:
• Coffee shops, cafes
• Restaurants, bars
The primary items that attendees identified to help create a better sense of community/sense of place
included:
• Architectural styles
• Public parks, plazas, and gathering spaces
For transportation preferences, attendees would prefer to travel in the CRA area via the following
modes:
• Walking, rolling (using wheeled modes that might primarily use the sidewalk; e.g., skateboards,
wheelchairs, etc.)
• Biking
• Golf carts, small vehicles
Map Exercise Summary
Figure 6-1 summarizes comments collected from the six small groups of attendees. Icons indicate an
issue or opportunity identified by staff and consulting team efforts prior to the workshop. Attendees
were instructed:
• to mark any comments regarding issues/opportunities identified by staff and the consulting
team in green.
• to mark any additional issues in red.
• to mark any additional opportunities in blue.
The boxes around each comment in Figure 6-1 reflect this color-coding.
Comments on specific needs and improvements related to major themes which included:
• Pedestrian improvements and connectivity, including mention of lighting and wayfinding
• Flood management
• Property appearance and clean-up
• Traffic calming
• Traffic congestion
• Parking opportunities
• Bike improvements
• Public art opportunities
Other comments mentioned redevelopment opportunities or use-related opportunities for commercial, DRAFT
Page 86 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
cultural development, or live/work spaces. Additional points of concern related to the Triangle area in
terms of improvements for the retention pond and interactions between service provider operations
and residential uses in the area. A final point that came up was raising the bridge over Haldeman Creek.
Mapping Exercise at the Community Outreach Forum
Comment Form Summary
The attendees had the opportunity to fill out a comment form which included the following prompts:
• In a few words, describe your vision for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA area.
• What is the most important outcome you would like to see from this CRA Redevelopment Plan
update process?
• Any additional comments
Since there were similar responses across all three prompts, the main themes overall for all the
questions are summarized below (these themes generally captured three or more related comments):
• Improving the ability to walk and bike in the CRA area
• Incorporating an arts and culture focus into redevelopment efforts
• Promoting commercial development in the area, including entertainment, dining, and leisure
• Promoting a local focus, including being able to live and work in the area and having local
businesses
• Expanding the CRA area to include areas to the east
• Promoting code enforcement and clean-up of properties
• Promoting commercial/residential mixed-use
• Addressing parking issues
DRAFT
Page 87 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Providing assistance in the development process
• Promoting safety
• Focusing on the Triangle area
DRAFT
Page 88 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Figure 6-1: Public Outreach Forum Map Exercise Comment Summary
DRAFT
Page 89 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
6.3 Canal Boat Tour Summary
On the final day of agency and public outreach, the consulting team and CRA staff completed a boat tour
of the canal network in the CRA area. A few key issues that emerged included:
• Seawall upkeep: in several places, the seawall was in
disrepair. Clarity is needed on the responsibility for
maintaining seawalls and funding repairs.
• Mangrove management: mangroves are an important
part of the natural environment along the waterways, yet
in some parts of the canals, mangroves have grown
thickly enough to obstruct parts of the passageway.
Clarity is needed on how to manage the mangroves to
account for environmental needs and requirements, as
well as keeping boat passages clear. Clarity is also needed
on the responsibility for maintaining and funding
mangrove management.
• Property management, including docks and boats: in some areas of the canals, boats and docks
are in severe disrepair. An approach is needed to properly maintain or dispose of boats and dock
components.
6. 4 Additional Stakeholder Calls
Additional calls with stakeholder were made to follow up on items that emerged from the public
outreach events described above. The following provides the stakeholders on the calls and key
takeaways from the discussions.
Collier County Zoning (June 8, 2018) – Takeaways:
• Provide clarity on relationship between mixed-use overlays and base zoning.
• Evaluate possibility for more consistency of uses and design requirements for heavier uses
• Zoning Division seeks CRA’s recommendation as part of a review with any public hearing.
• Evaluate possibility for reduced design requirements for parking for additional capacity,
balancing with style and design considerations
• Evaluate possibility for garage with new developments, such as the 17-Acre Site; also evaluate
on-street parking, multi-modal options, and shared parking.
• Evaluate if there are ways to address the underutilization of mixed use projects (MUPs).
Collier County Stormwater Management (June 15, 2018) – Takeaways:
• The County is in the process of adopting a stormwater utility with an assessment that would
apply to the unincorporated county. Consequently, there is a need for more capital
improvement coordination between the CRA and the Stormwater Management. The next year
of capital funding is committed, but then other projects will be evaluated, as well as other
funding sources.
Haldeman Creek in the CRA Area DRAFT
Page 90 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• There is a need for a more systematic plan around stormwater and capital improvements (such
as Immokalee CRA’s recent stormwater master plan).
• A follow-up call with the County can address the following topics:
o The potential for an easement in the Bayshore area for north/south and park
connectivity
o Site planning information for stormwater management
o Flood plain information
o Swale use and design in front of properties
o Capital needs coordination and prioritization in conjunction with the County
o Wetland mitigation
Isram Realty, owner and operator of Gulfgate Plaza (July 2, 2018) – Takeaways:
• There is a slow process of change towards a less seasonal population and increased disposable
income in the area.
• Effective development incentives might include tax breaks, assistance with tenant move-in and
relocation of existing tenants, improved roads and streetscape.
• There is large office space currently available on second floor of Gulfgate Plaza.
Kite Realty, owner of Courthouse Shadows (July 11, 2018) – Takeaways:
• Effective development incentives might include additional density, addressing length of time
development process requires, providing TIF dollars for infrastructure, and impact fee
reductions.
• Kite Realty currently considering possibility of multi-family residential development geared
towards young professionals on the current Courthouse Shadows site.
• Transportation improvements related to various modes and continuation of water line upgrades
may be helpful in supporting development.
Avalon Elementary School (July 11, 2018) – Takeaways:
• Of Avalon’s 500 students, approximately 70% are Hispanic and 20% are Haitian Creole; 80% are
a part of families who do not primarily speak English at home; 95% of the students are
economically disadvantaged.
• Affordable housing is a primary concern; many families share housing, and about 40 to 50
students were homeless after Hurricane Irma.
• Safety is also a concern; there is a need for lighting, landscaping, addressing crime.
• Most students get to school by walking or riding in a car; many parents walk or use CAT buses.
Families face barriers to driving due to licensing requirements and lack of car ownership.
• There is high parent involvement at the school; calls and flyers are more effective for reaching
them than social media; Spanish translation is provided at meetings. Friday morning meeting
times are more effective than evening times.
DRAFT
Page 91 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• The school population has been shrinking over the past few years, possibly due to students
attending private school or people moving into the area without school-age children.
• Compared to Avalon, Shadowlawn Elementary may have relatively lower, but still significant,
percentages of Hispanic students, students who speak a different language at home, and
economically disadvantaged students.
• There are many community entities that support the population at Avalon School, such as
volunteer efforts of the Isles of Collier Preserve community.
• The school uses County parks amenities through an interlocal agreement. School amenities are
not open for public use.
St. Matthew’s House, faith-based service provider (July 13, 2018) – Takeaways:
• St. Matthew’s House operates in several different locations, including the Bayshore/Gateway
Triangle area, Immokalee, and Labelle in Hendry County. It provides various services, including
shelters for those without homes, direct assistance to prevent homelessness, job placement and
training (partnership with Starbucks supporting the latter), substance abuse recovery assistance,
chaplain ministry in the County jail system, reintegration programs for those who have been
incarcerated, among others. St Matthew’s House is also interested in a business accelerator idea
to assist people in making a livelihood.
• The non-profit has a $16.5 million operating budget, 70% of which is generated by social
enterprises (retail outlets, catering, etc.) with fundraising making up the rest.
• St. Matthew’s House has invested approximately $12 million in the past 10 years and aims to
make $8 million more in project investments in the next year or two.
• The primary need identified for the community is affordable and workforce housing. Lot lines
also posed an issue with development of employee and transitional housing. Other needs
include renovation funds, downpayment assistance, and design features/design scheme for the
area’s public realm. In terms of transportation, there is more walking, transit use, and biking
among clients in this area than in others. Only about 10% coming into the shelter have a vehicle.
Clients often get work within 30 days, with about 80% employed.
• The area is seeing signs of improvement over time. The crime rate has decreased in the area
since the 1990’s.
DRAFT
Page 92 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
6.5 Public Outreach Takeaways
• The CRA area is in a transitional area between the highly urbanized Naples area and more
suburban/environmental lands, and the current development code may not accommodate
urban styles of development very well. The following are considerations emerging from the
public outreach for navigating the different development styles of the more and less urbanized
areas:
o The CRA area can pilot new urban approaches through the Comprehensive Plan and
LDC, which might include a multi-modal focus, transit-related improvements, traffic
calming, live/work spaces, a local focus to meet needs, smaller units or guest houses,
mixed-use.
o The community outreach events indicated that there are members of the community
who primarily desire single-family home development, are concerned about traffic
circulation and congestion, and desire accessible parking (primarily on Bayshore Drive,
discussed in further detail below).
• Attendees of the community outreach forum identified limited economic development and
employment as a challenge in the CRA area. Yet the public outreach events also indicated that
there is development potential for the CRA area. Developers with funding are interested, and
the area has a number of desirable qualities. It is near Downtown Naples, the beaches, and
other interesting destinations such as County parks and the Botanical Gardens which draw many
non-local visitors. These qualities signal a potential for tourist-oriented development in the area.
There is also social enterprise activity, and there is interest from St. Matthew’s House to
promote a business accelerator for local community economic development to support those
with tenuous livelihoods.
• Comments from the public outreach event characterized the development process as long,
costly, and complex, particularly for small developers and developers of infill, redevelopment, or
new types of projects. Needs identified included:
o Addressing the cost of land, environmental factors (e.g., wetland mitigation, flooding,
CHHA), and infrastructure needs.
o Addressing the complexity of the development process and code requirements (clarity
and streamlining of codes, dedicated County staff assistance, procedural time limits,
increased coordination of those involved, increased design-build and criteria-based
decisions, etc.).
o Increasing the involvement of the CRA in the development process.
• Aside from the development process, assembly of land was noted as a challenge to
development.
• Key potential development and real estate opportunities include the second floor office space of
Gulfgate Plaza, Courthouse Shadows, and Del’s 24 property, in addition to the CRA-owned
parcels.
DRAFT
Page 93 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
• Effective development incentives might include increased density, impact fee incentives (the
CRA cannot reduce impact fees but can offset the costs or allow them ot be paid down over
time),TIF rebates, TIF money provided for infrastructure, and incentives related to land
provision. Improved streetscape, transportation, and infrastructure provided by government
agencies can also support new development.
• Many comments from the public outreach relate to issues that impact the perception of the CRA
area and the community, with related impacts for development. These issues include:
o The need for a clear vision and way of marketing the area. There is currently a mix of
traditional development and efforts for more arts/culture-oriented development with
desire for a strategic plan and identifying public art opportunities. Architectural style
and public realm design were also noted as approaches to improving the community.
o School quality influences the perception of sub-areas in the community, with Bayshore
Drive acting as a dividing line between “better” schools in Naples and schools
elsewhere. Avalon Elementary, one of the elementary schools serving the area, has seen
large improvements in its school grades over the past several years.
o General site appearance and cleanliness was frequently noted as negatively impacting
perception of the area. This concern extended to Haldeman Creek and the canal system
in terms of seawalls, mangroves, and boat/pier property. The mixture of heavy uses and
residential was also noted to impact the feel and appearance of the community, with
concerns for property values of the owner-occupied residences.
o Public outreach participants raised concerns about crime and safety in the
neighborhood.
o The Redevelopment Plan update process can assess the role of code enforcement and
community policing to address site appearance issues and crime and also evaluate
where better planning can reduce reliance on these enforcement agencies.
• The CRA can focus on catalyst projects and spend its limited funds on nodes to stimulate private
development and capture spillover effects.
• Affordable housing and housing quality is a primary need for many of the existing CRA area
residents. Opportunities to partner with interested parties, such as St. Matthew’s House, should
be evaluated.
• The balance between owner-occupied housing and rental units should be explored further.
Ownership units were noted as a community stabilizer, but rental was noted as a way to retain
profitability in residential development. Further analysis on this topic is provided in Section 7.2.
• The CRA should account for community-oriented uses and services, including service providers
and clients based in the CRA area, in its planning to support these efforts and strengthen
community networks/connections between uses.
• Neighborhood commercial and restaurants were noted as an asset in the public outreach forum,
which can be a use to expand in the CRA area.
• The community outreach forum attendees identified public parks, plazas, and gathering spaces
as opportunities to build a sense of community and place. Public spaces are also important for
hosting events. The existing parks, recreation spaces, and gardens of the CRA area were
identified as assets in the outreach forum, and ideas for further improvements include: DRAFT
Page 94 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
o Expansion of CRA area to include parks and lands to the east to facilitate connections
and improvements
o Increased park connectivity through a possible easement.
o Better access and parking at Bayview Park to access waterways
o Evaluating opportunities and funding for a library
• In terms of transportation, the CRA area will have to navigate differences between
regional/auto-oriented and local/multi-modal needs given the major roadways in the area and
the desire highlighted in public outreach for improved conditions for alternative modes. Major
corridors and intersections, such as US 41 at Sandpiper Street/Davis Boulevard and US 41 at
Bayshore Drive, illustrate this issue. Transportation safety and connectivity for bikes and
pedestrians was highlighted as a problem in the outreach, with suggested solutions including
for example crosswalks, bike lanes, and a possible north/south easement east of the Bayshore
Drive neighborhood with connections to the parks and development further east. Alternative
vehicles also emerged, such as golf carts and shuttle services (e.g., Slidr in Naples). Providing
effective transportation is particularly important for residents who face barriers to driving or
owning a car.
• An additional issue for transportation is parking, particularly for establishments along Bayshore
Drive. Parking is a concern where innovative urban approaches may help address needs, such as
off-site parking and shuttles during peak season or shared parking opportunities. The CRA might
also consider additional parking lots or a parking garage for the area.
• Many of the above issues also apply to the CRA area’s relationship with the City of Naples. Issues
such as traffic and growth impacts can span between the two jurisdictions, particularly given
their proximity. Solutions can also span jurisdictions, such as coordination on alternative
vehicles and related infrastructure. Additionally, the City of Naples provides water for the CRA
area, so there has been coordination on water line upgrades and fire hydrant installation (see
Section 7.1).
• Flooding and stormwater drainage emerged as a problem in various public outreach events,
highlighting the need for systemic approaches to drainage that account for water quality and
use/design of right-of-way. Capital improvements will require increased coordination with
County Stormwater Management.
• Better communication between the CRA and residents was noted as a need; current CRA efforts
may begin to facilitate this improvement, such as an update to the CRA website design. The CRA
also needs to account for residents who do not primarily speak English in their outreach efforts
by providing materials and meetings in translation. It may consider coordinating with other
entities, such as schools, for effective and consolidated meeting times.
• CRA area improvements should consider both need and geographic distribution.
DRAFT
Page 95 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
7.0 Built Environment Assessment and Needs
7.1 Built Environment Assessment and Needs Planning Graphics
The final Redevelopment Plan provides planning graphics summarizing many of the findings and key
takeaways from the Built Environment Assessment and Needs in the following sections:
• Residential Land Use Characteristics
• Commercial & Industrial Land Use Characteristics
• Community-Oriented Uses
• Parks & Open Space
• Design Treatments & Attributes
• Needed Land Use Transitions
• Character Areas
• Existing Transportation Conditions
• Specific Transportation Needs
• Potential Complete Streets Projects
• Stormwater Infrastructure
• Water Infrastructure
The following information provides additional relevant analysis.
7.2 Ownership & Rental Housing
The balance between rental residential units and owned residential units was a topic to explore further
from the public outreach. Rented versus owned multi-family units can be shown using the distinction
between condominiums and apartments, as illustrated in Map 7-1. The map indicates that there is a mix
of condominiums and apartments, with condominiums primarily in the Windstar area and along
corridors in the Triangle area and apartments primarily in the northern Bayshore Drive area and central
Triangle area.
DRAFT
Page 96 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 7-1: Break-Down of Multi-Family Residential in the CRA Area
Source: 2017 Florida Department of Revenue
7.3 Housing Affordability
Table 7-1 shows for-purchase housing affordable within the CRA area at different levels of Median
Family Income (MFI) of the Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island area, as well as the share this housing
makes up of the total number of parcels (which corresponds to total number of units) for each type. A
“just value threshold” is determined for each MFI level by multiplying the income amount by 2.5, a
conservative multiplier to determine the just value at which a home would be affordable at the given
income level. The number of units available is determined by evaluating how many of the total units by
type have a just value at or below this threshold. Note that these numbers include occupied units and
that the number of units is cumulative as the percentage of MFI level increases.
The table indicates that there is some amount of for-purchase housing available at all of the income DRAFT
Page 97 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
ranges, with mobile homes in particular available to low-income households making 80% of MFI or less.
Note however that Section 5.1 found that approximately 80% of single-family homes and 42% of mobile
homes had a below-average improvement quality, suggesting that some of the affordability of housing
may be due to lower structural quality. It is important to ensure that a baseline level of dwelling quality
is accomplished in conjunction with maintaining adequate housing availability.
Table 7-1: Housing Available within the CRA Area at Different Percentage Levels of MFI by Housing
Type
MFI
Level
JV
Threshold
Single
Family
% of Total
Single-
Family
Condo % of
Total
Condo
Mobile
Home
% of
Total
Mobile
Home
30% $51,225 6 0.7% 12 1.0% 43 25.7%
50% $85,375 34 3.9% 201 16.1% 131 78.4%
60% $102,450 81 9.3% 234 18.7% 147 88.0%
80% $136,600 217 24.9% 485 38.7% 163 97.6%
100% $170,750 379 43.4% 645 51.5% 166 99.4%
120% $204,900 472 54.1% 688 55.0% 166 99.4%
140% $239,050 539 61.7% 767 61.3% 166 99.4%
150% $256,125 563 64.5% 778 62.1% 167 100.0%
160% $273,200 581 66.6% 798 63.7% 167 100.0%
180% $307,350 608 69.6% 875 69.9% 167 100.0%
200% $341,500 634 72.6% 959 76.6% 167 100.0%
Note: just value threshold is determined using a conservative 2.5 multiplier for MFI income to create an affordable home price. This threshold is
used to determine how many units by type are available at the given MFI levels by evaluating how many of the total units have just values at or
below the threshold.
Source: 2017 HUD Income Limits for MFI
7.4 Recent Development
Recent development and approved development provides a current snapshot of the overall
development activity in the area and indicates development interest. Map 7-2 shows new construction
permits for residential and commercial buildings between 2012 and 2018. The permits shown apply only
to the general building and exclude sub-structures and sub-systems (e.g., car ports, fire systems, signs).
A sizable number of parcels in the CRA area have had these types of permits issued, some parcels having
multiple permits issued. Table 7-6 provides more details on a few highlighted recent development
efforts. For more information on recent projects or those currently in the development phase, please
see the latest CRA Annual Report. These findings indicate that there is a fair amount of development
interest in the CRA area, which would be further solidified and strengthened by completion of a large
catalyst project.
Some of the approved development has highlighted points of potential improvement in the
development process. For example, Ankrolab Brewing Co., a new microbrewery coming online on
Bayshore Drive, highlighted ways to clarify and coordinate the various codes involved in development,
such as referencing SIC codes directly in the LDC to facilitate new types of uses in the area. DRAFT
Page 98 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Map 7-2: New Construction Building Permits by Parcel (2012-2018)
Note: the parcel with both residential and commercial permits issued (shown in purple) had 3 commercial and 2 residential permits issued during
this time.
Source: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency
DRAFT
Page 99 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table 7-2: Highlighted Recent Development Efforts in the CRA Area
Name Location Description/Status
Gateway Mini
Triangle
Project
Apex of US
41 and Davis
Boulevard
The contract to purchase and redevelop the 5.34-acre site was
awarded to Real Estate Partners, International in 2017 (the entire
Mini Triangle area is approximately 14.3 acres). The site is currently
planned for mixed-use, including retail, hotel, cineplex, car
showroom. In May of 2018, the zoning for the property was changed
to Mixed Use Planned Unit Development in the Mixed Use
Subdistrict of the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District Overlay. The
project is allowed up to 377 multi-family dwelling units, 228 hotel
suites, 111,000 square feet of commercial uses and 90,000 square
feet of general and medical office uses, 150 assisted living units,
60,000 square feet of self-storage and 30,000 square feet of car
dealership. The zoning change also allowed an exemption from
height standards for development in Airport Zones.
Cultural Arts
Village Project
Off of
Bayshore
Drive, west
of Sugden
Regional Park
Proposals for the 17.89-acre site are being reconsidered due to the
lack of financing for the most recent mixed-use project proposal by
Arno Inc.
Mattamy
Homes
Northwest
corner of
Bayshore
Drive and
Thomasson
Drive
Residential Planned Unit Development that allows construction of a
maximum of 276 units on a property of approximately 37 acres.
Regatta
Landing
Condominiums
& Boat Docks
End of
Lakeview
Drive
Multi-family residential development approved in 2013 for 64 units
on approximately 20 acres. In 2015, project modified and approved
for 26 boat slips. As of the 2017 CRA Annual Report, 60 units and the
boat slips were built.
Ankrolab
Brewing Co.
3555
Bayshore
Drive
Project in the development process to repurpose a building for a
microbrewery with 6000 SF Brew Garden planned
Woodspring
Suites
2600
Tamiami Trail
Project in the development process with building permit issued for
4-story hotel with 123 units
Sources: PUD documentation, Building permits, establishment websites, and 2017 CRA Annual Report
DRAFT
Page 100 of 100
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
7.5 Built Environment Takeaways
• There is a fairly good mix of rental and ownership in the CRA area, as well as for-purchase units
available at various MFI levels. However, since approximately 80% of single-family homes and
42% of mobile homes have a below-average improvement quality, some of the affordability of
housing may be due to lower structural quality. It is important to ensure that a baseline level of
dwelling quality is accomplished in conjunction with maintaining adequate housing availability.
• The number of newly approved developments indicate that there is interest in redevelopment
in the CRA area; the successful completion of a larger catalyst project could further solidify and
strengthen this interest and activity. Other incentives the CRA might consider are discussed
further in Section 6.0 of this memo.
DRAFT
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Community Forum Summary
The Redevelopment Plan update process included a Community Forum on September 19, 2019 from 6
to 8 pm at the Naples Botanical Gardens to present preliminary recommendations to the public and
gather feedback about project and initiative prioritization. More than 50 people attended the event.
Attendees had the opportunity to vote on which themes, projects and initiatives, and prioritization
criteria they considered to be the most important.
Based on comment form feedback focused on the vision statement, goals, and project/initiative
prioritization the following themes were most often mentioned (around 4 comments on related items)
as important to address:
• Walkability and pedestrian amenities
• Stormwater infrastructure and its maintenance
• Code enforcement issues and property clean-up
• Connections to parks
The remainder of this section summarizes the polling responses from the attendees.
DRAFT
Test Question: How Did you get to today’s
workshop?
1.Your Car
2.Bus
3.Bike
4.Walk
5.Other
39
1.2.3.4.5.
96%
0%4%0%0%DRAFT
Where do you live?
1.In the Triangle Area of the CRA
2.In the Bayshore Area of the CRA
3.Elsewhere in Collier County
4.Outside of Collier County
40
1.2.3.4.
4%2%
35%
60%DRAFT
Pick the top three themes that are most
important:
1.Land Use & Design
2.Public Space, Parks, & Open
Space
3.Private Development
4.Transportation & Walkability
5.Infrastructure
6.Process
41
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
29%
18%
3%
13%
23%
13%DRAFT
Pick the top three land use & design
projects/initiatives that are most important:
1.Gateway intersection design elements
2.Street signs/wayfinding
3.Design standards in an arts & culture plan
4.Land Development Code/Zoning updates
5.Wall and fence grant program
6.Public art grant program
7. Commercial façade grant program
8.Other
42
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
17%
11%
18%
6%
8%9%
3%
27%DRAFT
Pick the top two public space, parks, & open space projects/ initiatives that are most
important:
1.Haldeman Creek dredge
2.Triangle retention pond park
feasibility study and project
3.Community safety & cleanup
strategy
4.Other
43
1.2.3.4.
25%
17%
39%
20%DRAFT
Pick the top three development
projects/initiatives that are most important:
1.Arts & culture plan
2.Market study
3.Branding strategy
4.Marketing & communication strategy
5.Community land trust implementation
6.Micro-enterprise incubator strategy
7.Economic development grant program
8.Residential improvement grant/loan program
9.Establish CRA role in development review process
10.Other
44
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
18%
5%
9%9%
3%
11%
16%
13%
8%
9%DRAFT
Pick the top two complete streets projects/
initiatives that are most important:
1. Complete Streets & trails strategy plan and
projects
2.Bayshore Drive Complete Street
3.Jeepers Drive Complete Street
4.Bayshore bicycle/pedestrian trail feasibility
study
5.Sidewalk gaps/Bicycle Infrastructure
6.Other
45
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
26%26%
7%
16%
18%
8%DRAFT
Pick the top two Parking projects/ initiatives that
are most important:
1.Surface parking lot/garage –
Bayshore area
2.Surface parking lot/garage –
Mini Triangle area
3.Car/boat parking –Bayview
Park area
4.Other
46
1.2.3.4.
39%
12%
34%
15%DRAFT
Pick the top two infrastructure projects/initiatives
that are most important:
1.Water Infrastructure Upgrades
2.Stormwater Master Plan Update
3.General Road Minimum Standard
Improvements (Pine Tree,
Andrews, Woodside, Holly,
Palmetto)
4.Other
47
1.2.3.4.
29%
9%
25%
38%DRAFT
Pick the top three criteria for prioritizing projects/
initiatives (in addition to public input):
1.Timing of project/initiative
2.Planning already undertaken or completed
3.Funding availability from dedicated or outside
sources
4.Ability to address health/safety concerns
5.Magnitude of impact and multiplier effects
6.CRA staff prioritization recommendations
7.Other
Presentation | Date48
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
15%
18%
2%
10%
20%
15%
20%DRAFT
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area legal description from enabling Resolution 2000-82 of
the Board of County Commissioners:
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
TAX INCREMENT & MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNITS
ESTIMATES
Tax Increment Financing
The Redevelopment Area is dependent upon the use of increment revenue financing for funding. Using
this method, the County froze all taxable values within the Redevelopment Area at the 2000 rate to
establish a base collection amount. Millages are applied through the General Fund (001) and the
Unincorporated Area General Fund (111). The future taxes collected (associated with tax base and
property value increases) are placed into a separate account and designated for specific uses. The funds
can be dedicated to transportation or general improvements, or placed in the general fund with the
base ad valorem revenues.
The analysis is based on the historical tax roll data obtained from the Florida Department of Revenue
(FDOR) and population projections for Collier County obtained from the Bureau of Economic and
Business Research (BEBR). Specific increases in the tax base are shown in terms of expected
development and its value. This expected development is based exclusively on past patterns of activity
adjusted for anticipated community redevelopment activities within the Redevelopment Area. These
programmatic assumptions offer a baseline for comparison with future potential development.
For this analysis, the Bayshore CRA’s current millage rates have been used, and were held constant over
the planning horizon.
As for the structure of the revenues which may accrue, only the taxable value(s) net of the base year
taxable value is considered in calculating current or future increment revenues.
The general procedures used to calculate available revenues are shown in the following calculations:
• Assessed values, including new construction – Exemptions or exclusions = Current taxable
values.
• Current taxable values – Established base year taxable values = Net valuations subject to
applicable jurisdictional millages.
• Net valuations × by applicable millages = increment revenues. Pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Act, Section 163.387, F.S., the maximum revenue available to the
Redevelopment Trust Fund will be 95 percent of the calculated increment revenues.
Note that the first 5-years (2019-2024) of projected values are obtained from Florida’s Office of
Economic & Demographic Research (EDR) Revenue Estimating Conference. The conference produces
detailed projections of the “County Taxable Value” for each county in Florida. The values projected by
EDR were used for each CRA tax increment scenario with the low, medium, high growth scenarios
starting in 2025. For projection purposes past 2025, three different scenarios were developed that
reflect different future growth rates for taxable values in the Redevelopment Area. Additional details
for each scenario are presented below.
Scenario #1
Ad valorem revenues associated with the increment revenue financing for the Redevelopment Area
were estimated using the projected growth of the taxable values for residential and non-residential
developments. The average taxable values were indexed annually based on the positive correlation DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
between population growth and taxable value increases discussed previously, along with the historical
growth trends of taxable values in the Redevelopment Area, by land use. Based on these projections, if
the current millage is held constant (3.5645 mils for fund 001 and 0.8069 mils for fund 111), the ad
valorem taxes used for the Redevelopment Area fund are estimated to generate approximately $92.9
million between 2018 and 2040.
Additional growth scenarios are presented in this report that reflects more aggressive growth rates in
taxable values and potential revenues. Although more aggressive than the growth rates in Scenario #1,
these scenarios still present revenue projections that can reasonably be obtained. Since 1976, the
taxable value for residential property in Collier County has averaged a 10 percent annual increase, and
commercial property has averaged a 9 percent annual increase. Within the CRA, taxable values (all
property) have averaged a 5 percent annual increase.
Scenario #2
Scenario #2 reflects increased growth rates that are consistent with the historical growth rates in
taxable values for the entire CRA area. This scenario estimates slightly higher taxable value growth than
Scenario #1, with a projected average annual taxable value growth rate of 5.2 percent (as opposed to
Scenario #1 at 4.8 percent). As CRA properties are redeveloped, it is reasonable to assume that taxable
values will increase at or above historical growth rates. Using these higher annual growth rates, the
Scenario #2 increment revenue financing option would generate approximately $96.6 million between
2018 and 2040.
Scenario #3
Additionally, an optimistic growth rate scenario was developed. Scenario #3 has increased growth rates
that are more than Scenarios #1 and #2, bringing the average growth rate for all land uses more in line
with the recent growth rates of the entire county seen over the last few years. This scenario projects the
growth in taxable values for all property to average approximately 5.7 percent, annually. Using these
rates, the increment revenue financing option generated approximately $103.9 million between 2018
and 2040.
For each of the following scenarios, the following apply:
• Projected total taxable value of all properties within Redevelopment Area. Projected growth
rates by land use are consistent with historical growth rates observed between 2000 and 2017
within Redevelopment Area. All figures rounded to nearest thousand.
• Difference between total taxable value (Item 1) for each year and base year (2000).
• For projection purposes, millage rates are assumed to remain the same through 2040.
• Increment revenue by year (Item 2), divided by 1,000, multiplied by total millage rate, and
reduced by 5 percent for budgeting purposes.
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-1: Scenario #1 Projected TIF Revenues
1. Source: Scenario #1 projected taxable values for the Bayshore CRA. Average annual growth at
4.8%. Note that the first 5-years (2019-2024) of projected values are obtained from Florida’s
Office of Economic & Demographic Research (EDR) Revenue Estimating Conference.
2. http://edr.state.fl.us/Content/conferences/advalorem/index.cfm
3. Taxable value for each year (Item 1) less the base year taxable value of $288,081,106
4. For each fund, the tax increment for the previous year multiplied by the millage, divided by
1,000 and reduced by 5%. Note that the revenues for each year are offset against the tax
increment changes due to timing of collections (i.e., the revenue for 2019 is based on the tax
increment change from 2017 to 2018
Fund 001 Fund 111 Fund 001 Fund 111 Total
2017 $663,687,689 $375,606,583 3.5645 0.8069 ---
2018 $701,076,000 $412,994,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,271,907 $287,923 $1,559,830
2019 $761,806,000 $473,724,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,398,514 $316,583 $1,715,097
2020 $810,239,000 $522,157,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,604,163 $363,136 $1,967,299
2021 $861,111,000 $573,029,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,768,170 $400,263 $2,168,433
2022 $914,322,000 $626,240,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,940,437 $439,259 $2,379,696
2023 $970,752,000 $682,670,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,120,624 $480,048 $2,600,672
2024 $1,062,117,000 $774,035,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,311,711 $523,305 $2,835,016
2025 $1,109,715,000 $821,633,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,621,098 $593,341 $3,214,439
2026 $1,158,389,000 $870,307,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,782,278 $629,828 $3,412,106
2027 $1,208,139,000 $920,057,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,947,102 $667,139 $3,614,241
2028 $1,258,967,000 $970,885,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,115,569 $705,275 $3,820,844
2029 $1,310,871,000 $1,022,789,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,287,687 $744,237 $4,031,924
2030 $1,363,851,000 $1,075,769,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,463,448 $784,025 $4,247,473
2031 $1,417,909,000 $1,129,827,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,642,853 $824,637 $4,467,490
2032 $1,473,043,000 $1,184,961,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,825,908 $866,075 $4,691,983
2033 $1,529,253,000 $1,241,171,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,012,607 $908,338 $4,920,945
2034 $1,586,541,000 $1,298,459,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,202,949 $951,427 $5,154,376
2035 $1,644,905,000 $1,356,823,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,396,942 $995,341 $5,392,283
2036 $1,704,346,000 $1,416,264,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,594,579 $1,040,080 $5,634,659
2037 $1,764,863,000 $1,476,781,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,795,862 $1,085,645 $5,881,507
2038 $1,826,457,000 $1,538,375,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,000,790 $1,132,035 $6,132,825
2039 $1,889,128,000 $1,601,046,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,209,364 $1,179,250 $6,388,614
2040 $1,952,876,000 $1,664,794,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,421,585 $1,227,291 $6,648,876
2041 $2,017,700,000 $1,729,618,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,637,453 $1,276,157 $6,913,610
2042 $2,083,601,000 $1,795,519,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,856,965 $1,325,848 $7,182,813
2043 $2,150,579,000 $1,862,497,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,080,124 $1,376,365 $7,456,489
2044 $2,218,633,000 $1,930,551,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,306,930 $1,427,707 $7,734,637
2045 $2,287,764,000 $1,999,682,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,537,380 $1,479,874 $8,017,254
$106,154,999 $24,030,432 $130,185,431
Revenue(3)
Total
MillageYearTaxable
Value(1)Tax Increment(2)DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-2: Scenario #2 Projected TIF Revenues
1. Source: Scenario #1 projected taxable values for the Bayshore CRA. Average annual growth at
5.2%. Note that the first 5-years (2019-2024) of projected values are obtained from Florida’s
Office of Economic & Demographic Research (EDR) Revenue Estimating Conference.
2. Taxable value for each year (Item 1) less the base year taxable value of $288,081,106
3. For each fund, the tax increment for the previous year multiplied by the millage, divided by
1,000 and reduced by 5%. Note that the revenues for each year are offset against the tax
increment changes due to timing of collections (i.e., the revenue for 2019 is based on the tax
increment change from 2017 to 2018
Fund 001 Fund 111 Fund 001 Fund 111 Total
2017 $663,687,689 $375,606,583 3.5645 0.8069 ---
2018 $701,076,000 $412,994,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,271,907 $287,923 $1,559,830
2019 $761,806,000 $473,724,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,398,514 $316,583 $1,715,097
2020 $810,239,000 $522,157,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,604,163 $363,136 $1,967,299
2021 $861,111,000 $573,029,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,768,170 $400,263 $2,168,433
2022 $914,322,000 $626,240,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,940,437 $439,259 $2,379,696
2023 $970,752,000 $682,670,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,120,624 $480,048 $2,600,672
2024 $1,028,659,000 $740,577,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,311,711 $523,305 $2,835,016
2025 $1,086,938,000 $798,856,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,507,800 $567,694 $3,075,494
2026 $1,146,540,000 $858,458,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,705,149 $612,368 $3,317,517
2027 $1,207,463,000 $919,381,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,906,978 $658,056 $3,565,034
2028 $1,269,707,000 $981,625,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,113,280 $704,757 $3,818,037
2029 $1,333,274,000 $1,045,192,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,324,055 $752,470 $4,076,525
2030 $1,398,162,000 $1,110,080,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,539,311 $801,198 $4,340,509
2031 $1,464,372,000 $1,176,290,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,759,039 $850,938 $4,609,977
2032 $1,531,904,000 $1,243,822,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,983,244 $901,692 $4,884,936
2033 $1,600,757,000 $1,312,675,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,211,926 $953,459 $5,165,385
2034 $1,670,932,000 $1,382,850,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,445,082 $1,006,238 $5,451,320
2035 $1,742,429,000 $1,454,347,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,682,713 $1,060,031 $5,742,744
2036 $1,815,247,000 $1,527,165,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,924,822 $1,114,838 $6,039,660
2037 $1,889,387,000 $1,601,305,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,171,404 $1,170,657 $6,342,061
2038 $1,964,849,000 $1,676,767,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,422,462 $1,227,489 $6,649,951
2039 $2,041,632,000 $1,753,550,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,677,997 $1,285,335 $6,963,332
2040 $2,119,738,000 $1,831,656,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,938,006 $1,344,193 $7,282,199
2041 $2,199,165,000 $1,911,083,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,202,494 $1,404,066 $7,606,560
2042 $2,279,913,000 $1,991,831,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,471,456 $1,464,951 $7,936,407
2043 $2,361,983,000 $2,073,901,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,744,891 $1,526,849 $8,271,740
2044 $2,445,375,000 $2,157,293,894 3.5645 0.8069 $7,022,802 $1,589,760 $8,612,562
2045 $2,530,089,000 $2,242,007,894 3.5645 0.8069 $7,305,190 $1,653,684 $8,958,874
$112,475,627 $25,461,240 $137,936,867
Revenue(3)
Total
Year Taxable
Value(1)Tax Increment(2)Millage
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-3: Scenario #3 Projected TIF Revenues
1. Source: Scenario #1 projected taxable values for the Bayshore CRA. Average annual growth at
5.70%. Note that the first 5-years (2019-2024) of projected values are obtained from Florida’s
Office of Economic & Demographic Research (EDR) Revenue Estimating Conference.
2. Taxable value for each year (Item 1) less the base year taxable value of $288,081,106
3. For each fund, the tax increment for the previous year multiplied by the millage, divided by
1,000 and reduced by 5%. Note that the revenues for each year are offset against the tax
increment changes due to timing of collections (i.e., the revenue for 2019 is based on the tax
increment change from 2017 to 2018
Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs)
There are two MSTUs that overlap with the CRA area – the Bayshore Beautification MSTU and the
Haldeman Creek MSTU. The Bayshore Beautification MSTU was created to provide certain streetscape
and right-of-way improvements in the CRA area generally south of US 41. The Haldeman Creek MSTU
was created for maintenance dredging and navigational marker maintenance. Projected revenues for
these two MSTUs are based on the same scenarios described for the TIF calculations above. Note that
revenues stem directly from millages (as opposed to an increment difference with a base year as in the
case of the TIF revenues).
Fund 001 Fund 111 Fund 001 Fund 111 Total
2017 $663,687,689 $375,606,583 3.5645 0.8069 ---
2018 $701,076,000 $412,994,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,271,907 $287,923 $1,559,830
2019 $761,806,000 $473,724,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,398,514 $316,583 $1,715,097
2020 $810,239,000 $522,157,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,604,163 $363,136 $1,967,299
2021 $861,111,000 $573,029,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,768,170 $400,263 $2,168,433
2022 $914,322,000 $626,240,894 3.5645 0.8069 $1,940,437 $439,259 $2,379,696
2023 $970,752,000 $682,670,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,120,624 $480,048 $2,600,672
2024 $1,054,119,000 $766,037,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,311,711 $523,305 $2,835,016
2025 $1,119,750,000 $831,668,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,594,015 $587,210 $3,181,225
2026 $1,187,573,000 $899,491,894 3.5645 0.8069 $2,816,260 $637,520 $3,453,780
2027 $1,257,587,000 $969,505,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,045,927 $689,510 $3,735,437
2028 $1,329,792,000 $1,041,710,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,283,014 $743,180 $4,026,194
2029 $1,404,190,000 $1,116,108,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,527,520 $798,529 $4,326,049
2030 $1,480,778,000 $1,192,696,894 3.5645 0.8069 $3,779,452 $855,559 $4,635,011
2031 $1,559,559,000 $1,271,477,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,038,800 $914,268 $4,953,068
2032 $1,640,531,000 $1,352,449,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,305,574 $974,658 $5,280,232
2033 $1,723,694,000 $1,435,612,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,579,767 $1,036,727 $5,616,494
2034 $1,809,049,000 $1,520,967,894 3.5645 0.8069 $4,861,380 $1,100,476 $5,961,856
2035 $1,896,596,000 $1,608,514,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,150,416 $1,165,906 $6,316,322
2036 $1,986,334,000 $1,698,252,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,446,874 $1,233,015 $6,679,889
2037 $2,078,264,000 $1,790,182,894 3.5645 0.8069 $5,750,751 $1,301,804 $7,052,555
2038 $2,172,385,000 $1,884,303,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,062,052 $1,372,274 $7,434,326
2039 $2,268,698,000 $1,980,616,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,380,771 $1,444,423 $7,825,194
2040 $2,367,202,000 $2,079,120,894 3.5645 0.8069 $6,706,913 $1,518,252 $8,225,165
2041 $2,467,898,000 $2,179,816,894 3.5645 0.8069 $7,040,475 $1,593,761 $8,634,236
2042 $2,570,786,000 $2,282,704,894 3.5645 0.8069 $7,381,459 $1,670,950 $9,052,409
2043 $2,675,865,000 $2,387,783,894 3.5645 0.8069 $7,729,867 $1,749,819 $9,479,686
2044 $2,783,135,000 $2,495,053,894 3.5645 0.8069 $8,085,693 $1,830,368 $9,916,061
2045 $2,892,598,000 $2,604,516,894 3.5645 0.8069 $8,448,939 $1,912,596 $10,361,535
$123,431,445 $27,941,322 $151,372,767
Revenue(3)
Total
Year Taxable
Value(1)Tax Increment(2)Millage
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Bayshore Beautification MSTU
Table AE-4: Scenario #1 Projected Revenues
Note: there is a 5% statutory reduction requirement for counties when projecting for budget
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $520,652,265 95%
2018 $556,395,962 95% 2.3604 $1,247,651
2019 $591,115,003 95% 2.3604 $1,325,504
2020 $625,527,320 95% 2.3604 $1,402,670
2021 $660,034,619 95% 2.3604 $1,480,048
2022 $694,831,419 95% 2.3604 $1,558,076
2023 $730,024,175 95% 2.3604 $1,636,992
2024 $765,674,832 95% 2.3604 $1,716,934
2025 $801,819,577 95% 2.3604 $1,797,984
2026 $838,478,945 95% 2.3604 $1,880,188
2027 $875,663,295 95% 2.3604 $1,963,570
2028 $913,375,780 95% 2.3604 $2,048,136
2029 $951,615,129 95% 2.3604 $2,133,883
2030 $990,376,372 95% 2.3604 $2,220,800
2031 $1,029,652,374 95% 2.3604 $2,308,872
2032 $1,069,434,646 95% 2.3604 $2,398,079
2033 $1,109,713,336 95% 2.3604 $2,488,399
2034 $1,150,478,225 95% 2.3604 $2,579,809
2035 $1,191,719,137 95% 2.3604 $2,672,287
2036 $1,233,425,692 95% 2.3604 $2,765,809
2037 $1,275,588,082 95% 2.3604 $2,860,353
2038 $1,318,196,940 95% 2.3604 $2,955,898
2039 $1,361,243,853 95% 2.3604 $3,052,426
2040 $1,404,721,160 95% 2.3604 $3,149,919
2041 $1,448,622,279 95% 2.3604 $3,248,362
2042 $1,492,941,782 95% 2.3604 $3,347,743
2043 $1,537,675,538 95% 2.3604 $3,448,053
2044 $1,582,820,738 95% 2.3604 $3,549,286
2045 $1,628,375,926 95% 2.3604 $3,651,438
Total -FY 2018-45:$66,889,169DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-5: Scenario #2 Projected Revenues
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $520,652,265 95%
2018 $564,585,635 95% 2.3604 $1,266,016
2019 $606,549,761 95% 2.3604 $1,360,115
2020 $647,828,592 95% 2.3604 $1,452,678
2021 $688,973,702 95% 2.3604 $1,544,941
2022 $730,242,846 95% 2.3604 $1,637,482
2023 $771,769,450 95% 2.3604 $1,730,600
2024 $813,623,294 95% 2.3604 $1,824,453
2025 $855,837,738 95% 2.3604 $1,919,113
2026 $898,423,883 95% 2.3604 $2,014,608
2027 $941,377,891 95% 2.3604 $2,110,927
2028 $984,686,255 95% 2.3604 $2,208,041
2029 $1,028,328,725 95% 2.3604 $2,305,904
2030 $1,072,280,092 95% 2.3604 $2,404,459
2031 $1,116,512,185 95% 2.3604 $2,503,645
2032 $1,160,994,826 95% 2.3604 $2,603,392
2033 $1,205,696,625 95% 2.3604 $2,703,630
2034 $1,250,585,657 95% 2.3604 $2,804,288
2035 $1,295,630,050 95% 2.3604 $2,905,295
2036 $1,340,798,359 95% 2.3604 $3,006,579
2037 $1,386,060,036 95% 2.3604 $3,108,073
2038 $1,431,385,662 95% 2.3604 $3,209,711
2039 $1,476,747,194 95% 2.3604 $3,311,428
2040 $1,522,118,310 95% 2.3604 $3,413,168
2041 $1,567,474,241 95% 2.3604 $3,514,873
2042 $1,612,792,344 95% 2.3604 $3,616,493
2043 $1,658,052,037 95% 2.3604 $3,717,983
2044 $1,703,234,847 95% 2.3604 $3,819,300
2045 $1,748,324,458 95% 2.3604 $3,920,408
Total -FY 2018-45:$71,937,603DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-6: Scenario #3 Projected Revenues
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $520,652,265 95%
2018 $570,657,837 95% 2.3604 $1,279,632
2019 $618,846,476 95% 2.3604 $1,387,689
2020 $666,424,041 95% 2.3604 $1,494,376
2021 $714,013,673 95% 2.3604 $1,601,090
2022 $761,898,751 95% 2.3604 $1,708,467
2023 $810,218,308 95% 2.3604 $1,816,817
2024 $859,037,223 95% 2.3604 $1,926,288
2025 $908,377,891 95% 2.3604 $2,036,928
2026 $958,236,209 95% 2.3604 $2,148,730
2027 $1,008,590,342 95% 2.3604 $2,261,643
2028 $1,059,406,499 95% 2.3604 $2,375,592
2029 $1,110,642,628 95% 2.3604 $2,490,483
2030 $1,162,251,104 95% 2.3604 $2,606,209
2031 $1,214,180,327 95% 2.3604 $2,722,654
2032 $1,266,376,232 95% 2.3604 $2,839,697
2033 $1,318,783,498 95% 2.3604 $2,957,214
2034 $1,371,346,270 95% 2.3604 $3,075,079
2035 $1,424,008,878 95% 2.3604 $3,193,169
2036 $1,476,716,929 95% 2.3604 $3,311,361
2037 $1,529,416,999 95% 2.3604 $3,429,534
2038 $1,582,057,896 95% 2.3604 $3,547,575
2039 $1,634,590,626 95% 2.3604 $3,665,373
2040 $1,686,968,643 95% 2.3604 $3,782,825
2041 $1,739,148,306 95% 2.3604 $3,899,831
2042 $1,791,089,012 95% 2.3604 $4,016,302
2043 $1,842,753,405 95% 2.3604 $4,132,153
2044 $1,894,107,627 95% 2.3604 $4,247,309
2045 $1,945,121,181 95% 2.3604 $4,361,701
Total -FY 2018-45:$78,315,721DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Haldeman Creek MSTU
Table AE-7: Scenario #1 Projected Revenues
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $106,705,344 95%
2018 $114,144,177 95% 0.7348 $79,679
2019 $121,367,536 95% 1.0000 $115,299
2020 $128,526,521 95% 1.0000 $122,100
2021 $135,704,827 95% 1.0000 $128,920
2022 $142,942,896 95% 1.0000 $135,796
2023 $150,262,704 95% 1.0000 $142,750
2024 $157,677,032 95% 1.0000 $149,793
2025 $165,193,225 95% 1.0000 $156,934
2026 $172,815,346 95% 1.0000 $164,175
2027 $180,545,373 95% 1.0000 $171,518
2028 $188,383,756 95% 1.0000 $178,965
2029 $196,329,988 95% 1.0000 $186,513
2030 $204,382,850 95% 1.0000 $194,164
2031 $212,540,650 95% 1.0000 $201,914
2032 $220,801,394 95% 1.0000 $209,761
2033 $229,162,805 95% 1.0000 $217,705
2034 $237,622,632 95% 1.0000 $225,742
2035 $246,178,462 95% 1.0000 $233,870
2036 $254,827,995 95% 1.0000 $242,087
2037 $263,568,960 95% 1.0000 $250,391
2038 $272,399,253 95% 1.0000 $258,779
2039 $281,316,833 95% 1.0000 $267,251
2040 $290,320,002 95% 1.0000 $275,804
2041 $299,407,206 95% 1.0000 $284,437
2042 $308,577,110 95% 1.0000 $293,148
2043 $317,828,658 95% 1.0000 $301,937
2044 $327,161,143 95% 1.0000 $310,803
2045 $336,574,094 95% 1.0000 $319,745
Total -FY 2018-45:$5,819,980DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-8: Scenario #2 Projected Revenues
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $106,705,344 95%
2018 $115,835,723 95% 0.7348 $80,860
2019 $124,558,218 95% 1.0000 $118,330
2020 $133,140,017 95% 1.0000 $126,483
2021 $141,695,436 95% 1.0000 $134,611
2022 $150,277,871 95% 1.0000 $142,764
2023 $158,914,679 95% 1.0000 $150,969
2024 $167,620,097 95% 1.0000 $159,239
2025 $176,400,756 95% 1.0000 $167,581
2026 $185,258,652 95% 1.0000 $175,996
2027 $194,192,721 95% 1.0000 $184,483
2028 $203,199,877 95% 1.0000 $193,040
2029 $212,275,571 95% 1.0000 $201,662
2030 $221,414,344 95% 1.0000 $210,344
2031 $230,610,047 95% 1.0000 $219,080
2032 $239,856,126 95% 1.0000 $227,863
2033 $249,145,751 95% 1.0000 $236,688
2034 $258,472,054 95% 1.0000 $245,548
2035 $267,828,164 95% 1.0000 $254,437
2036 $277,207,234 95% 1.0000 $263,347
2037 $286,602,686 95% 1.0000 $272,273
2038 $296,008,161 95% 1.0000 $281,208
2039 $305,417,647 95% 1.0000 $290,147
2040 $314,825,418 95% 1.0000 $299,084
2041 $324,226,118 95% 1.0000 $308,015
2042 $333,614,832 95% 1.0000 $316,934
2043 $342,987,111 95% 1.0000 $325,838
2044 $352,338,908 95% 1.0000 $334,722
2045 $361,666,688 95% 1.0000 $343,583
Total -FY 2018-45:$6,265,129DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-9: Scenario #3 Projected Revenues
Underlying Assumptions
The following charts show underlying population and tax value trends that inform and contextualize the
revenue projections calculations presented in this section. Table AE-10 shows that the rate of
population growth for Collier County has decreased sizably since 2002/2003, with a more gradual
decrease projected out from 2017/2018 for the next few decades.
Tax Year (FY) MSTU Valuation
Budgeting
Adjustment Millage Projected
Revenue
2017 $106,705,344 95%
2018 $117,093,425 95% 0.7348 $81,738
2019 $127,106,206 95% 1.0000 $120,751
2020 $136,994,758 95% 1.0000 $130,145
2021 $146,888,010 95% 1.0000 $139,544
2022 $156,844,298 95% 1.0000 $149,002
2023 $166,892,038 95% 1.0000 $158,547
2024 $177,044,257 95% 1.0000 $168,192
2025 $187,305,175 95% 1.0000 $177,940
2026 $197,673,490 95% 1.0000 $187,790
2027 $208,144,221 95% 1.0000 $197,737
2028 $218,709,954 95% 1.0000 $207,774
2029 $229,361,500 95% 1.0000 $217,893
2030 $240,088,574 95% 1.0000 $228,084
2031 $250,880,014 95% 1.0000 $238,336
2032 $261,724,194 95% 1.0000 $248,638
2033 $272,609,257 95% 1.0000 $258,979
2034 $283,523,220 95% 1.0000 $269,347
2035 $294,454,148 95% 1.0000 $279,731
2036 $305,390,372 95% 1.0000 $290,121
2037 $316,320,528 95% 1.0000 $300,505
2038 $327,233,622 95% 1.0000 $310,872
2039 $338,119,195 95% 1.0000 $321,213
2040 $348,967,293 95% 1.0000 $331,519
2041 $359,768,601 95% 1.0000 $341,780
2042 $370,514,490 95% 1.0000 $351,989
2043 $381,196,966 95% 1.0000 $362,137
2044 $391,808,847 95% 1.0000 $372,218
2045 $402,343,563 95% 1.0000 $382,226
Total -FY 2018-45:$6,824,748DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-10: Population Growth Rate Trends and Projections (2000-2045)
Source: Source: BEBR, Volume 51, Bulletin 180, January 2018
In terms of historic tax value growth rates since 2000, Table AR-11 shows that there was an increase
during the lead up to the recession, followed by a drop during the recession itself. In recent years, the
rate has gradually risen.
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-11: Trends in Tax Value Growth Rates (2000-2017)
Source: Florida Property Valuations and Tax Databook & EDR Ad Valorem Revenue Estimating
Conference
Given the sizable changes during the lead-up to the recession and the recession itself, the model used to
generate TIF projections was matched to longer historical trends in County taxable values, from the
1970s through 2003/2004. historical taxable value for Collier County. Table AE-3 shows the historical
trend used for guidance in blue; this trend is continued for comparison to projection calculations (shown
by the grey line through 2044). The orange line indicates historic data that was excluded from the
historic trend basis since it was considered an anomaly.
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
Table AE-12: Historic and Projected TIF Revenue Trend Comparison
Source: Florida Property Valuations and Tax Databook & EDR Ad Valorem Revenue Estimating
Conference
DRAFT
DRAFT
www.tindaleoliver.com TAMPA ORLANDO FORT LAUDERDALE BALTIMORE SEATTLE
1000 N. Ashley Dr. | Suite 400 | Tampa, FL 33602 | (813) 224-8862 | Fax (813) 226-2106
RESOLUTIONS
• Planning & Zoning Resolution Finding the Community Redevelopment Plan is Consistent with
the City’s Comprehensive Plan [Forthcoming]
• 2018 Community Redevelopment Plan Update Adoption [Forthcoming] DRAFT
DRAFT