The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Agenda 09/20/2018 (Item #9A CPSS-2017-1) AGENDA#9A COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT (ADOPTION HEARINGS) PROJECT/PETITION: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [COMPANION TO PL20150002577] PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W 1st AVE sw m CCPC: SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [continued from May 3, 2018; May 17, 2018 & June 7, 2018] BCC: NOVEMBER 13, 2018 Clerks Office TABLE OF CONTENTS GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN - SMALL SCALE GMP AMENDMENT PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 [ADOPTION HEARING] CCPC SEPTEMBER 20, 2018 [DUE TO A 2ND NIM THIS MEETING WAS PREVIOULSY CONTINUED TO MAY 3, 2018, MAY 17, 2018,AND JUNE 7, 2018-& CONTINUED FURTHER DUE TO A 2"d NIM] 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENT: Revised CCPC Staff Report: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 2) TAB: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENT: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit "A"text(and/or maps): PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 3) TAB: Project PL20160002584/ DOCUMENT: Petition Application Petition CPSS-2017-1 4) TAB: Correspondence DOCUMENT: For and Against Letters & Emails from the Public and Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association 5) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Legal Ad 9Jtr9rnty REVISED STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 20, 2018 (originally heard May 3, 2018, but eventually continued indefinitely) RE: PETITION CPSS-2017-01/PL20160002584, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to CU- PL20160002577) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN _ NOTE: This petition was originally heard by the CCPC at Transmittal Hearing on May 3, 2018 and, eventually continued indefinitely. Due to proposed changes pertaining to the companion Conditional Use (CU) petition, the petitioner held a second NIM for both petitions. All revised areas of this Staff Report subsequent to the May CCPC meeting are highlighted for convenience of the reader. AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Josh Fruth, Jessica Harrelson, Anna Weaver, Derek Burr, AICP Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Applicant: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 Owner: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 Naples, FL 34104 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises ±6.25-acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876) and Collier Blvd. (CR951), in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 26 East (Urban Estates Planning Community). Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 1 of 11 t .. w ' m SII f _pi _1 .. is v n 50^ {��.. ...■ 16a, � 761J jy -..'6,t1 .� � 0.7„.-1,01 _ . f {- 8 ) N 3a5 : le , 1 .1401 is CC � 4ya -t ` roposedoo . .10 • ), - - '4:,_ _ _ _ -t- - -7-- ' ,, . - 4,-,Troisitiasiiimattsimsaarrim- '� s,ti+t .m b �■r+a . �'�1�'t",`,711011911.11 ?r 4 141. 'i ➢, Tis . Ess' +1,)t r r t1 ' sP - t o .- ,—ave a lieu f r;; r i tzei' . v REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a small-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), specifically to amend the text of the Estates Mixed Use District — Conditional Use Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria, to add the subject site as an exception for a church or place of worship. The applicant also proposes to create a new map ("Conditional Use Subdistrict: Golden Gate Boulevard & Collier Boulevard Special Provisions") in the Future Land Use Map series of the GGAMP, which will identify the newly created area in the revised Subdistrict. The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted, and is also reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A). 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates-Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estates zoning district within the Golden Gate Estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following four sets of criteria shall be met: Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 2 of 11 a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** d) Transitional Conditional Uses: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational — criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (see map titled Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan Amendment is to create text and a map for an additional location under the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict of the Estates designation in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The Conditional Uses Subdistrict is scattered about different locations throughout the Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 3 of 11 Estates Mixed Use District. The acreage for the Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria Subdistrict will increase by the amount (±6.25-acres) of this additional location. The GGAMP amendment is necessary in order to allow a church/place of worship use at this location in the Estates designation. A new map will be created of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria and included in the Future Land Use Map Series of the GGAMP. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The +6.25-acre subject site is zoned Estates Zoning District allowing uses of low density residential development (1 DU per 2.25 acres or per legal non-conforming lot) with limited agricultural activities; the Estates district is also designed to accommodate conditional uses, development that provides services for and is compatible with the low density residential, subject to locational criteria in the GGAMP. The Land Development Code lists churches as permissible as a Conditional Use for the Estates Zoning District. The Future Land Use designation of Estates is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses including conditional uses and essential services, (except as prohibited in the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict). Parks, group housing, schools, family care facilities, care units, and nursing homes are permitted uses. Estates zoning district conditional uses are subject to locational criteria as contained in the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately adjacent to the north (across Golden Gate Blvd) are a mix of residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a utility property fronting on the east side of Collier Blvd. owned by FPL approximately 1,000 feet north of the subject property. Further to the north, up to Vanderbilt Beach Road, are more residential single-family units and a few undeveloped lots, which are zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. South: Immediately adjacent to the south lies 1st Ave. SW and beyond are residential single- family units and a few undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Across Collier Blvd. (CR951) on the west side of the road, and approximately 1/2 mile south of the subject site there are two places of worship: Iglesia Cristiana La Roca (Rock Christian Church) and the Haitian Bethesda Baptist Church. Further south on the east side of Collier Blvd. at 15th Ave. SW, there are two other places of worship: Bethel Christian Church and Unity Faith Missionary Baptist. There is a commercial planned unit development (Brooks Village) approximately 1 mile south of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. and on the south side of Pine Ridge Road; this area is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. There are also 2 parcels zoned C-3 Zoning District and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict on the west side of Collier Blvd. on the north side of Pine Ridge Road. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 4 of 11 West: Immediately adjacent to the west (across Collier Blvd.) are residential single-family units and undeveloped lots, zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Directly across from the northern parcel of the subject site on the west side of Collier Blvd. (CR951) are two County owned parcels with a water retention pond. These two parcels make up the northwest and southwest quadrants of the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. Further to the west are additional residential single-family units and a few zoned Estates, and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. There is also a property with agricultural uses on Mahogany Ridge Road approximately 1 mile to the west of the subject site. East: Immediately adjacent to the east lies one single family residence abutting the subject site (in the NW corner of Weber Blvd. and 1st Ave. SW), and Weber Blvd., a local road that runs north/south (parallel with Collier Blvd.); Weber Blvd. serves as a collector for four local streets north of Golden Gate Blvd. and four local streets south of Golden Gate Blvd. To the east of Weber Blvd. are residential single-family units and a couple of undeveloped lots; this area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. Approximately 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile east from the subject site and fronting on Golden Gate Blvd., there are two places of worship: Estates Naples Kingdom Hall and Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church; a county park (Max A Hasse Jr. Community Park); and Big Cypress Elementary School. This area is zoned Estates and designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations: The applicant is proposing a Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to allow a conditional use for a church/place of worship to be located at the southeastern corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR951) and Golden Gate Blvd. (CR876). The site consists of±6.25-acres and is comprised of two tax parcels. The northern parcel is wooded and undeveloped and the southern parcel contains a single-family home and is heavily wooded. Although the northern parcel is located at the intersection of an arterial roadway (Collier Blvd.) and a collector road (Golden Gate Blvd.), as identified in the Transportation Element of the GMP, no development has been previously approved and constructed. The applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, purchased this property in November 2016 and is the owner of this site. The congregation has been holding services (sharing with another congregation) at the First Baptist Church of Naples on Orange Blossom Drive. Although the project is to be for a congregation of less than 300 people (seats), they want to worship in their own church. Their services will be conducted in Romanian. This petition and the companion Conditional Use application are for church-use only—not to accommodate a day care or any other community functions such as Boy/Girl Scouts or Alcohol Anonymous meetings, etc. The GGAMP provides that various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estates zoning district within the Golden Gate Estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following sets of criteria must be met: Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions, Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions, Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions, and Transitional Conditional Uses, and Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. The applicant has requested a conditional use Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 5 of 11 under the last criteria, Special Exceptions. In reviewing the surrounding area, 6 churches are located within a one mile radius of the subject site. Previously, in 2007 and 2008, the two existing churches near Max Hasse Park were approved via the Transitional CU provision. Other churches in the surrounding area were granted provisional uses in the 1980's, prior to adoption of the GGAMP. Previously, only two churches were approved under Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: a church on lmmokalee Road and a church on Santa Barbara Blvd. Compatibility (including appropriateness of the location)for this project is identified by staff as the potential main area of concern to address. Compatibility: The surrounding area (at least 1 mile in any direction from the subject site) is entirely designated as Estates. This designation is characterized by low density semi-rural residential lots with limited opportunities for other land uses. Typical lots are 2.25 acres in size. Residential density is limited to a maximum of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guesthouses. The range of uses in the area surrounding the subject site include mostly residential single-family units, with a small mix of churches scattered throughout the area, as well as a park, a school, two commercial sites, and a couple of utility sites. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses, including: conditional uses, subject to locational criteria, and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code. This amendment is proposing a land use that is in keeping with the surrounding area and the companion conditional use is an appropriate vehicle for obtaining permission for this use (the other means is through a rezoning). Historically, churches have been located within residential neighborhoods. Generally, these ._ churches were not megachurches with significant activity on site every day of the week, rather were small with primary activity on Sunday. Neither this petition nor the companion CU petition indicate a seating capacity of more than 300 seats. In staff's view, the impacts from this church appear to be similar to that of the characteristics of churches historically located in neighborhoods. Compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback and buffer requirements, etc. In staff's opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The agent for the applicant conducted and submitted a data and analysis review as part of the application packet for the GGAMP amendment. The analysis examined the following: • Vicinity to existing local parishioners • Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities • Property availability • Alternative site analysis • Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Vicinity to existing local parishioners: Currently the congregation consists of local residents, with no seasonal impacts to the church population. The applicant provided a map with the locations Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 6 of 11 of the parishioners showing that there are two clusters of existing members in Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The proposed church location would lie between these clusters. There is another cluster of members that live between Vanderbilt Beach Road and lmmokalee Road close to 1-75. Only a couple of members live outside of these areas. Location of alternative facilities offering similar denominational opportunities: The proposed church is unique in that it provides services conducted in Romanian. The applicant provided a map indicating where other churches in the state of Florida provided similar denominational opportunities. The closest churches to Naples were located in Hollywood (122 miles) and Lake Worth (132 miles). The only other churches in Florida were located in Seffner (160 miles) and Jacksonville (379 miles). Property availability: The applicant and agent reviewed other properties in the same vicinity that might meet the needs of the church with these key criteria: minimum of 5 acres, maximum of 10 acres, minimum lot width of 330 linear feet, located with frontage on arterial or collector roadway, a maximum of 5 miles east of 1-75 and north of Golden Gate Parkway, sale price less than or equal to $135,000. Two properties were identified: (1) Sungate CPUD Tract B (northwest corner of Green Blvd. and Collier Blvd.)and (2)a property on the west side of Collier Blvd. approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Alternative site analysis: The application included a description, map of two alternative sites, plus the proposed location, that were analyzed: (1)The Sungate CPUD - Limits the actual total square feet to 63,000 square feet for Tracts B, C, and D, so another development could cause restraints in the ability for the church to develop and water management facilities for the 1.02 County owned right-of-way might further limit the church's developable area in Tract B. Also, this site is not currently on the market. (2) Property on the west side of Collier Blvd. north of Pine Ridge Road - Access to Collier Blvd. might also be limited to parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church. Cost of constructing this site might be higher than proposed site due to an 8-foot deep storm water detention pond utilized for the roadway storm water attenuation. This site was also the highest cost per acre. The proposed site -3899 15t Ave. SW would need a Conditional Use and a GGAMP amendment. This property is owned by the applicant. Ongoing update/re-study of Golden Gate Area Master Plan: The Collier County Community Planning Section is currently conducting a restudy of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. A number of public meetings were held with citizens and developers in Golden Gate Estates in order to have an understanding of what changes in the Growth Management Plan they would like to see. Surveys were used to help indicate what land uses participants would prefer. The surveys indicated that the participants might be agreeable to some additional potential Conditional Use (CU) locations, if limited as to location and type. Between 45% and 50% of participants stated that additional CU's should be allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads intersected by 4 or more lane roads). There were 5 rural locations and 3 urban locations that were identified as potential sites for Transitional CUs under this description, including Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants). However, the Re-study also limits the size of these CU locations to 2.25 acres to 5 acres or less. Church uses evoked a variety of opinions (both favorable and unfavorable)among the participants. The GMP amendments based on the re-study (recommended for approval by the CCPC) have not yet been heard by the BCC at Transmittal hearing and must be reviewed by various state agencies before being heard at CCPC and BCC Adoption hearings. If the GGAMP Re-study amendments should be approved by the BCC as Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 7 of 11 presently drafted, a Transitional CU at this location would be permitted, if the acreage was between 2.25 and 5 acres. This petition is for a Special Exception to Conditional Use Locational Criteria. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1)A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a)The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer. /The subject site comprises ±6.25 acres.] (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. [No small scale GMP amendments have been approved in calendar year 2018;a ±5.35- acre small scale petition is scheduled to be considered for adoption by the BCC in May 2018.] (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. /This amendment does include a text change to the Comprehensive Plan and those text changes are directly related to the proposed future land use map amendment.] (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). [The subject property is not located within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (2) Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). /This project will be heard with only one public adoption hearing.] (3) If the small scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. [This amendment does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. [This amendment preserves the internal Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 8 of 11 consistency of the plan and is not a correction, update, or modification of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan.] Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Summer Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist with Collier County Environmental Planning Section has reviewed this petition. The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress, and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use (CU)for the project. The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, completed his review and approved this petition in August 2017. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition, without any conditions, in August 2017. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.03.05 A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on October 11, 2017, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County—Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120-jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. The applicant's team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. A total of approximately 9 members of the public along with approximately 4 members of the applicant's team and County staff signed in at the NIM. The public asked questions about the project details. The consultant explained that there were two separate applications: a small-scale amendment for the Growth Management Plan and a zoning action for a conditional use. One citizen spoke in favor of having this church as a neighbor. Several of the citizens who attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting, voiced concerns over the following transportation issues: additional traffic along Weber Blvd., location of ingress and egress points, County is unwilling to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd., and the trip count was calculated as 183 Sunday peak hour trips. The meeting ended at approximately 6:15 p.m. A second NIM was duly advertised, noticed, and held - on June 25, 2018, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County — Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W, Naples, FL 34120 -jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use petition. Fred Hood, agent for the applicant at that time, presented the project with proposed changes, using both a PowerPoint Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 9 of 11 slideshow and an updated list of 21 conditions for the Conditional Use zoning action (list was also a handout) and then answered questions. Approximately 23 citizens, 4 members of the applicant's team, and the 2 planners from the County attended the NIM. Questions and concerns from the attendees included: • Number of acres for project site? 6.25 acres • Number of square feet of storage shed? 1,800 sq. feet • Types of special events? Not defined yet • Where will special events be held on the site? in the pastor's residence? Outdoors? If outside, could be in parking area, or in open area, if pastor residence not built. • Traffic is already a nightmare. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Traffic access to site locations. Applicant will continue to work with County staff. • Could a bridge entrance be constructed over the Collier Blvd. canal? Not possible, since land that would be needed does not belong to church and safe distance from Golden Gate Blvd could not be accommodated. • If an event is held in parking area, where will people park? As part of a special event permit a parking plan is required. • Do not want carnival or revival type events. Agent asked if citizen wanted any other types of events eliminated. • Speeding on Weber Blvd. Citizens need to work with Sherriff's office. • Have an off-duty officer for traffic control. • Churches do not pay property taxes. • What will be cleared in the preserve area? Only native vegetation would remain. • Dates of Public Hearings. No dates were set yet. Meeting adjourned at approximately 6:08 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • There are no transportation or utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • The use is generally compatible with surrounding development. • The Re-study for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan identifies the eastern quadrants of Collier Blvd. and Golden Gate Blvd. as appropriate for Estates Zoning District CUs with conditions, including a size maximum of 5 acres. • In staff's opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase the likelihood of a similar petition (to allow an Estates zoning district CU) being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Blvd. at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. • Staff finds that the data and analysis submitted by the petitioner demonstrates a need for the proposed amendment and that this is an appropriate location to fulfill that need. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on April 19, 2018 and August 14, 2018. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map Series are in -- Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2 and 163.3177(6)(A)8, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 10 of 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, subject to including in this amendment the addition of the Subdistrict name in the list of maps under the heading "Future Land Use Map Series" at the end of the GGAMP. Prepared by: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 11 of 11 PREPARED BY: DATE: q _( SUE FAULKNER, PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: 1/1 :70) DATE: � ? rI DAVID WEEKS,AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, ZONING DIVISION DATE: f'--G—!Q MICHAEL BOSI,AICP, DIRECTOR ZONING DIVISION APVED BY: �` aG DATE: 7 Q— 7—/ AMES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION Petition Number: PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Staff Report for September 20, 2018 CPCC meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 13, 2018 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Zoning Division •2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 ORDINANCE NO. 2018- _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY REVISING THE CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20160002584] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. requested an amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map to revise the Conditional Use Subdistrict to allow a church or house of worship; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or an area of critical economic concern; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and [17-CMP-00982/1411506/1]96 Words underlined are added,words sttuek4hr-eugh have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PL20160002584 5/7/18 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small scale amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and map amendments are attached hereto as Exhibit "A"and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. [17-CMP-00982/1411506/1]96 Words underlined are added,words stfuek-threugh have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PL20160002584 5/7/18 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2018. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk ANDY SOLIS, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko, 6' Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Proposed Text and Map Amendment /"N [17-CMP-00982/1411506/1)96 Words underlined are added,words struck-through have been deleted. Grace Romanian Church GMPA PU0160002584 5/7/18 EXHIBIT A GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates-Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estates zoning district within the Golden Gate Estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following four sets of criteria shall be met: a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** d) Transitional Conditional Uses: *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Page 1 Row of asterisks (*** *** ***)denotes break in text. 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (see map titled Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions). *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Golden Gate Boulevard/Everglades Boulevard Center Immokalee Road/Everglades Boulevard Center Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Commercial Western Estates Infill Subdistrict Golden Gate Parkway Interchange Conditional Uses Area Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict Mission Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Conceptual Plan Everglades— Randall Subdistrict Southbrooke Office Subdistrict Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Collier Boulevard Special Provisions Ex.A_PC2016-2584 GnceRomChurch G:\CBES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2017 Cycles&Small Scale Petitions\2017 Small Scale petitions\CPSS•17.1 Grace Romanian Church PL2016-2584\Exhibit A text&maps revised sal/54-18 Page 2 Words underlined are added; words struck-through are deleted. EXHIBIT A PETITION PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 �/�� CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT: COLLIER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PROVISIONS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ISLANDWALK CIR AMBROSIA LN I VANDERBILT BEACH Rp_i 7TH AVE NW 7TH AVE NW 5TH AVE NW —z 5TH AVE NW cc W SUBJECT SITE W 3RD AVE NW CPSS-2017-1 -� 1ST AVE NW 1ST AVE NW GOLDEN GATE BLVD W c 1ST AVE SW A 1ST AVE SW z cc m ❑ -n cn z cc 3RD AVE SW 3RD AVE SW —W D_ N cc ❑• ce ❑ CO J 5TH AVE SW m w 5TH AVE SW • ¢ cc- —m U U W W> J > J O U 7TH AVE SW 7TH AVE SW Q PINE RIDGE RD U J WHITE BLVD W z ADOPTED-XXX , — Ord.No.XXX LEGEND PREPARED BY:BETH YANG,AICP CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet �/A COLLIER BOULEVARD SPECIAL PROVISIONS FILE:CPSS-2017-1 SITE LOCATION MAP.mxtl DATE:3728!2018 I I I I I I I I I EXHIBIT"A" PETITION PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 URBAN DESIGNATION ELTAIES.BESLCASILCA AGRICULTURAL'RURAL DES GNAT�ON 1911900 USE DISTRICT MONO USE DISTRICT C:3 x...,...,..v n,....- � ",NxitlenW I>.1.10 ," 11 � IoR v.S nn OVERLAYS ANDSPFCIALFFATURFS GOLDEN GATE AREA � WMRERCNl01tTRICTmnas�sm en C=11 ram 111111 . m.�soman p..ouvP' a..tao1 o...r �1 w:�c,...,....5 w...�. 0... .�. �,� p� FUTURE LAND USE MAP CO I, w0=7=7'. w,,,...9°"°`''''="'"'77,...444.s. ... IMMOKALEE RDst COSINERCIAL DISTRICT wCu.w988.Mlommrc..S.mwn w=.447'...7;Z:== I _- MB wm...wwm C..m.wl$wNna NM w .. .c Aw.MlE9�AN„1oT Z m I cc OIL WELL RD CO o 4 m4 RANDALL BLVD __.-._.____-- I— I, IMMOKALEE RD ------_ 1� z oo y p m D D N p VANDPR&LT BEACH RD 4 p 7 w GOLDEN GATE BLVD - GOLDEN GATE BLVD i Po O t) PINE R E RD co 0 rtGREEN BLVD ;r > co v N /IP \ c.LL1 .G PKwvl. 1SUBJECT SITE w qp / CPSS-2017-1 RII¢jQ Rn INTERSTATE 75 ///%////////////��y INTERSTATE 75 DAVIS BLVD S.R.84 p, f _ /, /4// z a 03 // V � / RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD 5j j. CB // 9y F GOLDEN GATE FUTURE LAND USE MAP , ADOPTED-FEBRARY 1991 AMENDED-DECEMBER A,2007 �: / (ORO.NO.2007-77) J `AMENDED•MAY 19 992 'AMENDED-OCTOBER 11,2009 / '— IORO.NO.2005-0% /� I AMENDED-MAY 251993 / AMENDED-JULY 29 2010 /,,,,,/,',./-// AMENDED-JULY 27 1993 (ORD NO 2010-32 j1 j /,/ AMENDED-JULY 25 2010 / AMENDED-APRIL 2 991 ORD.NO.201033 �*�/ / j AMENDED-MARCN 11.1995 I' ENDED•SEPTEMBER 11,2011 LORDNO.2011-2g2_ ., / AMENDED-OCTOBER 27997 AMENDECT NOVEMBER I',2011 © / ;741 AMENDED-APRIL /1995 Am,,,,,,,,, NOVEMSERCC (ORO NO 110.2015 / // / h AMENDED•SEPTEMBER.,1998'AMENDED-FEBRUARY 2].1999 AM ORD NO 2015-`2015 /4 , /y% ,, 37 AMENDED-JUNE t120) / z%/ /j // F MENDED-MAY 9.2000 .R•NO. �f)-] 1 AMENDED•MARCH I]1001 AMENDED-%%%%% _ LORD.NO.'XXX'�� © AMENDED-SEPTEMBER10.2003 I/ _,_19M.N0.20024/1 � // // AMENDED-OCTOBER 25.2001 / / 0 0.5 1 2 3 (ORD.NO.2504-71) : —��—=MII05 AMENDED.JANUARY M 2008 / / / � (ORD.NO.2008.2) ..ue AMENDED-JANUARY 25 2007 i.. _.......__ .._.._R 26 E a+0,No 2007.19) R 27� �R 28 E��f/ R 29 E DAV iDSON NGth'ECC:'ti C- GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH SMALL-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT Prepared For: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34119 and Prepared By: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 www.davidsonengineering.com s ' • vr,E DAVIDSON LIST OF EXHIBITS Application to Amend the Growth Management Plan Exhibit A Professional Qualifications Sheet Exhibit B Proposed SSGMPA Text Amendment Language Exhibit C Location Map Exhibit D USGS Quad Map Exhibit E Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay&Soil Mapping Exhibit F Environmental Data Exhibit G Surrounding Zoning Exhibit Exhibit H Surrounding Future Land Use Map Exhibit I Historical/Archaeological Probability Exhibit J ...� Proximity to Public Services Map Exhibit K Recorded Warranty Deed Exhibit L Letter of Authorization Exhibit M Alternative Site Data &Analysis Exhibit N Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit 0 Boundary Survey/Legal Description Exhibit P Traffic Impact Statement Exhibit Q Level of Service Comparative Analysis Exhibit R Utility Availability Statement Exhibit S Justification of the Proposed SSGMPA Amendment Exhibit T Planning Communities Map Exhibit U Future Land Use Map Exhibit V Existing Zoning Maps Exhibit W Disclosure of Interest Exhibit X Golden Gate Area Master Plan Inset Map Exhibit Y www.davidsonengineering.com Co er -nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: Rezone (RZ) Date and Time: 10/5/2016 Assigned Planner: Daniel James Smith Engineering Manager(for PPlfs and FP's): ^reject Information Project Name: Rezone/GMPA for a church PL tt, PL20160002577 Property I #: 36760800006;36760720005 Current Zoning: Estates D 3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL Project Address: City: State: Zip: Applicant: Waste Management Inc. of Florida Agent Name: Tocia Hamlin - Davidson Engineering Phone: 239434-6060 Agent/Firm Address: City: State: Property Owner: Please provide the following, if appiicable: Total Acreage: iL Proposed#of Residential Units: ilL Proposed Commercial Square Footage: For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: v. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: vi. if the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: • , Col ' . County ........., COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 I Meeting Notes , ....,,t rj,,L ti/Iiet 4Z2L,4--- k oc,4a4; • map ty-\ C) P -...-- __ f.- ____ 41:,„c..., , ,-,„f, 6 ( 1 i--iii4 — r\l,c 4 +-1 .L‘. 0 i, fr_i-a-.1--, .11.'l ‘..) 'S-•-• '7, , -/- '. -L 7 .7,-- (1 I ,.., . c ,::, ,_ -, - i , AO< ,<4; , -- h(i fl '-', /:?"- (1l. .(-±1d( ? • '5'7.-Ill ) A0 , L) ‘''' - • t - , i n L4. --ikt,f—, 4---4----- ---`t -41- , '1--e--*LcA- --- 2 '4" __-La.AL a , ' ) -^ C.:-- r ,, ,--/ ( A.,._ 1 Z 4, ellfr/ ) 11 , ,f L' - ' . 1- 1,',3.{ l'-g.fL-.11 vt VI'-TUC IC1-1. .. .k ei4+4-91v5 ( "vv.isil- ', ri7c-554 oh cvircstill ,, . Iv ,fr, A,i,41 't, 1 v il i't. ...•••••••, •-• 44,— h e-h, .5-,... .11.f!- t % „ C.wri!La-1 i-1 $1ic 4 i. Y4,0,14, •c F.-xzci/,. 5 cti•-•..tiv Nee)(4, ,5 me,fr..1 :1 4-4,4/1414e 4.--/*4-+‘ 4-1.--1Pia.spli- ,----"--- (' -* 5 61`c, e/vidkoiv,efA,-/Phe Di /A r4/0 t:itiviiete/itz- f-hve' P lid c 1 i,67c 1r 1 /5. g. I,--c.03.. P,/d/i -.s?deL -,.....6.L/L.:.5 - --e y- .,i,-,-ri ,---,(- 2 Pi' "--7 —)/4-. c-.7 ,r pt,,A [-cli - 6)6, &,2 . .4- De - I-17,56 4,:).11-- gofisirLiri, 4r„1 (iGt)1/7/,:,,!Li? e•-.)fl LI C/7 e I--/C+ (-; 6/1),--.1 — ci 2 c-6 er. b/hrri e..4. / // 4.1 /I)1 1- A.1 ,,„ -i: e 1 14 I, • .-N • t7 ) , , .., -- (,./11)Inaiiii/ if 1;4,,, (70. _ / ir. 41 iirr',- //V), eV' _ --1 .. //a A iv,// - -,,. z,,,:, e.. 7 z?/- F/lob c r---zr1 S VI41/ aill iier1 /./Z7nal /0 i ii7(441 (i)6/1% bit ' i , CcAgriLm tiegr 'pi, ,, fle,c‘s -,---- &it-kr!s's 1.-----'Q " - 1---44A et L_.> 1,k,) -k2 (". ‘i• in kez-1 I c„ r._ ,../ s-. q ck_vvt. -7 Co r County COLUER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.cottiereov.net (239)252-2400 Meeting Notes * `� ► +^ _ ter. . • 6` 1e'�rl.+."1Aer, "' !;(."'J\c�.c, a0-- � P F _ ��_3... :C� fr r a c Ctc Joi i E- or Lur-4 uo . 1 14, A (44. - 5 A IA) .gu _ _ P r 9&LntY COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.collierxov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD-Ch.3 G.2 of the Administrative Code n PUD to PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED • Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of ❑ ❑ why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments — II ❑ Pre-application meeting notes ❑ Ill ❑ Affidavit of Authorization,signed and notarized 2 II Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 II ❑ S Completed Addressing Checklist 32 NI II _ ,...... Warranty Deed(s) List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2 II ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4 II ❑ Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4 ❑ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser)with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included 5 -C7 ❑ on aerial. Statement of Utility Provisions 4 V Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with 03 ❑ project planner at time of public hearings. 1/Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include 4 C copies of previous surveys. phic 4...0//191,7 -TQC Mk, Traffic Impact Study 20 Historical Survey 4 W School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 2 4 ❑ Electronic copy of all required documents 2 .41 0 Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)+ ❑ ki ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this ❑ ' ❑ document is separate from Exhibit E) Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24"x 36"and One 8'!:" x 11"copy ❑ a ❑ Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24"x 36"–Only if ❑ ❑ Amending the PUD Checklist continued onto next page... 4/15/2015 Page 11 of 16 Coffer County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru&underlined 0 ❑ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 1 I 0 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing,include an additional set of each submittal requirement ''The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: ❑ Exhibit C:Master Plan-See Cho peer 3 E. :L.of the Administrative Code O Exhibit D:Legal Description O Exhibit E: List of Requested LOC Deviations end justification for each ❑ Exhibit F:List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use)Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690.3500 for information regarding"Wildfire Mitigation&Prevention Plan." PLANNERS—INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: n ❑ School District(Residential Components):Amy Lockheart ❑ Conservancy of SWFL:Nichole Ryan f Utilities Engineering:Kris Vanlengen ❑ Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad ❑ Emergency Management:Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑ City of Naples:Robin Singer,Planning Director _ 0 Other: I FEE REQUIREMENTS ' Pre-Application Meeting:$500.00 _ PUD Rezone:$10,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone:$8,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ P D Amendment:$6,000.00* plus$25.00 an a ction of an acre ISV omprehensive Planning onsisteney-Rew a ij, ' --..r-" � i— = -` Environmental Data Require it'ts-EIS Packe (sea• i`al determined at pre-application meeting):$2,500.00 O Listed or Protected Species Review(when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 g Transportation Review Fees: r Methodology Review:$500.00,to be paid directly to Tra sportation at the Methodology Meeting* S14602-7. Mklibc 6140 1 %D/Mac: E *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review:$750.00 xio Major Study Review$1,500.00 Legal Advertising Fees: k 17_Z . VD o CCPC: o BCC:$500.00 C School Concurrency Fee,if applicable: 4/15/2015 Page 12 of 16 Co .r County COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.cohlergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6359 a Mitigation Fees,if application,to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20%of the original fee. All checks may be made payable to:Board of County Commissioners 4/15/2015 Page 13 of 16 Col er • nty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 EXHIBIT A (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: CONDITIONAL USES(Optional) 1. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the (type of PUD) PUD Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. 4/15/2015 Page 14 of 16 EXHIBIT B (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) TABLE I RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 1 SINGLE TWO-FAMILY, CLUBHOUSE/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY PATIO& MULTI- RECREATION FAMILY ATTACHED& ZERO LOT UNE FAMILY BUILDINGS TOWNHOUSE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA S.F.PER S.F. PER S.F.PER UNIT S.F. PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT UNIT UNIT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA S.F S.F S.F S.F./D.U. N/A MIN FRONT YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN SIDE YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN REAR YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET ^. MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN FEET FEET FEET FEET or BH, N/A STRUCTURES whichever is greater MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET EXCEED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FRONT FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET SIDE FEET FEET FEET FEET BH REAR FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET DISTANCE BETWEEN PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO SPS SPS SPS or FEET FEET EXCEED S.P.S.=Same as Principal Structures BH=Building Height Footnotes as needed 4/15/2015 GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Setback may be either feet ( ) on one side or feet ( ) on the other side in order to provide a minimum separation between principal structures of feet ( ). Alternatively, if the foot ( ) setback option is not utilized, then the minimum setback shall not be less than feet ( ) and the combined setback between principal structures shall be at least feet ( ). At the time of the application for subdivision plat approval for each tract, a lot layout depicting minimum yard setbacks and the building footprint shall be submitted. TABLE II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PRINCIPAL USES ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM LOT AREA Sq.Ft. N/A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH Ft. N/A MINIMUM YARDS(External) From Immokalee Road Canal ROW Ft. SPS From Future Extension of Collier Blvd. Ft. SPS From Western Project Boundary Ft. Ft. MINIMUM YARDS(Internal) Internal Drives/ROW Ft. Ft. Rear Ft. Ft. Side Ft. Ft. MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN Ft.or sum of Ft. STRUCTURES Building heights* IMUM HEIGHT Retail Buildings Ft. Ft. Office Buildings Ft. Ft. - MINIMUM FLOOR AREA j Sq.Ft.** N/A MAX.GROSS LEASABLE AREA Sq.Ft. N/A * Whichever is greater ** Per principal structure,on the finished first floor. 4/15/2015 1oot-r) colt- County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE(Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) ❑ BL(Blasting Permit) ❑ SDP(Site Development Plan) O BD(Boat Dock Extension) 0 SDPA(SDP Amendment) ❑ C• arnival/Circus Permit ❑ SDPI(Insubstantial Change to SDP) ❑ C• U(Conditional Use) ❑ SIP(Site Improvement Plan) ❑ EXP(Excavation Permit) ❑ SIPI(Insubstantial Change to SIP) ❑ FP(Final Plat ❑ SNR(Street Name Change) O LLA(Lot Line Adjustment) ❑ SNC(Street Name Change—Unplatted) ❑ PNC(Project Name Change) ❑ TDR(Transfer of Development Rights) ❑ PPL(Plans&Plat Review) ❑ VA(Variance) ❑ PSP(Preliminary Subdivision Plat) 0 VRP(Vegetation Removal Permit) ❑ PUD Rezone ❑ VRSFP(Vegetation Removal&Site Fill Permit) ❑ RZ(Standard Rezone) 0 OTHER GMPA/REZONE LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties(copy of lengthy description maybe attached) SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49, RANGE 26- SEE ATTACHED Golden Gate Estates Unit 4 Tr 16 and h'„t 1 I2 of T+' '5 FOLIO(Property ID)NUMBER(s)of above(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 36760720005 & 36760800006 STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES(as applicable, if already assigned) 38991ST AVE SW • LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way • SURVEY(copy -needed only for unplatted properties) • CURRENT PROJECT NAME(if applicable) PROPOSED PROJECT NAME(if applicable) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PROPOSED STREET NAMES(if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER(for existing projects/sites only) SDP - or AR or PL# Co ier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMEFT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 vinfvwcolliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in,condominium documents (if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Please Return Approved Checklist By: ® Email ❑ Fax ❑ Personally picked up Applicant Name: TOCIA HAMLIN - DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. Phone: 434-6060 EXT 2985 Email/Fax: TOCIA@DAVIDSONENGINEERING.COM Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number 36760800006 Folio Number 36760720005 Folio Number Folio Number _� Number Folio Number Approved by: a /yl Date: 9/28/16 Updated by:.e_ Date: F OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED SmithDaniel From: FeyEric Sent: Monday, October 03, 201E 2:40 PM To: Tocia Hamlin Cc: SmithDaniel; LibbyPamela Subject: RE: PL201E0002577(REZONE) Tocia, I will not be attending the pre-application meeting on Wednesday and just wanted to let you know about utility service availability for this project. Below is a GIS screen shot: Tax - _ S ^^�.^....,.-w.....,�.,..•+.-..._ ,amu . if „-f "% .44 f ` , ire 3 s . -.. a is iate. , A a-'i ... K x 0 i o S I ate`. ," ` d _ .jI t k �d' f' , , , .,*--- 1- - _ - ...,‘-.,,,:, ''It- ' ' 8 _ ,-t,,-;- ,-- - „ , _t „--, , --,_-_, , _ ,,,,,,. .,„ ,_ , _ .., _ to ` s A41 zx .g €L___11!....ilky_ts_v_v__ F 2 # �. ,- ;, 411;48 S ®h7BJOgeM i s . -34' .,. > -g..; _ _ < - Y CO x t l a i t;.s ":- ;�` - 1 :, 3- I .:_ 4_ _-44 7 " ,., *`-' < '11-i--, 'f- f r s n y , 0A-IS -1011103 -�.`1 =f The purple shading signifies geographic areas excluded from the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance (2001-13). Per that ordinance,this project is not required to connect to the Regional Water System but would be subject to the imposition of impact fees if connection is requested. Water service may be extended from the existing County 10" HDPE water main on the north side and within the median of Golden Gate Blvd,east of Weber Blvd but wastewater service is not available. I am copying Pam Libby for confirmation that we would not allow a new connection to our existinig 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd. Thank you, r CUINHt1' Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities Department Planning and Project Management Division Direct: (239)252-1037 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. ----Original Appointment From:PaulRenald On Behalf Of CDS-C Sent:Tuesday,September 27,2016 2:05 PM To:AhmadVicky;AlcornChris;Amy Lockhart-Taylor(lockha@ccllierschuols.ton-i);AndersonRichard;AnthonyDavid; ArnoidMichelle;AshtonHeidi;AuclairClaudine; BaluchStephen; BeardLaurie; BeasleyRachel; BrethauerPaula; BrownAraqueSummer; BrownCraig; BurtchinMark; CascioGeorge; CondominaDanny; CrowleyMichaelle; David Ogilvie; dfev@northcollierfire.com; DumaisMike; FaulknerSue;FeyEric; FleishmanPaula;GewirtzStorm; Gosselinliz; GundlachNancy; HouldsworthJohn; HughesJodi; HumphriesAlicia;JacobLisa; jnageond@sfwmd.gov;JohnsonEric; KendallMarcia; KurtzGerald; LenbergerSteve; LevyMichael; imartin@sfwmd.gov; LouviereGarrett; MartinezOscar; MastrobertoThomas; McCaughtryMary; McKennaJack;McKuenElly; McLeanMatthew; MoscaMichele; MoxamAnnis; NawrockiStefanie; OrthRichard; PajerCraig; PancakeBill; PattersonAmy; PepinEmily; piimenez@sfwmd.gov; PochmaraNatalie; ReischlFred; RosenblumBrett;SantabarbaraGino; SawyerMichael;ScottChris;Shar Hingson; ShawinskyPeter;Shawn Hanson;SheaBarbara;SmithDaniel;StoneScott;StrainMark;SuleckiAlexandra;SummersEllen; SweetChad;TempletonMark;VanLengenKris;WalshJonathan;WeeksDavid;WickhamFlannery;WilloughbyChristine; tocia@davidsonengineering.com Subject: PL20160002577(REZONE) When:Wednesday, October 05,2016 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (UTC-05:00)Eastern Time(US&Canada). Where:CONF ROOM "C" Planner-Dan Smith Fire District-Golden Gate Fire ******************************************4.**************** «OLE Object: Picture(Device Independent Bitmap)» «OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)» Project Type: Pre-Application Meeting 3 Project Description: Rezone/GMPA for a church Existing Application Name: Meeting Type: Pre-Application Meeting Preferred Date: next available Unavailable Dates: Location:3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL,Parcel Number:36760800006;36760720005 Full Name:Tocia Hamlin Email:tocia@davidsonengineering.com Company Name:4365 RADIO RD STE 201 Naples, FL 34104 Representing:Davidson Engineering Contact Number:Work:239-434-6060 Thanks Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 4 Environmental Data hecklist Project Name C/91//f P G:l : .4 ii 'oa/i-,zeal The Environmental Data requirements can be found in LDC Section 3.08.00 (1-7) Provide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. 0( z• J WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT? Preparation of �/ Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. Please include revision dates on resubmittals. 0l 3. J Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the •� Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval.For sites in the RFMU district,provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores verified by the SFWMD or DEP prior to first development order approval. Where functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff,consistent with State regulation. 4. SDP or final plat construction plans with impacts to five (5) or more acres of wetlands shall provide an analysis of potential water quality impacts of the project by evaluating water quality loadings expected from the project (post development conditions considering the proposed land uses and stormwater management controls) compared with water quality`loadings of the project area as it exists in its pre-development conditions. The analysis shall be performed using methodologies approved by Federal and State water quality agencies,and must demonstrate no increase in nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous)loadings in the post development scenario. 5. Where treated stormwater is allowed to be directed into preserves, show how the criteria in 3.05.07 H have been met. 6. Where native vegetation is retained on site,provide a topographic map to a half foot and,where possible, provide elevations within each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified on site.For SDP or final plat construction plans, include this information on the site plans. r7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site.The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(F1,WCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS.Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee, when the project is not reviewed or technical assistance not provided by the FFWCC and USFWS. Additional survey time may be required if listed species are discovered ( j)rovide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03 9. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed species are utilizing the site or where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLUCFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans.Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 10. For sites or portions of sites cleared of native vegetation or in agricultural operation,provide documentation that the parcel(s)were issued a permit to be cleared and are in compliance with the 25 year rezone limitation pursuant to section 10.02.06. For sites permitted to be cleared prior to July 2003, provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 10 year rezone limitation previously identified in the GMP. Criteria defining native vegetation and determining the legality, process and criteria for clearing are found in 3.05.05,3.05.07 and 10.02.06. (�11. dentify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on-site. Include the above referenced calculations and aerials on the SDP or final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. 12. Include on a separate site plan, the project boundary and the land use designations and overlays for the RLSA, RFMU, ST and ACSC-ST districts. Include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 13. Where off-site preservation of native vegetation is proposed in lieu of on-site,demonstrate that the criteria in section 3.05.07 have been met and provide a note on the SDP or final plat construction plans indicating the type of donation (monetary payment or land donation)identified to satisfy the requirement. Include on the SDP or final plat construction plans, a location map(s)and property identification number(s) of the off-site parcel(s) if .. -.. off-site donation of land is to occur. 141. rovide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property,along with a narrative of the y gl measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. r,&. ( welt); 24/ /G 1-146 15. Soil and/or ground water sampling shall be required at the time of first development order submittal for sites that occupy farm fields(crop fields, cattle dipping ponds, chemical mixing areas),golf courses,landfill or junkyards or for sites where hazardous products exceeding 250 gallons of liquid or 1,000 pounds of solids were stored or processed or where hazardous wastes in excess of 220 pounds per month or 110 gallons at any point in time were generated or stored. The amount of sampling and testing shall be determined by a registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment and shall at a minimum test for organochlorine pesticides(U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) 8081)and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals using Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)soil sampling Standard Operating Procedure(SOP)FS 3000, in areas suspected of being used for mixing and at discharge point of water management system. Sampling should occur randomly if no points of contamination are obvious. Include a background soil analysis from an undeveloped location hydraulically upgradient of the potentially contaminated site. Soil sampling should occur just below the root zone,about 6 to 12 inches below ground surface or as otherwise agreed upon with the registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment. Include in or with the Environmental Site Assessment, the acceptable State and Federal pollutant levels for the types of contamination found on site and indicate in the Assessment,when the contaminants are over these levels. If this analysis has been done as part of an Environmental Audit then the report shall be submitted. The County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. 16. Shoreline development must provide an analysis demonstrating that the project will remain fully functional for its intended use after a six-inch rise in sea level. 17. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. 18. Where applicable, provide evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County. Include all state permits that comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 13,2005. 19. Identify any Wellfield Risk Management Special"I`reatment Overlay Zones(WRM-ST)within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat construction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUs,provide a separate site plan or zoning map with the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified. 7 v 20. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 21. For sites located in the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern-Special Treatment overlay district(ACSC- ST), show how the project is consistent with the development standards and regulations in 4.02.14. 22. For multi-slip docking facilities with ten slips or more,and for all marina facilities,show how the project is consistent with 5.05.02.Refer to the Manatee Protection Plan for site specific requirements of the Manatee Protection Plan not included in 5.05.02. 23. For development orders within RFMU sending lands,show how the project is consistent with each of the applicable Objectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. 24. he County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements.(LDC 10.02.02.A.3 0 The following to be determined at preapplication meeting: (Choose those that apply) Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. ki,)E xplain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the 0c. GMP. CCA,IF C?t'5 6 7- Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. and how the project's design d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions compensates for wetland impacts. e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. 1" 25. PUD zoning and CU t#ions. For PUD rezones aitd CU petitions,applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) document,prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete.Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. 26. Is EAC Review(by CCPC)required? pilaf/40 ,VO 11-. 27. Additional Comments r 28. Stipulations for approval(Conditions) Environmental PUUZ-PUDA Chec hlist inon-RFMU) Project Name C/&Ali 4 f 6. 6 • / I' .0/5 e?l(/4r /? J .40,, 1. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays,districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties?(CON, ST,PUD,RLSA,RFMU, etc.)(LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00)Not in CV Library O. ubmit a current aerial photograph(available from the Property Appraiser's office)and clearly delineate the \\��,,11 subject site boundary lines.If the site is vegetated,provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland,wetland and exotic vegetation(Admin.Code Ch.3 G.1.Application Contents#24). FLUCFCS Overlay-P627 O.Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as"Preserve"on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label-P546 4. 'rovide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained,the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site.Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations(LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F;3.05.07.H.l.d-e). Preserve Calculation-P547 gireated and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.I.b.Preserve Width-P603 1 Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3,include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors.(LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4) Preserve Selection-P550 1 �a. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory ' structures and other site alterations,fill placement,grading,plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve(i.e. stem wall or berm around wetland preserve).Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25'. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.) Preserve Setback—New 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required,when so warranted.(LDC I0.02.02.A.2.f) Listed Species-P522 (9. rovide Environmental Data identifying author credentials. consistency determination with the GMPs, off-site �._ preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels,and analysis of water quality.For land previously used for farm fields or golf course.provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required—P 522 J(0. UD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved.(LDC 10.02.13.A.2) Master Plan Contents-P626 11. UD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses,the following is suggested: A.Principal Use:Preserve;B. Accessory Uses:All other uses(list as applicable or refer to the LDC) 12~ UD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that 0 wall be preserved on the site. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2.) Unique Features-P628 Example: A management plan for the entire project shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not limited to Black Bear,Gopher Tortoise and listed birds. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the project. 13. Provide information for GIS? Additional Comments: Co er County COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Sign-In Sheet PL#:PL20160002577 Collier County Contact Information: r _ j Phone-1 _ Name Review Discipline I CI Richard Anderson { I Environmental Specialist 252-2483 richardanderson@colliergov.net ❑ David Anthony I Environmental Review ( 252-2497 davidanthony@colliergov.net ❑ Summer Araque I Environmental Review 252-6290 summerbrownaraque@colliergov.net i ❑ Steve Baluch,P.E. Transportation Planning 252-2361 StephenBaluch@colliergov.net __ y Laurie Beard Transportation Pathways 252-5782 lauriebeard@eolliergov.net I-;i- Rachel Beasley Planner 252-8202 rachelbeasley@coil!ergov.net LI Marcus Berman County Surveyor 252-6885 MarcusBerman@colliergov.net 0 Madelin Bunster Architectural Review 252-8523 madelinbunster@colliergov.net 71 Mark Burtchin ROW Permitting 252-5165 markburtchin@colliergov.net L George Cascio Utility Billing 252-5543 georgecascio@colliergov:net ! Heidi Ashton Cicko Managing Asst.County Attorney 252-8773 heidiashton@colliergov.net ,--\(Sue Faulkner Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 suefaulkner@colliergov:net 11 Eric Fey,P.E. Site Plans Reviewer 252-2434 ericfey@colliergov.net 7 Paula Fleishman Impact Fee Administration 252-2924 paulafleishman@colliergov.net r. Nancy Gundlach,AICP,PLA Zoning Services 252-2484 nancygundlach@colliergov.net CI Shar Hingson East Naples Fire District 687-5650 shingson@ccfco.org ❑ John Houldsworth Engineering Services 252-5757 johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net Cl Jodi Hughes Transportation Pathways 252-5744 jodihughes@colliergov.net 11 Alicia Humphries Site Plans Reviewer/ROW 252-2326 aliciahumphries@colliergov.net ❑ Eric Johnson,AICP,CFM Zoning Services 252-2931 ericjohnson@colliergov.net Li arcia Kendall — Comprehensive Planning ! 252-2387 marciakendall@col!iergov.net • Stephen Lenberger I Environmental ReviewI 252-2915 steveienberge_r@co!liergov.net — paulomartins@colliergov.net• Paulo Martins Utilities 252-4285 ov.net II ii ❑ Thomas Mastroberto Fire Safety 252-7348 ; Thomasmastroberto@collierg ❑ Jack McKenna,P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jackmckenna@colliergov.net ❑ Matt McLean, P.E. Principal Project Manager 252-8279 matthewmclean@colliergov.net ❑ Gilbert Moncivaiz Utility Impact Fees 252-4215 I gilbertmoncivaiz@colliergov.net ❑ Annis Moxam Addressing 252-5519 annismoxam@colliergay.net Planning and Zoning_Stefanie Nawrocki _ ___ 1252-2313 StefanieNawrocki@colliergov.net ❑ Mariam Ocheltree Graphics 252-2315 mariamocheltree@colliergov.net —e— \ LiBdOtroItIIIII_ T5it j 252-5859 brandyotero@colliergov.net I Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 ❑ Branch Pollard Utility impact fees 252-6237 brandipollard@colliergov.net Fred Reischl,AICP Zoning Services 252-4211 fredreischl@colliergov.net ❑ Stacy Revay Transportation Pathways. 252-5677 stacyrevay@colliergov,net ❑ Brett Rosenblum,P.E. Utility Plan Review 252-2905 , brettrosenblum@colliergov.net ❑ Michael Sawyer Zoning Services 252-2926 michaelsawyer@colliergov.net ❑ Corby Schmidt,AICP Comprehensive Planning 252-2944 corbyschmidt@colliergov,net _ ❑ Chris Scott,AICP Planning and Zoning 252-2460 chrisscott@colliergov.net Xi Daniel Smith,AICP Landscape Review 252-4312 danielsmith@coiliergov.net ❑ Ellen Summers Planning and Zoning 252-1032 EllenSummers@colliergov.net l Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-8400 scottstone@colliergov.net 1 ❑ Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 252-4446 markstrain@colliergov.net _❑ Kris VanLengen Utility Planning 252-5366 krisvanlengen@colliergov.net ❑ Jon Walsh Building Review 252-2962 jonathanwaish@colliergov.net fir; David Weeks,AICP Future Land Use Consistency 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net ❑ Kirsten Wilkie Environmental Review 252-5518 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net ❑ Christine Willoughby Planning and Zoning 252-5748 I ChristineWilloughby@colliergov.net ,^ Additional Attendee Contact Information: fired °I GI avid Qiie irree tt Name Representing Phone I Email Czth 4... ti_ k-6.,,"--G') 1›...,i:1 D A L.+6:.r,,,r- 61 AL{_,..04"., L x.57& UCJ elt 6,1,s+(5:r.,r.["a W0 1 t a `` 0C.v'1Sa, T.,SIn<<:;ni Lif4-(J-ee MQr1ARrda1�I4r01-*1►5nrci ) L)' it ,aa } :t r i 1131-1660 4^� �oict.; lege..,,,e., yti, 14.1 o.4. 5vrµi 0 fk-k; Ttct.15 ,-.1,4,),6,;152 L l,A.w.- . ... t T‘t.<- ,. .,-.'' Ili k/9c oi•isvr+hv C>l�u :398-25-17 MRrA+� Aw (e0/43 0P4->I!/ Ade GhigE anisevw itoac. 2s3 ,ail G,fr-e . EXj- /Bfl 'A APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE October 5, 2016 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Company "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Address 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34119 Phone Number 239.398.2527 Fax Number N/A B. Name of Agent * Josh Fruth, Jessica Harrelson, Anna Weaver, Derek Burr, AICP • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Davidson Engineering, Inc. Address 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34104 Phone Number 239.434.6060 Fax Number 239.434.6084 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Address 6017 Pine Ridge Road, #84 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34119 Phone Number 239.398.2527 Fax Number N/A D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL,Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 1 t'"1 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock "Grace"Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 100% 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34119 C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest t".1 D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE,with an individual or individuals, a Corporation,Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership 2 Date of Contract: F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired Subject property was purchased November 28, 2016. See Exhibit"L"for the warranty de( If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached Boundary Survey and Legal Description, as Exhibit "P" B. GENERAL LOCATION Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards,within Collier County, Naples, Florida C. PLANNING COMMUNITY D. TAZ 241 E. SIZE IN ACRES ±6.25 acres F. ZONING ESTATES G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Please see Exhibit "I"for the surrounding land use patterns. H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Estates Mixed Use District- Residential Estates Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element 3 Capital Improvement Element CCME Element Future Land Use Element Exhibits"C"and"Y" Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 28 OF THE Golden Gate Master Plan AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strikc through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: This amendment will affect Policy 1.1.2.A.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by allowing a Conditional Use for a church, religious facility,or place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15,Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4. Please see Exhibit"C"and Exhibit"Y". C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Estates Mixed Use District Residential Estates Subdistrict TO Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict. (See Exhibit"C"and Exhibit"Y") D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) An Golden Gate Area Master Plan Inset Map, including the subject parcels, has been created and included as Exhibit"Y". E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 1 1 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit H&D Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit F Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit H&I Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibit I&V Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands,with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibits F&G Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exhibit G Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or 4 archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: NO Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. YES Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity SEE EXHIBIT"N" to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-1 1.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: EXHIBIT R&S Potable Water EXHIBIT R&S Sanitary Sewer EXHIBIT Q Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS X Drainage The proposed project will provide water management design consistent with SFWMD criteria. X Solid Waste The subject property shall be served by the existing solid waste provider serving the area(Waste Management). N/A Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2 Exhibit K Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e.water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3.Exhibit R Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire 5 protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: ZONE AH &X500 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION N/A $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) INCLUDED $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) EXHIBIT L Proof of ownership (copy of deed) EXHIBIT M Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) INCLUDED 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. � * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of$250.00 at the r 1 meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 6 DAVIDSON EXHIBIT "B" PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SHEET Davidson Engineering,Inc. Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner Mr. Hood has a Bachelor's of Urban Planning from the University of Cincinnati's College of Design Architecture Art and Planning. He has been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) and has practiced land planning in Southwest Florida since 2006. During his career in urban planning, for over twelve years, Mr. Hood has managed large and small development projects while working closely with a myriad of land development professionals in the physical development and policy adoption of residential, commercial, mixed-use, institutional and industrial projects. Mr. Hood has been tendered and accepted as an expert in land planning in cities and counties throughout Florida as well as being tendered as an expert witness in the area of Urban and Land Use Planning. Mr. Hood continues to attend continuing education seminars to remain current on planning theory and methodologies in an ever-changing regulatory environment. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC Jeremy Sterk Ecologist\Partner Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. Jeremy holds an active real estate license and his experience in the early stages of property due diligence studies greatly assists clients in making informed decisions. His extensive and varied experience allows him to successfully guide clients through the local,state,and federal permitting maze. This experience includes environmental land use planning, environmental resource permitting, vegetation and habitat mapping, protected species surveys, protected species management plans, environmental impact statements, property use studies, post permit compliance, and GIS\GPS mapping. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Jeremy is certified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as a Gopher Tortoise Agent. In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co-authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. Jeremy was a member of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee from 2009 to 2014 and is currently a member of the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC). Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAYIDSOr1NN c rac kcc Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Norman J.Trebilcock,AICP, P.E. President Mr. Trebilcock has a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Miami and a Master's Degree in Engineering, with an emphasis in Public Works from the University of Florida. He is also a graduate of the US Army Engineer Officer Basic Course. Mr. Trebilcock has practiced transportation planning and engineering in Southwest Florida since 1990. Mr. Trebilcock produces plans, designs, and permitting efforts on public works and private sector projects. His primary area of expertise is in transportation engineering, including highway design, utility relocation, drainage design, street lighting, signalization, access management and permitting. He prepares and reviews traffic impact statements and related reports. In addition to being a registered Professional Engineer and holding a certification from the American Institute of Certified Planners, Mr. Trebilcock holds an FDOT Advanced Work Zone Traffic Control Certification. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA is classified as a Small Business Enterprise with the South Florida Management District and the FDOT. Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan as of Ordinance No.2016-12 adopted May 10,2016 2. ESTATES DESIGNATION EXHIBIT C ***TEXT BREAK*** A. Estates— Mixed Use Distirct ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(X) 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict ***TEXT BREAK*** (VI)(VIII) e) Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria: (XIII)(XVI) 1. Temporary use (TU) permits for model homes, as defined in the Collier County Land Development Code, may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. Conditional use permits for the purpose of extending the time period for use of the structure as a model home shall be required, and shall be subject to the provisions of Section 5.04.04B. and C. of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. Such conditional uses shall not be subject to the locational criteria of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII) 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, are not subject to the locational criteria for Conditional Uses and may be allowed anywhere within the Estates-Mixed Use District. (XIII) 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates zoning district, is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97. (XV) 4. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship as allowed in the Estates Zoning District is allowed on the north 180 feet of Tract 107, Unit 30, Golden Gate Estates. Church-related day care use shall not be allowed. Development shall be limited to a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. 5. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District, is allowed on Tract 16 and the west half of Tract 15, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4 (See map titled ). ***TEXT BREAK*** Grace Romanian Church—SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict March 2018 28 Words added are underlined and words struck through have been deleted Z:1Active Projects 1G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG1PIanning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGM PA-EXHIBITD(LOCATION MAP).mxd N I --LW _�` E S VANDERBILT BEACH , .— n .... 1 l ....,s 1_ cGOLDEN GATEIBLVD ) » 1 n I ) ) IP J � r CO PINE RIDGE RD CG C) l I l 1lt 1 I i I 5 LEGEND 1 I I -SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES — MAJOR ROADWAYS I I( 0 0.5 1 — SOURCES'CO 'COUNTY'GEOGRAPHIIC'INFORMATION'SYr STEMS'(X017) 1 _ iMILES,. %°, e tREND `f' � 111 PAL EACH 111 41111 eR•IA �Ka I 11111 I 1 DADE --� `1.a-1SIA. DEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 PAvRsoly PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAP Z. ■ ! r 0 cu ■ [. v' o o:. ■ a r r.) G w < 11- ii /f N . • lil k w if :--. '''''■ X C.T. j Q ■ t ■ O a ■ • a M ■ 1 Ca r . t ■ ij • a w ■ ■ i3 C`J ■ " 1' n } ■ a t� ■ 6). M a U ' ■ , a ■ L. :� _ - ire■ �� y J J ..sd 1, _____��.�'C� �/. l9 a3 Ili A s U . Li U ;---, Ijjlllll • :,_..„..,,. * • z o, oi i 1:,, .1 " > _ —OATH IMI TIO3 +■ `:�■e< z o:°,o 1 WQL� 5 U j] C9 a � ~a0V ,. #r { _-0e� s, ,;(. _,...... .,„ F IL-0..• Qff4: u a a a 5 w',_�Ot ■ ■ 1 ■ II a 1{ f '�+ °i ■ 1 �� { ) 5• ■ a 9 a C ' tt ■ a $- •$r of i : t"� U O ■ L.T. • r En, i C� a Eni ; ■ ■ ■ o m O ■ ■ /1 O U • a fs • a o p ■ ` 1-, 0 11 io 1 1 a � 1 .j lE Wd 10:44:I. /PxwldeW Pent)SOS11SI011awed 1.96 NO PAI8 OOWOJng3 ueiuewe aoeJ0\2{BIl1OO\S103rOUd\Sleewn000 nu313G0 Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG\PlanninglGIS12017-04.24 GR SSGMPP.-EXHIBIT E(AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd N W�P� - E li S i } a `ate. F 'q -; • 1r _ . -4.31, -0 GOLDEN GA TE BLVD x ': t )' t - _ ,Arlit t 111 -. .-�.," . '�� ' _:-:".4, - .� :.w lF" SWI Y. a. .±` - - s d r J t - .+ .�. _, +"" •_ : `, Q �,_. ca s<y ...„` .* .fir , . az _ ' i::':,:;.:-.7„ _ 1,mat �`i„a _ ;" a€a S.. -- .r -$ .. §�� '-- ., :Z7....;!....:^ `� _ _i s a I _ u , ;`#, ; _1 s ", - -4 ). ` to LEGENDillia d ^., . � '' •+ - �'i<aa' i,as r : . x � :7 =ye 1 Q GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT �� -;;• "' 4 PROPERTY625ACRES ' i'. `*'`� �` � �� `�� ;; �iii; p y_ 600 r 1 200 SOURCES COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) i h- ati; DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, F1_131470604 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239 EXHIBIT F.1: AERIAL EXHIBIT ENGINEERING Note: 2017 Aerial obtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. r :It rr : as ],:;-' C K HN....'. " :;: IiJ cor , , fes S ',..i..,'- f . w w.1!:1' r X . ao< oQ g I - Q -'-libit-'"'"----:4-;--'*--.4 # :'-114-7- Ir-'4 '-4!„!:*-'-'4J . - I'S1-7---- '7-0!-7::E:--.;--P:-'-k.---gin''.71:r--:'-:i.--:.1:!T-.:-.-1';7':- .--:'4-1 N. O 3k 1 ^fig ':.. f1 J ,. .-./ 6.5. J S 111' z�- as - - -— _ 1, e=.j y s r G, gO s s 2 w;lif 1- ¢vQx ` 4 c _ ansa a3nio� _i 7 lrr - cd ',V% # ,.-'-''- .."-.:---!.,..-.!--..Orli !,A-- U o U C ee a� q _"- .i. F , - .,:!....:-::„----.44-4-.)**,,,,--- m g .11 111;:-.'.:;-'-%.--.':1--imay-¢ 9 X i - -` 4334""GG-4 ` ' $S - ,O. n (1�'� V d n 1.,. Z N d i Wtl OZ OL 6/Pxw.eW S00flld\SIJU��ed 146 210 PAle JO\y�Jny0 ueluewoa amIDa31l1OO1S103fO2ld\eleewf1O0O mu313F0 lilf.1 on IY -i 1 t.,- I CO co 3 mr oD : Ii ; o Jo '.* ..1 t A''''''''' + r t W y a c`,-.)cn a ,_ te a �' 4_ Cl) M U — . - ' � gdit .. o _ :411„,, 414 ._ , . ,,._ i ,,,. "a ,,, �':a� Jim z o « f1Vif z �.p blaL..0 o n CI II„,„0,9e- .' <`. ~ S R-p‹,,,5wrza , . 0a - ' ` ` `- ' rerz _. 5 gi I ;, , +, _ .r • vr *-y 4,. M QA]8219T1IOJ} , � .. i 3 `S s .;, .,f,:-....--7, 2 g - - , o a.. .`� 1 - U fJ. F Lam' _ O g z+ .EF.am.. # ._ O U cd O O o aQ. '" U Q– §K a` INV 9£1,1,LI./Pxw•eW WS SO2iN\SIO\la°ped I.S6 210 PAIS 00Wan1140 ueluewob aoeJO\21311100\S1O3rO21d\sluewnoop nu313\0 ,. EXHIBIT G GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL xm q �� Environmental Data Report Section I I / Township 49 S / Range 26 E - t Prepared For: ;.: '.4 '4" \ ii '; o-,en `./ O Collier County Growth Management Department _,„ Al Development Review Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ''£ 1. Prepared By: i &arth Tech Earth Tech Environmental, LLC k 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34110 4l4k` -- 't 110 239.304.0030 .� Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida,com �� April 25, 2017 Updated: ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Rezone Pre-App Notes& Environmental Checklists APPENDIX B: Staff Qualifications APPENDIX C: Protected Species Survey APPENDIX D: Davidson Engineering Site Plan INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00)for rezone and GMPA of the Subject Property for development as a church campus. This information is in response to the circled items in the Rezone Pre-Application Notes as provided by Davidson Engineering. See Appendix A, Rezone Pre-App Notes& Environmental Checklists, pgs. 17-22. PROPERTY LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located at the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The property is approximately 6.25 acres. See Figure 1, Location Map. n L . S "',- ,att'�a- "'X L A1E 9L lm _ -,4---„%ti � ,, '.1^, - E ,ams. JACKSONVILLE - � r SITE LOCATION __I f _.nr'y. \ __3 ... i • k MST VE DRIVE - _.__•� _ - - .. _. -. , _-: ♦ir•EARSWT R �.. sf.. VAND.___i SEALl9 RDRT... ^}�j I G � w,wr.,EriE9u BEACH 9:D - T PE ERSSURG'�, 7fNAVE my .I. TTNAVE N* It Ijj Y m� o � 6TNAVE/AV 12 fDNAVENN 6I 0 6i %1 4 .1 oH � ..2a OpRI WOODDP ytDAVENw 1`u1 JiDAVE Nw A i1 CI N' ♦L.. -.. A A E"ON 9$TAV ♦ ' TEM WOOD .._y;. -... i5 '_` I iii G040EwGRE BLWw 1 '_ I _ - xnAVEsm cAVEsw i CAPE CORAL$ -- ii NAVE sw SfnAVESW • �. LSPRINGS T[Hmssw 1 WNAVESW y 1� ( !t��i�i�1��A� s _ m y��+�:.{�I -OKE PINE LLYVJOOP 9Tj T wi,.._ WME YfV0 I I% ;yd �f�r��r#� _ • LEAH p ... flit REA:E9>8 Eu - �� ,4F - • -- 99YNAVE Sri - 19iNAVE99W„_ N99 AVE SW ..f '1 •! ' __ f39MAVE Sw u 13TNAVESW _ jy 1 ) 4tNAVE SW If i I & n P•'••• Figure I. Location Map Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST (Numbers match PUD checklist) 2. Who and what company prepared the Environmental Data Report? This Environmental Data Report was prepared by Earth Tech Environmental, LLC. Ecologists Jeremy Sterk and Jennifer Bobka. See Appendix B, Staff Qualifications. 3. Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Based on the FLUCCS system,there are no jurisdictional wetlands present on the property: FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland,but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a 'drained' designation. See Figure 2,Aerial with Wetlands Identified. ' 1 c 740 sM Gj a,M 4 o �M1 c 4 _ + i &. _ Q Su6)ed Property FLUCCS Mapping a s NO S ng+e Family Descents] ,k„ 1 Q ` 824-0.Paye•Cyprese•Cabba0R Palm terabesb 2017 AL4,,rG.Mkw Cfr.,Can, - 740 Disturbed teed Dmgn,., vase. Figure 2.Aerial with Wetlands Identified (No jurisdictional wetlands present). Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 vw,+w.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT 7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 8. Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. 11.Identify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site,according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCCS Codes identified. See Figure 3,Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Based on the FLUCCS system,the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre. This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50% and included Brazilian pepper, ear-leaf acacia, old-world climbing fern, Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. The community was likely a historic wetland,but no longer meets wetland criteria due to lack of wetland hydrology. Adjacent roads and the CR 951 canal have likely had a significant impact on the hydrology. Based on these factors, this community was given a 'drained' designation. FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities.On the subject property, this area consists of a small,unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity,as well as two smaller areas along the north-eastern property boundary. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 v✓ww.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT .4' 4. €, ,, he` co�DEN G TE euo s. r v DBP. 3 o,1 �, ri y.o- r w, „ , .A. orae ' , ,,,,, 1! :: ::4;4"-E..44:4.,:k.:kr•.k.k'll-L,4*,:1'',4'ei.;4.A . 4, , ' t t ., * '.., FLUCCS Mapping 0 C? 91D Single Family RSBaent. Nat 1, 4 624-D,Piro-Cypress.Ceti+ege Patm id•a'n!-a) Aeamay.n P-4;e Ca�;r '§ `s 744,pkSurbed laM Figure 3.Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay 14.Provide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property, along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment has not been conducted on the Subject Property. 24.The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's compliance with LDC and GMP requirements (LDC I 0.02.A.3 f). a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. See companion GMPA application. The project proposes developing the parcel into a church with associated structures. A portion of the existing habitat will be preserved onsite (0.77 acres). There are no wetlands present on the property. Water management facilities will be designed according to SFWMD and Collier County criteria. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See the information provided in this document. c. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and LDC. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan and FLUCCS map in Figure 3. The site totals 6.25 acres. Of that acreage, 6.15 is classified as native vegetation. There is an existing home site on the property that was allotted 1.0 acres of clearing as part of its building permit. 6.15 — 1.0 acres = 5.15 acres of native vegetation present on the property. 5.15 acres X 15%= 0.77 acres of native vegetation required to be set aside as a preserve. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure 4. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 ssw.v,eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design compensates for wetland impacts. There are no wetlands on the Subject Property and there will be no wetland impacts. e. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. See Appendix C, Protected Species Survey. No listed species were observed. 25.PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) document, prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. See this document. ENVIRONMENTAL PUDZ-PUDA CHECKLIST (non-RFMU) 2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser's office) and clearly delineate the subject boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G.I. Application Contents #24). FLUCFCS Overlay - P627. See Figure 3, Aerial with FLUCCS Overlay. Descriptions are found in #I I above. 3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as "Preserve" on all plans (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on- site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculation (LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H.I.d- e). Preserve Calculation - P547. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.I.b. Preserve width - P603. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors (LDC 3.05.07.A.I-4). Preserve Selection- P550. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. The preserve has been provided as a contiguous single area. There are no preserves to connect to offsite. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 vwww.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations,fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with the GM Ps, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination (LDC 3.08.00). Environmental Data Required - P 522. See this document. The site has not previously contained a golf course or farm field. 10.PUD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved (LDC 10.02.13.A.2). Master Plan Contents-P626. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 1 I.PUD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses, the following is suggested: A. Principal Use: Preserve; B. Accessory Uses: All other uses (list as applicable or refer to the LDC) not in CV Library. See Davidson Engineering conceptual site plan. 12.PUD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site (LDC I0.02.I3.A.2). Unique Features- P628. No listed species were observed on the property. There are no unique vegetative features. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 vnvw.eteflonda.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT GOLDEN GATE EIND:1N )I f iatlagl '; fi hi a s3 ; (1601111i N'f.k �I V i c 1 Et 1 Subject Property '1% 01,6 44B -_ IwygnsrAfrowFn Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX A REZONE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLISTS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com T Wy COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 vr.coliiergov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: Rezone (RZ) Date and Time: 1 0/5/2016 Assigned Planner: Daniel James Smith Engineering Manager(for PPL's and FP's): Project Information Project Name: Rezone/GMPA for a church PL#: PL20160002577 PrcLperty 113 #: 36760800006;36760720005 Current Zoning: Estates Project Address: 3899 1st Ave SW, Naples, FL City: State: Zip: applicant: Waste Management Inc. of Florida Agent Name: Tocia Hamlin - Davidson Engineering Phone: 239434-6060 Agent/Firm Address: City: State: Zip: Property Owner: Please provide the following, if zpplicabia: i. Total Acreage: ii. Proposed#of Residential Units: iii. Proposed Commercial Square Footage: - iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number: v. If there is an Ordinance or Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the type and number: vi. If the project is within a Plat, provide the name and AR#/PL#: Co- .r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2300 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 WWW.COOliergov.net (239)252-2400 Meeting Notes ___ . _. . _�. ,,, tl ., ' , . , , .- ..„.:1;.,..1: a.-56,:4(JO p f 1 f 111 ry �, t . �! ,„"),,,,,1 �'' 1� 0 9 .79......i . 4 ms i �- -, ., a , • . 5 s.„---e,„: i // 1 ,d-�y ��• cif ° /t dmoi`E> ts.,--. 1._ � r L" . a_, I i. `; f �'r � ,' j 1 is �! i ._. 1- �-1 A ; '} !1 L-Pyi „:;-----<v .p„ _ .,71,...---4,c ' ‘r-fri_.^ 'IL S 17 s, , :3 j) . 7 t *�,,frL i qy 17vC is rt)1et.-I. t ( ,--N,'\' — 1Y-1+141,5 Cw/o,141,5 ' t R Z.)its* ht= ` yo x-3542 Col c rYe.n; it, a 4,,,t,! L r h .41,1 T kikt, Ack,,-;,,,,a, - 11:,..0-41,,,,- 44---44--- h e-w t't,t,4lJtr.ria, 6...,�s`al 1, .r i�,-t► Y€. 1,5t d::'le�-1,'d<d?'�.,� .f (!i-vr:,f-)vn,� Gi-.#t ,'" G ,,.+#.{z NeeitcA,_ -,.51aer. 'J - ;> 4.,/ill tom.•- -r-I t, p- 5/( ex/0xo/vhfFf te , tiff /'' ' ' ,, ,, P ild cf I,l6 1 'S 1 r�cat/ JJ/1-stt cr ,_ - tr/r r i."-)i') r_ L/ •-i I .'.,,j E+'' .t?, r-1 4,6 /1 &Gt/es-/6!)C., 6/1-iri — _.;,,..),--_1:-.2.e.,/- /les. r // kaf,-c_t:-.fyie., a t /r i 0 I t-ti-ki, ft,,.4 eS/7 ./g . \ i 1 'r li'A Lrr// Ji, ,/ ih/i c [-)t 0<5 tir;P S s ailde, ` ,,,,y, tf- $ t°�J/l I fi�I/ ‘< 1stalf w f '-� .° - f 'ir,C k , ,,...,1-,.' .i c`,,6t ; .� t-4-- _ , , e,), U7 LAI Pik' � .-- ' -7 I '7,. Lk,..) - t tri ,L " ('`I i (I 0,. Co' er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34W4 WWW ergall.flet (239)252-2400 Meeting Notes ii tom g —19 .•.L.7:n I itt)IA _ 4,Aijr:- ‘att 110•01)1 IRPIS - - - - 117 1,1_,I7 , Me _,tittor AI .1 • 'Ng 1". er 4 ^'1 e- (4- -.I:, r-ireisso4-% •IA.) rioiN Oa"1 1-‘1.4:105 2.0/0u%' F4 (-1,5vN...0,0 t•-•1 t-P__LAY) _ t-t ttta4 ef4-3 e7"4-4 E-e2r or A . • Ct Pri 6f- . CAM r LL- Ci K.-64.Y) .e.E 17 112, CC-1--147 5LI c9 1"..1 CO T • my COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: ❑ PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code ❑ Amendment to PUD-Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone-Ch.3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTScoP ES REQUIRED REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of ❑ ❑ why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments _ ❑ Pre-application meeting notes ❑ ji El Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 II ❑ -- Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 II _ Completed Addressing Checklist 2 ■I [] Warranty Deed(s) 3 !i ❑ List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2 UI ❑ Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4 II ❑ Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4 V ❑ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser)with project boundary and,if vegetated,FLUCFCS Codes with legend included 5 ❑ on aerial _ Statement of Utility Provisions 4 / ❑ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4 ❑ Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) packet at time of public hearings.Coordinate with ❑3 ❑ project planner at time of public hearings. Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include 1 4V( ❑ copies of previous surveys. pihie kW/09W .r ( 1 : Traffic Impact Study 7 41 ❑ Historical Survey 4 School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 20 Electronic copy of all required documents 2 L El Completed Exhibits A-F(see below for additional information)+ ❑ * ❑ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each(this ❑ ii ❑ document is separate from Exhibit E) _ Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24"x 36"and One 81/2" x 11"copy .--r-1 a ❑ Original PUD uc. _ntlar1inance,and I11.-,7".r Pl n 24"x 36"—Only if Amending the PUD Checklist continued onto next page... 4/15/2015 Page 11 of 16 Cao er Count► COLDER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru&underlined El ❑ ❑ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 ❑ 0 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing,include an additional set of each submittal requirement +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: ❑ Exhibit C:Master Plan-See Chapter 3 E.1.of the Administrative Code O Exhibit D:Legal Description O Exhibit E:List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each O Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use)Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-690-3500 for information regarding"Wildfire Mitigation&Prevention Plan." PLANNERS–INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: ❑ School District(Residential Components):Amy Lockheart ❑ Conservancy of SWFL:Nichole Ryan ❑ Utilities Engineering:Kris VanLengen ❑ Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad ❑ Emergency Management:Dan Summers ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: i EICity of Naples:Robin Singer, Planning Director ❑ Other: ___ FEE REQUIREMENTS + Pre-Application Meeting:$500.00 PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre ❑ PUD to PUD Rezone:$8,000.00* plus$25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre 1P .)D Amendment:$6,000.00* plus$25.00 an a ction of an acre �!!' ;;mprehensive Planning . . , _ r _ vironmental Data Require ' ` " •ac e sit; '-al determined at pre-application meeting):$2,500.00 O Listed or Protected Species Review(when an EIS is not required):$1,000.00 g Transportation Review Fees: X Methodology Review: $500.00, to be paid directly to Tra sportation at the Methodology Meeting* ' 1,4644;;;; ME$W6C f'1 Ribilgiaa ., *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review:$750.00 x o Major Study Review$1,500.00 Legal Advertising Fees: t Iz.Z . o CCPC: 525.,8®- o BCC:$500.00 L School Concurrency Fee, if applicable: .—. 4/15/2015 Page 12 of 16 Collier County COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT ME NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROVITHft-4ANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT KAPL FLORIDA 341E4 omiet (rts)2S2-2. 14 FAX:(23 )2u-e35s o Mitigation Fees,if application,to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20%of the original fee. All checks may be made payable to:Board of County Commissioners 4/15/2015 Page 13 of 16 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.met (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 EXHIBIT A (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: ^ — 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to: CONDITIONAL USES(Optional) 1. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the (type of PUD) PUD Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. ^—� 4/15/2015 pag�14n,�s r EXHIBITfi (To be completed in a separate document and attached to the application packet.) TABLE I RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE TWO-FAMILY, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE FAMILY PATIO& MULTI- RECREATION FAMILY ATTACHED& FAMILY ZERO LOT UNE BUILDINGS TOWNHOUSE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA S.F.PER 1S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F.PER UNIT S.F. PER UNIT UNIT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA S.F S.F S.F S.F./D.U. N/A MIN FRONT YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET N/A MIN SIDE YARD FEET FEET FEET FEET , N/A MIN REAR YARD FEET FEET , FEET FEET N/A MIN PRESERVE SETBACK FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET I MIN.DISSTRUCTTANCE BETWEEN FEET FEET FEET FEET or BH, N/A RES _ I whichever is greater _ MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO FEET FEET FEET 1 FEET FEET EXCEED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FRONT FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET SIDE FEET FEET FEET FEET BH REAR j FEET FEET FEET FEET FEET ' I PRESERVE SETBACK I I FEET FEET I FEET FEET FEET DISTANCE BETWEEN PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE MAX.BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO _ ___________ EXCEED SPS SPS SPS or FEET FEET S.P.S.=Same as Principal Structures BH=Building Height Footnotes as needed I GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. Setback may be either feet ( ) on one side or feet ( ) on the other side in order to provide a minimum separation between principal structures of feet ( ). Alternatively, if the foot ( } setback option is not utilized, then the minimum setback shall not be less than feet ( ) and the combined setback between principal structures shall be at least feet ( ). At the time of the application for subdivision plat approval for each tract, a lot layout depicting minimum yard setbacks and the building footprint shall be submitted. TABLE II DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PRINCIPAL USES - ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM LOT AREA Sq.Ft. N/A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH Ft. — N/A MINIMUM YARDS(External) From Immokalee Road Canal ROW Ft. SPS From Future Extension of Collier Blvd. Ft. SPS From Western Project Boundary Ft. Ft. MINIMUM YARDS(Internal) Internal Drives/ROW Ft. Ft. Rear Ft. Ft. Side Ft. Ft. MIN.DISTANCE BETWEEN Ft.or sum of Ft. STRUCTURES Building heights* MAXIMUM HEIGHT Retail Buildings Ft. Ft. Office Buildings Ft. Ft. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA Sq. Ft.** N/A MAX.GROSS LEASABLE AREA Sq.Ft. N/A * Whichever is greater ** Per principal structure,on the finished first floor. 4/15/2015 CAT County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE(Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) ❑ BL(Blasting Permit) D SDP(Site Development Plan) ❑ BD(Boat Dock Extension) 0 SDPA(SDP Amendment) O Carnival/Circus Permit 0 SDPI(Insubstantial Change to SDP) O CU(Conditional Use) ❑ SIP(Site Improvement Plan) ❑ EXP(Excavation Permit) ❑ SIPI(Insubstantial Change to SIP) ❑ FP(Final Plat 0 SNR(Street Name Change) ❑ LLA(Lot Line Adjustment) ❑ SNC(Street Name Change—Unplatted) O PNC(Project Name Change) ❑ TDR(Transfer of Development Rights) O PPL(Plans&Plat Review) D VA(Variance) ❑ PSP(Preliminary Subdivision Plat) ❑ VRP(Vegetation Removal Permit) ❑ PUD Rezone ❑ VRSFP(Vegetation Removal& Site Fill Permit) ❑ RZ(Standard Rezone) [] OTHER GMPA I REZONE LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties(copy of lengthy description may be attached) Golden Gate Estates Unit 4 Tr 16 SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 49, RANGE 26- SEE ATTACHED r^nd 1 /2 of T. 15 FOLIO(Property ID)NUMBER(s)of above(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 36760720005 & 36760800006 STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES(as applicable, if already assigned) 38991ST AVE SW * LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way * SURVEY(copy -needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME(if applicable) PROPOSED PROJECT NAME(if applicable) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PROPOSED STREET NAMES(if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER(for existing projects/sites only) SDP - or AR or PL# Collier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-5724 Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in,condominium documents(if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Please Return Approved Checklist By: 0 Email 0 Fax ❑ Personally picked up Applicant Name: TOCIA HAMLIN - DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. Phone: 434-6060 EXT 2985 Email/Fax: TOCIA@DAVIDSONENGINEERING.COM Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number 36760800006 Folio Number 36760720005 Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: �� ;� /�'l�a Date: 9/28/16 Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED SmithDaniel From: FeyEric Sent: Monday, October 03,2016 2:40 PM To: Tocia Hamlin Cc: SmithDaniel; LibbyPamela Subject: RE: PL20160002577(REZONE) Tocia, I will not be attending the pre-application meeting on Wednesday and just wanted to let you know about utility serv-ice availability for this project. Below is a GIS screen shot: I : r ., fir'lit:i +mac ' fir,.�► - .s ' ill'ep . ' - __ + >., L a b "44 ' £ - 4. ;: is • iftPr ,,,,,,,,.„,,, , , , ..„......., .: ..,..„f _ , .„, , „ , .,, , .. ... ‘,.... .. ..„,. , ...... , .., ,..... ,... , , . ,.....,„, , .. , _. . „,,, 1 , , _ , , t ` .` 3899 z 1 at / ilk i tj.S T d ' Yxg s � - > 1st-AVE SW _ 2 s 1 z:ci. _ , ,,,,,,i .--- - - ----- :---- , - ----- - , , --, . . :!-M ,, '"--'''-'- -- ;:r:, -, -, sem` eg sjimi...,,,i,,,-4,...,,,,,:„.„--.- -; . „ .,.-. , ...-s.., _ ,,_, - - —� _ --_. ,... �e...�.. ST®h`I® �aga�y�y dam -191V=' F. Ana se .4.. ,--,..- ,,,,, -„,:,,,,,,,-„:.,-,,--z*,..,,....'-4.-.„- ---' „. - -----,, -„F. _ 4,-,-Ni„, . -. __I- co , t..,,, ,...-,-*!.1,!,-..,---:-.„ ,,-_-„, :-...1,-- -,_-_ ,-A,N--,---,,,:,, ,-- „,._ _ --,,,- -,--;„.....-„...--,-, ----,,,,v,„„,,k . . ....- ..„..,,,,..,.,,.. -,..; ..,...„,-___..-_,,_ . ...-„,-,,-._..:_. ,-„, I _ - . ,. . <Y .. lip- ,.-:-' ...4k,'-, ,,-4.,:,,iiit lir:_ '''. ' , ' 7.' .''' ' ;4; ,,sit&,„: .__,I.,-.41104,:j"1,,,-'*.- :,,,li -.7.---,iro.4 .. • = -._z-,,,4„.. _ -,-- - - ---A, : -- -:-- -.-- ---ttrjeli„,f.* ,-- _ *- =- .--- ' -fo--;, il ..) , 1.4 , .,4, .." :' r .-,,,,-_,-,.,-.,, ,,..fpr.-14...„ -------4:.,.... '. --' ---IA--- . f'-'-,:%';"--''-' ' -,,pt,„,.:- ^�If- i 3 Oh'7>3 �8111�� ._+. The purple shading signifies geographic areas excluded from the Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance (2001-13). Per than^ ordinance,this project is not required to connect to the Regional Water System but would be subject to the imposition of impact fees if connection is requested. Water service may be extended from the existing County 10" HDPE water main on the north side and within the median of Golden Gate Blvd,east of Weber Blvd but wastewater service is not available. I am copying Pam Libby for confirmation that we would not allow a new connection to our existinig 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd. Thank you, -� ' !' '�srtlT�► Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities Department Planning and Project Management Division Direct: (239)252-1037 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. ----Original Appointment From: PaulRenald On Behalf Of CDS-C Sent:Tuesday,September 27, 2016 2:05 PM To:AhmadVicky;AlcornChris;Amy Lockhart-Taylor(lockhac collierschools.com);Anderson Richard;AnthonyDavid; ArnoldMichelle;AshtonHeidi;AuclairClaudine; BaluchStephen; Beardlaurie; BeasleyRachel; BrethauerPaula; BrownAraqueSummer; BrownCraig; BurtchinMark;CascioGeorge;CondominaDanny; CrowleyMichaelle; David Ogilvie; dfev@northcollierfire.com; DumaisMike; FaulknerSue;FeyEric; FleishmanPaula; GewirtzStorm; GosselinLiz; GundlachNancy; HouldsworthJohn; HughesJodi; HumphriesAlicia;JacobLisa; inageond@sfwmd.gav;JohnsonEric; KendallMarcia; KurtzGerald; LenbergerSteve; LevyMichael; Imartin@sfwmd.gov; LouviereGarrett; MartinezOscar; MastrobertoThomas; McCaughtryMary; McKennalack;McKuenElly; McLeanMatthew; MoscaMichele; MoxamAnnis; NawrockiStefanie;OrthRichard; PajerCraig; PancakeBill; PattersonAmy; PepinEmily;piimenez@sfwmd.gov; PochmaraNatalie;ReischlFred; RosenblumBrett;SantabarbaraGino; SawyerMichael;ScottChris;Shar Hingson; ShawinskyPeter;Shawn Hanson;SheaBarbara;SmithDaniel;.StoneScott;StrainMark;SuleckiAlexandra;SummersEllen; SweetChad;Templeton Mark;VanLengenKris;Walshionathan;WeeksDavid;Wickham Flannery;WilloughbyChristine; tocia@davidsonengineering_com Subject: PL20160002577(REZONE) When:Wednesday, October 05,2016 1:30 PM-2:30 PM (UTC-05:00)Eastern Time(US&Canada). Where:CONF ROOM "C" Planner-Dan Smith Fire District-Golden Gate Fire <<OLE Object: Picture(Device Independent Bitmap)>> <<OLE Object: Picture(Device Indeperiv It ?ittnap) » Project Type: Pre-Application Meeting 3 Project Description: Fieaone/GMpA for a church Existing Application Name: Meeting Type: Pre-Application Meeting Preferred Date: next available Unavailable Dates: Location:38991st Ave SW, Naples, FL, Parcel Number: 36760800006;36760720005 Full Name:Tocia Hamlin Email:tocia@davidsonengineerine.com Company Name:4365 RADIO RD STE 201 Naples, FL 34104 Representing: Davidson Engineering Contact Number:Work:233-434-6060 Thanks Under Florida Law,e-ma addresses are public recordsif you do not want your s-rna!l address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact ttiis office y te`-_phone or in writing. Environmental Datahecklist Project Name C/1 t',4// J ( G• Kai 4 1/,Gt 'I 'i The Environmental Data requirements can be found in LDC Section 3.08.00 COProvide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. 0( , WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT? Preparation of �/ Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. Please include revision dates on resubmittals. 0l 3. J Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the `.J Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval. For sites in the RFMU district,provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores verified by the SFWMD or DEP prior to first development order approval. Where functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff,consistent with State regulation. 4. SDP or final plat construction plans with impacts to five (5) or more acres of wetlands shall provide an analysis of potential water quality impacts of the project by evaluating water quality loadings expected from the project n (post development conditions considering the proposed land uses and stormwater management controls) compared with water quality'loadings of the project area as it exists in its pre-development conditions. The analysis shall be performed using methodologies approved by Federal and State water quality agencies,and must demonstrate no increase in nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous)loadings in the post development scenario. 5. Where treated stormwater is allowed to be directed into preserves, show how the criteria in 3.05.07 H have been met. 6. Where native vegetation is retained on site,provide a topographic map to a half foot and,where possible, provide elevations within each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified on site.For SDP or final plat construction plans, include this information on the site plans. r7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site.The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the guidelines or recommendations of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(FI-WCC) and the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS. Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low,the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee, when the project is not reviewed or technical assistance not provided by the FFWCC and USFWS. Additional survey time may be required if listed species are discovered ()rovide a survey for listed plants identified in 3.04.03 9. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed spc es ire utilizing the site cr where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLUCFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 10. For sites or portions of sites cleared of native vegetation or in agricultural operation;provide documentation that the parcel(s)were issued a permit to be cleared and are in compliance with the 25 year rezone limitation pursuant to section 10.02.06.For sites permitted to be cleared prior to July 2003,provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 10 year rezone limitation previously identified in the GMP.Criteria defining native vegetation and determining the legality,process and criteria for clearing are found in 3.05.05,3.05.07 and 10.02.06. 11. dentify on a current aerial the acreage, location and community types of all upland and wetland habitats on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS), and provide a legend for each of the FLUCFCS Codes identified. Aerials and overlay information must be legible at the scale provided. Provide calculations for the acreage of native vegetation required to be retained on-site. Include the above referenced calculations and aerials on the SDP or final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. 12. Include on a separate site plan, the project boundary and the land use designations and overlays for the RLSA, RFMU, ST and ACSC-ST districts. Include this information on the SDP or final plat construction plans. 13. Where off-site preservation of native vegetation is proposed in lieu of on-site, demonstrate that the criteria in section 3.05.07 have been met and provide a note on the SDP or final plat construction plans indicating the type of donation(monetary payment or land donation)identified to satisfy the requirement. Include on the SDP or final plat construction plans, a location map(s)and property identification number(s)of the off-site parcel(s) if off-site donation of land is to occur. 14. provide the results of any Environmental Assessments and/or Audits of the property,along with a narrative of the measures needed to remediate if required by FDEP. J/LJ ,9frt wet," ip/m kale i 15. Soil and/or ground water sampling shall be required at the time or first development order submittal for sites that occupy farm fields(crop fields, cattle dipping ponds,chemical mixing areas),golf courses,landfill or junkyards or for sites where hazardous products exceeding 250 gallons of liquid or 1,000 pounds of solids were stored or processed or where hazardous wastes in excess of 220 pounds per month or 110 gallons at any point in time were generated or stored. The amount of sampling and testing shall be determined by a registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment and shall at a minimum test for organochlorine pesticides(U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)8081)and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 8 metals using Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)soil sampling Standard Operating Procedure(SOP)FS 3000, in areas suspected of being used for mixing and at discharge point of water management system. Sampling should occur randomly if no points of contamination are obvious.Include a background soil analysis from an undeveloped location hydraulically upgradient of the potentially contaminated site. Soil sampling should occur just below the root zone, about 6 to 12 inches below ground surface or as otherwise agreed upon with the registered professional with experience in the field of Environmental Site Assessment.Include in or with the Environmental Site Assessment,the acceptable State and Federal pollutant levels for the types of contamination found on site and indicate in the Assessment,when the contaminants are over these levels. If this analysis has been done as part of an Environmental Audit then the report shall be submitted.The County shall coordinate with the FDEP where contamination exceeding applicable FDEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. i 6. Shoreline developruent must provide an analysis demonstrating that the project will remain rutty functional for its intended use after a six-inch rise in sea level. 17. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. 18. Where applicable, provide evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County. Include all state permits that comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 13,2005. 19, Identify any Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones(WRM-ST)within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat construction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUs. provide a separate site plan or zoning map with the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified, 7 v 20. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management regulations of 3.07.00. 21. For sites located in the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern-Special Treatment overlay district(ACSC- ST), show how the project is consistent with the development standards and regulations in 4.02.14. 22. For multi-slip docking facilities with ten slips or more,and for all marina facilities, show how the project is consistent with 5.05.02.Refer to the Manatee Protection Plan for site specific requirements of the Manatee Protection Plan not included in 5.05.02. 23. For development orders within RFMU sending lands, show how the project is consistent with each of the applicable Objectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. 24. he County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project's .r. (LDC 10.02.02.A.3 compliance with LDC and GMP requirements. f) The following to be determined at preapplication meeting: (Choose those that apply) iEs.,),1).... E Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. xplain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the , GMP. i CAf/ 6�e4 '5 6 Pi" 7. ( c. /Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in the CCME and �1 LDC. t,, d. Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project's design compensates for wetland impacts. ° e. Indicate hothe project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigationw for impacts to listed species. iliP PUD zoning and CU petitions. For PUD rezones and CU petitions, applicants shall collate and package applicable Environmental Data Submittal Requirements into a single Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) document,prior to public hearings and after all applicable staff reviews are complete. Copies of the EIS shall be provided to the County Manager or designee prior to public hearings. 26. Is EAC Review(by CCPC)required? pperAfGf frO i", 27. Additional Comments 28. Stipulations for approval(Conditions) Environmental P(JDZ-Pl7)A Chechlisf(non-RFMLT) Project Name Clfl'i-c f ,4,' 6, 6}-f/ / AV C'clrl��/€ Pi') 1. Is the project is in compliance with the overlays,districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties?(CON, ST,PUD,RLSA,RFMU,etc.)(LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00)Not in CV Library 2.ubmit a current aerial photograph(available from the Property Appraiser's office)and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines.If the site is vegetated,provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland,wetland and exotic vegetation(Admin.Code Ch. 3 G.1.Application Contents#24). OC. FLUCFCS Overlay-P627 learly identify the location of all preserves and label each as"Preserve"on all plans.(LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label-P546 4. 'rovide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained,the max. amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site.Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations(LDC 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F;3.05.07.H.l.d-e). Preserve Calculation-P547 5.0reated and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.11.1.b.Preserve idth-P603 i6. etained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3,include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors.(LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4) Preserve Selection-P550 — 1, 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25' from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations,fill placement,grading,plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10' of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve(i.e. stem wall or berm around wetland preserve).Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25'. (LDC 3.05.07.11.3; 6.01.02.0.) Preserve Setback–New 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where an EIS is not required,when so warranted.(LDC 10.02.02.A.2.f) Listed Species-P522 ().)Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials.consistencydetermination with the GMPs, off--site . preserves.seasonal and historic high water levels,and analysis of water quality.For land previously used for farm fields or golf course.provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required–P 522 \10. LTD Document and Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved.(LDC 10.02.13.A.2) \,..... Maser Plan Contents-P626 11. UD shall include Preserve Tract section. When listing preserve uses,the following is suggested: A.Principal Use:Preserve;B.Accessory Uses:All other uses(list as applicable or refer to the LDC) l?. UD Document shall identify any listed species found on site and/or describe any unique vegetative features that will be preserved on the site. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2.) Unique Features-P628 Example: A management plan for the entire project shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements and procedures of the LDC for listed species including but not limited to Black Bear,Gopher Tortoise and listed birds. The management plan shall be submitted prior to development of the first phase of the project. 13. Provide information for GIS? Additional Comments: Co r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Sign-In Sheet PL#:PL20160002577 Collier County Contact Information: 1 Name Review Discipline 1 Phone Email L❑ Richard Anderson Environmental Specialist 252-2483 richardanderson@colliergov.net ❑ David Anthony Environmental Review 252-2497 davidanthony@colliergov.net ❑ Summer Araque Environmental Review 252-6290 summerbrownaraque@colliergov.net ❑ Steve Baluch,P.E. Transportation Planning 252-2361 StephenBaluch@coliiergov.net Yf Laurie Beard Transportation Pathways i 252-5782 Lauriebeard@colliergov.net Kl Rachel Beasley Planner 1111( 252-8202 rachelbeasley@colliergov.net Ll Marcus Berman County Surveyor 252-6885 MarcusBerman@colliergov.net • Madelin Bunster Architectural Review 252-8523 madelinbunster@colliergov.net F.' Mark Burtchin ROW Permitting 1_252-5165 markburtchin@colliergov.net r George Cascio Utility Billing 252-5543_ georgecascio@colliergov.net I I Heidi Ashton Cicko Managing Asst.County Attorney 252-8773 heidiashton@colliergov.net Sue Faulkner Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 suefaulkner@colliergov.net i 1 Eric Fey,P,E. Site Plans Reviewer 252-2434 ericfey@coiliergov.net Paula Fleishman Impact Fee Administration 252-2924 paulafleishman@colliergov.net 1 Nancy Gundlach,AICP,PLA Zoning Services _ 252-2484 nancygundlach@colliergov.net l Shar Hingson East Naples Fire District 687-5650 shingson@ccfco.org ri John Houldsworth Engineering Services 252-5757 johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net ❑ Jodi Hughes Transportation Pathways 252-5744 jodihughes@colliergov.net _ C7 Alicia Humphries Site Plans Reviewer/ROW 252-2326 aliciahumphries@colliergov.net ❑ Eric Johnson,AICP,CFM Zoning Services 252-2931 , ericjohnson@colliergov.net ❑ arcia Kendall Comprehensive Planning 252 2387 marciakendall@colliergov.net Environmental Review 252 2915 stevelenberger@colliergov.net • Stephen Lenberger � C Paulo Martins Utilities 252-4285 paulomartins@colliergov.net ❑ Thomas Mastroberto Fire Safety252-7348 Thomasmastroberto@colliergov.net ❑ Jack McKenna,P,E, Engineering Services 252-2911 jackmckenna@colliergov.net ❑ Matt McLean,P.E. Principal Project Manager 252-8279 matthewmclean@colliergov.net _❑ Gilbert Moncivaiz Utility Impact Fees 252-4215 gilbertmoncivaiz@colliergov.net ❑ Annis Moxam Addressing 252-5519 annismoxam@colliergov.net _ ❑ Stefanie Nawrocki Planning and Zoning 252-2313 StefanieNawrocki@colliergov.net Graphics 252-2315 1 mariamocheltree@rolliergov_net ❑ Mariam Ocheltree — f_l Brandy Otero Transit _ 252-5859 1 brandyotero@colliergov.net I Co •r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliereov.net (239)252-2400 �_❑ Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees 252-6237 brandipollard@colliergov,net 1 xr Fred Reischl,AICP !�� Zoning Services 252-4211 fredreischl@colliergov net ❑ Stacy Revay Transportation Pathways 252-5677 stacyrevay@colliergov.net�{ ❑ Brett Rosenblum,P.E. Utility Plan Review f 252-2905 brettrosenblum@cofiergov.net 1- - - i ❑ Michael Sawyer Zoning Services 252-2926 michaelsawyer@colliergov.net ❑ Corby Schmidt,AICP + Comprehensive Planning 252-2944 corbyschmidt@colliergov.net _ ❑ Chris Scott,AICP �_ Planning and Zoning 252-2460 chrisscott@colliergov.net KI Daniel Smith,AICP Landscape Review 252-4312 danielsmith@colliergov.net ❑ Ellen Summers Planning and Zoning 252-1032 I EllenSummers@colliergov.net —1 Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-8400 scottstone@colliergov.net ❑ Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 252-4446 markstrain@colliergov.net _ ❑ Kris VanLengen Utility Planning 252-5366 krisvanlengen@colliergov.net ❑ Jon WalshBuilding Review- 252-2962 jonathanwalsh@coltiergov.net r' David Weeks,AICP Future Land Use Consistency f 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net ❑ Kirsten Wilkie _ Environmental Review 252-5518 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net ❑ Christine Willoughby Planning and Zoning 252-5748 ChristineWilloughby@colliergov.net Additional Attendee Contact Information: -frCd 6 daV!'d SOn,o► lnTe ra Name Representing Phone Email �l vr+,+c. L. i--t.I.- _ _______I'L- 1 •''-•. - : .-; t- ,.' i J (4 -°._ , cf, ,, s,.'.,, \/ y l V)I •:_ t" P T."•t 1ntC, ,',.i �li•4 C41-t' j`JIQ�'4AIikJCJF�v��a,all r� Yi.'r - (,. _ I t C3/ICtib A J{ /� Il�,1,,(jt, ft.1', s =l "'Yi;r " t r.4-rrr j r.,,.: ,,, t _f. ..r� � 4 . � ' . i . t ..._i � ; .,�i- i{�. � . .i •--_ -r+ "gi4J *Mil G I� rtV C{(u)i 698-257-7 AtRiRwF.rii•+4+P0 •0?-4 i'!/ AYde GgitE 4vni gifit,mow 2s -62,46-13' r-tx:).7 i ELT__ _ T f ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX B STAFF QUALIFICATIONS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflonda.com JEREMY STERK, CEP. Relevant Experience Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on uio C Ec lev Gs projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. His varied experience spans marine, upland, and estuarine habitats and includes extensive work with a wide variety of listed species. j.sterk@eteflorida.com 9 In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy co- 239.595.4929 authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers(RCW)and Florida panther on the same property. Years Experience In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water 22 years Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Education/Training Early in his career,Jeremy was the principal investigator of a field research project in the Bahamas B.S.Aquatic Biology(1994), that utilized telemetry tracking to study the swimming speed of sub-adult lemon sharks. St.Cloud State University Jeremy's environmental consulting experience includes: Protected Species Surveys Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) Professional Affiliations Listed Species Management Plans Turbidity Monitoring Academy of Board Certified Vegetation&Habitat Mapping Wetland&Water Level Monitoring Environmental Professionals USFWS Section 7 &Section 10 Permitting Environmental Impact Statements(EIS) #16992037 Water Use Monitoring&Compliance Project Management Preserve Management Plans GIS/GPS Mapping&Exhibits Florida Association of Post Permit Compliance Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Professionals Environmental Land Use Planning Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Native Vegetation Restoration Plans Lake Management Plans Incidental Take Permitting Due Diligence Reports Site and Aerial Photography Wetland Jurisdictional Determinations USFWS Bald Eagle Monitor Bonneted Bat Surveys Gopher Tortoise Surveys,Permitting,& Mangrove Assessments&Restorations Relocations Scrub Jay Surveys Hard Bottom& Bottom Benthic Surveys Burrowing Owl Surveys Artificial Reef Deployments Shorebird Surveys Seagrass Surveys Certifications/Credentials Certified Environmental Professional#1692037,Academy of Board Certified Environmental Professionals Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent— Permit No.GTA-09-00192 Florida Association of Environmental Professionals—member since January 1995;served on the Board of Directors for the Southwest Florida Chapter from(2008—2012). Past Secretary, Vice President,&President. State of Florida Real Estate License(2003 to Present) Appointed by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners to: • Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee,Chairman of the Lands Evaluation and Management Subcommittee.(2009 to 2014). • Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee(DSAC)(2015 to Present). • FWC Local Rule Review Committee(Manatee Protection Speed Zones)(2016 to Present). �3tth Teeg Publications Sundstrom, L.F.,J.Sterk,&S.H.Gruber.1998.Effects of a speed-sensing transmitter on the swimming speed of lemon sharks.Bahamas J.Sci.6(1):12-22. Environmental,LLC 239.304.0030 I www.eteflorida.com %wily.mcam JENNIFER BOBKA Relevant Experience Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental LLC in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 5 EcolrOst years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. Her experience includes projects throughout Collier,Lee and Gallatin counties.Her varied experience spans coastal marine,shoreline and estuarine habitats,to upland forests and alpine environments. She has worked with a wide variety of native and invasive plant and wildlife species. She is also an experienced Naturalist and Environmental Educator. As an Ecologist,Jennifer fulfills duties in environmental consulting, wetland & wildlife jenniferb@eteflorida.com monitoring,species surveys,invasive species removal,report writing,GIS mapping,and 239.304.0030 ERP permitting. Years' Experience Jennifer's work experience in many fields of ecology includes: 5 years Wetland Delineation Education/Training Protected Species Surveys Naturalist II & Environmental Listed Species Research&Monitoring Educator Turbidity Monitoring (2012-2016) Vegetation& Habitat Mapping Manatee Research Intern Bald Eagle Monitoring Florida Conservation Gopher Tortoise Surveys and Relocation Commission GIS Mapping (2013) Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) AmeriCorps Field Crew Leader Invasive&Exotic Species Removal Montana Conservation Corps Natural Resource Management (2010) Trail Maintenance .-. Mechanical& Manual Forest Fuel Reduction B.A. Environmental Studies Ecological Restoration Montana State University Environmental Education (2009) Marine Biology&Coastal Relevant Certifications/Credentials Ecology Study Abroad Costa Rica Certified Interpretive Guide (2007) Python Responder/Patrol Training Professional Affiliations USFS Sawyer Florida Association of Environmental Professionals League of Environmental Educators of Florida Florida Master Naturalist Program earth Tech 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.comEnvironi f, LLC www.etenvi,on.eom ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX C PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY • Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com • P PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL 444 �, NAPLES, FLORIDA `• APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES *1-1-1, _ Prepared For: Y4 Collier County Engineering& eev C�etriLy �,� e� I Natural Resources Department ' '</{ 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 R�z 3y� t' N -4-, ",1-7.1.1,,..,1 ,. ,may. f ,y�„� ,. � , South Florida Water Management District Lower West Coast Service Center ,d ' 2301 McGregor Boulevard Fort Myers, FL 33901 tet. ` ` Prepared By: ' 1 411' '� earth ToAilli �� Earth Tech Environmental, LLC • �`~' 1455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 Naples, FL 34 10 � 239.304.0030 ` x' Environmental,LLC www•eteflorlda.com y x April 12, 2017 Protected Species Survey INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure I) below for Location Map. 1--- — 1011111111111, JA•KSONVILLE di for pit SITE LOCATION , Ras D E •ti♦ i, V__ ( ♦ ille L ,7 M, ��SEPCH i 1ANDERBI.T BEACH RD EM ♦.L rrHAVEXw� TiHAveNW -E^ :ERSBlM G _ MAVEHW,, $rHJNE NW u m . u. rte. x-- 1i ID AVENW Fu TiDAVEHW II. DofW-NODD DR 7RD � ,,, ",3 �C 4 A '' 171.A WD DR iST AVEHW ^-. t'. ..--0. ,,,wwW»ww�I9L W / ♦ / Y RIDGE DR 11 312DAVE SW �:AVE SW o M .CORAL 5TH R "�5�} c STHAVE sw ♦ t�sa� --LSPRINGS 7THAVEBW 7fHAVE SW_ i l I1:4*......., • TO ' OIIE PINE •1-LYWOOD PINE RIDGE RD EXT -9 ..v4-11T BLVD lw b'i•6ti V' ♦��•O r��' � LEAH I 11TH AVE SW g x x ♦��• i. 1ITIVWESw - i EUHAVE5W U -i 13THAVE SW 15THAVESW .' j THAVE SIV 3 15fXAVE Sw,' 15THAVE Sw `+ t �, 'I -.-mook Sw GP_ iRHAVE SW pTTI� •!� i��11 y j or ' A �rStm�l -a , 1BfNAVESW ){%ti,Jj'I//•YYY.'l...l + s''ue Figure I. Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida."This methodology is as follows:Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2& 3).The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species.The lists were obtained from two agency publications: n Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 wnvw.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ❖ A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication "Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists", Publication Date: October 2016. ❖ A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants", Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community.See(Table I)of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary,transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80's. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately four(4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) /, details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd.West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre.This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50%and included Brazilian pepper,ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www,eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey /*N FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities. On the subject property,this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential,Low Density 2.27 624-D Pine—Cy ress—Cabbage Palm(drained) � 3.88 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: 6.25 _ .,'s'.,n GOLDEN GATE BLVD W s } cm Subject Properly 41 FLUCCS Mapping C) C 110,Single Family Residential 624-0,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) 1 7Ae(nmoededfiom CoaerCouq ` 740,Disturbed Land rroPero/wu� � �1 Figure 2.Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 740 06 Ac 740 Ot Ac 624D 3.68 Ac 740 .01:4c 110 2.27 Ac 0 0 O Std eciPrepeny FWCCs Mapping t 70,BinyaFamliy Resiaentiar u +t 20. .eon 624-0.Pine-Cypress;Cabbage Pier.Idminedi 740.D10100140 Land —_. prg: Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table I). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ( • a. ,;,® „rin, .GOLDEN GATE BLVD W A^ 6240 740 • 110 � '= 227Ac S Subitl ProputY 5 _., Appcoinlati.of Spelim Surety Traismts FLUCCS Mapping 110,Single Family Residential 624-D,Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) 740,Disturbed Land 0 CZ) d 2de 2m�na-dawnod tram Calker County PropertyAppre'ser , :.: b Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map& Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculoto) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www,eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey /'"N Table I. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status `FWC/FDA I FWS 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus flondanus Florida Panther Fells concolorcoryi E E Little Blue Heron retia caerulea � � Egretta �-----T � Snowy Egret Egretta thula T L Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals,Amphibians, Reptiles,&Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name Scientific Name Observation listed? Status (YIN) Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - /�. Turkey vulture l Cathartes aura DV N - Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus HV Mammals Common Name Scientific Name Observation listed? Status (Y/N) Gray squirrel Sciurus niger ovicennia N,DV N LArmadillo Dasypus novemcinctus OH I N Reptiles Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) None None I NA NA Amphibians Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) None -- ----- � None -----— — --- -------� NA NA --E --i Plants Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (YIN) Wild Pine* Tiilandsia fasoulata DV N CE *=protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service t."'N Status E=Endangered Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours I Task March 23,2017 2:00 pm 14:00 pm 14.0(2 ET @ 2 hrs) Species Survey Total 1 1 4.0 1 1 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com E:,ecuw B,oleele\C\BEDCf RONAN'm CBUROI-CR 95,\e.<'Dp_Bo\EC,e-ao-n G1.RC-r-EMSE m sums.°(*VS(HED_D.A'n.20'e-132 ESTATES ESTATES (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED WATER MANAGEMENT) , COLLIER BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY 'C -< p gc) v o-4 m >$ coo (nT >W o. COUNTY CANAL RIGHT-OF-WAY C m m m z E_ (PLAT BOOK 4,PAGE 79) -1-1 -i D z ''N=om :Um itt 600°1910°680.00'() _S 0 N00°28'33"W 680.0MS) } 30.00(r} _ - ,75 nm(a) \ ,� sOM' ` f O Z — I m n n nI - m < K II LJ L1J zoo m m i NT o r )� m o D• -{ o o> 73 mo m it s \ �Za 0 co m po 00 fl U un Z0� 1 1II m - m-D� �a omZK(mn�m 1 Iop�� c1 I4 €5 < < n J #: Acn 00 1. m (n73 = I / / • v r- m m H n r , ,. „, „ ,_,., 2 P- E.: -< n`— — arn1�,v ,1Mr�- - - I m m Z I rn-N X-4 ,5 TI o z 14 g o J N00°28'48°W 330.09'(5) 1 O w Z o D r • F D? o• , <co '4 r0 co� m Z> ,W t // m r , M O v c 10'PRESERVE 0 m Tc SITE ALTERATION m cn 0 -n; SETBACK I w-+1 v r-(a cn z X25'PRESEkVE 'C4 z m-i 0 m r ST UCTUR RFTRACK m V - r0-N Dm Ni;No mD _ c . , «�« ;'[-..---Ti m Ty �N �H T i m � . . • « v D m m Ng -< m(n gn IG4 eg }G —,M« S" .(n CO z -1o 003« «Ei m v 0 Dm p .ri0« .t: co m Z z<yr y l fT �« «Dm m O __cam 'ADe z Z • m •s '« -( i °.zn 2 n,« ...mt D d hl r- 75'FRONT YARD ALs M A.«° ) SETBACK Ox8 1;3f•f« «f«'« «• «aP m / f-2 75.00'(P) `i d. i. 75.00'(P) y n m C2 275.00'(5) 75.00'(5) i N00'19'10'E 330.00'(P) WEBER BLVD.S.-X.. C- N00°19'10°E 350.00'(P) 600'28'4&W 330.19'(S) -n 600°28'48`W 350.00'(S) RIGHT-OF-WAY m oQo �� R € ^p IRA :As < m m 13 %Op og� cmi m c r0 �pn m n>Vm� v 0 m m mom z 0 0 m 7; • Z y (n (n m y 0 m rrJ �m z „ � m-I r(n �m ro it,EA y-ai 0 m-1 m i 5,2zco ?D<7 co-O 13az-1m II 0 c m " -na TD o DC oommaz C-I mmx OA �� n gm gtmn onm-r° oomCCDm-171 -•mm9--Ii -N rM < A�3 ao�m<< m�rnm� Dz073 m m zam?1 �c zZmy om-., y< � cn l'•3 � � m P ° xF,1 5 >,omn m ( m bco < Z ��y.1 o Z Z � mx�'�aim m��p 4m� D �-r P 1 --'I TD.Z_.I �Ora-ADN oG >7D y (fl C A ,.I C) r- 1- o y o cnzx am <0>m cn p D 5 Z n(ny m Om_1 rm_m<(0 O O ~ m CD n —ITO O()[n� z -1 Oy ,� -- 0 nm Ko la -i Z 0) /-y '4 Om y Zcnr• Z rn zm '•Ivm m DE (PRO ECT m GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 'IBNr. DEA.ERNE0BY REVISIONS P ` GRACE ROMANIAN ow.w7 BY: ° DAVIDSON CHURCH ABO ENGINEERING ' BIiE£7 TM.: ) 6017 PINE RIDGE RD.,464 CHECKED BY. ' NR '3 app, CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN NAPLES,FL 34119 POJECT NO.: RBa,a Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Planning\GIS\2017-06-20 GR SSGMPA-(ZONING).mxd . LEGEND �� - - DATA&ANALYSIS AREA GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPASUBJECT r )`"h' PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES ,yX ::44' --'''."''':'V''''.'''''''''2-24114:re':11,:„,..14:::::::::7:171:17:- ZONING DISTRICTS tea. » -A _. Ell A-MHO a -A-PU-GJ -A-RFMUO L IM A-ST mii C-2 1 C i I -C-3 C-4 <-1(Y"- , ' Ctao ti I R , II 1 im C-5 4,,<-,...73 I IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 • { -CF r. `9 �.. .n t1 i0 1 I is CF,PUD , off �' il. I i �" CFPUD 1 V II .- CPUD d I \ 11 imi CPUD-sBCO D3 1E fA. _ ) I I GC I r. ',44IPUD \\,.?1- _e__ ti, MPUD x 1 1O 'VANDERBILT BEACH RD. 1 PUD w ��. , ' - - 6 RMF-12 co 7.,,,,, RMF-I2-GGDCCO Iling (�j ST p ' RMF-I2-SBCO2 > S m RMF-16 Q GSI RMF-6 RMF-6-GGDCCO 4. 0 ' RMF-6-SBCO J_.. .,�I MI RPUD Ct. .._ 1 I RSF-2 QitS -- : RSF-3 a� i I RSF-3-GGDCCO cr,�+`a. ®PINE'RIDGE'RD WHITE BLVD Ori I I RSF-4 �' 14� ��0 1� RSF-4(3) 0 h � .... .._. .... p 13 �N j RSF-5 p it 0 re p 0„__.,4 '� IRSF-5(0.4) Q O m. p GREEN BLVD®1� IN RT �__„_ riii—ki I � O B I 11 >I�� .11�� ,�c+� �. .-1 1 I► CW i‘t_„ . Il nom.. � �� CO 1' "`_ F < C w_ t /,.... - N .— w ," ••• 4 1.,,„01k ".-----, CR 886/GOLDEN'GATE Q — , W 1,,, .14 in . E • 2 t ?tom: 1 JS ' S/Vnmu0/O�� _..,. _ MILES SOURCES:COLLIERLCOUNT.Y GEOGRAPHICIINFORMATION SYSTEMS;12015).<.-____— DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIOROAD,SUITE 201 ': ' : NAPLES,FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 ENGINES tdG EXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS Z:\Active ProjectslGIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\PIanning\GIS\2017-04-24 fivGR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT H(ZONING EXHIBIT s ' --??fi�gg -.� ��; ��`� '�t} ,.� �-r r , <. ----- '0.i- , ;a ° x tea- E s. ',Itr...; '”4.7f,%'' _it.'''.;.lit4.7'1' f•-*-:4 lc t-' -._ S s-* ;k 'mac_ ..,; cs^ -: -c -„.a �` bela.-. ; .7 3RD.AVE NW .; _; � 'ik'3RD,AVEF NW = ,..,. ,,.,' *I, -'%.7 'I,I:Mit, -7' ,:44P;tk,A, .,.44ISIt 0. ,;,.! .A,‘... '''''4- 4 '74ri A.;VA..'' ' '-' Y " � 1,4k,12'.* 951 _ TIW its,,.., ..,-...i., „.4.4v,,t-....-1,,-,% - ., ;.• -,,,,:-1,-...%.,: ,; <,. -_:Irtfo,,t.-„- a: $F.-J Y�i" ''4,..,47.-4 --,:-i.-:,,"10,1.--, ,- ' --'z- . -041 .; -gi - , €N:'".T ! fri -Y.: - .s _ WW t :1,,,,,, . ' - , - no. ...was � .-" , at�t a,�: di 1ST AVE NWa. £. ., t 4. ,-` 300 FOOT RADIUS 0'' e.., GOLDEN GATE BLVD W E /. ...../ 1ST AVE SW yksi AVao ✓ D N > Ca J Wm LU d' J UJ J LUm 3RD AVE SW o 3RD AVE SW LEGEND 1.1.71.GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.2 5 ACRES L_i300 FOOT RADIUS ZONING DISTRICTS O E-ESTATES 0 600 1,200 FEET SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2016) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN CONDITIONAL BAPTIST CHURCH D 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 ENGI!�!EERING EXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS Z:\Active Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG1PIanning1GIS12017-04-24 VC GMPA-EXHIBIT I(FLUE EXHIBIT).mx6 W_4_F;)- FP--gig giADCIP G i'7 `< ° °G.S'A GLI iii3FLIP DID ggra7@,G121 W W GOLDEN GATE BLVD s:217 i / 1 s 40 Q M-JJ1 W W Q' J L!! J G SW U 7 LEGEND GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT 4:PROPERTY 6.25 ACRES x_`300 FOOT RADIUS ES-ESTATES-MIXED USE DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT FEET;, SOURCES:COLLIERtCOUN1NY GEOGRAIjHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2016) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT I: SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ENGIN EERIt�1G EXHIBIT This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a STOP project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 =Florida Master Jessica Harrelson Site fl�ilil' File Senior Project Coordinator Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239)434-6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel#36760720005 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Federal,state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws,you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 500 South Bronough Street• Tallahassee,FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph I 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us j This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a I STOP project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. March 8, 2017 rr-=Florida Master Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator lii' File Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone (239)434-6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of March 08, 2017 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcel of Collier County: Parcel#36760800006 When interpreting the results of this search, please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws,you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Rachel -Thompson Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Rachel.thompson@dos.myflorida.com 500 South Bronough Street• Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph 850.245.6439 fax SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us Z:\Active Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWGIPIanning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT K(PUBLIC SERVICES MAP).mxd I ........) LEGEND ®SUBJECT PROPERTY:625 ACRES i ,RADIUS_RINGS rSchools * COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF FACILITY OHospital North Naples Fire and Rescue Station 42 I, 7010 Immokalee Road IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 3 MILES ♦ Medical ,! IP _�� s '- �� __` O COLLIER COUNTY FIRE STATION . r �Guast-High School �� FIRE DISTRICT � lfCo7878 Shark Way %. Big Corkscrew Fire Laurel Oak-Elementary 7800 Immokalee'Road t Oak Ridge-Middle School I East Naples Fire ,. o / 14975 Collier Boulevard I I Golden Gate Fire 2 MILES I I North Naples Fire CO Y ' ''�� __obi / Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 73 `` / / 14575 Collier BoulevardN. • / VANDERBILT BEACH RD. 1 MILE `e • ii co ;Vineyards-Element;ry Tr 6225 Arbor Boulevard W ; 1 c o -0.... r ) 1 u) z I� 1 N D I GOLDEN GATE BLVD -o N o I Golden Gate Fire and Rescue Station 42 m II Big Cypress- 9513th Stret SIN 3520 Golden Gate Boulevard W / s a, , t / / w co % / / I- I- : e PINE RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD I cox li 4 z-,T, I Physicians Regional`H so pita) / M th 6101 Pine Ridge Road rn / � � cn / •i •• o // ° / co i Zcc � `�' > SII/ N 161 H AVE.SW GREEN BLVD, z ` S w 7 J Golden Gate`Elementary it JO // 4911 20th Place SW o I/ I `` ' i'CCSOGolden Gate Substation-Dist2�' Golden.Gate Fire and.Rescue Station 70 4707 Golden Gate Parkway 4741 Golden Gate Parkway I Golden Terrace North-Elementary 01 2711 N CR 886/GOLDEN GATE Golden Gate-Middle School Golden Terrace South-Elementary 270,1'48th Terrace SW 2965 44th Terrace SW Q W��EE � S r E Q Mike Davis-Elementary Golden.Gate-•High School 3215 Magnolia Pond Drive 2925 Titan Way 5 0 1 2 0 S MILES SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) co R 93 / 75 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH D 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVRARN PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT K: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES ENGINEERING INSTR 5339200 OR 5337 PG 3573 RECORDED 11/30/2016 9:06 AM PAGES 2 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA EXHIBIT L DOC@.70 $4,725.00 REC $18.50 CONS $675,000.00 i Prepared by: Bradley D.Bryant Bryant Law Office 4851 Tamiami Trail North Suite 300 '• Naples,FL 34103 239-566-1001 File Number. Grace.MDLT.BB Consideration.:$675,000.00 Prepared without examination or opinion of title [Space Above This Line For Recording Data) Warranter Deed This Warranty Deed made this 28th lf'+ a i..e� F 6�.1(=4 MDLT Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited liability company whose post office addr 0.s Golden Gatel'tt r a 4. uite 106,Naples,FL 34105,grantor, and "Grace"Romanian Baptist Church o ,Inc.,a Florida not for . -,£t •rporation whose post office address is 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84,Naples, 34fi gi mtees,� \ \ (Whenever used herein the terms"grantor"a d"gr t '.,t, ude :-'—, ..,.. th• i. andihe heirs,legal representatives,and assigns of " individuals,and the successors and assigns of orpor . ,•.4 t t`. \ 1 ( ! i Witnesseth,that said grantor, for apd; ...'•r :ti' o . of 'jAM 4 b/100 DOLLARS ($10.00)and other good and valuable considerations to _, :. .r in han. paid .y4 gran,- die,*' t whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted,bargained, and sold to i grantee,and grantee's is forever, the following described land, situate,lying and being in Collier Comfit ,rida to-wit: . g The West half of Tract 15,Golu tater Unit No. to the mapor plat thereof as recorded hi Plat Book 4,Page 79, is ,)i 41 Florida. � iGy ,Fl AND All of Tract 16,Golden Gate Estates Unit No.4,according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 4,Page 79,Public records of Collier County,Florida. Parcel Identification Number:36760720005/36760800006 • Together with all the tenements,hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. To Have and to Hold,the same in fee simple forever. And the grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land;that the grantor hereby fully warrants the title to said Iand and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; and that said land is free of all encumbrances,except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31,2015. In Witness Whereof,grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Doublellme. *** OR 5337 PG 3574 *** -....... 11 Signed,sealed and delivered in our presence: (vii4urt. MDLT H. ,',.gs,LLC,a 'arida lit.'ted liability company , By: 14AN.,.... NII. . Witness Nam : , . .t ie. Erik E.Moget : 1,M.,,--•.er (Corporate Seal) I . I _ /7 ,,,, ) "...4 v e: Nlklina Dimitrova atAnytoVA NEOUttk . • ' •., NOTARY PUBLIC -L 1--4-STATE° - F FWMA comm*FF"5223 , . ,------I- f4 1-11-4„. , EXgres 312312018 -,- 4 •-% 1.-., ‘ —‘..,€ ..."'N, State of Florida //:11'‘)''-- .\/- County of Collier ( The foregoing instrument was acicnow*g.edtbOoreine-this 28thday,of Nov .,. r;g016 by Erik E.Mogelvang,Manager of — MDLT Holdings,LLC,a Florida limited liftbil*cbmpany,Rn beEtilftof the co .orition. He U is personally known to me or[X]has produced a driver's licensil as i f entfica004.4.-‹ .------ ,, ..-, ) i / if \-J i i '''‘ \ I T1) \•-- V i , Al t tr- [Notary Seal] k" k--4\., "-4 - 1''') - --- - 144arY _ 1110' , I ',.e., -..- Prilltt&Nattie:. ;:.:7;:-.1 Nikolina Dimitrova I 411... " My Com4idreitpires: 312312018 -,'....$ Vkl... ?-';----:- ---)c%)"' ,.:(13-' C I IN- -.',.•-'' ....-.... Warranty Deed-Page 2 DoubleTimee EXHIBIT M LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Davidson Engineering, Inc. (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property i.,entitled in this Application. Signed: ...— Adrian Ro an, President/Secretary,"Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Date: NA\ ,XV.1 I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the for-going application,and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge Si•n:ture of Applicant kNoczg, eR ,r\ \ces f: .k Name-Typed or Printed STATE OF (kWc ) COUNTY OF ( C4 S ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this \ day of , b 1�► ___� • . MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: VIVA\ P1249•0 Notary `ublic CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: �r who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and �( ,,•;; ` zµy►'n�, JESSICA HARRELSON did take an Oath Notary Public•Stato of Florida did not take and Oath '• Commission#FF 854332 ��-a My Comm.Explras May 18,2020 NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: `'''"""� % Bonded through National Notary Assn. Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 7 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION I,Adrian Roman (print name), as President and Secretary,(title,if applicable)of Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc., (company, if applicable),swear or affirm under oath, that I am the(choose one): -. The owner X applicant contract purchaser_and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches,data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. S. We/i authorize Richard Yovanovich, Esq. to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. 6. Applicant is the owner of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed submittal; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of Applicant's knowledge and belief; and that if Applicant is not providing an attorney's opinion of title, that the information Applicant provided to the surveyor is sufficient to prepare an accurate boundary survey for this application, and is honest and true to the best of Applicant's knowledge and belief. 7. Applicant understands that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed, shall not be altered. Applicant further understands that if Public Hearings are required,they will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted. *Notes: If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp.pres. or v. Pres. •If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company(L.L.C.)or Limited Company(L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's"Managing Member." •If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. •If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner"of the named partnership. •If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • in each instance,first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury,I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts stated in it are true. 7/23/18 Adrian Roman, President and Secretary, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. Signature _ ,_ _ ` A,�Printad 1U e/Title „.•=�'Y •.,, JESSICA HARRELSON STATE OF Florida '+°4� Notary Public-State of Florida .. '�'•' Commission 0 FF 954332 COUNTY OF Collier .;� r3;' My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 ..... Bonded through National Notary Assn. The foregoing instrument was sworn to(or affirmedrand ssuubscrihed before me orL1 b, r�3C , I&) (date) by drian Roman(name of person providing oath or affirmation),as President and Secretary who is personally known to me. STAMP SEAL ``ti Sig ature of Not , Public EXHIBIT N Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com ALTERNATIVE SITE DATA & ANALYSIS GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH SSGMPA CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT PREPARED FOR: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. 6017 Pine Ridge Road,#84 Naples, FL 34109 and PREPARED BY: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 March 1, 2018 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 Contents Purpose: 2 Physical Description of Subject Property• 2 Data &Analysis: 3 Alternative Site Analysis: 5 Attachments: Attachment A—Location Map Attachment B—Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay l Attachment C—Protected Listed Species Survey Attachment D—Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners Attachment E—Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities Attachment F—Alternate Property Map(within Market Study Area) Attachment G—Parcel 75180000120 Information Attachment H—Sungate CPUD-Ordinance 09-06 Attachment I—Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information Attachment J—Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy—White Paper Purpose: The purpose of this data & analysis report is to provide an evaluation for a modification to the existing Conditional Uses Subdistrict within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; demonstrating a change to the existing Growth Management Plan (GMP) as warranted. The proposed conditional use is located at the southeast corner of the signalized intersection of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West(see Attachment A - Location Map) and consists of±6.25 acres of land. The intent of the Conditional Uses Subdistrict is to provide specific areas and properties for approved conditional uses within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. The Collier County GMP currently designates the aforementioned property (±6.25 acres) as part of the Residential Estates Sub-district within the Estates Mixed Use District of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This designation allows the following uses: Group Housing, Parks, and Recreational Areas/Open Space, Single Family Residential(at a density of 1 unit per 2.25 acre), Essential Services, and Nursing Homes. The additional development of uses are available through a conditional use application. The proposal of this amendment application is to identify the location and allowable square footage/maximum number of seats within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict in order to construct a church at the proposed location. Upon final approval and adoption of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (SSGMPA), the property will move forward with its companion Conditional Use application for zoning and a Site Development Plan; meeting the intent of the Land Development Code by identifying a proposed church facility with allowable accessory uses within the±6.25-acre parcel. Physical Description of Subject Property: Recently, ecologist Jeremy Sterk of Earth Tech Environmental, LLC, prepared a Florida Land Use Cover Classifications System (FLUCCS) map and reviewed the potential protected species correlated with the FLUCCS map for the subject property. The FLUCCS shows ±6.25 acres as identified with a single-family house (2.27 acres), native vegetation (3.88 acres), and disturbed lands (0.08 acres); please refer to Attachment B. The potential protected species report advises that there are likely no protected species on-site; please refer to Attachment C. 2 Data &Analysis: To justify the need for the Future Land Use designation modification, a data & analysis review has been performed. This report identifies justifications to demonstrate the requested amendment is warranted. Criteria for this analysis include proximity of the local church's parishioners,properties at the intersections or close to arterial and collector roadways, and existing availability of potential development sites between 5 and 10 acres from Interstate-75 (forming the western boundary) to five miles east (eastern boundary), the border of between Collier and Lee Counties (the northern boundary) and Golden Gate Parkway to the south (forming the final boundary of the data &analysis study area). The limiting criteria were selected based on vacancy,size, current market value of land, and accessibility to parishioners. The subject property,as well as any alternative sites, have been evaluated to ensure that the existing and future demographics will support the proposed land use based on the following: • Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners • Location of Alternate Facilities Offering Similar Traditional Worship Opportunities • Property Availability and Compatibility with the proposed development Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners Demographic information is an excellent indicator of demand for proposed services that currently do not exist. Population statistics for the data analysis were obtained from the Church/applicant; refer to Attachment D. In this case, the parishioners are local to the area and as such, there are no seasonal impacts to the population. Location of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities In defining a warranted use for the requested service,locations of existing facilities with identical or similar services provided were also identified; refer to Attachment E. The results are listed below, along with the respective addresses and distance from the ±6.25-acre proposed location: 1. Grace Romanian Baptist Church 1542 Harrison St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (122.0 mi) 2. New Life Romanian Baptist Church 1950 Van Buren St, Hollywood, FL 33020 (123.0 mi) 3. Betania Romanian Baptist Church 4001 Hendricks Ave,Jacksonville, FL 32207 (379.0 mi) 4. First Romanian Baptist Church 6423 Marbletree Ln, Lake Worth, FL 33467 (132.0 mi) 5. Romanian Baptist Church 5416 County Rd 579, Seffner, FL 33584 (160.0 mi) 3 Property Availability Due to the specific nature of the land use proposed, minimum criteria and constraints have been established in defining potential available sites. The key criteria for site development are as follows: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Maximum 10 acres in size • Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet • Located with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway • A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate-/+75,north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County • Sale Price of Less than or equal to$135,000 per acre In making the decision to proceed with the subject site (±6.25-acre property), all viable sites that are available were reviewed and discussed. Due to the limited amount of undeveloped properties meeting the criteria (including PUD's with similar uses and intensities permitted), few options existed; refer to Attachment F. Available property includes the following: Option#1 Folio#'s: 75180000120 Address/Legal: 4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES FL 34116 OR 4468 PG 3302 Parcel Size: 5.17 Acres Zoning: Sungate CPUD (Ordinance No. 09-06; refer to Attachment H) The site is generally located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard approximately 3.00 miles east of Interstate-75; refer to Attachment G. Option#2 Folio#'s: 36618000107, 36618000000 Address/Legal: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W and GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates The site is generally located midblock on the western side Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951). Approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Limiting access points are located on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951). 4 Alternative Site Analysis: To further identify a need for the Future Land Use Element and Map designation amendment of the subject property, an alternative site analysis was completed based on the locational and dimensional features of the subject property; along with the required zoning designations required for future development of the proposed land use. The following criteria identify the unique features associated with the subject property to perform a data and analysis review required to support the Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA). Within the analysis,the subject property(±6.25 acres) and the alternative sites were evaluated by their consistency with the following: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Maximum 10 acres in size • Minimum Lot width of 330 Linear Feet • Located at a corner an arterial or collector roadway with frontage • A maximum of 5 miles east of Interstate 75, north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County • Sale Price of Less than or equal to$135,000 per acre These specific criteria were chosen to identify alternative sites that may be similar to the subject property to develop and operate the proposed land use. The property acreage and dimensional criteria have been chosen to ensure the proposed church will be afforded the same, or better, net developable area the master concept plan illustrates to develop the proposed mixture of principal and accessory land uses; i.e. a proposed sanctuary, multi-purpose fields and support structures as necessary. Per the current Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy-White Paper, a survey was conducted regarding the allowance of additional Conditional Uses in the Rural Estates. Most individuals polled that additional Conditional Uses should be allowed at more locations within the Rural Estates, and specifically at arterial intersections.Therefore,the locality of the site on an arterial or collector roadway specifically identifies a location that is compatible with the present Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy; refer to Attachment J. Additionally,the location on an arterial and/or collector road will not only provide better site visibility, it will provide the proposed development with available transportation conveniences in the forms of increased vehicular access by comparison to those sites without access to major thoroughfares. By defining the area of development east of Interstate 75,and north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County, a site can be identified that will benefit the existing parishioners commute to the proposed development and defines an area that meets the requests of the church. As a final criterion, cost per acre was evaluated. It was deemed a critical component to determining available property due to the non-profit business of the church facilities. Places of worship, specifically Grace Romanian Baptist Church,does not generate an income that provides the church a profit,therefore affordability of available property to the applicant is essential. 5 In making the decision to proceed with future development of the subject property, all viable sites that are available were reviewed. It is assumed that all vacant/undeveloped and/or cleared properties adhere to criteria of availability with the addition of a Multiple Listing Search (MLS) for properties meeting the identified criterion. Due to the limited amount of available properties (including PUD's with Church Facilities),few alternative option exists. Proposed Site Location Folio#'s: 36760720005, 36760800006 Address/Legal: 3899 1st Avenue SW/GOLDEN GTE EST UNT 4 W1/2 OF TR 15 OR 1494 PG 211 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT4TR 16 Parcel Size: 6.25 Acres Zoning: Estates The proposed site is owned by the applicant. It is currently zoned Estates. Currently,the site is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Upon the successful completion of this GMPA application,the proposed church and accessory land uses will be found consistent and permitted within the Subdistrict and subsequent zoning. As noted above, to develop the property for a church, the applicant is required to file a GMPA and a companion Conditional Use application for the property. The GM PA's intent is to justify and permit the proposed land use at this location based on a thorough data analysis. A Conditional Use application will be necessary to develop the site for the church facility. This site meets all of the stated criteria and is further justified by the data analysis. Alternate Site Locations: Alternate Site#1: Property located on the corner of Green Boulevard and Collier Boulevard approximately 3.00 miles east of 1-75 Zoning: Sungate CPUD;Attachment H Folio#'s: 75180000120;Attachment G Parcel Size: 5.17 Acres Ordinance 09-06 defines the zoning and development control of this property. These parcels are void of any development. The identified site is Tract B within the Sungate CPUD with commercial zoning and is set to accommodate a total of 63,000 square feet. Identified in the Future Land Use Map as the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict,the GMP does not limit intensity. It can be argued that this location has the potential of providing more visibility due to its location,although developable area and available square footage of development limit the site. Per the Planned Unit Development Tracts B,C,and D are limited to 63,000 square feet of commercial buildout. If the available commercial development is rationed according to site acreage—Tract B would be limited to approximately 50,000 sf of building. Additionally, per the PUD Ord. 09-06, Tracts B, C, and D would be responsible for 6 providing water management facilities for 1.02 acres of County owned right-of-way and Tract A (2.04 Acres)further limiting the available developable area within Tract B. Due to the Commercial Planned Unit Development zoning on the site,the intensity of the property is limited;thereby inhibiting space for the proposed use. When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the intensity of the site from a zoning standpoint,the proposed site location is more logical and better suited site than this parcel. Alternate Site#2: Located midblock on Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951)approximately 0.13 miles north of Pine Ridge Road. Zoning: Estates;Attachment Folio#'s: 36618000107,36618000000 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres The property is currently zoned Estates with a combined lot width of 330 linear feet and acreage of 5.00 available for development. These parcels are currently void of any development; and were identified through a MLS as available property. It can be argued that this location meets all the requested criterion, based on property acreage and dimensional criteria, location of the site on an arterial or collector roadway within the defined area of and study. However,to develop the site as proposed,the property would also require a GMPA and Conditional Use Rezone. Additionally, based on existing conditions of adjacent properties, access from Collier Boulevard will be granted to the site via a single egress/ingress point to the Boulevard; therefore, limiting access to the parishioners during peak transportation hours for the church. Additionally, the right-of-way directly adjacent to the property is designed as a±8-foot deep storm water management detention pond utilized for the roadway storm water attenuation;thus, increasing the cost of constructing the proposed access and increasing the permitting fees. Furthermore,of the properties analyzed this site demands the highest cost at$138,000.00 per acre. As a completely vegetated lot with a number of site improvements that will need to be addressed,to develop would be too costly for the church to absorb. When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the criterion previously identified,the subject property provides more site accessibility and cost-efficiency to develop per the wants and needs of the applicant. In addition,the proposed property better suits the integrity of the Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan in reference to conditional use properties within the Golden Gate Area. • 7 Alternative Site Analysis Table CRITERIA PROPOSED SITE LOCATION ALT.SITE#1 ALT. SITE#2 Folio#s 36760720005& (SUNGATE CPUD) Folio#s 36760800006 Folio#75180000120 36618000107& 36618000000 PROPERTY SIZE OF 5-10 ACRES ±6.25 acres ±5.17 acres ±5 acres SALE PRICE LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO$135,000 $444,104.13/acre Sale Price- Sale Price-$135,000/acre PER ACRE (currently not on $138,000/acre market) MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 330 LINEAR FEET Yes Yes Yes LOCATED WITH FRONTAGE ON AN ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR Yes Yes Yes ROADWAY MAXIMUM OF 5 MILES EAST OF INTERSTATE-75, NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE Yes Yes Yes PARKWAY&WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY ATTACHMENT "A" Location Map Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG\PIaoning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT D(LOCATION MAP).mxd _. N S VANDERBILT BEACH t .- n I 1--- ( 1 Si r- GOLDEN GATE BLVD ) . \ r _ J ) I I I `� J PINE RIDGE RD w l ` i l ( 1 `l( I 5 LEGEND r I I El- SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES ®—MAJOR ROADWAYS 1 0 0.5 1 �- SOURCE`'CO '�UNTY'GtE-OGRAP,IC1NFORMATION'SY MS"(1017) _ MILES_ y‘„ .1.018— tp, HEND �, ' ,-_' a PAL :EACH 4iii A IR. , COLLIER -p ■! N DADE —. r DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH nC NAPLES, FL 34104 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA PAL PHONE: 239-434-6060 LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT "B" Aerial with Florida Land Cover Classification System Overlay GOLDEN GATE BLVD W y ' it �^x� �ib va,,.P'.a...�.� :; .":.,, fix, . "' s 0.08 AC RD , rr 624D 3:86 Ac N 6 7_40 0.01 Ac E c0 U J i _ g .113 REVC8 a S • 5 U 1 m o 9 U rt .E, '1,4 ''),(Oltiti:1 1w - , '" A'''�* Q Subject Property a t m°� a:^, . > FLUCCS Mapping 110,Single Family Residential EN . Q 0 = f�40o �_.�624-D,Pine-Cypress Cabbage Palm Note: ..- w:;a r yP 9 (drained) 0 2017 Aenalobtained from Colher County ,,. j 740,Disturbed Land R Property Appraiser (113 a E • Tec Pi 4 EARTH TECH la]Vi;.ENVIRONMENTAL LLCA FLUCCS S Grace Romanian Church 'th• NAP R — Hi AD @LVO„ sLITE e Map NAPLES— FLQ RkgA 3411Q w Collier County,Florida nuc PH.o.NE (334) io4 QQ1Q FAX (334), 3,34-QQQ4 s"EEreo.x DATe4/12/17 l'''''''''N/A I AS SHOWN (0 13 ATTACHMENT "C" Protected Listed Species Survey SFJ PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH PARCEL i, _ NAPLES, FLORIDA APPROXIMATELY 6.25 ACRES 4�;�", k fi ? ' Prepared For: -,i',,,.'' z 4 ' i Collier County Engineering& „*:-.-.,-1.i.--.,i_.',„ ! ► + J' Natural Resources Department r f 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Na les, FL 34104 `` '". . South Florida Water Management District , 4gg (SFVmD) Lower West Coast Service Center 2301 McGregor Boulevard ,,„, **, , Fort Myers, FL 33901 � r Prepared By: �h TQ Earth Tech Environmental, LLC �ai-i '� 455 Rail Head Boulevard, Suite 8 " Naples, FL 341 10 if 239.304.0030 environmental,LLC vvww.eteflorida.com t j r X � April I2, 2017 ` "'".• Protected Species Survey INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Grace Romanian Church parcel prior to development of the property as a church campus. LOCATION The Grace Romanian Church property is located on the corner of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard West, in Section I I, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The parcel is approximately 6.23 acres. See (Figure I) below for Location Map. Iligl 41-111111411, ' ffillil •KSONVILLE - 111441117" L41: i j _ I "ilk 44 ma' 44ii . ,SITE LOCATION 1 . __ J s* sb...igki ,,A, ,_ • ` V . .. PPoS. D E i t� _ , imph• ba {It _ s•vi EARVIT - W,NDERBILTREACH RD 44NDERELTEEACi1RDPXT SPS WM AVE NW TM AVE NW Ili +. j SHAVE NW � MIME NW n t g COPAL WDCO Mt 3RDAVE NW ,i wm)AVE NW Ci i F. ^ ' learippi, '¢'^1EAK WOOD DR 1ST AVE NW -,l GoLDENrATEEL W KIANGDANV.RODE DR- ,.�;•DAVESW r_ 3RDAVESW °a L•CY\P CORAL STNAVE'SW 6T0 AVE SW 'A 'r m 7THAVE SW � TTH6 0 •RAL SPRINGS AVESW ! 1 _ 't 0,Wee •• _ 4 a•a••••i' I--OKE PINE OLLYVVOOD 3 intim � .•t:10,X o ..E_WORM Eia s��o�� At! ,tTHA 0TH AVE sw 2THAVESW,' t3TNAVESW WTHAVE SW 4 w TNAYESW ,STHAVE SW f ,- I�fi' _ a °STHRi-sW Cr��1 Ll'D ,TTNAVESW G� r —r \4 ETN - o� T9THAVESW_ ily w� Figure I.Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida."This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land-uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 2& 3).The resulting FLUCCS codes are cross-referenced with a list of protected plant and animal species.The lists were obtained from two agency publications: ^, Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www,eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ❖ A list of animals and birds was obtained from the FWC publication "Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists", Publication Date: October 2016. ❖ A list of protected plant species was obtained from the publication "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants", Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Bureau of Entomology, Nematology & Plant Pathology- Botany Section, Contribution 38, 5th Edition (2010). The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each FLUCCS community.See(Table I)of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary,transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of fox squirrels and listed plants. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 80's. Cloud cover was absent. Approximately four(4) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey. (Table 3) details date and time spent in the field. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Collier Blvd North Golden Gate Blvd.West/Residential South Residential East Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS map below. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Residential, Low Density, 2.27 Acres This community consists of low-density rural areas characterized by a relatively small number of homes per acre.This type of land is almost entirely committed to residential use, even though it may include forest or range types. FLUCCS 624-D, Pine—Cypress—Cabbage palm (Drained), 3.88 Acres This is the largest vegetation community on the subject property. Canopy vegetation includes scattered bald cypress, slash pine and cabbage palm. Other vegetation observed includes grapevine, beauty berry, cocoplum, sword fern, myrsine, dahoon holly, strangler fig, and isolated patches of saw palmetto. Exotic plants were estimated at be <50%and included Brazilian pepper,ear-leaf acacia, old- world climbing fern,Java plum, and Caesar weed. The ground is covered in heavy mats of slash pine needles and other duff. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com /"""\ Protected Species Survey / FLUCCS 740, Disturbed Land, 0.10 acres Disturbed Lands are areas which have been changed due primarily to human activities.On the subject property,this area consists of a small, unfinished turnoff/driveway in the north-central vicinity. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE j DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential,Low Density 2.27 624-D Pine—Cypress—Cabbage Palm(drained) 3.88 740 Disturbed Land 0.10 Site Total: I 625 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W Fib /� B can \ H; ,. igirl Y Q Subject Property FLUCCS Mapping d ,ZD 110,single Family Residential 624-D,Pala-Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) WIZ217 K, 740.Disturbed Land 20nely AP...from Co^_�sr Carty ,, a PruPKh/1pp®sar. kA. .. Figure 2.Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping /'\ Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey GOLDEN GATE BLVD W 740: 08 Ac 740 01 A[ 624D 3.66 Ac 740 .01 Ac O 110 cd 2.27 Ac w • O U Q SWjectPropaty FLUCCS Mapping 110,Sine Family Res,dentia) c .00074-D.Pine-Cypress-Cabbage PNm ld'ained) 1 ( - 740,!Intuited Land Figure 3.FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS/DISCUSSION The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown in (Table I). All animal species observed on the subject parcel are detailed in (Table 2). Within (Table 2), any protected species observed are specifically noted. See (Figure 4) below for results and field observations. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey 1 $ i 4 1 i ,,,1-, coW GATEBL '1i. s I. Cs 740 01 Ae l 629D _ t - t 1. • 740' 0 Ac 2.27 At' t ''t j � IJ _ tp c3Py b - mea Appbnnf5PetluSwg1aame FLUCCS Mapping '*7.: i' 110,Single Family Residential r 624-D,Pine•Cypress-Cabbage Palm(drained) I l l O m Q 740,Disturbed Land Nolo: I 6 > _. �� 2017Aer�l pblain.d from -„,t, -6:: - C..: Caaier LauMy PQM Appreuar 3 QM Figure 4. Protected Species Survey Transect Map& Field Results Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the property: Wild Pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) Several common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) were observed in trees within the parcel. No other listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey Table I. Protected Species List According to FLUCCS Category I FLUCCS I Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Desi: ated Status FWC/FDA FWS_.____ — -- — ----------- ----- 624 Florida Black Bear Ursus americanus floridanus T - 1 Florida Panther I Fells concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - ' Snowy Egret Egretta thula Tricolored Heron E retta tricolor T - Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FVVS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Commercially Exploited Table 2. Birds, Mammals,Amphibians, Reptiles,&Plants Observed on the Subject Property Birds Common Name i Scientific Name Observation Listed?— Status 1 (Y/N) Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus DV N - 1 Turkey vuhure Cathortes aura DVI N - I Red-shouldered hawk Buten lineatus HV N - Mammals - --- —--- -Common Name Scientific Name f Observation I Listed? Status (Y/N) Gray squirrel Sciurus niger avicennio N,DV N - Armadillo Dosypus novemcinctus OH Reptiles i Common Name Scientific Name Observation Listed? I Status None i None NA NA - Amphibians _ Common Name T Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status I (Y/N) None ( None �.NA 1. NA Plants Common Name i Scientific Name Observation Listed? Status (Y/N) Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciulata DV , N CE =protected species Abbreviations: Agencies FWC=Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service Status E=Endangered Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.etefloridacom Protected Species Survey T=Threatened T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity o f Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Observations DV=Direct Visual HV=Heard Vocalization OT=Observed Tracks OH=Observed Hole\Burrow MT=Marked Tree C=Cavity DB=Day Bed N=Nest Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time Man Hours 1 Task March 23,2017 2:00 pm 4:00 pm 4.0(2 ET @ 2 hrs) 1 Species Survey Total — -- 4.0 • Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT APPENDIX D DAVIDSON ENGINEERING SITE PLAN pm Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com Imo09 2 j 0Imo. 9 HYBL,, :oNloaroad NVld 311S 1Vf11d3ON00 009F00 .001.1901N- 6419E id'S316VN 1.02 WS'R.0109139996 :A303NO3N0 IO#'Oil 300183NId Ll09 3LLu 133N6 ONIY 33 NI'JN3 roav HOMO . NOSOIAVQ o eNmvao NMNtlW02133tl110 HOH013111-10O 1SIldV8 NVINVWO21 3OVN0 �� SNOISN3a 4.ev3I9aa :1N310 .300990> n�' I_ co F - to w 1 ��jjrr C/) N ZJOw W Z Zm2 of 4 W 0 1=x"0- ILO O HJO 1- ai co Li0 OjF 0 �xw LL O. Z Wi F- _ _ Z 0 QO!y Ow XZ CO OfnU J J 13 E W a tx000 CDacc,o . pad g ¢ V J I- oo UJOwa J� ZIYZ iz:Z Z d l Q > w ❑7w w- WN >.,w w1_ Z Z '1 r H w w 1w-may • mZ¢2~o aa3 p p - 14 W CA CT) 2 atu 2UJi 0z ozO Wgap 00 O' Z ce O ?a z z w w a E2,..1<,,, Wap J J_ TO } W co I:: Fa WZQ wy]woo J>0o w� w� v -. Ce Wo �w>HZ w1=000.0 a1=a 6 I-Q I-Q N I-W W ni cd wZ WZ Wo O 111 0 Z X Zmii C in F Z • Eww Co p 0 CT) m w a W W ri p D 0_ d F-I d W$o -J 0 I 0 WYY 1 LI.1 LU " w , , =l6 Li§i' o o a W a a,.d O L.L.WLam.. (S)L00"0SE M.99,9Z.00N c LL AVM-A0-1H0121 (ELM. M.99.94.0014 (d).00'09E 301,61.00N p - -'S•0Al8 21383M (d).00'0EE 3.01.61.00N - (s)�0O"sL- (s),o0 siz p y - S m 6 6 a /' �/: . �)' T( t �� .'.° 'g' °t �`,a NOV813S td ' e,. 'p* 6. rc MAYA_NONd SL J qt a Q ,w,z� zm I Q w0 srL Ip 0 W Qom, ,,, ..f,EF iaY wp Z cl >a. rn. 1 i 1>-0 w iia +1xr 0- WQ Cl) p Y r, -03 6 'COO UN 0W Z <i. W OJ S • ,d m co 1101 cG mn J W & .'.'.', . . .'.',' J W Q I-Q > . > . . . , u, <LL UW$ °),,,.@_:, rL FW W�'�..' . . . . , f II--w - ti co C7 aLL = L {)uval�5'dunion 'ls . j <m CO 0 w" Ia-w Z LL I 3AM3s3Nd,9Z1 , y y z o w(�7 F/3 5-1 NOV813S w p rZn w J NThOI1VN311V 3115 'ILLL W p 3AN3S3Nd.0L 0 p O a l W // m Co aN J I-' U' }� � I— } QF p aLL W m aEC�Zm j 1- IISW 1-0 Ow �j p „g FQ L�. _�W_� W W Q �WZuw- co\. Om .- �I Q LL CO m aN QOZO I�1w (S).60'0££rt949Z.00N )g N wO - r u,am ww I - lu)yttaa,.374.6b. l.ON _---- ---11., ¢ > �¢2L 'CO �pZ a miU \ um�OR .... �� W W w F a` 41.• = = Z ri w w N o� cc `$ I H0 -.W 0 !0A W. Zoo H 2E L. 8A = J ax w W ZSO t+0ik CO L11 Lc, dep w ,o; co w I+I w k ' FQ z g R FJ--I-R'Z u_2 00 O W W W W Z a:2 m ~LL _ o a P p Lu6 P CCI ¢ II aIZw It 4 ;'<tOjp� U mmcg o -Q JF a. YWd O iaN W 1 Tr (s1.0o'st i tI J _ - - (d).00 CCC, �,(AM sr; Iv (d),uu SLZ I (SWOON 099 M.EE.9Z.00N i,E U (d).00'069 3.01..61.00N W 00 °`En 7°60 z m >LL (6L 30Vd'ti>i0081V1d) •9 °w m c9 0 w j AVM-d0-1HOIN 1VNV0 AINl0O it F. LL O Ld as a U O �m ¢z_s 01 2 K O Aa DI ¢ X AVM-d0-1HOIN 021VA31f108 N3I110O (.1.N3Vg30VNVA 1,131VM 03d013A30) (lVI1N301S3N AllINVd 31ONIS 03d013A30) S311V1S3 S31V1S3 ATTACHMENT "D" Vicinity Map to Existing Parishioners Z:\Active Projects\GIGRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG1PIanning\GIS12017-04-25 GR SSGMPA(MEMBERSHIP LOCATION).mxd I I 1 2 I 1 I I 1 I Amolas I 1 I I I ■ ■ ■ I 1 i El gloom IE MN ®ME DB,®EKE®I®Eal® EilIMIwwa=MN OMNI 130MilMEM EEMININEMfNo1 A s: iiiis‘ I (OIL WELL RD I 1 iIMMOKALEE RD o ® m •Z • ® w a o 9 w VANDERBILT BEACH 0 I— s W W W GOLDEN GATE BLVD W J s 0 J ,�� • • a PINE RIDGE RD •I i alb 0 in LL Q • 0 It ui � s l • ■ w J p ® p 0. RADIO RD \.111 - ■ C9 § I DAVIS BLVD ■ wg A g. 1 __,S ii CeLegend s $ '® �7 1 ,e1 DATA&ANALYSIS AREA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES `t. A • EXISTING CHURCH MEMBER LOCATIONS I10.k s MAJOR ROADWAYS ®COLLIER COUNTY BOUNDARY 'URGES:COLLIER COUNTY`GEOGRAPHIC NFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017)i, DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH E4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXISTING CONGREGATION LOCATION EN GfNEERIN ATTACHMENT "E" Location Map of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Denominational Opportunities ']'7 Z:\Active Pro'ects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG1PIannin.BGIS\2017-10-12 GR SSGMPA GR LOCATIONS FL.mxd REIM -•••-.., 110LVIVir � - 4001 HENDRICKS-AV.E,-JACKSONVILLEiI p , FL 322074‘.."'�,. 11111L1 ,,,A , , "is _ 1114111115 ilk A itik \ I • 4111\i‘Mit IS .04 doirjoimmi. , 5416 COUNTY RD 579, SEFFNER FL 33584 14laAT litiCIV IbilkillPhr, ‘1.4k,u, iroi* _ Millr lin il I _. 4 6423 MARBLETREE LN, LAKE WORTH, FL 33467x/ I 1542 HARRISON-ST, OL OYWLOL OYWL OD;FL 33020 1950 VAN BU�RENIST, HOLLYWOOD, FL 313020 ffCiiit a Legend r -. i EXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST DENOMINATION CHURCHES •+.17'• URCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH DE4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAnyppti PHONE:239-434-6060 EXISTING FLORIDA ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCHES ATTACHMENT "F" Alternate Property Map (within Market Study Area) Z:1Active Pro'ects1GIG RACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG 1PIannin"IGISI2017-10-12 GR SSGMPA ALT.PARCELS ZONING.mxd R Z,ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES',-WITHIN TjHE STUD`Y"aREA, BETWEEN5-10 ACRES(SEPARA EIV ORTCOLLECrTIVELLYr -A ONG OLLECTOR`OR AR•TLERIAL_ROWS ¢' x 6ZONING RARLAj VKiCHUR HES;_BYFRIGHT,)REZONE$ f '.R CONDITIONAL 1 (WITHOUT A,,GMPAA,REO UEST) ,. - 4= I - _ :;: 1 VANDERBIL4 BEACH Weia �j GOLDEN GATE BLVD • `.F . Q 3.66180.0.011107 3661.80.0.0.0.0.0 r . mo• i RIDGEa) I, ' :-'..f:::,....;;;..-:::_-_-: ,,,--,,,-:.,,:.:-1,-i 1: -; '1:- ii.:::-''': -- ' i, ' f, - .' - i/- .,....,..- :....-- ,. --_,„::_:_:,„,..,,,_- --',,,, .:-.,,,_. _ , ',,,, , ' -.!..' Vjµ Legend " ' - /,:- - ,JDATA&ANALYSIS AREA "' SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES . r_ ' GOLDENfGAnTE PKWY - - - 1 1MARKET STUDY AREA:AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES s. } zx LLIERTCOUNTYrGEOGRAPHIC '"RCESCOIINFORMAT;IgyAy rbi S(20,17) • DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA -- ,---.44i.,..,. NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE:239-434-6060 AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIES r-- ATTACHMENT "G" Parcel 75180000120 Information Collier County Property Appraiser ,� Property Summary _ Parcel No. 75180000120 Site Adr. 4087 GREEN BLVD, NAPLES, FL 34116 Name/Address COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC I 1454 MADISON AVE W 1 f I City IMMOKALEE State I FL j Zip 34142 Map No. f Strap No. I Section 1 Township I Range I Acres *Estimated 1 4B15 646900 B 14815 15 49 26 5.17 _A Legal1SUNGATE CENTER PUD TRACT B, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 4468 PG 3302 Millage Area 0 100 Millage Rates 0 *Calculations C Sub./Condo 646900- SUNGATE CENTER PUD IN UNIT 26 School Other Total Use Code 0110-VACANT COMMERCIAL 5.245 6.4442 11.6892 Latest Sales History 2016 Certified Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) Date Book-Page Amount Land Value $1,352,325 03/18/14 5020-3283 $2,900,000 (+) Improved Value $0 10/27/03 3431-48 $0 __._,.m_.. -- - - ---- - — (_) Market Value $1,352,325 (_) Assessed Value $1,352,325 (_) School Taxable Value $1,352,325 (_) Taxable Value $1,352,325 If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll /"\ 4/25/2017 Collier County Property Appraiser Collier County Property Appraiser N%1::.<_ SMA“ I In UMW I LARGE I kg y��ER 1:004,,,,, _ •F,., ;,a ^zr.`a F'. Zeam I11 "> Zoom Out limmi 4 Introduction 4110 Search for Parcels by P Search Results ¢ r a Fully ti Parcel ID:75180000120 , a It: ,' I _ V Ty_ Name:COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES INC r ' Previous Street#&Nae:4087 GREEN BLVD Vtew BuileitN:B/1 � d ` ' i''; Zoom To - S d .�;,. :.: _. r; elects +Layers ' "' aeaph,cs Graphics It Legend . S +�Printta — ...Overvies. w �,� a Home Page Aerial Year: 4 Help • :, x2017�.j s r Sales it OFF •_ g _ ¢441 7. y i$_. rX w A .110 r s u , Aerial Photography:January-2017 16 inch]-2017 12 feet]-2016[2 feet]-2076 150 feet] 1/1 http://maps.collierappraiser.com/Map.aspx?ccpaver=1.9.6&ref=disclaimermaps&msize=L 33 ATTACHMENT "H" Sungate CPUD - Ordinance 09-06 Cf:;'-' #44). :, f,'4 618 910 jr ". Ctp ‘ y�r- ''% • �`� T?l ORDINANCE NO. 09 -0 6 1 ` ��' Ary lIEGEWHJ ':1(5'1.<7: ; `;' -, , r/ , , ‘2. `_Q ;,MAR 2009 q AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY ‘- '",:s. t�'', 4? r, °' COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, `ve. `a3 ,,:;'-1-'4-.1- ;-;',-, ,,, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-41, AS -7 ,� =''. .1`, 41+x AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) FOR THE SUNGATE CENTER CPUD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF GREEN BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 10.0± ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 95-42, THE FORMER SUNGATE CENTER PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTWE DATE. WHEREAS, Robert J. Mulhere, AICP of RWA, Inc. and R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. of Roetzel and Andress, LPA, representing Wynn Properties, Inc., and R. Bruce Anderson, Esq., representing Carbone Properties of Naples, Inc.,petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to be known as the --- Sungate Center, PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Page 1 of 2 Revised 1-05-09 '2g Sungate Center CPUD in accordance with the CPUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: Ordinance Number 95-42, known as the Sungate Center PUD, adopted on June 20, 1995, by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida, this a 44hday of E.thrudity , 2009. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGJT KROCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA rw��:`��i( �.'_ BY: 4)7.77-144., 1 r". ' Y `>` rtv Clerk DO A FIALA,CHAIRMAN s un,o• f Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: )4-46-- (-JILL_ Steven T.Williams Assistant County Attorney Project History: Ordinance Number 95-42 This ordinance filed with the S2scrf tory of Stat mai-c. Office the doy of c. and acknowledgement of that Sungate Center,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Page 2 of 2 filing received this _ day Revised 1-05-09 o fgiYy� � Deputy Clerk SUNGATE CENTER COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PREPARED FOR: Wynn Properties,Inc. 9220 Bonita Beach Road Suite 200 Bonita Springs,FL 34135 PREPARED BY: -nw-Acc yONSULTIN, C' IL. ■ 711 Robert J.Mulhere,AICP 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34109 8 R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire Roetzel &Andress 850 Park Shore Drive Trianon Centre-Third Floor Naples,FL 34103 PREVIOUS ZONING APPROVALS ORDINANCE 92—93 ADOPTED 11/24/1992 ORDINANCE 95—42 ADOPTED 06/20/1995 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC Pa./4,200g ORDINANCE NUMBER Z00q—o(p AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL 04-41 . 45-42 Sungate Center PUB,PUDZ-A-2006-AR•10325 Revised 1/20/09 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Exhibits and Tables i Statement of Compliance ii Section I Property Ownership,Legal Description 1-1 Section II Project Development Requirements 2-1 Table 1 2-1 Table II 2-2 Section III Commercial Development Standards 3-1 Table III 3-4 Section IV Development Commitments 4-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT"A" CPDD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT"B" CONCEPTUAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXHIBIT"C" UTILITY FACILITIES & OFFSITE IN I'ERFACE EXHIBIT EXHIBIT"D" PLAN SHOWING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY TRANSPORTATION EXHIBIT"E" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF 0.96 ACRE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE EXHIBIT"F" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20109 SUNGATE CENTER CPDD STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 10.00 acres of property in Collier County, Florida as a Commercial Planned Unit Development(CPUD)to be known as the SunGate Center. The CPUD shall comply with the goals,objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan(GMP). The project is proposing a Commercial Planned Unit Development located within the Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill (GGECI) Subdistrict, as identified on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map(GGEFLUM),in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan(GGAMP). 1. The subject property is located on the west side of C. R. 951 between 15th Avenue S. W. and Green Boulevard and is father described as Tracts"A","B","C",and"D",a replat shown on the plat of SunGate Center CPUD,as recorded in Plat Book 27, pages 1 and 2 of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 2. Allowable uses set forth herein are consistent with the commercial use limitations set forth in the GGECI Subdistrict,which reads as follows: Commercial uses shall be limited to: Low intensity commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and intermediate commercial uses, in order to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, and Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C-1, C-2, C-3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code(Ordinance 91-102), adopted October 30, 1991. 3. As encouraged in the GGECI Subdistrict,the requested rezone is in the form of a CPUD. 4. Shared parking and access shall be provided for within this project. 5. The project does not provide for direct access to Collier Boulevard. 6. The development will be compatible and complementary to existing and planned surrounding land uses. II Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20109 SECTION 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION,PROPERTY OWNERSHIP,GENERAL DESCRIPTION AND SHORT TITLE 1.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed for development under the project name SunGate Center Commercial Planned Unit Development. 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tracts "A", "B", "C", and "D", a replat shown on the plat of SunGate Center PUD., as recorded in Plat Book 27,pages 1 and 2 of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP Tract "A" is owned by Carbone Properties of Naples, Limited Liability Company, an Ohio limited liability company, 5885 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 110,Cleveland,Ohio 44124. Tracts "B", "C", and "D" are owned by Wynn Properties, Inc., 9220 Bonita Beach Road, Suite 200, Bonita Springs, FL 34135. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION The property consists of approximately 10.00 acres of land located in the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida. Presently, +1- 2.04 acres are developed with a United States Postal Services Annex,and 0.91 acres along the northern and southern boundaries of the site fall within right-of-way easements(providing a portion of the 15th Avenue Southwest and Green Boulevard rights-of-way,respectively). The remaining+I-7.05 acres are undeveloped. 1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION It is the intent of the developer to convey +/- 0.51* of the +/- 7.05 undeveloped acres to Collier County for the expansion of Green Boulevard and to develop the remaining, undeveloped +/- 6.55** acres of the subject property with commercial uses and related accessory uses and structures consistent with the provisions set forth in the GGAMP GGECI Subdistrict, and the applicable provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC). *The total"R-O-W Conveyance"to County will be 0.96 acres,but 0.45 acres of that number lie within the"right-of-way easements" already accounted for, in Paragraph 1.4 above, as reducing developable area. **Last digit affected by rounding. 1.6 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall be known and cited as the "SunGate Center Commercial Planned Unit Development Ordinance". 1-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1(20/09 41 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the SunGate Center CPDD,as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Development of the SunGate Center CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Ordinance and applicable sections and parts of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order, such as,but not limited to final subdivision plat, final site development plan(SDP), excavation permit, and preliminary work authorization, to which such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the SunGate Center CPUD shall become part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the CPUD site may be developed. 2.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PLAN AND LAND USE TRACTS A. The project Master Plan, including land uses for the various tracts is illustrated graphically by Exhibit"A,"CPUD Master Plan. LAND USE SUMMARY PARCEL PROPOSED USE ACREAGE Tract"A" Existing Commercial r+/-2.04 Tract"B" _Commercial +l-5.19 Tract"C" Commercial +/-0.79 Tract"D" Commercial +/-0.57 ROW Easements ROW +/-0.45 Current Roadway Dedications ROW +/-0.96 TOTAL +/- 10.0 TABLE l:Land Use Summary B. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown on Exhibit"A", such easements as necessary(utility, private,semi-private) shall be established within or along the various tracts as may be necessary. 2-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 2.4 DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY The project's commercial intensity is set forth in Table 2,below. PARCEL PROPOSED USE INTENSITY ACREAGE (SQ.FEET) Tract"A" Commercial 20,000 +/-2.04 Tract"B,C,and D" Commercial 63,000 +/-6.55 Right-of-way Easements& Right-of-way N/A +/- 1.41 Current Roadway Dedications Table II:Development Intensity 2.5 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County GMP, and the Collier County LDC, a minimum of 15% of the existing native vegetation on-site is required to be retained or replanted. The site is partially developed with a postal annex and water management facilities. The site is almost entirely cleared; however,there are some existing trees. At the time of issuance of issuance of the first development order(SDP/PPL) 10% of the native trees shall be required to be retained or replanted with mitigation-sized native canopy trees in the landscape buffer.No preserve management plan or conservation easement will be required. 2-2 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 at SECTION III COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT 3.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses within areas designated as Tracts A, B, C,and D on Exhibit"A",CPUD Master Plan. 3.2 MAXIMUM COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET Commercial square footage shall be limited to a maximum of 20,000 square feet on Tract A and 63,000 square feet in aggregate on Tracts B, C, and D, for a total maximum square footage of 83,000 square feet. 3.3 PERMITTED USES',2 No building or structure,or part thereof,shall be erected,altered or used, or land used in whole or in part,for other than the following: A. Principal Uses 1) Accounting,auditing and bookkeeping services(group 8721). 2) Amusements and recreation services(groups 7911,dance studios and schools only, and group 7993). 3) Apparel and accessory stores(groups 5611-5699). 4) Auto and home supply stores(group 5531), 5) Automobile parking(group 7521),garages-automobile parking,parking structures. 6) Barber shops(group 7241),except barber schools. 7) Beauty shops(group 7231),except beauty schools. 8) Business services (groups 7311, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338, 7361-7379, 7384, 7389 except auctioneering service, automobile recovery, automobile repossession, batik work, bottle exchanges, bronzing, cloth cutting, contractors' disbursement, cosmetic kits, cotton inspection, cotton sampler, directories-telephone, drive-away automobile, exhibits-building, filling pressure containers, field warehousing, fire extinguisher, floats-decoration, folding and refolding, gas systems, bottle labeling, liquidation services, metal slitting and shearing, packaging and labeling, patrol of electric transmission or gas lines, pipeline or power line inspection, press clipping service, recording studios, repossession service,rug binding, salvaging of damaged merchandise, scrap steel cutting and slitting, shrinking textiles, solvent recovery, sponging textiles, swimming pool cleaning, tape slitting, texture designers, textile folding,tobacco sheeting,window trimming,and yacht brokers). 9) Child day care services(group 8351). 10) Civic, social and fraternal associates(group 8641). 11) Depository institutions(groups 6011-6099). 3-1 Reference Executive Office of the President,Office of Management and Budget,Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987 Edition 2 No permitted use(whether principal or accessory)shall allow for or a sexually oriented business or use,as defined in the Collier County Code of Laws or LDC. Sungatc Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 12) Eating places(group 5812 only), 13) Food stores(groups 5411, including convenience stores with fueling and accessory car wash, 5421-5499). 14) Funeral service(group 7261 except crematories). 15) Gasoline service stations with accessory car wash (groups 5541 subject to LDC Section 5.05.05). 16) General merchandise stores(groups 5331-5399). 17) Hardware stores(group 5251). 18) Health services(groups 8011-8049, 8082). 19) Home furniture, furnishing,and equipment stores(groups 5712-5736). 20) Individual and family social services (group 8322 activity centers, elderly or handicapped; adult day care centers; and day care centers, adult and handicapped only). 21) Insurance carriers, agents and brokers(groups 6311-6399, 6411). 22) Legal services(group 8111). 23) Management and public relations services(groups 8741-8743, 8748). 24) Membership organizations(groups 8611-8699). 25) Miscellaneous repair services (groups 7629-7631, 7699 bicycle repair, binocular repair, camera repair,key duplicating, leather goods repair, locksmith shop, picture framing, and pocketbook repair only). 26) Miscellaneous retail (groups 5912, 5932-5960, 5963 except pawnshops and building materials, groups 5992-5999 except auction rooms, awning shops, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths). Drug stores may have drive-through facilities. 27) Museums and art galleries(group 8412). 28) Nondepository credit institutions(groups 6111-6I63). 29) Offices for engineering, architectural, and surveying services (groups 0781, 8711- 8713). 30) Paint,glass and wallpaper stores(group 5231). 31) Personal services(groups 7212, 7215,7216 nonindustrial dry cleaning only, 7291. 32) Photographic studios(group 7221). 33) Physical fitness facilities(group 7991). 34) Public administration (groups 9111-9199, 9229, 9311, 9411-9451, 9511-9532, 9611-9661). 35) Real estate(groups 6531-6552). 36) Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores(group 5261), 3-2 37) Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors(group 7251). Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-1 0325 Revised 1/20/09 4c 38) Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges, and services (groups 6211- 6289). 39) Self storage facilities (group 4225 indoor, air-conditioned and mini or self-storage only),if permitted within the C-3 Commercial Intermediate zoning district. 40) Social services(groups 8322-8399). 41) Transportation services(group 4724),travel agencies only. 42) United States Postal Service(group 4311 except major distribution center). 43) Veterinary services(groups 0742,0752 excluding outside kenneling). 44) Videotape rental(group 7841). 45) Vocational schools(groups 8243-8299). 46) Any other permitted principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (`BZA")by the process outlined in the LDC. B. Accessory Uses: Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including,but not limited to: 1) Uses and structures that are customarily and typically permitted as accessory and incidental to the uses set forth in Section 3.3.A.above. 3-3 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-I 0325 Revised 1!20/09 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE III COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,000 S.F. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 75 FEET MINIMUM FLOOR AREA 1,000 S.F. SETBACK FROM NORTHERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE EXISTING 30 FOOT ROW EASEMENT THAT IS THE SOUTH HALF OF 15th AVENUE SOUTHWEST. SETBACK FROM SOUTHERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY CPUD BOUNDARY,WHICH IS THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY THAT THE APPLICANT IS CONVEYING FOR THE WIDENING OF GREEN BOULEVARD SETBACK FROM WESTERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 25 FEET FROM THE WESTERLY CPUD BOUNDARY SETBACK FROM EASTERLY PERIMETER BOUNDARY 20 FEET MEASURED FROM THE EASTERLY CPUD BOUNDARY SETBACK FROM INTERNAL DRIVEWAYS 5 FEET SETBACK FROM ANY INTERNAL PLATTED PROPERTY LINE 10 FEET SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES 50%OF THE BUILDING HEIGHT,BUT NOT LESS THAN 15 FEET MAXIMUM ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT 50 FEET MAXIMUM ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT 62 FEET ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SAME AS FOR PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES, EXCEPT THAT THE REQUIRED MINIMUM SEPARATION BETWEEN ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES OR OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES SHALL BE 10 FEET. 3-4 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 47 SECTION 1V DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of the project. 4.2 CPUD MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Exhibit "A", CPUD Master Nan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final, and may be varied at anytime at any subsequent approval phase. Subject to the provisions of the LDC, amendments may be made from time to time. B. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all services and all common areas in the project. 4.3 TRANSPORTATION The development of this CPUD Master Development Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. Access points shown on the CPUD Master PIan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property boundary. The number of access points constructed may be less than the number depicted on the Master Plan; however, no additional access points shall be considered unless a CPUD amendment is approved. As a specific exception to the foregoing, this Applicant, and any successor Owner/Developer of this PUD, is assured that the remaining, western most of the existing driveways on Green Boulevard, as well as all three (3) existing driveways on 156 Avenue S.W., shall remain, with the understanding that the most easterly driveway on 15th Avenue S.W.may,at some future time, be restricted to egress only by, and at the sole discretion of,the Collier County Transportation Department. B. The County reserves the right, at its sole discretion to close the median opening at 40th Terrace SW on Green Boulevard, as well as any median opening that may be approved and constructed to accommodate left-turn egress from the Development's Green Boulevard driveway. C. Standard County practice dictates that if any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County rights-of-way or easement(s),then compensating right-of-way shall be provided at no cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement(s) upon final approval of the turn lane design during the review and approval of first subsequent development order. As a specific exception to the foregoing, any turn lane that this developer, or any successor owner/developer of this PUD property, may necessarily construct upon County rights-of-way shall not cause or require the provision to Collier County of any "compensating right-of- way,"as stipulated in the first sentence of this paragraph. 4-1 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 D. Standard County practice dictates that if, in the sole opinion of Collier County, traffic signal(s), other traffic control device, sign, pavement marking improvement within a public right-of-way, or easement, or site related improvements (as opposed to system related improvements)necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, are determined to be necessary,the cost of such improvement shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. Such being the case, any developer of this CPDD property shall be required to pay for or construct: 1) a sidewalk within the 15th Avenue S.W. ROW, for the entire length of the Development property; and 2) any left or right turn lanes that may be required for the accessing of any of the Development's driveways. Other than those stated improvements, however, this or any successor developer of this CPDD property shall not be required to make any contribution to or for the improvement or other alteration, past, present, or future, of Green Boulevard,Collier Boulevard,or intersection of the two. RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE E. Within ninety (90) days following the latter to occur of: I) the expiration of all appeal periods for PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 without an appeal being filed, or 2) the dismissal or other satisfactory resolution of any such filed appeals; Developer shall convey (the "Right of Way Land Conveyance") to County approximately ninety-six one-hundredths (0.96) acres of land, as depicted and labeled on Exhibit "D" as "0.96 AC. RIGHT-OF- WAY LAND CONVEYANCE" and more particularly described in Exhibit "E", for road right-of-way, drainage, utility, and ancillary purposes to be used by the County for the proposed expansion of Green Boulevard. Developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall cause to be removed from The Right—of—Way Land Conveyance all liens and encumbrances, except oil, gas and mineral reservations and existing easements for utilities and drainage. The Right—of—Way Land Conveyance shall be delivered to County via statutory warranty deed. County, at its sole cost and expense, shall provide Developer an ALTA title commitment to insure title to The Right—of—Way Land Conveyance. Said title commitment shall be utilized and relied upon by Developer as the authority for the existence of any and all liens, encumbrances, or qualifications as to the then-current state of title of the Right—of—Way Land Conveyance parcel. County shall record the deed in the Public Records of the County and shall assume the costs associated with the recordation. The Transportation Administrator or his designee may extend the conveyance date at his discretion. F. Developer shall provide to County evidence of the authority of the record title holder's executing representative to execute the above-referenced deeds,and shall obtain from all entities releasing their respective liens and/or encumbrances from the Right of Way Land Conveyance evidence of the authority of the executing representative to so execute on behalf of said entity. G. The parties acknowledge that the Right of Way Land Conveyance is characterized as property rights acquired by a highway or road agency for the improvement of a road within the boundaries of a public right-of-way. 4-2 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 4P STORMWATER ACCEPTANCE H. Developer and any successor owners of the Development agree to accept, store,and treat, in perpetuity, all of the stormwater drainage from any section, or sections, of Collier County Right-of-Way that may be selected by County; provided that the total area of all roadway sections being so drained to, and accepted by, the Development does not, in total,exceed 1.02(one and two one-hundredths)acres of right-of-way. I. Developer and any successor owners of the Development further agree to cooperate with County in County's efforts to obtain regulatory permitting for the drainage arrangement stated in the prior paragraph, including the execution of any necessary commitment documentation and the granting of any easements or permissions that County may need to facilitate and assure the actual stormwater conveyance in accordance with the permits obtained. Furthermore, in the event that the Development's stormwater management system has not yet been constructed by the time that County begins its improvements to Collier Boulevard (County Project No. 68056), Developer agrees to permit County and its contractor to enter upon the subject property and construct the proposed stormwater retention and treatment pond, and to install the drainage structures necessary to out-fall from the right-of-way to the pond. Any spoils excavated by County in these activities may be left on the Development property. J. County, at its sole cost, shall deliver and construct all necessary structures for the conveyance of said stormwater to the Development's Water Management System, as depicted in Exhibit"B". K. County shall make all reasonable efforts to assure that no hazardous waste material is contained within the stormwater that County conveys to the Development's Water Management System. L. If any actions or improvements by County cause damage to Developer's water management system, County, at its sole cost and expense, shall repair and mitigate said damages. SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT M. Within ninety (90) days following the latter to occur of: 1) the expiration of all appeal periods for PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 without an appeal being filed, or 2) the dismissal or other satisfactory resolution of any such filed appeals; Developer shall deliver to County a Slope and Construction Easement over the area depicted and labeled on Exhibit "D" as "SHARED SLOPE/CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT" and more particularly described in Exhibit "F". Said easement shall allow County to enter upon the easement area for the purpose of constructing County's adjacent roadway and to place upon the easement area any amount of landfill necessary to effect the proper slope relationship between the Developer's Land and the new roadway and ancillary roadway improvements such as sidewalks, drainage structures and street lights. The easement shall also grant, in perpetuity,to County the right to place and maintain, within the southern most three(3)feet of the western most two hundred thirty-five(235)feet of the easement,any lighting system that County deems necessary. 4-3 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 Developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall cause to be removed from the Slope and Construction Easement all liens and encumbrances, except oil, gas and mineral reservations and existing easements for utilities and drainage. The ALTA title commitment referenced in Paragraph E (above) shall be utilized and relied upon by Developer as the authority for the existence of any and all liens, encumbrances, or qualifications as to the then-current state of title of the Slope and Construction Easement parcel. County shall record the easement in the Public Records of the County and shall assume the costs associated with the recordation. The Transportation Administrator or his designee may extend the conveyance date at his discretion. N. County shall replace any damaged or removed improvements or vegetation. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS O. There shall be no monetary or Collier County Road Transportation Impact Fee credit compensation to Developer for any of the above contributions. P. By virtue of, and in consideration of, Developer's cooperation and contributions as described herein, Developer shall not be held responsible, and shall not be charged for any past or future improvements to Collier and/or Green Boulevards, including but not limited to, roadway improvements, expansion, signalization, street lighting, sidewalks, bike lanes, and/or turn lanes. Nor shall Developer be required to make any payments in lieu of any of the foregoing. Developer's contributions satisfy all transportation fair share and mitigation requirements. As a specific exception to the foregoing, any developer of this CPUD property shall be required to pay for: 1) a sidewalk within the 15`x' Avenue S.W. ROW, for the entire length of the Development property; and 2) any left or right turn lanes that may be required for the accessing of any of the Development's driveways 4.4 ADDITIONAL COMMITMENTS A. Development within this CPUD shall comply with the lighting standards specified in Policy 5.1.1 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. 4-4 Sungate Center PUD,PUDZ-A-2006-AR-10325 Revised 1/20/09 51 i 1 t a i Bi 1111 _ _ 0.,-..-4-$.41513 r.: -1�� X61 �:■niraur �� I ili g 8 1.��...manna= � � e� .:C" ririinin OFT " 4j41 *k- t ::.nan��'= iiiI Vuuna „s 1 w illlll nanm iri:inn: kl m ,I pnmr nannr.,gnnnn 3 noiiir�m ry IIII{t�>flllMll�M�IIt/1lalltllfll�lill! !' I i 1 `tltl �eIl■I 56 i_lai,,..ill.+•61 CO i'1"1 cr4 8z to 8 CD cil 'mcj ,J 8 mcl n › to ei-N cn tri CD� � r+ t .+• ` poi CD F.+ > .....i tri • m N I1 Jerrie NI (11.1) i. r \ fin gV .,_45.477 '.�� . v5 • 1:::::) l� _ I .- 11111110 ,s. I ori r� G t/404 r01109_ 10 g ......... Ipti 111" Qs - a is iI0 iIII ;111 i 1,-„i 4 ., . i li t j 4. - 4 i IMIE=-*---- U ll U ;`� I 1 tii Il` \'- .r.1SYa1 r. J t�. 9 la�lLL r \ l 3 8 AS axu BlOB 11 I�\, 11/ 4 L 4 1 k� of 1 \ CPO I i V� N Mfi• �, I \ I� al Z 4 , 5 A311Y 1M 11, � ca i 3 �N 1 .e.lave! }}}ttt-�... I* ?1 '', I a.lave! �e-....r.. / 1�� \; nm>:.G.Oral (Q Ali Z 1 \! .a lanae j ��[ 'I I —- -- -_ ---- -- . to -- ,,,!MENNE . .ii.' ►\ T..* . ..... \\ 0i111111 3 11tZg _" :eEe#- Ar'mil = tieti� 11'lf 2 • �.IIII�IA.iai/.NIIIIIgm1i:UIII , V�W I "HP 1 ' I [NI IN1111i1111=-1111!11 ➢a S Ai' 1E=ef=MUMS*. i els In 11 1 Ii N 'NN NE,N em Neta rite e�t—l— EXHIBIT "A" ..TR sar,nor n Al fe ""' WYNN PROPERTIES,INC �°"� T INC. �,on Sungate Center DIATARousing Visualization r n.aa. CPUJ)MASTER PLAN Lr A Ar CONS. I TA. � OTIN SA 01411. I Lrtyl♦ CPUD . . .� A. S 1111.11.1.1.M.I.M.1100.1.111 04 SOWN 14.14101•Me 53 1 t e s a . i 111 II PP _L r- Amiliki I I • -ic , , _ 1 , fir -— N a - `;� • NI s` Y C ZI .3 A'S 'WELL KM ! l `\ l �� i4 i` t ii , k i` < < < , t a i .. 0 `; \ k. y `V k ! . „ ,..1 ... .. 1 % % 1 % % : % LI' \111'.= /4311V 1lYS Ii 11 ` -....• I,. 1 a , 1, , t,L,..:,:,---„,.. __.....„._._. , ... .. - ... ... .... ,.....„. .... 1 NS; 14,44.! II - < 1 :<-1,---.3,---1 <s...:-.i..._J,�y .i. % — --'0�s .SN''''''.-_ . . . .�:.t.:`.."''I la' -_ _. .. - - - / 06�Gram. -. - 1 \ i 1 EXHIBIT "B" w.WIT.mn m +►ret ; arm WYNNPROPERTIE$INC INC. -° - Sungater Center �j^ PlaNdre b Iffill ®.00rw uxsaxw. CONCEPTUTAL WATER CPU') .. STA 1 SuravaveyTh'SktafrigMoa • . , °® . MANAGEMENT PLAN n`_.. M""""' ^::�;."°`,^ . i \-- I .1` 45Trt ST. S.', I r � ; _ , cnc � I D VIID \ D A cn rn r\w_ I D 4 RD T RACE & iir MS N :11101111 y I€i mow. ; \ ,► �''ogiitilik. ill. Ai. ■ iumu N` T(i1 42N �:, AC S. ) I ift voimisis c.:\ i '..-i Zt 4."1.7.:,,N. y III �w (� JJ ' Ilik < hvl e�12 In rn rn ry" in ...iia►7TT1 - . ° < ``�T co W. D Y J MI 1 k 0 I!J1 !!1ICis ti ro S.W. _ m i f�Q \ I lite 1 MEN * NU1NIIIIIIiiIIII �lil 1� 1► _ _ 1 L `....ti COUNTY ROAD 951 ..."-- --.^--- "-"'^----- BIG CRSS BASIN LANAI, +^^--_ - -----36"MAIN k. t • n.c'9r • ; *z 2 I 30" RAW N .1 oAAl�1 0*m N A� 07J-4?., omooPo_ I g tti 1 icC X —J Z m D rn r Z y rn n 7 c EXHIBIT "C" - TR.Xi ' u rt z PROPERTIE F..a .t,.. 1-... •, e Center 'D%ITA MIS YisuatiratIce =WI �^.0 + UD CONS DIA a Hr MOM OFFSITE I f•1L ws� "...iw'".IIR'w'n' No+t...P.. ar�.+•r wr.rrrrw • 4 ! m @' 4.0 i 138I ll Eill §Ig 1 I 1 r_..,„,20... V H U I 111 t ti11 �Q Ts til v�, i I ' F• II e jI... II 1 r g ; I El 1 f I "'I U.S 14/131.314/131. I II i " l H.1.04 11 � � I l I I " II 1 I 1 oi I I I' I I I sl• I I iu' I, A3TW I1YS I —i i 'On I I. I I , . 1 I 1 s 11i il ri I, Q 1• ii 1 ; 1 # laa• �a ' 7VNVO 1S6 1x il 1 r )r ,L j AMASS SOI IS INC 01140J411100AMYLI'�,'O WYNN PROPERTIES DVC. SUNGATE CENTER CP�ID liD Phoning Viettalizatlat PAM ,r'.:��ti, ~u..MSI EXHIBIT V RIGNTOF WAYDEDICA770M ` T 11.14 1 S ya Mppe [MOM SHARED SLOPE COMTRUCTION EASEMENT ..�...............«.. ..�......E.O. EXHIBIT " E " LEGAL DESCRIPTION (0.96 ACRE RIGHT-OF-WAY CONVEYANCE) A PARCEL OR TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE COUNTY OF COLLIER LYING IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST AND BEING • PART OF TRACT "B" AND "D" SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27, PAGES 1 AND 2, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEGINNING AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT D: THENCE S.89'30'50"W., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. FOR 660.07 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT "B"; THENCE N.00'29'08"W., ALONG SAID WEST LINE FOR 64.25 FEET; THENCE N.89'30'50"E., FOR 235.00 FEET; THENCE 5.00'29'08"E., FOR 2.25 FEET; THENCE N.89'30'50"E., FOR 393.62 FEET; THENCE N.5759'23"E., FOR 39.14 FEET; THENCE S.00'29'08"E., FOR 85.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN. CONTAINING 41,819 SQUARE FEET OR 0.96 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL AS BEING N.00'29'08"W. NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR BY; ' — /b/Z ��' RICHARD V. NESTLER, LS# 4786 DATE SIGNED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCH REVISED 10/20/08 RWEngineers, s0/20/08 CLIENTWYNN PROPERTIES INC Lc St.rferors&Mappers, N/A ..L,L V 7.L ..L Ptanttcrs,PrcgrctMane�rrs Dana rr 6810 Willow Park Drive,Suite zoo RY imE LEGAL DESCRIPTION Ho Florida 34t0➢ @�, (23a 897-0578{PrioiRE> W 0.96 ACRE RIGHT—OF—WAY CONVEYANCE (2ww0 conauit—rwa{eom) SEC; weh pct, PROJECT SHEETFQE FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUIHORi7ATk7H LB/062 15 49S 26E HIM ER: 050214.00.01 NUMBER: ' OF 2 NUM8ER: 050241 SK2 *** THIS IS NOT A SURVEY *** EXHIBIT " E " WEST UNE OF TRACT"IB Ll N00'29'O8'W '.0.1' C `` N00'19'l0-E 680.00 (P) \\ \ \\ .y \\ ‘‘k\. (0 .�\\ \\ Q ` \ U+ :\ `\�'\ P1 ,\:\ SCALE 1"-100' 1 `\.,\ ~ � � LINE TABLE ,,\ \ oa �.5 LINE BEARING LENGTH ;o `.L2 E^'� '8L1 N00'29'05"W 64.25 ,� \.\ i�B 9 P a L2 S00'29'06°E 2.25 \ mz,2 L3 N52'59'23"E 39.14 tL '\ v ro m L4 500'29'08"E 85.29 40TH TERR. S.W. \ \\ `., - aro pyp 0 , 5 ``\ ngN>a `,\\``, Rt, 1{a10 ` `' FAvf'1•� 0, ,\\,'\ '\ re O , ro a m K , Ui 2 \ 0 \ •, 3 ri .\�`\\`m LEGEND g \ `\;•,`'to POC — POINT OF COMENCEMENT m '\� L'' POB — POINT OF BEGINNING r '\ \ N O.R. .. OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK \\\:, PB - PLAT BOOK PGS m PAGES \\ ', C = CALCULATED P c PLAT (E =CENTER UNE \`'\\\'`. \N.\:\\.:\>\ BEARING BASIS \ \ \ N00'29'06'W 660.09 C PUB-- --' L4 N0019'10'E 660.00 (P) . SOUTHEAST CO iNER TRACT"tl' SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D, I C. S.R. 951 (P) COWER BLVD. (F) SEE SHEET 1 FOR LEGAL REVISED 10/20/08 *r-. DAM j2o/Os CLIENT: T �,, I WYNN PROPERTIES INC I iI Survctaurs&Mappers, 1 =100 - I. V .L i Miura,Pluiecr.Maa: ,,cis Mali Ern TITLE: SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY 6610 N9iow Park Dries,Shits 200 RY N les,Florida 34109 CNECK[D DY: DESCRIPTION (239)897-0675(PHONE) MAW — (23s)597-0'575(Fax) Ws 11V,_ Rc1; PRo.rEGT SHEET FILE �rw�.caawlt-rwaoan 050214.00.01 2 050241 SK2 FLORIDA CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION L8f5952 15 495 26E NUMBER: NUMBER: OF NUMBER I EXHIBIT " F " LEGAL DESCRIPTION (SHARED SLOPE AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT) A PARCEL OR TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE COUNTY OF COLLIER LYING IN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST AND BEING PART OF TRACT "B" AND ' D SUNGATE CENTER P.U.D. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 27, PAGES 1 AND 2, THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT D; THENCE N.00'29.08"W., FOR 85.29 FEET; THENCE S.52"59'23"W., FOR 8.89 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE 5.52'59'23"W., FOR 30.24 FEET; THENCE S.89.30'50"W., FOR 393.62 FEET; THENCE N.00'29'08"W., FOR 2.25 FEET; THENCE S.89'30'50"W., FOR 235.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT "B"; THENCE N.00'29'10"W., FOR 15.75 FEET; THENCE N.89'30'50"E., FOR 652.92 FEET; TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE ,PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN. CONTAINING 11,005 SQUARE FEET OR 0.25 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE EAST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL AS BEING N.00'29'08"W. NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE AND RAISED SEAL OF A PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR BY: — _ /C/Zcz RICHARD V. NESTLER, LS# 4786 DATE SIGNED PROFFESIONAL LAND SURVEYOR SEE SHEET 2 FOR SKETCHREVISED 10/20/08 P0 ., • rur 0A,/23".07 CLIENT` scwEWYNN PROPERTIES INC NG Sunrpots to{appers, N/A TITLE: LEGAL DESCRIPTION Al.IL. V 51 Wo pve, , J 00'x' ` °""'�'RY SHARED SLOPE AND _. " —or175(P 00 Davao°Y` CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (zs�) asp—os7s( toftE) MAW (239)597-0578(Fox) sea TNR Rae PROJECT SHEEP FlLf ELORIDA CERTIFFII0'TE OFIAUIHORIZA'I10N 1808952 15 49S 26E NUMBER: 050214.00.01 NUMBER: 1 or 2 NUMBER: 050241SK1 59 *** THIS IS NOT A SURVEY *** EXHIBIT " F " 1.5 N00'29'08"W 660.09 (Q) \ N00'19'10"E 660.00 (P) \ WEST UNE tRACT"If to ,, U 6..1 i' SCALE 1'=10D' Ps) , W Cpl ,, o O \\ L4 ,`mb�� LINE TABLE 4 LINE BEARING LENGTH 40TH TERR. S.W. \,o S N "_ r°I LI N00'29'08 W 85.29 �� ` " o- L2 S52'59'23"W 8.89 egg ` m Plc, L3 S52'59'23"W 30.24 gym" 44 \ca'n � L4 N00'29'08"W 2.25 �, IQ o L5 N00629'10"W 15.75 oeo G1 \ >E 0 g v,m CDs ap + Pp CP \ ;>`""" go S " f' NjN J r�"*'I LEGEND to \\ POC - POINT OF COMENCEMENT cJ '\ POB .. POlN7 OF BEONN1NG O.R. a OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK N 9 PB > PLAT BOOK PPCS = PACES \ C + CALCULATED P - PLAT ,`� 4_ -CENTER LANE `\ ,N, 1 PROPOSED SHARED BERM EASEMENT N \ \ �� BEARING BASIS POB-4,1 N00'29'08"W 660.09 (C) POC-'' L1 N00'19'10"E 660.00 (P) SOUTHEAST CORNER TRACT"VI_ SUNGATE CENTER P.U.O. • a Q S.R. 951 (P) COLLIER BLVD. (F) SEE SHEET 1 FOR REVISED 10/20/08 mc. 7/23/07 CLIENT: �n�;��IS, WYNN PROPERTIES INC .C.-)N S cut veyars&M ppe,�. 1"=100' -�- a- • 5810 eAIL w Pork n}i,`Wilt 200{"ra ° '""LPO 7ITLE: SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY Naplo,Florida 34109 macro am DESCRIPTION (232)597-0575(PHONE) MAW (239)597-0576(Fax) scc twr non PROJECT I SHEET FiZE wCA E OWt-rwacori 15 49S 26E NUMBER: 050214,00.01 1 NUMBER or 2 NUMBER, 0502415K 1 FLGRIpA CERj�JCA7E OF AUTkDRIZADON mom an STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2009-06 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 24th day of February, 2009, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 27th day of February, 2009 . DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts a77„Clerk ..kf• 'a i,' i . Ex-officio to $ord-of '._> County CommisO'iopers ' , 2 ,c_ii,::_{,.., ,, f ; .0, •• :), 4 SIV` -. 6tir By: Martha Verg Asa •P`" Deputy Clerk u' 61 ATTACHMENT "I" Parcel 36618000107 and 36618000000 Information Page 1 of 1 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary 1_ ®w Parcel No. !36618000000 1 _ Site Adr 1 795 CR 951, NAPLES, FL 34119 I__ _.____ _____ _r Name/Address GRAND CORP ALINE JIDY ALFREDO JIDY PAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOON CIR City SANTA FE State NM Zip 87507 Map No. I Strap No. f Section I Township Range ! Acres *Estimated 41310 325600 120 04610 10 49 i 26 2.37 , Legal GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 N1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR 4613 PG 1761 Millage Area 0 100 Millage Rates A *Calculations Sub/Condo 325600-GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 School 1 Other Total I Use Code 0 0 -VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 1 6.5246 11.6466 Latest Sales History 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) ^ Date Book-Page ! Amount i Land Value $128, 07/19/10 , 4590-3261 $ 300 (+) Improved Value $0 04/16/07 1 4214-758 $ 150,000 -- p (=) Market Value $128,673 04/16/07 4214-756 $0 — 05/04/05 3790-2413 $485,000 (-) 1 Cap $77,926; 06/01/84 1085-760 $43,000 I (=) Assessed Value $ 50,747' (=) School Taxable Value $ 128,673 (=) Taxable Value $ 50,747' If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll 1 httn://www.cnllierannraicer_cnm/main cearoll/rep nrrldeta i1 hi417cir1=A1 1 71 01 1 ngTMan--Nrcar Pill i tiNTInm=2F. 111/1 1/')n17 Page 1 of 1 Collier County Property Appraiser Property Summary Parcel No. 36618000107 Site Adr. Name/Address ARAND CORP ALINE JIDY ALFREDO JIDY RAUL JIDY JR 4184 NEW MOON CIR City SANTA FE State I NM i Zip 87507 Map No. Strap No. Section Township I Rng ae Acres *Estimated 4B10 325600 120 14E310 10 } 49 26 [ 2.23 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 S1/2 OF TR 120, LESS E 35FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN ORDER TAKING OR Legal 4613 PG 1759 Millage Area 0 100 Millage Rates 0 *Calculations Sub./Condo 325600-GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 1 School Other Total Use Code 010-VACANT RESIDENTIAL 5.122 6.5246 11.6466 Latest Sales History 2017 Preliminary Tax Roll (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) (Subject to Change) Date Book-Page Amount Land Value $ 134,525; 07/19/10 4590-3261 $300 (+) Improved Value $0 [ 04/16/07 4214-758 $150,000 04/16/07 4214-756 (=) Market Value $134,525 _L $0 _. (-)_10%Cap $75,756 05/04/05 3790-2413 $485,000 �_ �_-_-__.. ___. .___. _._.. —__�— (=) Assessed Value $ 58,769 i (=) School Taxable Value , $ 134,525 (=) Taxable Value , $58,769' If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll ., ... , , i , , , , fid 1n • I ii 1 n1 n, 1O_T..r___—l.T_ 0-1r-1I_AT._W-7L 1 nil 1 /nn1 7 Page 1 of 1 ;,I i *; . ■ P 3 y_ I �3'- k- t III tI: b F `;» I � tip ` , 1 , o-w 4.z 3 st f x Y : syn • o a. rtaetxij^ a®Ss ''3y,I.."'.:'44wNa 4arY:� L .,,!� 7f .:,m: 10/1 1/2017 http://maps.collierappraiser.com/output/Collier 2016P sde0316540545210242.ing ATTACHMENT "J" Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy—White Paper 66 Attachment "J" Co #er County .� Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper y..� .. ? 5 --- GOLDEN GATE AREA =i. .__± FUTURE LAND USE MAP ap c r LI___;:r. 5 - c II Ig .. _ / 1 r al 'I . . 5a r A airammisma -i „_ sisaseasimi , I ROE I RUE1 P.,£ I_..--RUE Prepared by the Growth Management Department, Community Planning Section Staff December 2017 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 1 of 220 67 Co ger County Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Table of Contents Page Section 1: Introduction 1 Section 2: Background 4 Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis 10 Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations 73 Appendix A: Public Outreach 78 List of Figures Page Figure 1: Golden Gate Master Plan Update 3 Areas 2 Figure 2: Golden Gate Area South Blocks 5 Figure 3: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels 6 Figure 4: Golden Gate Western Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels 7 Figure 5: Golden Gate City Aerial 8 Figure 6: Golden Gate City Vacant Parcels 9 Figure 7: Golden Gate City Residential Parcels 11 Figure 8: Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations 12 Figure 9: Proposed Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations 14 Figure 10: Golden Gate City Redevelopment and Renewal Focus Area 15 Figure 11: Golden Gate City Activity Center Aerial 16 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 2 of 220 68 Co ger Cou�.ty -^ Figure 12: Golden Gate City Planned Transportation Improvements 21 Figure 13: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Distribution of Residential Development26 Figure 14: Golden Gate Western Estates Distribution of Residential Development27 Figure 15: Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Study Area 28 Figure 16: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Neighborhood Centers 30 Figure 17: Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard 31 Figure 18: Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface 32 Figure 19: Area 1 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 33 Figure 20: Area 2 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 34 Figure 21: Area 3 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 35 Figure 22: Long Range Transportation Plan Highway Cost Feasible Plan 42 Figure 23: Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment 43 Figure 24: Long Range Transportation Plan New Bridges 44 Figure 25: North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project 52 Figure 26: Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area... 53 Figure 27: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Non-Conforming Lots 55 Figure 28: Golden Gate Western Estates Non-Conforming Lots 56 List of Tables Table 1: Watershed Management Plan Initiatives 60 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 3 of 220 69 Section 1: Introduction This White Paper provides a conceptual framework to address elements of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy. The GGAMP is a separate element within the County's Comprehensive Plan.This framework serves as a vehicle to further vet and inform staff, community leaders and the public in advance of the specific language that will be incorporated into the transmittal documents for Growth Management Plan amendment, and the public hearing process. The GGAMP is the second of four restudies focused on eastern Collier County, as directed by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) on February 10, 2015. Focus areas of all four restudies include complementary land uses and economic vitality, including housing affordability, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship. As the staggered restudies unfold, relationships and synergies between the study areas are identified and maximized. The Community Planning staff in the Zoning Division of the Growth Management Department provide this document to describe the history and status the GGAMP (Section 2), the planning process, outreach, data and analysis (Section 3) and the list of Initial recommendations (Section 4). Appendix A includes the full documentation of the public outreach process and results. The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, public outreach was designed and pursued along these three geographic lines. However,this report will generally follow a format that separates Golden Gate City from both Estates areas. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in common.Where differences exist,they are described in Section 3. Golden Gate City is fundamentally different than either of the Estates areas. The basic structure of the current GGAMP is divided into two main parts:The Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) section and the Land Use Designation Description section. The former section sets forth vision,values, requirements and aspirations;the latter describes specific subdistricts and their land uses within the GGAMP. Both sections guide the Code of Ordinances and Land Development Code in enactment and updated amendments. As a non-substantive consideration, staff proposes that the GOPs and Land Use Descriptions remain as the organizational framework, but within two parts. One part will be the Golden Gate Estates,the other will be Golden Gate City. In this way, the GOPs pertaining to these very different areas will lend more geographic clarity. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 4 of 220 70 As with all restudy efforts, the fundamental premise is that any proposal for amendment to the existing Plan must reflect the goals and vision of residents and stakeholders. Residents responded well to outreach efforts and provided a foundation built on community vision and individual preferences. Non-resident stakeholders include interests that extend beyond the boundaries of the Golden Gate. For example, public water utilities in Collier County and City of Naples draw potable water from beneath the Golden Gate Estates area.The issues and potentials involved in water must be considered, along with other shared policy matters. Note on terminology in this White Paper:As shown on Figure 1,the Estates area east of Collier Blvd. (C.R. 951) will be alternatively described as the eastern Estates or the rural Estates; the Estates area Figure 1 GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN UPDATE:3 AREAS -\e C W LEE COUNIV UNE z , Al: - I __ WIGGU4 ABo RD l OIL WELL RD F DR WELL RD _ G re 111THAV N W610KALEE RD RANDALL BLVD z i tib O O O ., VANDERBILTBEROH RD z TE ZvissmulisinTis i c _ ; GOLDEN GATE B.VDW GOLDEN GATE BLVD E _ C 6 O i O J 1 8EKioriDR d ?zIN MGR RD EASTERNEE�TATE z 1 m w I e _ I C C w m o °a, u w O tf ®QQ o a _ '�. D_DEN(7AE MIY r� E N 5 RADIO RD I west of Collier Blvd. will be alternatively described as the western Estates or the urban Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 5 of 220 71 Throughout this White paper are several figures or maps used for reference. These are also maintained in PDF format on our website, so that the public may view and zoom in, as needed, with greater picture clarity: http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning- division/community-planning-section/golden-gate-area-master-plan-restudy/library. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 6 of 220 72 Section 2: Background History of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan The Golden Gate area was first conceived, platted and developed by the Gulf American Land Corp. Development began in the late 1950's and the subdivision was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 1960. By 1965, 90%of the land was platted and marketing was well underway. The Estates portion of Golden Gate comprised 163 square miles (111,000 acres), nearly 8% of the County's total land area,and was believed to be the world's largest subdivision. It included 813 miles of roadway (mostly lime rock) and 183 miles of canal to drain the area for habitability. Prior to development, the area was regularly inundated by several feet of water during the wet season.The Estates subdivision included mostly 1.25, 2.5 and 5 acre parcels. It was intended to include single family, multi-family and commercial land uses, but was rezoned into low-density single family residential uses in 1974. By 1982,the minimum (legal conforming) lot size for all areas of the Estates became one unit per 2.25 acres. In 1983, the County entered into a settlement agreement with Avatar Corp., the successor to the defunct Gulf American Land Corp. By that time, leaders recognized additional acreage and funds would be needed to provide public services. The agreement included the provision of 1,062 acres under County ownership to be managed for the purposes of recreation, utilities, community services and essential services.The land was also provided as a source of funds to construct the facilities. Prior to 1991,the Golden Gate area was governed by the County's Future Land Use Element(FLUE), part of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) first adopted in 1989. As mandated by the first GMP, the unique characteristics of the area were recognized in 1991 by the adoption of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), a separate element in the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Citizens and County leaders recognized the unique quality of the area, and gave special consideration to natural resources, land use, water management and public facilities, as identified by a Citizen's Steering Committee. In doing so,former Objective 1, Policies 1.1 and 1.3 and Future Land Use Maps for Golden Gate were superseded. Nevertheless, other Goals, Objectives and Policies in the FLUE remain applicable to the Golden Gate area. In 1996,the Board adopted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report(EAR)for Collier County.As a result of that effort, the original Master Plan was replaced by a new GGAMP, pursuant to Ordinance 97- 64. In 2001, the Board directed a restudy of the GGAMP, undertaken by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Committee. The Committee met on more than twenty occasions between June 2001 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 7 of 220 73 and June 2003 and proposed amendments to the Board for consideration in two phases.The stated goal of this restudy was to guide future decision making in a manner that balances the residents' need for basic services with natural resource and preservation concerns. Importantly, many of the topics heading todays restudy were closely reviewed by the Committee: commercial uses, conditional uses, rural character and transportation. Subsequently, amendments to the GGAMP were adopted in 2003 and 2004, reflecting community vision for the future of the area. Since the 1990's, the State of Florida had been purchasing parcels in the South Golden Gate Estates/NRPA area. Under the Florida Forever and Figure 2 Save our Everglades lNONALER ROAD g Golden Gate Estates r d �� programs, Picayune Strand South Blocks I State Park was envisioned and pursued, along with J significant restoration r En. WEU. ROAD activity. The acquisition s IAMMOi9LEE ROAD RAfi1MLL1 9)liLEti"ARP process was completed around 2006. Since then, s -` YADDEREILI _ miles of roadway and canals REACH ROAD .ii `L D S GUIDON GATE I DOLO-EVARD 0 have been recontoured and T ME 1.Maiir l walrc RLVII n three large pump stations and levies installed, with 2 ee---„ the aim of rehydration to ¢ = restore natural sheetflow R I^•°L ,TE.,, ax.�, w for the benefit of wetlands, DAVIS BOC1EkARD _ aquifers and estuaries, SR-DJ ___ _ `_-____ 0 G c under the direction of g i South Florida Water ry �� s .,T _-_ 14* Management District and \ the Army Corps of 1 _ _ Engineers. Accordingly, as shown in green on Figure 2, 1 —= approximately 39,000 acres that comprised the "south --E- blocks" are no longer part a L."--_.1 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 8 of 220 74 Current Conditions Following the completion of the purchase and assemblage of Southern Golden Gate Estates by the State of Florida, the remaining area of the rural Golden Gate Estates remains at approximately 58,000 acres. The urban Estates comprise Figure 3 about 8,300 acres and Golden Gate City GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES( E OF 951) PARCELS TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 approximately 2,500 Parcels with Structures:Approx.11,296 acres. The Parcels without Structures:Approx. 12,512 characteristics of these Legend areas vary greatly. STRUCTURE IM,�CX�EERD The rural Estates PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES ■ , r. fl , , retains the most"rural" PARCELS WITH STRUCTURESli,- , character of the three ` ' 1t- ®.[ ' FI lP r m areas, given its size and �' , � ; l a residential distribution. _ ' l; 11,y " 7 " I' i7 IL uI' i„ lit 1" li Because of the -4} j IL ' l 2l 1, ' - _ ; � development pattern � �'` i i ' ,; and changes in I 1_ Du ' -j1 condition over the past I°„ 6 i 5 decades, flooding, M,A1° EES •" �I10r ;" �, ' t waft'�� '� ;lt , r,tr f l. R1 4 i r a wildfire and wildlife a HI II' ;_ , '' " �°'� �'�4 "�` ill i 1., #-.11 P v lr ,ii.. , i- a . t conditions play a more g �� !' e tom., (. ; '`'i � important role in �' ! VANDERBILT BEACH PD 'l' ' '21' rfl yl�J r4 r ----+� aqrM1eastern Estates 4 :— l ` s `t residents' lives asi. } r� ' '—f,u•N , ` ' , k ""�'� compared to the urban X11 _ 4 i�: 6 ) 'i WNEzD Y I 1 t .�r n Cr- �"' --1_--_—_-_____-:-_'}T"�.•Y� I� ) �:7 41 i- area. !�l3 �_ p 9Fj� GREEN BLV �i ` I -.„ ,,,:..±,t,:: 31ie? �� ',-i_f 11, III 1 My I As of 2016, the rural ;,t. . „ ,4 r:i, Ali,FttEstates was nearly 50% / ; 4"4 �� built out, as shown in ° - �� t r. Figure 3, with a higher � ) concentration of v• 1°5 I 1,1 dwelling units located g h N m I D 0.5 1 2 3 //7/# . nearest the urban area. I Miles The population % A --. projection for 2016 was Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 9 of 220 75 approximately 32,000 persons. For several decades, this area has been described as a de facto "affordable" housing area, given the land costs in comparison to urban locations. Though its developers built canals to "drain" and lower the water table, remnant wetlands remain on a significant portion of the eastern Estates, Figure 4 including within GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES areas (WEST OF CR 951) the Horsepen Strand 4 i 1MMOKALEE RD flowway. 1. Meanwhile, the pace I �i1 Legend of development -- , MN DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.2.601) remains high in the u IIsi ' 1 INE VACANT RES IDENTIALIAPPROx.4a0) mar eastern Estates. In I 1 fact, building permits VANDERBI BEACH RD issued in this area increased from 273 to � I # 86 408 year to year, as it [ ( - GOLDEN GATE BLVD measured second 7 i i B quarter, 2016 to 2017. 0 - is I i 1 In contrast to the a rural, eastern Estates, I i p .£ r- PINE RIDGE RD 7) the western Estates is �� ' 1 more associated withz r the urban area, 1 N LSLVD although large lots o a predominate. This z relatively smaller area J OM is in closer proximity to goods, services and _ job opportunities. GOLD: xi, i u t I e- job fulii ii Because of its t fit a �,r� ��w �" >v location, it is closer to i A build-out with 86% of the lots developed, leaving only 14%vacant as of 2016. Figure 4 illustrates the number of residential parcels developed and the number of parcels vacant. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 10 of 220 76 Golden Gate City is at the heart of the GGAMP. As illustrated on Figure 5, the City comprises a denser population in close proximity to a mix of uses which include commercial, office, schools and parks.Although some canals create impediments, and some infrastructure needs improvement,the City is well connected to support a more walkable and bikeable community. Creating a vibrant, walkable community has been identified as a top priority by its residents. Figure 5 n GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA A µ f • e r ti m ccm a _ O C,O The projected 2016 population of Golden Gate City was 24,000. Golden Gate City has a unique demographic; different than what is typically found in urban Collier County. The average age of its residents is 30, compared to 47 county-wide. There are 42% more persons per household (3.38 v. 2.38) and 65% less median household income ($40,000 v. $66,000). Nearly all parcels within Golden Gate City have existing development, however a few parcels remain vacant. Figure 6 shows the current vacant parcels, along with the underlying land use designation. Several vacant parcels exist in both residential and commercial designations. Many of the existing residential and business structures date back to the 1960's with land values exceeding structure Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 11 of 220 77 values. In addition, some of the larger commercial parcels within the Activity Center are now vacant big-box retailers.These circumstances are a foreshadowing of future redevelopment. Figure 6 GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA VACANT PARCELS am Vacant Parcels _ r Golden Gate Master Plan GG Urban Infill Commercial =Activity Center r;- " Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrict i Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict GG Parkway Professional Office Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict f*; '411111111,— � o Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 12 of 220 78 Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas:the eastern or rural Estates (east of County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated area.With these differences in mind, the restudy effort included public outreach and planning analysis along these three geographic lines. This Section provides information reflective of the unique conditions of Golden Gate City and the Estates. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in common and are discussed in this Section under the same Golden Gate Estates heading. Where differences exist, they are described. The focus areas of complementary land use and economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship are addressed under both Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy public outreach process included extensive public engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. Appendix A includes the public workshop summaries, polling and survey results, and other communications from stakeholders. The public workshops for both law Golden Gate City and the western and eastern Estates kicked-off with a " ° visioning process. The intent was to determine if any of the community values had changed. The visioning - . ..,i^ '4% 4-- process lead to each community r. developing their own vision ""*'. statements. These community- v4.-- '. - r,.. defined vision statements should provide guidance for implementing t;•. , - planning goals, objectives and �° �� policies. These are provided as a preface to the following Golden Gate /,' City and Golden Gate Estates sections. Golden Gate Estates Visioning Workshop Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 13 of 220 79 Golden Gate City The residents of Golden Gate City created a vision statement during the public workshops.This vision statement reflects the need for the County to adopt land use and transportation policies in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan that are people-oriented and support economic development and redevelopment. Each adopted policy should relate to and further the community's vision.This vision of a family-oriented community gives direction to consider residents of all ages, children, adults and the elderly,and how they safely move about town,and what destinations are available to help them thrive. Golden Gate City Vision Statement "Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse,family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, parks,shopping and services within a vibrant,walkable community." Land Use and Economic Vitality Within Golden Gate City there are numerous future land use designations ranging from single family residential use to heavy commercial use. Golden Gate City is a true mixed-use community. Within Figure 7 GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA FUTURE LAND USE ACREAGE Residential:Approx.2,255 Acres Non-Residential:Approx,291 Acres Schools:Approx.102 Acres vim Schools Golden Gate!aster Plan GREEN BLVD ni GO Urban Infill Commercial ®Activity Center Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict 00 Padtwayi Profasalonal OfficeConrnerciat SubdtitrictVis' Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict `l 0 J m J W m - V CO , ``' `� � IllkGOLDEN GATE PKY1.1.1117 V' _.......\\\ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 14 of 220 80 Golden Gate City's four-square-miles, residents are in close proximity to schools, parks, goods and services. The majority of Golden Gate City is designated as residential (approximately 2,255 acres). Commercial areas (291 acres) are distributed throughout the community along the major arterials including Golden Gate Parkway, Santa Barbara Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. To accommodate both residential and commercial uses, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map provides six different commercial designations, each with different allowed uses, intensities and development standards. Figure 7 shows the Golden Gate City areas designated residential in yellow, school sites, and the six designated commercial or mixed-use areas. The majority of Golden Gate City is designated residential as seen on Figure 8. Well established, stable neighborhoods are the building blocks of any community and should be protected and enhanced. According to the most recent Collier County Property Appraisers information there are approximately 7,887 residential units, which includes 4,213 single family homes and 3,674 multi- family homes.The multi-family homes are condos,apartments, and a good number of duplexes.This Figure 8 A Golden Gate City Single Family and Multi-Family Units lesmas da>n. GREEN BLVD 1 I �"'� }5 U '�'� Kul_^ %k , Legend , ,- ,,; , Single Family trfl: �, c �__ 4.248 Units , !i i}Ni4li ifpotsabif,,t, i 1 R k Multi-family i� �z. •��_ � s,. Mali(3,674 Units) Z .Z`;`r�`" ¢, �' ` '' / - i ,! Golden Gabe City ' tri, r ;-; f�nns!r 1 il! :::-R.4 AN:1-,..41.4fatori sf,,,.,-, frAll, ,.of i hill�< 2 T S.!i `.; ,. 1° res» ,''� `""'—m"t� I 113.1 011 r 0 1 �c:a�i r max+, 1. Q aa. w�u m a .� -' J -'?a -FIs • 4k.,:4"14° tlJ - 4 •.*t - AIM� 4i'31' 2,.-<---t., ".. 731.1? maty ry �.-�•. on° i t ii a 2 1' /� -kt �� ,,wAitr i ILto rnmst,•-_ a ( ` ,� GO • N GATE PKu` ."' -' -4 t.',;ii-:,11 ,,msw:—"1 lip,\Itir-77 iii - , ...1, , ....__ ,,.. L........h-D l �i Wim®. Vii► �_., �� Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 15 of 220 81 housing mix supports great diversity in housing choices within Golden Gate City and allows for aging in place within the same community. While the Golden Gate Master Plan offers a full range of commercial uses, many commercial areas remain under-utilized. Some of the largest stores, including K-Mart and Sweet Bay, have recently closed. During the public workshops,the majority of participants felt there isn't a need for additional commercial areas, but instead want to focus on redevelopment of the existing areas to bring in new businesses, shops, restaurants and services. Along with community public workshops, Collier County Community Planning staff organized a workshop specifically for all property owners within a commercial land use designation.The purpose of the workshop was to identify opportunities and constraints to developing commercial uses. In addition to noting desires to unify and simplify the uses, design standards and processes throughout the commercial designations, there was strong sentiment supporting the evaluation of redevelopment programs and tools for Golden Gate City. To set the stage for redevelopment and creating an authentic sense of place, it is proposed to simplify the commercial land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway, and provide consistency in the mix of uses and development standards.The following modifications are proposed to the land use designations and Future Land Use Map. 1. Modify the designation of the Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict(shown on Figure 7 above)to redesignate it and make consistent with the Golden Gate Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict.This change will simplify the effort to create design themes and development standards to benefit the community's desire for future redevelopment that is vibrant and walkable. 2. Add two properties along Golden Gate Parkway, not currently included in this designation. One property is at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara, where a CVS store is currently located. The second property is the Coral Palm Apartments located between the Activity Center and the Downtown District. Including this property meets the intent of creating a mixed-use corridor. The addition of these two properties is forward looking to provide for greater development consistency along Golden Gate Parkway in the event of future redevelopment. 3. The final proposed change is to include the Wheels BMX skate park and band shell within the boundary of the Activity Center. The Activity Center provides many civic uses and including this park is consistent with the mixed-use intent of the Activity Center. This will provide Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 16 of 220 82 greater certainty that the park is well connected into the Activity Center and a focal point for community celebrations. Figure 9 PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP if Legend N GREEN BLVD Category - i'✓fr Addition ME Golden Gate Urban Infill Commercial ININ Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict i Goden Gate poaRown Center ---' Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict L__J Urban Residential I I. Activity Center 1 Addition Addition O ii 0 W WI : J ED W J j G3 Q a O w to v I- Z Z Q CO f Z 4 to Addition I ,^ ......\\GOLDEN GATE PKY kV__„ ! I There are two policies in the current GGAMP that call for community-planning and neighborhood- based planning programs, however, these policies have not been implemented. During the public workshops, residents expressed a clear willingness to participate in the planning process for their community. When asked, "would you be willing to participate in community-based planning program?", the majority of workshop participants were willing to engage in such a program. Continued community participation will be needed for future planning efforts such as redevelopment, urban design themes, development standards, and the creation of branding and marketing materials. To best facilitate community and neighborhood-based planning programs Collier County staff should engaged with and support the established Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Municipal Services Taxing District (MSTU), utilizing these established groups to involve residents in future planning efforts. Working with these associations builds cohesion, recognition and support for Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 17 of 220 83 community leadership to continue their focus for improvements in Golden Gate City. It is proposed to work within the established Civic Association and the MSTU, their leadership, administration and outreach platforms, rather than creating a new community planning group administered by Collier County staff as currently called for in the Master Plan. Supporting Golden Gate City Redevelopment Golden Gate City contains several commercial areas that are centrally located to the population.The available acreage for commercial development is sufficient to support the residents of Golden Gate City and the surrounding area;therefore, there is not a need to designate additional areas. Instead, focus is needed within the current commercial areas.These areas are dated,auto-oriented and have some significant "dark boxes" resulting from big box store closures. For the community vision to be realized, redevelopment that is people-oriented is needed. The proposed areas to emphasize renewal efforts are the Activity Center and along Golden Gate Parkway (Figure 10). Figure 10 Redevelopment and Renewal Area of Focus *�` e� , f #tO � x te - ee -*` x: 1ct z� 41.. l Area aoudaF` neRe,newae�dev apr+ - $£ - - rr -i " „ ,s :„.7- ,, ,,, - t� _ : :„ , ,--;_:-i,:„.71 - ;-,1,. 4:::4,0, .. , , :‘,,,,,;,...;.--.,. ..; ,.„.4,___ .4,, i �> } s �� r y � �.' egg ,x -,,11. .�_ „ >,> ,tf, -' :it 111; Y,# f g" ? ^�..rr_- ., s k: '-m. , *,� } - `&,mow+ '� ' � e '`' Yom_ 2 _x (40'4.-1-‘71,-:-:;-:7;:1111‘4 " - 4 e. - -. , .:iti'-'? ,/,...---., - -- - s -ice ''-':' ' 't- -;;:;Tr-k-,- ‘,-T-4.,,----,.v. Yft.T-. '•',"-- - -%-,-;4:11-.4'..- ,,,;.-1--;—, A-r-4-- ,--_-. - 't''' 4.1 -* -4:1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 18 of 220 84 There are three distinct areas within the Activity Center; one is the civic area where the community center, library and other civic uses are located, the second area is where the Winn-Dixie is located, and the third area is where the vacant K-Mart building is located. Both the Winn-Dixie plaza and the vacant K-Mart plaza each have a single owner, making these large aggregated parcels more viable for redevelopment (Figure 11). Figure 11 Activity Center Development Areas As developed, these three =w areas within the Activity ,. ;„ y _', Center do not interconnect or $ relate to one another. They I �_ - _ - were clearly developed : - 4 separately without a vision or s `' ; consideration for the whole. This is a shortcoming of the full 4, potential of this Activity `'-` � s'"` Center. Moreover, the Activity `" * Center plazas were developed \ ' , ' ' • in an auto-oriented pattern .4 -.,, „4,,,,,, with access and circulation ``i- \\ , favoring the automobile. This • '5 .< 40, z•„` _ -- .0-Sift form of urban development, also found along Golden Gate Parkway,creates impediments to the community's desire to be a safe, walkable, vibrant community. The typical auto-oriented pattern creates an "anywhere USA" and lacks authentic community identity. Opportunity Naples (2014) has been a guidepost for Collier County economic development. Opportunity Naples found a need for shovel ready sites for target industries in Collier County. The report also found "growth trends in Collier County's age dynamics risk the future sustainability of the local workforce. Collier County's 25 to 44-year-old population is proportionally smaller than every comparison area except Sarasota County, as is Collier's percentage of 0 to 19-year-old residents. Without an influx of younger workers migrating to the County or a spike in birth rates, Greater Naples could face a significant shortfall of replacement workers for future retirees. Likewise, there will be an occupational shortage in Collier County if qualified workers aged 24 to 44 are not recruited to the area to replace retirees." This age group, and most specifically the millennials, is one of the most sought-after market segments. Fortunately for Golden Gate City the median age is 30, falling right into that desirable workforce age range. Study after study shows millennials are increasingly choosing vibrant, healthy, walkable communities and rejecting the automobile-centric land use patterns of the generations before them. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 19 of 220 85 Golden Gate City has the basis to be just the type of place the young workforce and their employers are searching for. Further supporting mixed-use, allowing employment centers, and improving the walking infrastructure can become an economic development strategy—a tool to retain and attract a skilled workforce and to build a sustainable economic base. To increase job opportunities within Golden Gate City, and provide nearly shovel ready sites, it is proposed to add several specific land uses to the Activity Center designation. These uses support target industries such as, advanced manufacturing, software development, and data and information processing.To ensure a process to determine compatibility with the surrounding area, these new uses within the Activity Center are proposed as conditional uses, hence nearly shovel ready. Alternatively, the Board could allow these as permitted uses and promoted development standards within the Land Development Code to address compatibility. There are several redevelopment programs that could assist in furthering economic development within Golden Gate City. Collier County uses two of these tools. First, the Community Redevelopment Area (CRA).Collier County currently has two CRAs, one in Immokalee and one in the Bayshore Triangle area. The establishment of a CRA is a very lengthy and bureaucratic process. At the state legislative level, CRAs have recently come under scrutiny with some legislators supporting their disbandment. The advantage of the CRA is the County's administration, engagement and oversight of the redevelopment area projects, along with Tax Increment Financing (TIF). However, Golden Gate City's demographic and economic profile is similar to that of Immokalee and Bayshore and while a CRA may benefit Golden Gate City, it is likely to compete for grants with the other two CRAs therefore inhibiting the potential of the all CRAs. The second tool the County uses is the Innovation Zone. Ave Maria town centers are designated Innovation Zones. The Innovation Zone, created by BCC Ordinance 2010-20, is a local TIF tool to promote economic growth and diversity. Innovation Zones may be designated by the BCC through the implementation of Economic Development Plans adopted by resolution for each Innovation Zone. Per the Ordinance, "the use of available TIF revenues within an Innovation Zone as a dedicated economic development tool and funding source enhance the general welfare of the County through the advancement of new employment opportunities, the implementation of redevelopment initiatives, the creation of new economic development opportunities and locations and the expansion of existing employment centers." By permitting specific light industrial uses and employment centers for target industries within the Golden Gate City Activity Center,there is a clear intent to promote economic growth in Golden Gate City,thereby making the Innovation Zone an applicable and viable tool for redevelopment.As a local -- tool,the BCC is able to designate Innovation Zones without State oversight. Measuring the pros and cons of each redevelopment tool,it is proposed for the Board to designate an Innovation Zone which Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 20 of 220 86 encompasses the Activity Center and Golden Gate Parkway to promote economic growth and redevelopment. In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict there is a provision for a minimum project size of one acre. Most parcels are half or a quarter of this size making it less feasible for the property owners to develop or redevelop their properties under this requirement. It is proposed to remove this limitation in effort to support the property owners desire to develop their property consistent with the uses allowed. The Land Development Code may be revised as necessary to address any development standards needed to support this change. The Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, located along the western side of Collier Boulevard between Golden Gate Parkway and Green Boulevard allows heavy commercial with some properties presently zoned C-5, the most intense commercial district. Sustainable communities need appropriate locations for heavy commercial zoning. This land use designation is well located and there are no changes proposed. However, it should be noted that some homeowners located within the western portion of this Subdistrict were very surprised to learn their home had a heavy commercial land use designation.The previous restudy expanded this subdistrict boundary back into a single-family neighborhood. Careful consideration should be given within the Land Development Code to ensure design standards are in place so homeowners are not negatively impacted. Growth Management Plan Policies The following goals, objectives, policies and land use designations outline the land use provisions currently adopted. The policies are relatively non-descript and do not necessarily form a clear the direction for Golden Gate City. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to identify and further the community's vision. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Goal 4: To preserve and enhance a mix of residential and commercial land uses within Golden Gate City that provides for the basic needs of both the local residents and the residents of the surrounding area. Objective 4.1: Provide for residential and commercial land uses that meet the needs of the surrounding area in the development and redevelopment within Golden Gate City. Policy 4.0.1: Development and redevelopment with Golden Gate City shall be guided by the residential and commercial needs of the surrounding area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 21 of 220 87 Policy 4.1.1 Collier County shall develop an implementation schedule for the creation of a community-planning program for Golden Gate City... Policy 4.1.2 Collier County shall begin to examine, by holding community meetings,the feasibility of establishing neighborhood-based planning programs within Golden Gate City that focus on the unique or distinct features of the different portions of the community. While focusing on distinct areas within the community,such neighborhood planning efforts as may be established shall not neglect Golden Gate City as a whole. Policy 4.1.3: Collier County shall examine the feasibility of crafting land development regulations specific to the Golden Gate City community. Such regulations shall focus on the unique circumstances of this community. Existing Non-residential Land Use Designations(synopsis) High Density Residential Subdistrict To encourage higher density residential and promote mixed-uses in close proximity to Activity Centers,those residential zoned properties permitting up to 12 dwelling units per acre. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: The primary purpose of the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage redevelopment along Golden Gate Parkway in order to improve the physical appearance of the area and create a viable downtown district for the residents of Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. Mixed-use Activity Center Subdistrict The Activity Center designated of the Future Land Use Map is intended to accommodate commercial zoning within the Urban Designated Area. Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Golden Gate Urban Commercial In-fill Subdistrict This Subdistrict is located at the southwest quadrant of C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Parkway. Commercial uses are limited to low intensity and intermediate commercial uses similar to C-1, C-2, or C-3 zoning. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict The intent of the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict is to provide Golden Gate City with an area that is primarily commercial, with an allowance for certain conditional uses. Thy types of uses permitted within this Subdistrict are low intensity retail, offices, personal services and institutional. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 22 of 220 88 Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict The provisions of this Subdistrict are intended to provide Golden Gate City with a viable professional office district with associated small-scale retail. Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict The primary purpose of the Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage redevelopment along Collier Boulevard in order to improve the physical appearance of the area. This Subdistrict is intended to allow a mix of uses, including heavy commercial within those areas presently zoned C- 5. Recommended Policies • Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote compatibility. • Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City. • Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City. • Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing. • Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning programs. • Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development and redevelopment strategies. • Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation. • Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City. • Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeking business creation and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City. • Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent development pattern. • Add target industry uses to the Activity Center. • In the Santa Barbara Commercial District, remove the minimum project size of one acre. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 23 of 220 89 Transportation and Mobility Golden Gate City has a well-connected neighborhood roadway network. However, nearly all streets lack sidewalks or other infrastructure to support walking.This severely limits safe transportation for Figure 12 Golden Gate City Transportation Features fir. m � am Gat! +. .•g s m ! %. �.. 1.1 TRANSPORTATION FEATURES xr S�hnol% r , ., . 1 P:xc 9feU4n¢ Ex,g Pavetl Shou L, F __.,____Ex15unP BIkE Life « G .Yn�cn +• -Fzixlvr9�a Rwies __..� FS.afaa a carte Reae� PINE RIDGE RD ' s . P'rannetl Pmke �, -�_. 45TU WKicamn Protects ; k 44 Parks' Fut.ue SAewaaa . I : ; Fuwrr,TranitPark-0]Filtla Furore Transit Trartsfor f+:. ,..... „1 I ''''.°Y An" <i It ` GREEN BLVD < �� tI �.�. ryala � ... a- 5 �' �'"'Sr•4 v 1 t t s r 5 1p ' F t` �� la r t # ilr ry 1 .oma -`. i t.S ,` �G z � FF d .k S,o €.. . aux s , tF- (- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 24 of 220 90 children and those that don't drive. During the public workshops, there were few complaints of traffic congestion, apart from a few residents' concern about peak-hour traffic on Santa Barbara Boulevard at the Green Boulevard intersection. The primary transportation focus of residents is improving walking, bicycling and transit access. This is reflected in the Golden Gate City vision statement. It was reported during the public workshops that many Golden Gate City residents are bicycling to work in the coastal area. Recognizing Golden Gate City is a family oriented community, many of the citizens are not of driving age; rather, they are children and seniors that are no longer driving trying to get to services, schools, parks and friends homes. The 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment shows a needed demand to improve Santa Barbara Boulevard north of Golden Gate Parkway, and that is the only roadway improvement shown as "needed." The critical need for transportation improvements in Golden Gate City are those that support walking, bicycling and transit. Figure 12 shows the existing sidewalk systems is limited to those areas surrounding schools. A few planned sidewalk construction projects are mainly along arterial roads. Very few streets have bike lanes.The Collier MPO has identified the transit need in Golden Gate City by including a future transit transfer point, indicated with a blue circle in the center of Golden Gate City. Additionally, recognizing the transportation needs of pedestrians,the Collier MPO recently initiated the Golden Gate City Walkable Community Study. This study will assess and prioritize pedestrian facility needs for Golden Gate City based on quantitative and qualitative factors. This study will provide guidance to improving the waling conditions in Golden Gate City. Further, it will help the Golden Gate City achieve their vision of a safe, family-oriented community. Following completion of the study and acceptance by the Collier MPO, the approved study recommendations should be incorporated into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Growth Management Plan Policies The following goals, objectives, policies outline the related transportation provisions currently adopted. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to identify and further the. community's vision. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Policy 6.2.3: Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities, schools, commercial areas and the planned County greenway network. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 25 of 220 91 Objective 6.3: Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department, police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met. Objective 7.3 Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division—Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area including interim measures to assure interconnection. Recommended Policies • Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability. Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the MPO's Walkability Study. • Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within or adjacent to the Activity Center. • Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and continuity for future pathway corridors. • Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment. Environmental Stewardship The primary concern for potential environmental degradation in Golden Gate City is associated with the many private wells and septic tanks. As reported by Collier County Utilities Department, residences so near one another pose a significant risk of contamination to individual water wells or supply-sources for the entire region. Private water wells and septic tanks age over time, have a limited lifecycle, and have a wide disparity in the level of maintenance by various property owners, affecting the life and functionality of the tanks. Currently, only one complete quadrant of four within Golden Gate City has access to a treated potable water supply from a private utility, Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA). At their June 27, 2017 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners provided direction to County staff to initiate a due diligence process and negotiate terms of acquisition of FGUA. Integrating the Golden Gate City system into the Collier County Public Utilities system and expanding utility services to homes and businesses within Golden Gate City provides a long-term strategy to address potential environmental impacts and system reliability. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 26 of 220 92 Growth Management Plan Policies While Golden Gate City doesn't encompass significant natural resources, it is important to focus on policies related to utilities for the reasons stated above. The adopted policies are related to the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority. The proposed provisions reflect the County's initiative to assume responsibility of maintenance and expansion of utilities for Golden Gate City. Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP Objective 1.2: Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service. Policy 1.2.3: Consistent with Chapter 89-169, Florida Administrative Code, the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, or its successor, shall provide updated water and sewer service data to the Collier County Water and Wastewater Authority on an annual basis. Policy 1.2.4: Due to the continued use of individual septic systems and private wells within a densely platted urban area, the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, or its successor, is encouraged to expand their sewer and water service area to include all of that area known as Golden Gate City at the earliest possible time. Recommended Policy • Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water and Sewer District Implementation Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 27 of 220 93 Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings." Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement "Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area." Land Use and Economic Vitality Within the GGAMP,there are Goals,Objectives and Policies(GOPs)as well as a Land Use Description Section that pertain specifically to Estates land uses. This section describes the status, review and community recommendations pertaining to GOPs and Estates land use descriptions, both east (rural) and west (urban) of CR 951. Generally, the land uses can be divided into these categories: Residential, Commercial and Conditional.Additionally, policies related to public facilities,adjacent land uses and notice provisions are considered. Residential Land Uses Golden Gate Estates is an area primarily intended for residential uses. Of the 66,000 acres that make up today's Golden Gate Estates,over 95%is reserved for residential use under the current plan.This is consistent with Goal 5 of the GGAMP that balances the preservation of rural character, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops. wildlife activity and low density residential with limited commercial and conditional uses. As of 2016,the rural Estates residential lots total almost 24,000 in number.Approximately half have been developed.Absent future changes in conservation of parcels for environmental or recreational purposes, the current population of 31,100 can be expected to double by build-out. Figure 13 shows the existing distribution of developed residential areas within the rural Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 28 of 220 94 By contrast, Figure 14 shows Figure 13 the development of urban GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES(E OF 951)PARCELS Estates lots is much closer to TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 build out. In this area,86%of Parcels with Structures:Approx.11,296 Parcels without Structures:Approx.12,512 the parcels have been Legend developed, leaving only 430 STRUCTURE 09.4�EtR vacant parcels in this much I PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES II .` ` a,; nit 1:Iiiiti a,:,,1,:11.1..'t...;1‘ — smallerportion of Goldenr .. "" I PARCELS WITH STRUCTURES Gate Estates. I ` [.,' 11, . til7 r--- tilI 1 , An analysis of building " -tom -��...i 'activity in Golden Gate k ;,A .1 i. :14 ; . l Estates suggests that _ development is currently -_ ""°""" i iII'�i I :I`!' accelerating. When J 101,.-i �t . 1 -r )',, 1.1 comparing annual totals as ; r� r,="r,o ,`i ` �'�' of second quarter, 2017 to i L `= ills1* -- . , l .. �x _�"'� gtg'k� t' IN z second quarter, 2016, permit _ applications rose from 273 to I 4' " I +' i F', 408, an increase of almost r ',,,,lift,,,,,.., � it 50%. Taken together, 681 housing starts over this 2- I I_ -- i� ,j year period suggests 1 r: ,,t >'i economic vigor in a post- j r',. "HI.' _"III ;'i1 .11 high foreclosure market. �-''`-� N a r 0 0.6 1 2 3 Miles % ,i f7I Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 29 of 220 95 Figure 14 During public outreach, residents GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES (WEST OF CR 951) and stakeholders did not advocate any major changes in - 11 IMMOKALEE RD1 nil ( residential land use. Most Legend individuals1.1olledpreferred to � p r DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.2.669) t maintain a low density residential !:, (([ ` ,.I-( VACANT RESH3ENTAL(APPROX.434) To environment with few changes. In fact, the Golden Gate Estates VANDERBIL1T BEACH RD Area Civic Association (GGEACA) I! voiced the preference for a "low00,1 ! 1. GOLDEN GATE BLVD density overlay" to protect its -- I i character well into the future. I ;, The minimum lot size would + t ( ( 9 . E remain unchanged, with the �� , ` ' `� a i � possibility of recombining some e0 ' legal non-conforming (smaller) "" `( ,{ I, ,1 lots. No new designations of0.0 ) residential areas to Neighborhood Centers were ( ei suggested.The sole conversion of ' GOLD . ay i L1�z.„. I — residential areas endorsed by the public was for office type 1.75 commercial along a short length of Immokalee Road in the Urban Estates and the possibility of non-residential land uses near the Randal Rd. curve on Immokalee Rd. Residents were polled about some specific aspects of Residential land use. Polling questions included allowing group homes as a permitted use and changing the rules surrounding home-based businesses. Public sentiment was against any change in either topic area. When asked about the desirability of allowing rental of guest houses, polls found mixed results. At a public workshop held in November 2016, 56%of respondents were in favor. In contrast, only 26% responded favorably at a February 2017 public workshop. Currently, there are approximately 700 guest homes in the Estates area. Based on the strong environmental preferences in response to other issues, staff does not recommend guest house rentals, as it would tend to weaken the desire to retain a lower density, lower impact community. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 30 of 220 96 Some requested changes, as described in the environmental portion below, relate the desire to recombine legal non-conforming lots and to require or incentivize on-site stormwater retention and other water-related initiatives to maximize water quality, percolation and floodplain protection. Also, noted in the environmental section, are recommendations for strengthening wildfire prevention and lighting standards. These provisions cross several land uses, including residential land use. Public Notice Although the concept of strengthening various notice provisions was not queried or mentioned in public outreach workshops, staff has observed one notice issue in the context of public petitions. Currently, mailed notices are required in advance of Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) as well as certain public hearings. Where required, it would be beneficial for all involved to provide notices along the entire length of dead-end Estates avenues or streets where a project makes direct impact, if the length is greater than the required linear distance of 1,000 feet. (See Non-Residential Uses/Notice provisions, below.) Specific Property Re-designations From time to time staff was queried about specific properties and whether there would be any specific land use changes recommended. Staff understood its Restudy scope as one essentially limited to universal principles- either in land use or other GOPs. However, it is always possible that, during the Public Hearing process, public officials will endorse land use changes in a parcel specific manner. For example, parcels owned by the County may be Figure 15 Future Land Use Study Area the subject of Board direction at 33rC AVE NE Transmittal to effect affordable OIL WELL RD or senior housing needs, or to I accommodate other public uses i such as park and ride locations, w w 3 m Z Z � , or other land uses. One specific Z a0, r410 location that gained attention e " .0/I r� following public outreach is the �� 25N AVE NE area in the vicinity of the 1:ANDALI-BLVDImmokalee Rd. curve near IMMOKALEE RD RANDALL BLVD Randall Blvd. This is a location Rantlsl Blvd Commercial M,Bubtl strlc,: m 24th AVE NE where significant transportation planning is underway, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 31 of 220 97 area may be suitable for non-residential uses such as an activity center or other designation. The recommendations below include this area as a future study area to determine appropriateness of re-designation,following the completion of the Randall Blvd. and Oil Well Road Corridor Study.The depiction of the future study area, below, extends from 33d Ave NE to properties west of Wilson Blvd., and may be adjusted before the study begins. Staff recommends that the study commence upon the completion of the Oil Well Rd. and Randall Blvd. transportation study. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in GGAMP: Designation Description/Residential Estates Subdistrict: Single family residential development is allowed within this Subdistrict at a maximum density of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guest houses. Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Policy 5.3.0.1: Rural character protection provisions shall provide for the preservation of such rural amenities as, but not limited to, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops, wildlife activity, and low-density residential development. Policy 5.3.2: The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates area. Objective 1.4: Provide a living environment within the Golden Gate area, which is aesthetically acceptable and protects the quality of life. Policy 1.4.0.1 Collier County shall provide a living environment that is aesthetically acceptable and protects the quality of life through the enforcement of applicable codes and laws. Policy 1.4.1: The County's Code Enforcement Board shall strictly enforce the Land Development Code and other applicable codes and laws to control the illegal storage of machinery, vehicles and junk, and the illegal operation of commercial activities within the Golden Gate area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 32 of 220 AR Recommended Policies • See Non-residential Land Uses and Environmental Recommendations. Neighborhood Centers and Non-residential Uses Presently, there are three (3) Neighborhood Center designations in the Rural Estates and one (1) on the eastern edge of the urban Estates. In addition to Neighborhood Centers, there are four (4) mixed-use or commercial Sub-districts in the rural Estates and six (6) within the urban Estates. The locations can be seen below in Figure 16. During the public outreach meetings in the rural Estates and in the urban Estates, no new Neighborhood Centers were suggested or desired. Rather, there was strong sentiment to increase the availability of commercial uses in adjoining RFMUD and RLSA areas. In this way,the predominant Figure 16 Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers Golden Gate Master Plan Category GOLDEN GATE ESTATES I CONDITIONAL USE SUBDISTRICT �^�' INFILL COMMERCIAL O NEIGHBORHOOD RENTER SUBDISTRICT IN MISSION SUBDISTRICT FUTURE LAND USE MAP -PINE RIDGE RDMODE USE SUBDISTRICT -RANDALL BLVD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT MI ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER RURAL SETTLEMENTAREA IM\IOKALEE:RD - MISOUTHBROOKE OFFICE SUBDISTRICT r r EVERGLADES RANDALL SUBDISTRICT I URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT -GOLDEN GATE PON INSTITUTIONAL SUBOISTRICT -LLESTERN ESTATES INFILL SUBDISTRICT ®INTERC.HANGEACTIVI"T CENTERSUBDISTRICT r I RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT F 5 I t. I I 1)11.51:LLRD L O11.N'ELIRD 7 l IMAIOKAI.JE Rn �!/ R:INT\I.1-RI ll D m ` 1 'AND BEtCB nn --—_ — A o 4 7 P jz GOIDENLLLI Ii DIVE)W -j MIDI:s,GAIL BI\Tis PLN k. E n ., P Lxa —._____.--_ __ n G 7, p — c C L J o_______ i— 5 N x Cw C INTERSTATE-7A DAVIS DM Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 33 of 220 99 rural, residential character of the Estates could be maintained. Importantly, by placing office, commercial, business and industrial parks in these adjoining Districts, shopping, employment and entertainment opportunities would emerge in closer proximity to the Estates, and within easier drive times. As noted in the Master Mobility Plan (2012), reverse trips and shorter trips (fewer vehicle miles travelled) yield benefits to infrastructure demand, local economy, quality of life, environmental protection and public safety. Resizing the Neighborhood Centers Although no new Neighborhood Centers were desired by the public, there was a clear desire by those within the rural Estates that the three Neighborhood Centers should be "right-sized", to function appropriately within a rural context. For example, Figure 17 shows the three quadrants within the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center contains development areas of 8.45, 7.15 and 4.86 acres, as seen in the figure below. As stated by the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA), these Figure 17 Centers should be allowed Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards "sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, o and water retention." /1 Additional rationale would include parking, future right- 4: of-way expansion and effective buffering from residential uses. `"' `° "' r The GGEACA recommended an 80-acre maximum node for each of the three rural Neighborhood Centers.This equates to a maximum of 20 acres per quadrant- an important measure because at least 2 of the 3 rural Neighborhood Centers will not develop all 4 quadrants. In most instances 20 acres will not be required to build an efficient development area, but can serve as a maximum under the Master Plan. Upsizing of any Neighborhood Center would require a rezoning of the property. The maximum acreage per quadrant is not an entitlement but allows the applicant to request zoning greater than the current Future Land Use Map would indicate, under criteria, without a requirement to amend the GGAMP. In all, there are 10 commercial or mixed-use subdistricts in Golden Gate Estates. For the most part, -- these subdistricts emerged over the past 20 years through private plan amendment applications and Board approvals. As noted, the scope of this Restudy does not include additional site-specific Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 34 of 220 100 recommendations. Further, stakeholders do not presently support additional site-specific commercial designations. Immokalee Rd./Oaks Blvd. Interface There is one location within the urban Estates best described as a potential corridor re-designation. This is an area along the Immokalee Road/Oaks Estates interface as shown in Figure 18. Currently zoned uses among the 16 parcels located in this corridor include 2 commercial uses (C-1), 8 conditional uses and 6 residential uses. One of the residential uses is entitled to a transitional Figure 18 Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface I III I i N U\-7( ��j I arpo\t''& 'i. -. r �LegendG aik i —j POTENTIAL CU 1‘ = ,# +' IIII . -EXISTING CU&PU �,` . --i-,,,,m_ ��\, �� ' . `� -COMMERCIAL .�_ �-/`�� Note: .= i��t► ��, s t/I la)"CommerciN"includes parcels vaned commercial and/or designated commercial on the NMI ,1"`` la Golden Gate Area Future Land Vol Map andlor developed commercial. (h)Most"Commercial"parsesaGolden Gate r e eligible for a shook!be c Use. le � Oirik �,� )c)This map Is a quid". Golden tals Ana Master Plan should on consulted to determine and/or confirm eligibility of lend use. ) / ''� , lj 4 n / im iii, ______, rim 1111111 a 00 In- / ii111J 11111176,_11144iii -I Immokalee RD II Illi 1.1 — (Autumn Oaks LN r P 1 JI 49 wes 1 72 (rq a len 1 12 12r 132 149 condition conditional use application.Another is a County-owned parcel for water retention.Thus,five parcels could retain existing residential zoning or apply for a CU or rezone to C-1, under the recommendation below. When asked about additional conditional uses in the western Estates, a slight majority felt that additional locations were not needed. However, when asked whether the Immokalee Road/Oaks interface should have future land uses to include office and conditional uses,over 75%were in favor. The public understood that a more unified planning approach to this corridor could result in better outcomes, including access points and continuity. For this reason, the recommendation below suggests a FLUE designation that allows rezone applications for C-1 uses as well as conditional uses in this corridor. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 35 of 220 101 Conditional Uses Conditional use opportunities in Golden Gate Estates include churches, social and fraternal organizations, child care and adult day care centers, Figure 19 private schools, group care APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES facilities (such as nursing - _ farnc.�a.n homes and assisted living l ! -- Legend Q_IIIIIIIIIIN� El POTENTNLcu I facilities) and model .eve- "eerel>ald ® N EXISTG CUAPLJ :=4111arellra' fs.v.e e p -COMMERCIAL homes. As conditional emiii h1IIl� ... W. uses, they are generally 7irdi I �� E 'm_ .., I.j.�p. .ajr=n.,.1and.d.. ® ld.af. .W Nn Fw.....W YYa.'r Y.if.p.f rsare:Y. $TheeIbllicwMammgl k The OW. worldSas , NWO.wa.Ia d p e fke fY! - Iq Tin.MIDIS f.iN..Th.O.Yw,WMw WMr M.naM1a M..a.W.i1.YMnka appropriate if compatible hisad \I!jjJiIIIIiII ules VAMIRMtiRNSM RD location and number. A aa,`isdlo 1 to �� 1 nml E Ne ee 4 a i°°ii min GGAMP allowance for raIIh1IIhII1lliMIIhIIII!°I1111m11u11g eh°h°E!m1111111 MIIIlle:r111n In1011g conditional use provides a -y=IIIIllllll IutI 111111111:111111 111ii1 right to seek approval, not lliiiiIII IMI NIIIIMMI1 i IUMB tt Olfl IIllr!IB ° 11°°1° 1 11111 n1114!lr.11111 '� i/li Ikt61mllmnh+.,lllinn nnl.. a right for the use at any 111111n111nul!t!!L1oeulllllelld 11114E ElEnlef'r111I111 I1 I IIII9I111; va12MiTIh'JllOGt111111111111a 11111111111111.1 location. Typically, if 111111111111111 ou°111111111u1111°Cf 111- 1111111111111E IIIMPleulli ln!IITIMIo111111111111= I111n11nu1_ lnminllller �, . r�I"u111111eunIuIaTsula l 111111 IUIIi granted, conditional uses III'!°�°E��e9n� _ �.�1�'!°!Eflllll■llrlll11ln'h::11m1111nIn: 1 I a I2 111111E�t!!C�111111�+"' 11111111° 11111i are subject to numerous fill �6" I ° R! �I 101111111111•111111111111[111111iDlI – �� conditions of development °° ° 1 11I 1mill IlUEII - lir and operation. �•1111IIIIIIIP!'_ IIIn111111I 111111111111 immune _ 111111111111110'' '� �'=' _I11111°III 1 i ■oe1__acawnfs C ,a�1�111II°III° IMr111111111H.I1 Ih_J �11 V1111 I .1 1111111111 The GGAMP allows ■InIE��II° f► MUM. w(ll a#� 1 ��=muumuu! u r nrh!!■lin ` 1t �� rrra It'I°m�11�1111 conditional use rr�uum°nu�� SII _ � n1I11111 _; smu111m1-1" „zt�l. — minim" applications for properties e ' r I_ ........1,,.— n p�InE !1 � 1 _.111u11111111r esoaoomumm n uin•ln11rr1011- . 0�.1 C11n11111In designated as residential. ■111E��»!� Ile �� ii mnnlnni aE'aa�eayae \1111111111111=f I'� . �, rk `11°11111111 a>•iMl.�w.. 1 However, the locational "IIIrn1�°Iret ,."". 11 m . Iris — 11 iu ruii m A n:li 1a III II r" lou I_l 111 1310111111111_ criteria are extremely r°°11°°pt X1°°1°°.' film— I0 o. �r�ww-� a•� m �� i limited,except for essential 411 services. The Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow such applications if immediately adjacent to a designated Neighborhood Center (there are 4 in total). The Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow applications for conditional uses if adjacent to some, but not all non-residential uses. In addition,there are further restrictions along Golden Gate Parkway from Livingston to Santa Barbara Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 36 of 220 1,19 Figure 20 APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES y rg"6" e t oml�1H1� �1 IHHIHIIIHHnU 1 p IIIIltlflllltll =111HIm1111111mHIII�l�l axr i 11tH dl 111 i@!.A I u- msHHIHImhhI[InlioHhUIIIIIHImmmummIHH 11"11- a..>u IBM/111iI111R14111n11m r1111r111H10 11M01111HHInIH1H1 lug 1�H Hl1��i��1� 111�111� 111111/II11111SrI11 IIHIn 111111 1 HI x11.111111111111111 111111VM1�u1t11 111111111111= 5.4 �� 1111111111,11111=r1/111111111111111111� 1 _ .. 111111111111111C1m11m/11 CH11o111111 =11H1111t1u11111/M111= 111pp 1111111 1 p `r-i 11111111,11111=7111111111111'T:minium rl11111111111111111HIIHQ IIMI1HHu 11111 ' \11111111111111 C1111m11111-C11111114I111nIlnunlimumnil rx1il ! Imumu H + :sdL 11111!11111111 n11111111t11. ^111111111111I11HH111/1/11H111H111 C11111011111mI11111lt mma xi mmi=ra smaimam num maw=LmamIltlol111111mmm=mamtammammum Im11II11ms ralim 1m •rmu 11111 7-Wt 1H111o11111111111r4na HmHHuo mam e y_ rapt `ui1111111111 0;•111111111 r111tnum =111111111111111u1t umpan 1mumlummt m- 1HIm111i11H C11111111H11--Cmatm1111:mummytem 111HHmmimaa {�11 m 11 ''..- • 11111111111111=^IS1111HI111 =.IIHHm111 =lommimmunumetrrinu H1tinummen fl_" .r'` min111t11I1 r11HIiH11-minm11m UmmnmHmnn11 rmammu it wit a �.- IIIl11 mall ma MI IH1�7lllllnnm 61111Hn11mH11.111m1 GH11HHH1111111111t1111= mlmntlln=�I1litlll1l C1111t111IHI =1nnH11t11HIHHH1Hl �111�1111t1HHIHHHIH=: Q11H11111111�1•� en.x " - El l=..CCxlp C CC11111©111H@ll x1[11 11 H11RHP111m= :1151"` Hw.x. Ln rr �p r - IIHHIIIHH[ �L HhIIIholinll _ �1 fat_. °11111�11IMIIIfxr —C„"' C11w�.'3..` C S mua E tra I dUI1 -1111111101111111HIM== Hmmla11= BrArE E LeTaz mEs C a 6i CT. S"'r *HIII!IhII Irk ' x a . - -+� 1 IItHIH111uxO[111HI1Hf11H1111111111r EI�HmhI rx rr ^ rx�C .ew ..CrGr'�''C ''C"llJm i mil .l I is m11n111mim 1 lIti1ll fx� r= yC.r,rr..== er. =x-�- - _E hI lllnnIHll-SIIIHIHHIf1I HH 11 I� CIH1111lnnt1111 BE11'III HiloH11HHIHhHHHHmIHnminll Il lFunHIHHmuHlrllnt1H11niammIH111HH1!mmatammimmatim CIHIIIII 1 IIHnmf nazi miti Hllhlf=Il 1n11HHt111111I11IH1 hh 1rHIImIIhIHHl11m111mm1HI1uhmi1mIn Im1HIHHIhHIHHHmhI �I lllnm > r�r"�.E6= p�$ --.. 1oCr------------ntlmHmHt �mH1117HIIHHn_I hI_ rl 111M1 *�==.11111ww C C - Cr Gr +Som11111hIH I11H111IhHf(HHI1HIH• 711111111111111===� r r G :srr C " 1 11111 mir,ma ImINH1�I nit tm'Pil m11 S IES EE C=rat 4 -- r: 1111 1 1 x 1111111 111 11 l Ih 1HHHI11IH II:e.,— -� --- - x C•`L' _ r-`_� '! r. 1111 1 nlm •rlij 11,12,„-=.-=--...---r .........==.41111111111M1111;11/11111111111111111111111.,=='__ IIHIHnUHII �HH11111m 11 f 111 al 1 -x -..---2745.7•2="E r I1H11111 111 IHHIHI11111H1111t1/11 pmHm11H3 .H.�. `�` "*'� = x� x +� HmhI IJll 1Hmmn1Iu11HIIhHI mile mI1P/1m m mutim- u�r "4m1II ■ H"rxr 1 mHIHIIIh ®ammim 1 H I :-nuH1111!'I11IHHIm111E=--%••et . um.,o ��I I1HI111111 111111nIHH111111 1� 311111111111111"* S �r �5+.d •if HL m 1111 om 11 pa1�mHmll: '�eri'n�.. i _ _ H�I(Hlr@6�1 111 tptl111R1111 c Z x a x �"`' + .mama:�ICIm11I Illi 111 1= 11lltt]t amm rens.. n :� � . 1, nl.n i .11111111 "�""!HN[IH11 11111111111" r•. • Hm11lltlllP33Cax: "` �`+'�� + '. II111m 1111 1�1HH11u11111n :HIP1111a1111 ; r r rr r xnnai z11111HhII1111mIP'IIII: m11Hm110 a x1118111;mIH111d1 manna H1111n1 xmnn111H11 ..1..-. -..:' �o : 1M111111/7.101111111111111111111117.4thI HmHI1HIHr ...1. 1'3InI111uI1,1Im mmoma ex == HI11mm11[11 i mIt x =mammas xx==C IM111111111111 ItHH111u1111111!61111' 111P't1111I1 -.� Legend IHHI111 111 1IHH imiilMHi 1IH11111111h e. ` ,111m111 M1111111H1111HHIPI11111C: HHI1IHmr =gmx ...vma I> >s PatRriuLcu i ml11m H11HIH[111lmimn: C:Hm11HhIIM , = r Ns OUSTING CU&PU MOM= 111 MITI 1HHH1PPHIL HI1t 111111! ---rn - N .mIhHim 1111mmhmhHnlmii: � 111111111111 _ N.COMMERCIAL 1HIIIIII .:H11m11H111111 11111 �mt1111HHG L , 11111.1111=11/11111111111111111111111 xfl 1111t11Hi N.=u- �" "•-111111111 Mi11H1111HIIL11PPIn1 ^a11t11HIIHt rerc.......rwuma..pern.n+darxnMae+Mcwawl.,.w.«.»,ax.oa. 111111111==1111111111111111111111110 :IIIH1111111 - Gala.nGw.ewNAM 4naQat wPa.awNrer.Ma.n.waeaw. 1111111 ImHHHInhlH1111!H1: rof e.ee'c..n..•aa panda.rr a.as*Ole r..Came'!u.. HHm1 ml1�pp uNllp i1� m16!11111 '''1'"..1:./,:e.-n.°"'" s"'""uw.,r..."ae.w..Jed "..." mHummomm n111ll111Imin 1illIWI11 1 .avo.re.laro■ae .w.,.. — rimn==minquiummumg and on the west side of Collier Blvd. The limited availability for conditional use applications can be gleaned from the analytic Figures 19, 20 and 21.The areas marked in yellow indicate conditional use potential under the current GGAMP. Because Golden Gate Estates is 50% built out, it is likely that additional locations would be useful for conditional uses as development progresses. With this in mind, staff sought public feedback on the possibility of expanding location potentials. n Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 37 of 220 103 Figure 21 1- APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL,! 11.111.1 AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES a�R1111 1°00.0 IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES MM 11 114 nan _ 1■110•c .tlt11w01ww11111_Y1u /11�IlRnP-1111111 {!111! =��11�"411111 111 £ =■01®■1111r=cIu11II IR Legend r-111111111tw1111=.Orltin u 1 -'1tI�L6 liiei HIRo [_ 1 POTENTIAL CU =NRIMIR 41uC11ul1uiI11 EipSTENG CU&PU 1 =-111�0E■IIunNIln=1 111111 N 11111wrw11nntlelllu=l D111aUnn{IttlI [w_ -cOMMERC!P ==Ra ummozIOItI II II Trr. IIiIt9rttil=1 C=wRMIIIIIM•111111111111. NOOK 0111:111/RY■P'rFIr1.I11n101:1 la)'Camm.del'indtdts pmadt Emma mmmmdal m,d'm dedlmiyd mnawmet DM*. LT IIMMIIIIIIIIMIR11111111111111111 Cafes 6ale,rrFnlaN LASS Ute Ill ani'm dewlaped ydiet+ldal. ' .'-4'1=eaMiM11E11t11'941.01101 bl■ad'C.fteltkr Sestet*Said also le slllih Mr a Casein'Uss r.C11111.11111111.111HOIIIIII11111111 Mills step is s swift.Ms GeMW,G.Awe Multi Pin AlwdNae t owned Mdeters** mal! Int SSIIhWI I 10101 uses - a 2Z111■ MI 122 L.1~e eIIIII?Ills =- C= -II - 11 ■ 11Onlllllll =RanI114 1 EILIIIIIIIII= 771111111MINIIII=111HP III II .Inrtrl*L 1u,111Du 111 IlltlnIIr -=P-■I=IiIIiIll nil IIuu111 CI O■1■ICII IIID IIIII „. 11111 zunn t - - C N11It_11M11■1=•11110011* Lill,innlilll11nnA1u11I111C=111111111 ----- ----� - 1rrziervana=aneinteato IIIIIL:t11I OII1llulllllllt1111 =1111 Nt11 - 1 =...111■11111=11111111111 11111111ii11M1711111![��II ICIIIIIIIlPI I =■~r 111111111IIIInI-IuIn111O =211111.111MINII Illll It" "lila 111010 111 11 • k I111111lllull 11=11111111111 Il w11�I ,,. nail•. ..tIu1 nn r 1•u I MEM111R IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1n111u11I ■ ""-.•I I� IIIIO 1111 111lt rtl1ll t r ��■ _ _ nlunlnulut n111.I111n. • ILISIIIII 1 . t Si nt 11111■111IH11Iuinmlt c ______l_ll..,__ s V 1111k MEM Re--111MINIIIIMEMIIIIIII••I== 111111MINIMw 1111111 Jill IS OHM==l1R1111MIIIIIIIIIII:..z. � >�11eatim t 1l� _�w11unnnm 0000•�111IIIII11111n1n5��I nlnllnitIlllllllllll rtl��Aiiirinii^ss* 1n11I!?!!•MILS*9�Ou11n1 ul.11lum 1.ru11m� nnnn•tt r S•y� Iulu11t11111t1 lIII,IllItll =Iu111uul1 Ilnunln� =111w111w11/nmmnl t',I ",�. 111111tH,*•111 NIIIIIIII :uttnultu Itllnlil�r.n-1re1■IIlnrtt 1 Inu111n11im muunIII -mnnnu1 llnintill ■■�A Iglu lenlun!l11 11111Hrtr 1111 rultlunr IIIIIIIIIII It1,11nt11RR/�! IP�R■IIIIIR6"( ■uwnnl➢n nnuuuu :mull(Lill -unnuiiii �1��■11nnauul C jam isim iml wmnt -u1➢unwI ILIul0IlI—■1/w'::I t •ItIIn11111 _ �' t! 1111 P/iii._%1ti1I11111 ^IIlIIIiiiiil ❑isi iiiiii1 -a?s�MIIIIFISPIII ,�. 1uun11nun 1111111110 =11uuunu uI1I1111u��r C�11.ufnn11l 11111111111111 !�11111111( SIIII11111111 19s111t11� .-■y111��,iili11rt 1 .. 1111111111111 n77111 lllllll at _IIIIIIIll111 111111IIInmatommes111emm■IIIItuiIIII al1II1111I 1111 Pll lllll II=TIIIIIIIIIIHr.:99.111111111MINNIIIIIIIIIIIIP.'1.1== ih yr • y CEIIIIIIIIIllll IIIIIIIlll I1 n1111Iilull 1111 InI111�� 1 -�UlIIlI11u1I Z f ItIuuIr11111 - Iu111I1r uuI 1.t•m111.tleslR -1INIIIIIMI11nur 11 C In11111111uO II1nn111II IIIIIIIn111 IIIIIIIIItI■I��w ==It■II11111tII 1tIPIlIp -- Illr�ll.. =��RIIIInt!1 - _1211 11 ---: lummox■ '-(FIs 1■I n1I1111 t1 =1 1.111111 --- -- - - - - 11a19IIIIINI8rINIII ■IIt1111111t =11 1,,,I1 -.-._.-.----,-..----..___.,--l..- -- _._. .�.-...I®A-C=�111IIIlulI11_=1 1,,,,f411-`-`'-•:'-' _ -" "-`-- ,. .. - . . -`-C # = �111l mlll ill =LCI It.lI'I1`-" I r 1111111MM101111tI11I III-.-IIII. 11,••f'II IwMIR111IIII1 :eINI1!•uiinllll171-=t11 [101111111111n1111OO11n1t1111Irr1HI 111uIn111111111111111111 MinnOI111IIIIlII111Inul IOI IIII I.-—. 4t0i1111�■It111OnIumltlR i"[III11111111IIIIlI1t IItIIIIIHIOl11nn is llllllltlllla111I1111I _Mini ;1��■IIIIIIIII101111111 111111111 -. - "•1111111�a.".�■..1■■■nnrt 1111 -L1R1 1t!! 11 -.-.- _- a[®1�=:.�m1111t11IllIn Cul■ lu------ :-----.._�:-----.-_.._�____ _.:__ :_ =t5111�11■1!«■■I�r■nllt m-011111 1.-p Ill= ----- --------1m ItIlIm111ui=ul■ Arterial Intersections Surveys in the rural Estates indicated a preference to allow some additional potential CU locations if limited as to location and type. A majority stated that additional CUs should be allowed at more locations, and specifically allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads intersected by 4 or more lane roads). Slightly less than half of those surveyed in the urban Estates thought that CUs should be considered at major intersections (45%v. 50%). While suitability of land use underlies this recommendation, we note that there is a possibility that the conversion of use from residential to conditional use could potentially increase future ROW acquisition costs for future road expansion. A compilation of the intersections that would qualify as include: Rural Estates • Everglades Blvd. and Oil Well Rd. • Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants) • Vanderbilt Beach Rd. and Wilson Blvd. (future) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 38 of 220 104 • Everglades Blvd. and Randall Rd. (future) • Wilson Blvd. and lmmokalee Rd. (future, south quadrants) Urban Estates • Logan Blvd. and Pine Ridge Rd. • Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. (west quadrants) • Logan Blvd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd. (future, SW quadrant only) (Note: "future" designation derived from 2040 LRTP) Based on this recommendation, a total of 6 quadrants in the rural Estates could qualify for CU application, not considering current land uses at those locations. An additional 10 quadrants could support conditional use applications in the rural Estates, based on improvements indicated in the MPO's LRTP. In the urban Estates, a total of 6 quadrants could qualify for CU application not considering current uses. An additional quadrant could qualify based on the MPO's LRTP. Public opinion differed when individuals spoke about church uses. Opinions ranged from allowing churches along major road corridors to eliminating any additional locations for churches. Staff's recommendation, below, is the addition of the major arterial intersections (as defined) as a locational criterion for CU applications; plan language would allow parcel assemblage where minimum ingress/egress requirements dictate. The CU applicant should demonstrate the need for the requested acreage in the context of the intended use and facilities and ingress/egress recommendations. Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions As noted in the Related Existing Provisions section, below, there are special provisions related to Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd.frontages.As described above,the only change to the Golden Gate Parkway provisions would be a change allowing CU applications for properties located at the corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. The two quadrants at that location are currently zoned PUD or CU. With respect to the Collier Blvd. Special provisions, the GGAMP currently requires adjoining conditional uses on two sides, rather than the transitional conditional use provision requiring certain non-residential uses on one side only.Staff observes that,during a public hearing for a zoning change request at 13th Ave SW and Collier Blvd, a conditional use was not available under the GMP due to this provision. However, the property in question was located next to an industrial type (PUD) use, Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 39 of 220 105 which could make a CU a suitable transition to adjoining residential. For this reason, the recommendation below would remove the Collier Blvd. Special Provision. We also note that this specific recommendation was not vetted during public outreach workshops. Accordingly, this fact should be noted during the Transmittal process. Communication Towers Communication towers are listed conditional uses in Golden Gate Estates.As such,they are limited to the locational criteria found in the Designation Description section.The available locations for cell towers are extremely limited, as these are not "essential services" as defined in the Land Development Code. As technologies quickly advance, the applications for communication transmission devices may look considerable different in just a few years than they do today. Individual consideration of proposed installations should be reviewed in each instance. A solid majority of residents surveyed, both in the rural Estates and the urban Estates, indicated dissatisfaction with existing cell service. Over 75% of the rural estates residents surveyed believed that communication towers should be conditional uses, available at any location in the Estates.The recommendation below retains this land use as a conditional use, requiring application, notice and public hearing, but available for application at any location in the Estates(at least 2.25 acres in size). Conditional Use Acreage At present, conditional uses are generally limited to 5 acres. Although not specifically queried in public outreach, staff sees the 5-acre limitation as creating problems similar to the acreage limitations within currently approved Neighborhood Centers.The issues noted there are adequacy of stormwater retention, buffering, parking, roadway needs and septic provisions. In some cases, the current 5-acre standard may prove sufficient. However, applicants may wish to request a greater acreage. This request would remain subject to the public hearing requirements of the Conditional Use, but the provision for greater acreage in the GGAMP would relieve the applicants from amending the GMP to creating otherwise unnecessary sub-districts. Rather than suggesting 20 acres as recommended by the GGEACA for Neighborhood Centers, a more modest 10-acre maximum is recommended. If embraced, staff also supports enhanced buffering requirements similar to those required for the Neighborhood Centers. Public Facilities In addition to the growing transportation network in and near the Estates, numerous public facilities serve Estates residents.The eastern Estates is served by: two high schools, several elementary and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 40 of 220 106 middle schools; three fire stations; 2 EMS stations; Sheriffs stations; a library; community parks and a regional park under design. Additional public facilities are planned to accommodate the growth in population, as monitored by the County's Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and coordinated through the Growth Management Department and associated County departments, including the Collier County School District and independent agencies. With regard to public facilities as a land use, members of the public stressed compatibility within a predominantly residential area. Specifically, there is interest in developing rural architectural standards for public buildings as well as other non-residential structures. A unified architectural standard can provide a greater sense of identity to the Estates District. In addition, there is interest in updating development standards such as setbacks and buffers, particularly as public uses intensify at existing or future locations. Firebreak Staging and Park and Ride Park and ride facilities are essentially parking areas that can serve several purposes. As many rural estates residents commute to the urban area for daily work, or for occasional shopping and entertainment,a park and ride area can support voluntary ride sharing to and from proximate urban locations. Ride sharing applications for mobile devices have emerged as a helpful tool for commuters. At an appropriate time, bus/transit service could also serve these locations. The importance of park and ride and ride sharing for community-wide benefits was underscored by the Master Mobility Plan (accepted by Board, 2012) and by ULI in their review of housing affordability (2017). Additionally, as part of the initiative to support natural disaster prevention and response programs, portions of these facilities could be used for staging equipment,vehicles and operations. Nearly 40% of the citizens polled reported that they would consider using such facilities. It is suggested that the County consider appropriate locations for these facilities, with locational criteria including direct access to arterial roadways and buffering, and apply for Board approval through the Conditional Use public hearing process. Adjacent Future Land Use Districts The eastern Estates is bounded by The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) on 2 sides and the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) on another.There are two essential parameters of interest to eastern estates residents. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 41 of 220 107 First, residents are very enthusiastic about the possibility of more robust economic development in the RFMUD and RLSA. Residents desire more proximate commercial areas for shopping and services, and want employment opportunities. For these reasons, residents were highly supportive of RFMUD Village centers, RLSA towns, and freestanding business and industrial park locations in these Districts. The potential for eastern Estates residents to shop and work within shorter distances and outside of the urban area is a great benefit to them, and this advantage redounds to County taxpayers through reduced miles travelled, lower capital and maintenance costs for roads, and a reduced carbon footprint. Second, eastern Estates residents desire compatibility of uses where adjoining Districts develop adjacent to the Estates. Enhanced buffers and setbacks are suggested at the interface of these Districts. These development standards will be specified by LDC review and amendment, and reflected in the Policies of the GGAMP. Notice Provisions Although not discussed in the Restudy outreach workshops,staff has observed past private petitions that involved Estates re-designation and rezoning. In the Estates, written notice provisions related to Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) and public hearings extend 1,000 feet from the property lines of the project (compared to 500 feet in the urban area). In reality, affected Estates residential uses may extend the length of a dead-end street. A typical dead-end street in the Estates is approximately one mile. Accordingly, many affected residents are not provided with written notice. The recommendation associated with this topic would require written notice beyond 1,000 feet, where traffic impacts can be reasonably anticipated, as a result of the land use change, on a dead- end street or avenue in the Estates. In such a case, notice should be provided along the entire length of the affected street or avenue. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Objective 1.2 Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 42 of 220 gnu Goal 3: To provide for basic commercial services for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate Estates residents, shortening vehicular trips, and preserving rural character. Existing Land Use Designations (synopsis) Neighborhood Center Subdistrict: Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents, Neighborhood centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future land use map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the estates zoning district within the Golden Gate estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the following four sets of criteria shall be met: a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: ... b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions: ... c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Uses Provisions: ... d) Transitional Conditional uses: ... Recommended Policies: • Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change the GGAMP existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations described below. • Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that upsizing will be granted, but provides an opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs. • Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor(Oaks area). This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows application without amendment to the GMP (5 parcels affected). • Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane roadway (or greater), as identified in the Long-Range Transportation Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 43 of 220 109 • Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. • Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same locational criteria as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates. • Allow conditional use applications at any location (of at least 2.25 acres) in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to amend the GGAMP. • Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial, conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity that reflect the rural character of the area. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for "park and ride" uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and the RLSA, the County should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC. • Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners within a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be reasonably anticipated. • Following the completion of the Randall Boulevard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use. Transportation and Mobility Estates residents expressed their views on several transportation-related topics. Among other issues, peak hour conditions capture the attention of residents who face congestion on a recurring basis. Beyond immediate concerns, the public expressed preferences for long term considerations. These include bridge priorities, 1-75 access, lime rock roads, route alternatives, greenways and pathways, road design and park and ride facilities. Many transportation projects are expressed in existing Plan language. Augmentation of these provisions are suggested to convey preference and direction for future consideration. At the heart of the transportation discussion is the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), adopted in 2015 by the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Of note, as shown on Figure 22, within the road network are planned improvements to Wilson Blvd. North and South, as well as the extension of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to 8th Ave, NE. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 44 of 220 iin The Collier MPO is Figure 22 a federally mandated and COWER 2040 federally fundedanVvtaX)IPlan ' ' Q.O transportation Po making { • �� _ ..,r ,, organization and is _. a, , Via. I Highway Cost Feasible Plan made pV;V4.1"'7..:-.7::: ' ,I.,::,-• 15.44;Aif!:'717 ';'-'44.1r--4:-'*' up of Highway Improvements by Funding Period x. representatives of t� local governing ' bodies. The MPO 4 4k,�' ' , . .rtit„4,;i0,-;ti has the authorityto ' ' plan, prioritize, and �� , select = �r .'�— il transportation .� � �q ro ects for federal �4. p 3 s . 'i II -e •"' r '� funding �► .. i � ; �- n appropriated by opfe � � � �, �-. a the US Congress .. through the US j Department of 23, Transportation, ws ,r�s€�- Federal Highway f: Administration and �, Federal Transit 4' fan Administration. dart® In addition to �� Estates residents, mlanee Collier County citizens, taxpayers and visitors are also stakeholders in the transportation and mobility concepts involving Golden Gate Estates.The synergy expected between the surrounding Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District and Rural Land Stewardship Area village and town development with the largely residential Estates area is a prime example. Retail, service and job opportunities in and around future towns and villages will result in shorter trip lengths for current and future Estates residents,when compared with trip lengths today. In addition Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 45 of 220 111 to shorter trip lengths, north south and reverse direction trips, particularly at peak hours, will be a positive factor in road infrastructure demand and resulting levels of service. Figure 23 This synergy was also highlighted in coWER2aao recommendations in Longl �geTarupa tx�n ,® ®,�r0 ; the County's Master I �� g; Mobility Plan (MMP), 'Needs AssessmentVA I t accepted by the , I"-- ` Board in 2012. l� 147, Recommendation #3 T in the MMP calls for :-.7.', •�. - 1.....,:!--4.2 =`� incentivized goods, lut .ij , services and jobs in ` '� `= h [ ° , : , . Neighborhood € § -; ; Centers, the RFMUD t fa } , Villages and the ' Orangetree t s iici, � _ Settlement area to a ` "` �, reduce the vehicle tNa „- • i miles travelled by t fi ” g t - r - estates residents. i i y � � It �� ,, Mobility related to t k2--4 the Estates is also � � , i - -- - addressed by ; 6 Y -� ` Recommendation #9, ._ - . Study Area enhanced localized r-�-`..01*'-'' m -- connectivity through ` k interchange Impnvement bridges and other tit 1 _ intersectionlmprovement connectors and byxt : . et,A.1.-'A''' �... Foud 1Uy In��arovemeIP nf Recommendation #13, development of ..- � Eve s�' 4 'sa $ 3t,,'ti '-div -\7:#-'1.-- '� z .s`,., ,t`g . park and ride lots. t = , These concepts are further discussed below. As noted on the 2040 LRTP cost feasible plan, the MPO has designated additional study areas !n and around the Estates.The Randall Rd.JOil Well Rd.study is currently underway.The North Belle Meade Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2°17 2119/2017 Page 46 of 220 112 study area is not yet funded. Staff recommends funding for route alternatives study of the North Belle Meade east/west corridors in order to accommodate area planning efforts in the North Belle Meade Receiving area and to provide linkage for Estates residents travelling to south Collier County and the urban area. Funding will need to be identified for alignment, design and ROW acquisition. Bridge Connectivity within Golden Gate Estates Existing GGAMP objectives stress the importance of increasing linkages within the local road system to reduce traffic on arterial roadways, Figure 24 shorten trips and increase overall road capacity. In 2040 addition, coordination COWER Long Range Transportn Fan „ with emergency services , LI.C3 officials is mandated for County staff and MPO. 1 I CMS/ITS and New Bridge Projects � In August 2008, the _ . ` - - Collier County ! ,-, �'"� Transportation Services I t - - .�� Division produced the , East of 951 Horizon Study i for Bridges. The study included stakeholder , #' . . input from Emergency �` '°'' ' p P service providers, environmental groups1�;;it,r c 1:171. 1T, and other County t I :�`'E ' Divisions. The study ' considered emergency I =` - . G service response times, f evacuation needs, public ! service efficiencies, general mobility improvements and public sentiment. Design and cost considerations were components of the study, but costs have increased significantly since that study was completed. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 47 of 220 113 The outcome of the study prioritized eleven bridge construction projects in eastern Golden Gate Estates. Subsequently, three (3) bridges have been programmed: • 8th St. NE at Cypress canal (fully funded) • 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal (partially funded) • 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Canal (partially funded) Staff is currently seeking full funding via gas tax revenue funding for the 16th St. NE and 47th Ave. NE bridges. Each bridge costs approximately$8m to$9m (2016 figures) to construct. During public outreach, the GGEACA urgently requested consideration for a fourth high priority bridge, located at 10th Ave. SE at the Faka Union canal. This request was based on public safety concerns, in the contexts of emergency response and emergency evacuation.The recommendation was endorsed by North Collier Fire and Rescue. For this reason, the initial recommendation below calls for an update to the bridge study within the next 2 years. As of this writing, County staff has begun planning for the public outreach associated with the updated study. A provision currently in the GGAMP specifically calls for the construction of a north-south bridge on 23d St., SW, as one of three alternatives to address emergency evacuation. As emergency services and evacuation concepts will be foremost in the bridge evaluation and update, this provision is recommended for removal from the GGAMP. Concerns were raised about the cost components of sidewalks and bike lanes on and leading to all bridges, both with respect to right-of-way acquisition and construction.Therefore,the updated study should include prioritization, design alternatives and cost components.The requirement for sidewalks and bike lanes leading to new bridges should be reviewed in the context of the individual bridge location. Eight of the initial eleven bridges are depicted on Figure 24. Additional locations will be studied as part of the Bridge Study Update. 1-75 Interchange The GGAMP currently calls for coordination between the County and FDOT to implement a study of a potential interchange "in the vicinity of 1-75 and Everglades Blvd." In 2012, the County petitioned FDOT to consider an interchange through the submission of an Interchange Justification report(IJR). At that time, FDOT concluded that it could not recommend forwarding the IJR to the federal Highway Administration.Subsequently,the Board approved a course of action that would request emergency access to 1-75 (now approved), consider an updated IJR between 2020 and 2025, and to "continue Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 48 of 220 14A to work with FDOT, other permitting agencies and NGOs to complete an environmental impact assessment and mitigation plan". By the use of the term "in the vicinity of 1-75 and Everglades Blvd., staff understands this as allowing alternative locations within Sections 31 through 34,T49 S, R28 E, and proposes this specificity for the GGAMP. Accordingly, the current GGAMP language should be updated to include the IJR submission in coordination with the MPO and its LRTP, and continuation of environmental assessments in coordination with all stakeholders, if feasible from a cost/benefit standpoint. It should be noted that emergency (limited) access to 1-75 was granted subsequent to the 2012 IJR submission. In addition to 1-75 access, concerns were raised by residents and by the GGEACA regarding traffic conditions on Everglades Blvd. The residents and association would like to protect against the possibility of expanding Everglades Blvd. beyond 4 lanes. For this reason,a recommendation appears below to limit expansion of Everglades Blvd. to no more than 4 lanes, as shown on the 2040 LRTP Needs Assessment. At a GGEACA meeting in November 2017, it was suggested that the 4-lane design maximum apply to all future roads to and through Golden Gate Estates. That idea does not appear as a recommendation because its more appropriate path for consideration is through the Collier County MPO. Lime Rock Roads The GGAMP calls upon the Transportation Department to explore alternative financing methods to accelerate paving of lime rock roads in the Estates.As of 2016,there were 29 miles of unpaved roads remaining in the Estates. At the current rate of nearly 3 miles per year, all lime rock roads would be paved in approximately 10 years. Residents have commented that an acceleration of paving may be more cost-efficient. Lime rock roads require maintenance costs that may be somewhat higher than paved roads. Additionally,the added ad valorem revenue potential from home values that appreciate due to improved road access may also influence the cost/benefit assessment.Staff recommends that the County update the study the relative costs and benefits of paving lime rock roads on an accelerated basis, and provide the study result to the Board with 2 years of adoption. More recently, the BCC embarked on a budgeting schedule that would provide sufficient funds over a three-year period to complete the paving of lime rock roads. Accordingly, the recommendations Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 49 of 220 115 include an alternative recommendation that the County will budget for the completion of paving in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. Greenways The GGAMP calls for a public network of greenway corridors that connect public lands and permanently protected green space, emphasizing use by non-motorized vehicles and using the existing or future public rights-of-way. The Collier MPO 2012 "Comprehensive Pathways Plan" provides the vision for a Greenways and Trails Program as a separate network from the overall Pathways Program. It notes that the provision of off-road facilities addresses safety and comfort concerns of pedestrians and bicyclists.This would allow a more focused approach to greenways and the identified entity to secure funding and expertise. As noted in the public outreach surveys, a majority of citizens favor the retention of this concept to create a greenways program. The GGAMP policy should be updated, however, to encourage coordination between the County Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO to identify areas of responsibility in planning,funding and implementation of a greenway plan. Road Design Eastern Estates residents commented on various aspects of road design for both new and expanded roadways. As communicated through the GGEACA, preferences include a rural road design without curbs and gutters, Florida Friendly (depressed) medians to the extent landscaping would be employed, and a preference for eminent domain on one side of an existing local street rather than partial takings on both sides. While these preferences are noted here, the MPO and the County Transportation Division design with specific site requirements that vary from one location to another. Moreover, these elements are best suited for review and public comment under the statutory public vetting requirements of those agencies. As such, the GGAMP should remain silent on these design preferences. Park and Ride Lots See Land Use/Non-residential Uses. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 50 of 220 116 Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP GOAL 6: To provide for a safe and efficient county and local roadway network,while at the same time seeking to preserve the rural character of golden gate estates in future transportation improvements within the golden gate area. OBJECTIVE 6.1: Increase the number of route alternatives for traffic moving through the Golden Gate Area in both east-west and north-south directions, consistent with neighborhood traffic safety considerations, and consistent with the preservation of the area's rural character. Policy 6.1.1: In planning to increase the number of route alternatives through the Estates Area,the Collier County Transportation Division will prioritize the following routes over other alternatives: a. The extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road from its current terminus to DeSoto Boulevard. b. The development of a north-south connection from the eastern terminus of White Boulevard to Golden Gate Boulevard. c. The development of a new east-west roadway crossing the Estates Area south of Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 6.1.2: Collier County shall continue to coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to implement a study of a potential interchange in the vicinity of 1-75 and Everglades Boulevard. OBJECTIVE 6.2: Increase linkages within the local road system for the purposes of limiting traffic on arterials and major collectors within Golden Gate Estates, shortening vehicular trips, and increasing overall road system capacity. Policy 6.2.1: The County shall continue to explore alternative financing methods to facilitate both east- west and north-south bridging of canals within Golden Gate Estates. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 51 of 220 117 Policy 6.2.2: Planning and right-of-way acquisition for bridges within the Estates Area local road system shall make adequate provision for sidewalks and bike lanes. Policy 6.2.3: Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities,schools,commercial areas and the planned County greenway network. OBJECTIVE 6.3: Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department, police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met. Policy 6.3.1: The Collier County Transportation Planning Section shall hold at least one annual public meeting with Golden Gate Area emergency services providers and the local civic association in order to ensure that emergency needs are addressed during the acquisition of right-of-way for design and construction of road improvements. Policy 6.3.2: The Collier County Transportation Division shall continue to coordinate with Golden Gate Area emergency services providers to prioritize necessary road improvements related to emergency evacuation needs. GOAL 7: To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater Golden Gate area, as well as the health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for, mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters. OBJECTIVE 7.2: Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency services providers are included and coordinated in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area. Policy 7.2.1: Preparation of Collier County's annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff's Department to ensure that public project designs are consistent with the needs of these agencies. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 52 of 220 118 Policy 7.2.2: Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff's Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public projects. OBJECTIVE 7.3: Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division —Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area, including interim measures to assure interconnection. Policy 7.3.1: The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services,the Collier County Transportation Division,Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes: a. An 1-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. b. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to 1-75. c. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 7.3.2: All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association, Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition. Policy 7.3.3: Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes. Policy 7.3.4: County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on-going management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned properties. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 53 of 220 119 Recommended Policies • The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR 951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times, cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this policy. • Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and 1-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes. • The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO's 2045 LRTP to submit a revised Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at 1-75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd (T 49, R 28,S 31-34). • The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including a cost/benefit analysis for accelerated programming,within 2 years of adoption of this policy; Alt.:The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. • Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinated under the MPO's Comprehensive Pathways Plan in coordination with the County's Parks and Recreation Division. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for "park and ride" uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • Encourage the MPO's identification of funding sources for design and ROW acquisition of an east-west arterial roadway into North Belle Meade to facilitate land use planning in that area. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 54 of 220 120 Environmental Stewardship —� Watershed and Related Water Resource Topics In 2011, the Board accepted the Collier County Watershed Management Plan (WMP), which was developed over several years by staff and consultants. The WMP covered the major basins within Collier County, including the Golden Gate/Naples Bay Watershed.The underlying study included an evaluation of the surface Figure 25 water and groundwater, North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project AA, A*. wetlands and related Legend environmental resources, �-1 1 NOG- Project Bounder,' ., and the performance of the • Mo > rsepen VY�tlands current water management NGGEPW Wetland �x facilities in providing the Description .. .� .t ; no Cypress * . ' Everglades Blv desired levels of services for `. Hydric Ftatwo€ad ''' + . flood control, water supply, M � � -, y Winches dead . ' il -w water quality and Mash . - - ,� environmental protection. swpt +� r It recommended initiatives water " that would serve as a guide __-��,.� � '`' "� °' " for staff in developing ," � � " policies, programs, 4 �,, s, ordinances and regulations ©Iden Gate 'Blvd , �q for further consideration b ` " ' the Board.The major water s :1-'''+'''' t lain Canal resource concerns �> identified for the GGAMP t region include: � ,' ° � a ` � ,: , . ,..-. -t -_ ,t,",„". ,- ,,r-g,:-.,,,,,,,,:,. !, • Excessive fresh '" � North Belle Meade water discharges from canals into ` '� - -Ott , Naples Bay x . • Lack of appropriate „,,,,,, 1: . ,: "'� levels of flood t,' V protection ,„ • Pollutant loading ” �.� ". " associated with development and land use activities • Aquifer impacts due to reduced recharge and increased withdrawals Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 55 of 220 121 Notably, among the WMP ranking of projects for benefit to cost ratio, the Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration project scored highest. Accordingly, the North Golden Gate Estates (NGGE) Flowway Restoration Project ensued. Its purpose was to reconnect the primary wetland flowways in the Estates area, particularly the major wetlands of Horsepen Strand and Winchester Head for eventual restoration of the flowway connection from NGGE to the historic Henderson Creek/Belle Meade watershed as shown on Figure 25.The Study was completed in 2013, funded in part by FDEP and SFWMD. As a result of the Study, the historic and remnant flowway connections were identified and a plan was recommended.As a first phase of its implementation,42 new culverts were installed in selected sections of NGGE and the project was completed in August 2014.The study also yielded a conceptual design for diversion of stormwater into North Belle Meade. In 2016, as part of an application for BP settlement "RESTORE" funds, the Collier County Comprehensive Figure 26 Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area Watershed Improvement N . Plan was developed and _ Legend A�. E '`, ,�;.,, Belle Meade Area accepted by the Board. � County < } $ Golden Strand al Forest Collier ounty • This plan, co-sponsored , , —Golden a1ecanad - collier county watersheds by Rookery Bay National a4 ,. Canals Estuarine Research ' ,Pi aay ' .r4iters,hed; ' Gouray Boundary Reserve, outlines a :,,'''' * Belle Meade rehydration effortH Area Naples Bay cote cite canal ' designed to provide } greater balance between r Picayune Strand StateForest the Rookery Bay and Naples Bay estuaries, through diversion of a portion of Golden Gate Canal flows to the Belle Rookery Bay , Meade area. The RESTORE funds are 0 25 5 i„ ;. intended to aid in design �� Maks and implementation of the project. A depiction of the area in relation to watersheds appears in Figure 26. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 56 of 220 177 In 2017, as part of the implementation of a non-structural WMP recommendation, the Board adopted newly revised surface water maximum allowable discharge rates, now applied to development in 16 additional County basins, including the main Golden Gate Canal Basin. The reduced allowable discharge rates convey County-wide benefits, but it should be noted that they do not apply to single family parcels, such as those previously platted in Golden Gate Estates. Additionally, the Board amended stormwater standards in 2017, directly impacting Estates lot development.The amendment requires a stormwater plan for all lots and provides a new threshold for engineered plans based on percentage of impervious lot coverage. This addresses site specific issues but does not address area-wide stormwater concerns. The aquifers beneath the Estates provide potable water supplies to residents of the Estates, and to customers of the two major public water utilities serving City of Naples and County residents. In meetings with Golden Gate Estates residents and with the GGEACA, a strong preference emerged regarding conservation principles related to the protection of water resources. Ideas and support for those ideas included wetland preservation initiatives and aquifer health. Residents and community leaders value the relationships among components of water policy: floodplain management (dispersion and diversion), water quantity and quality, aquifer recharge, salt water intrusion and estuary health. The following subsections reflect ideas and comments presented by residents and considered by County staff. Necessarily, most of these ideas will require additional study and debate, and therefore appear as aspirational recommendations. Lot Combinations Most of Golden Gate Estates was platted into 5 acre tracts by Gulf American Land Corporation (GAC), the developer of the Estates, although many larger and smaller lots were also platted. The Land Development Code currently allows lot splits into parcels no smaller than 2.25 acres with frontage of at least 150 feet. However, that was not always the case. Smaller lot splits were allowed in the past: prior to Oct. 14, 1974 in the former "Coastal Area Planning District" and prior to Jan. 5, 1982 in the former "Immokalee Area Planning District". These legal non-conforming lots (sometimes referred to as "band-aid lots")abound in the Estates, both in the western area, Figure 27, and in the eastern area, Figure 28. Of the 27,250 total parcels in the Estates, 7,275 are non-conforming. Of those, 3,397 (nearly half) are not yet developed. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 57 of 220 123 Citizens and representatives of the GGEACA suggested that these lots might be re-combined, if possible, through an incentive- based system.The rationale behind Figure 27 recombining these smaller lots GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES(E OF 951)PARCELS relates to water benefits- TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 watershed, flood Iain, a uifer and Parcels 1.5 Acres:Approx.6,433 p q (Parcels with Structure:3,036;Parcels without Structure: 3,397) estuary related. It has been said by Legend a former District 5 Commissioner, MOOLEEPA 11111 Parcels<=1.5 Acres without structure{Vacant) that protection of this low-density Parcels<=1.5Acres with structure 111111!'"M,111 t P Golden area translates to a "County DRGR t (density reduction, groundwater ��+ - n"" recharge) area without cost to the a l (I County. It follows that further n,�r",�awun 1. ��{,s1�' l�t,i.� —12 � h density reduction in the Estates can '1•,E 111. m ' 1� 1: !I enhance these benefits. Larger lot - _ , � �� p � it sizes with relatively less imperviousS,'t��f1'i1R,"I�! area generate less run-off per lot, t,t';' !. , , < : ; �ti + o 'r p f' and contribute to surface water ,r, '_ _ 1.4, 'I'`� +'i {')''E attenuation, water quality benefits, - - pl .41,.1. floodplain storage capacity, aquifer , =-=_- - Y_ '7-7 -`,+E11"� ��l; y r: }I` iR recharge and less flow or"pulse"to #�}ti'i ' +� ' I� 1 KW w WWI PI SI �(t I.}t canals and estuaries. l i = j a„I:t,E; YY, 1 r Ideas to incentivize small lot '��U Ik�gl ;;)11',+ti;{ recombination have included tax ',; , dci r'1 4' 4-1 — incentives, impact fee reduction g �µ' N and credits for stormwater a as 1 2 3 Miles stewardship, if a stormwater utility is created. Not all potential solutions will suit every situation. For example, it would be possible to recombine vacant parcels to create a larger parcel with any of the above suggestions. On the other hand, combining a vacant 1.14-acre parcel with another developed lot takes impact fee credits out of the equation. Moreover, the legal and fiscal basis for implementing incentives requires further study and Board direction. Ad valorem tax abatement would require a referendum before County voters. Impact fee credits may necessarily require a study to keep overall impact fees in a neutral revenue position. The costs and benefits of all incentives need further study to determine fiscal impact and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 58 of 220 174 quantifiable benefits. For these reasons, the recommendation related to this initiative supports further study within a defined time period to implement any incentives for recombination. Following the study, if the Board directs Figure 28 implementation, its provisions would GOLDEN GATE ESTATES WEST OF 951 PARCELS be contained in the Land Development TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.3,442 Code or Code of Ordinances. Parcels<1.5Acres:Approx.842 (Vacant Parcels:136;Developed or Other Parcels:706) Legend Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Vacant Parcels(Parcels<1.5 Acres) credits in the Estates = N.Developed or Other Parcels(Parcels 1.5 Acres)— 1 1 t�� 1, i1Ii it s' Community Planning staff attended I, -1i �1�i; o numerous Comprehensive Watershed U Improvement Plan Ad Hoc Technical �� \ VANDERBILT BEACH RD Advisory Board (CWIP) meetings, —; ir 1 . i exchanging concepts related to the op iexisting TDR program (RFMUD) and Z Q !i1 GOLDEN GATEBLVDW potential Golden Gate Estates 0 1 1 ot initiatives. One idea that gained 1 1 li' •1 � )11 .. attention was the potential issuance of 1'Pl ER,DTyR TDR credits as part of a sale or I i r f � li g donation proposal for parcels within current or future acquisition areas.The l 1 'IR 11 examples of two specific wetland sites, c I,yI1 Red Maple Swamp and Winchester =�z tri 111fII /V` Head within the Conservation Collier - 1 ._ ' w u N acquisition areas were discussed andn _ �` i studied. The "Gore" properties and surrounding area could also be RADIO RD '�_ considered. The CWIP committee understood its role as a technical advisory committee,and not a policy advisory committee. Accordingly, by motion at its March 7, 2017 meeting, CWIP recommended the concept of using TDRs for acquisition of select wetland parcels as "consistent with CWIP goals in improving the floodplain, surface hydrology, aquifer recharge and connectivity of the watershed". In the Committee's view, a recommendation beyond consistency would have exceeded their scope. In the meantime, the Board considered the idea of external (outside of RFMUD Sending lands) sources of TDR credits at its RFMUD Workshops in January, May and June of 2017. Staff had Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 59 of 220 125 recommended a modest allowance of TDR credits as part of an acquisition program in Golden Gate Estates, if the number of credits would have a nominal effect on overall TDR supply and price. Staff also noted that implementation could be difficult within the same RFMUD currency or domain, because property values are much different in the Estates as compared to RFMUD Sending Lands. The Board did not reach any consensus on this issue, but held it open for later discussion. Given the complexity of the evaluation and completion of the RFMUD Restudy, staff is now of the opinion that acquisition of Estates lots for stormwater benefits using RFMUD TDR credits should not be pursued. As stated by some RFMUD stakeholders, a closed system, at least on the supply side, should be more predictable while avoiding the dilution of currency to Sending Land owners. One alternative is the further study of a second credit system, (Transfer of Development Units or TDUs),which could direct Estates density values to urban development.This could be considered in the context of County(or other agency)ownership of quality wetland or high habitat value locations. The related recommendation, below, suggests an evaluation in a timeframe directed by the Board. Dispersed Water Management The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association has also been in favor of the concept of dispersed water management (DWM) as a means of attenuating stormwater to the benefit of residents. The typical Estate lot is 660 feet deep, encouraging the owner to construct a home and accompanying impervious areas (driveways, parking, etc.) close to the roadway. This leads to stormwater run-off to roadside swales with eventual conveyance to the nearest primary or secondary canals. Several recent studies (including the Watershed Management Plan (2011), have indicated that the present system of conveyance and treatment of stormwater run-off in the Estates is deficient in providing the desired levels of service for flood protection,water quality improvement,groundwater recharge, fire protection and restoration of historic flowways. Protection of water resources in this area is critical to the health of the public water supply, including wellfields for Collier County and the City of Naples. The road and drainage infrastructures have virtually eliminated some of the historic wetland flowways, leading to exotic infestation, draw-down of the water table and severity of wildfires. As the extent of impervious area continues to grow, the antiquated canals and swales cannot fully accommodate runoff, leading to frequent nuisance flooding. Major structural modifications to the current conveyance system does not appear feasible, either environmentally, economically, or socially (if private property rights are encroached). Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 60 of 220 40a DWM is a means to reduce the full impact of single family development on water resources and management. To the extent that homeowners can attenuate stormwater runoff in quantity and quality before it reaches swales and canals, the better County water goals may be achieved. To be sure, DWM is not a "one size fits all" solution. Parcels with very little wetlands on or nearby may be able to detain some water toward the back of the lot, so long as detention is very temporary, its elevation is sufficiently above the wet season water table and does not interfere with the proper functioning of septic systems. Properties with high percentages of wetland areas might require an engineered solution and/or an incentive-based approach to convey drainage easements to the County at relevant locations. The best proposal for DWM on single family Estates lots will be simple to understand and apply. Consideration should be given to regulatory approaches (required detention or limited fill quantity) and incentive-based approaches and whether to apply various rules to developed and undeveloped properties.Among other ideas, abatement of stormwater utility billing can be considered.Study and public input on a regulatory approach for new home construction should be included. The Restudy recommends a formal study of solutions that will be equitable, reasonable in cost, and understandable to land owners. The study feasibility should commence as funding becomes available. At its meeting on November 8, 2017, the Floodplain Management Advisory Committee found, by motion, that DWM would be an important feasibility study for application to the Estates. Potential of the C-1 Canal and other Golden Gate Canal Relievers The GGEACA spoke in favor of further improvements to the connector C-1 canal.The C-1 connector provides a 1.7 mile east-west link from the Golden Gate Main Canal to the Miller Canal. Due in part to numerous crossings that have constrained its effectiveness,the C-1 has historically played a minor role, serving as an equalizer depending on the head differential between the Golden Gate and Miller Canals. In view of its strategic location, improvements to the canal's capacity could add operational flexibility and allow Golden Gate Main outflows to be moved south by the Miller Canal. In addition, this initiative would also require design and placement of an in-line gated structure to control flow exchanges, and ensure that desired flow directions are achieved. The concept of Aquifer Storage and Recovery systems was also encouraged by the GGEACA to divert wet season flows from the Golden Gate Canal. This is another capital-intensive initiative, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 61 of 220 127 County should continue to study costs, feasibility and possible implementation as a long-term beneficial initiative. Finally,flood control can be more easily measured, predicted and accommodated by tory:. 9 with the South Florida Water . # Management District to review their Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. Educational Components Many of the concepts noted above or measures currently in place should be augmented by Golden Gate Canal public education efforts where possible. Residents, potential buyers and builders of single family homes in the Estates would be well served by a better understanding of water-related issues and programs, and how these serve their self-interests. Wetland maintenance, aquifer recharge, floodplain protection and Firewise concepts should be stressed. As an example, builders and land owners should become aware of the benefits of adding "freeboard" to building plans, which will provide even greater flood prevention beyond current base flood elevations (BFE) standards, as well as providing National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) discounts in premium. Other Watershed Management Plan Initiatives The structural (S) and non-structural (NS) projects listed in the table below were derived during the development of the County's Watershed Management Plan, and have particular relevance to Golden Gate Estates. These projects have the potential to benefit the Golden Gate Estates community by addressing flood control, water supply, water quality, and environmental protection and restoration. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 62 of 220 128 Table 1: Selected Structural (S) and Non-structural (NS) Water management Improvements in GGAMP Recommended by WMP Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status (S)North Golden Gate Golden Gate Canal, Reestablish habitat and *Two feasibility and Estates Flowway Naples Bay and hydrologic connectivity modeling studies have Restoration Project Henderson Creek—Belle along two wetland strands been completed;and,a (Winchester Head and Meade for eventual restoration of network of 42 culverts was Horsepen Strand) the historic flowway to the installed in project's first Rookery Bay Watershed phase. *Funding and evaluation of other project segments are needed (NS)North Golden Gate Golden Gate Canal, Multi-parcel (60) *Land donations are Estates Land Naples Bay&Faka Union acquisition within the accepted through the Acquisition for Canal Winchester Head area offsite preservation Winchester Head provision of the LDC Wetlands Preservation *Funding for acquisition and/or additional land donations is needed (S)Corkscrew Regional Golden Gate Canal& Hydrologic restoration by *Project scope has been Ecosystem Cocohatchee berm removal,vegetation defined Watershed/East Bird control,ditch blocks and *Funding is needed Rookery Swamp flowway redirection Hydrologic Restoration Enhancement (S)Northern GGE, Unit Golden Gate Canal& Wetland restoration in the *Project scope has been 53 Acquisition and Cocohatchee area of Shady Hollow Rd. defined Restoration Ext.and 38th Ave.N.W. Ext. *Funding for land by berm removal and exotic acquisition and restoration vegetation control is needed (S)Golden Gate Canal Golden Gate Canal& Six Tracts conveyed by GAC *Funding for feasibility Water Quality Naples Bay to Collier County totaling 33 study needed Improvements acres,with 3,646 ft.of frontage along the GG canal system,to be used for isolated water quality treatment (NS)Stormwater All Watersheds Restoration and protection *Retrofit options such as Retrofit Project of existing natural systems sewer inlet protection, by establishing retrofit debris collectors,and bio- programs to address swales have been existing developments, identified by staff public facilities and other *Pond inventory and SOPs areas that lack treatment established for county owned facilities *County staff,in cooperation with the Water Symposium,to monitor county stormwater ponds and Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 63 of 220 129 establish Best Management Practices. *Ongoing efforts to establish new programs to meet project objectives Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status (NS)Water Quality All Watersheds Define water quality *Ongoing program that is Monitoring Program conditions in estuaries and periodically reevaluated along canal networks to and adaptively managed achieve greater distribution by the County's Pollution in the groundwater Control staff. (Specific monitoring network recommendations for monitoring completed in 2014) (NS)Verification of No All Watersheds Implement requirement for *Modeling was used to Floodplain Impact development to verify no evaluate future impact upstream and development alternatives downstream for the 100 on DFIRM base flood yr./72-hr.design storm elevations(BFE)in GGE. event The analysis of future build-out shows an increase of BFEs in the range of 0.25—0.5 feet assuming current development practices(fill placement for SF homes). This is well below the NFIP threshold of 1 ft. increase. *Consider implementation (NS) Flood Protection All Watersheds Propose a standard 25-yr *SFWMD is modeling the Levels of Service design storm for drainage primary canal system on arterial roads and 10-yr. *County to follow with design storm for collector modeling of the secondary and neighborhood roads to system increase flood protection *Staff to continue to refine levels of service concept for inclusion within the planning process for the CIP (NS)Low Impact All Watersheds Implementation of a LID *The Pollution Control Development(LID) program that would apply Section is developing a LID Program to all new development manual to be used as a countywide technical working document by the community At its November 8, 2017 meeting,the Floodplain Advisory Committee approved a motion in support of the Watershed Plan Initiatives as important to include within the GGAMP. Related to that, the GGEACA stressed the importance of hydrologic connections by suggesting that future acquisitions by Conservation Collier should prioritize hydrological benefits above other review criteria. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 64 of 220 130 recommendations include language in support of these concepts, and staff believes that the Conservation Collier recommendation should be fully vetted during the public hearing process. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP OBJECTIVE 1.3: Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area. Policy 1.3.0.1: The County shall protect and preserve natural resources within the Golden Gate area in accordance with the Objectives and Policies contained within Goals 6 and 7 of the Collier County Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Policy 1.3.1: The Collier County Environmental Services Department shall coordinate its planning and permitting activities within the Golden Gate Area with all other applicable environmental planning, permitting and regulatory agencies to ensure that all Federal, State and local natural resource protection regulations are being enforced. Policy 5.3.2: The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates Area. Policy 7.1.4: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall hold one or more annual "open house" presentations in the Golden Gate Area emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency management. Generally: Conservation and Coastal Management Element Capital Improvement Element Stormwater Management Sub-element Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 65 of 220 131 Recommended Policies • The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives as financial and staff resources become available. • The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. • The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with adjacent parcels,to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates.Within 2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed and undeveloped lots. • The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board. • The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management (DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and undeveloped properties. • The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, builders, real estate professionals and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner's financial and personal interests as well as area-wide impacts. • Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with Watershed Management Plan objectives,and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other review criteria. Wildfire Preparedness According to the Florida Forestry Service, Fire has always been a natural occurrence in South Florida. Sparked by lightning, wildfires cleared old brush and other fuels within forested areas. Biologists know the value of these periodic burns, as habitat and other natural values become refreshed. However, as population has moved further into the "wildlands" and development has dried the landscape, wildfires emerge as a very serious threat to people and property. Golden Gate Estates is situated within this urban/wildland interface. Community leaders have been aware of this threat for many years.The"Firewise"standards created for development in the Rural Fringe have been a part of the Land Development Code for well over Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 66 of 220 1't7 10 years. Policy provisions within the GGAMP are numerous, and have been part of the Master Plan for many years (see existing provisions, below). Concurrent with the GGAMP Restudy, the Board directed the Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) to provide an overview and recommendations related to wildfire risks, responsibilities and funding. In early 2017, current mitigation practices were outlined with recommendations for improvement. It was noted that brush fire calls per year have reached an average of 130. Springtime, 2017 came with hundreds of wildfires across the state, following a severe "dry season" that resulted in area-wide and state-wide drought. Collier County was particularly hard �- hit. A March wildfire burned over 7,000 acres in Picayune Strand a � � � State Forest. In April, the "3d Avenue Fire", stoked by high winds, tore across the North Belle 2017 Wildfire in Picayune Strand State Forest Meade area and narrowly missed more developed portions of Golden Gate Estates. Thousands of acres burned, thousands were evacuated, and seven homes were lost. At the Board's direction, a multi-agency technical working group was formed under the existing structure of the Emergency Management Advisory Group. This working group was tasked with making recommendations to the Board by September, 2017, to address priorities for bolstering the County's defenses against wildfires. It was noted that educational programs continue to provide excellent resources for self-help in mitigating individual property risks. Likewise, the Florida Forestry Service and the Independent Fire Districts, supported by mutual aid, were roundly applauded and appreciated for the excellent work performed in response to these events. While this working group has not reported its findings at time of this writing, funding issues in support of landscape scale mitigation activities will be at the center of attention. Funding for fire Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 67 of 220 133 break creation and maintenance and for prescribed burn activities needs augmentation. Several alternatives have been suggested to supply the Forest Service and Independent Districts with the tools and resources for a higher level of safety, including a Golden gate "fire utility fee" through an MSTU and general revenue funding. Also under review will be Land Development Code standards and Collier County Water Sewer District raw water access issues. Improvements to LDC language or permitting procedures are under review. A number of strategically located raw water wells have already been retrofitted for Fire Department use. As stated by Mr. Dan Summers, Division Director, BES, a community-wide effort to improve wildfire mitigation "is a marathon, not a sprint". In other words, this is a hazard that must stay on the County's radar for continual opportunities to enhance and support wildfire mitigation for many years to come. Continual opportunities should consider: • Effective and fair funding options • Resource readiness • Clear legal and procedural boundaries • Notifications and alerts • Mutual aid agreements and Interlocal Agreements • Educational components • Land planning opportunities Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP: GOAL 7: To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater golden gate area, as well as the health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for, mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters. OBJECTIVE 7.1: Maintain and implement public information programs through the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, Collier County Sheriff's Department, Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate agencies,to inform residents and visitors of the Greater Golden Gate Area regarding the means to prevent, prepare for, and cope with, disaster situations. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 68 of 220 134 Policy 7.1.1: The County, fire districts that serve the Golden Gate area, and other appropriate agencies, shall embark on an education program to assist residents in knowing and understanding the value and need for prescribed burning on public lands in high risk fire areas. Policy 7.1.2: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall actively promote the Firewise Communities Program through public education in Golden Gate Estates. Policy 7.1.3: The Collier County Land Development Services Department of the Growth Management Division shall evaluate the Land Development Code for Golden Gate Estates and shall eliminate any requirements that are found to be inconsistent with acceptable fire prevention standards. This evaluation process shall be coordinated with the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services. Policy 7.1.4: The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services shall hold one or more annual "open house" presentations in the Golden Gate Area emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency management. OBJECTIVE 7.2: Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency services providers are included and coordinated in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area. Policy 7.2.1: Preparation of Collier County's annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff's Department to ensure that public project designs are consistent with the needs of these agencies. Policy 7.2.2: Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier County Sheriff's Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 69 of 220 135 projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public projects. OBJECTIVE 7.3: Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division —Planning and Regulation for the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area, including interim measures to assure interconnection. Policy 7.3.1: The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services,the Collier County Transportation Division,Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes: d. An 1-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. e. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to 1-75. f. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Policy 7.3.2: All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association, Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition. Policy 7.3.3: Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes. Policy 7.3.4: County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on-going management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned properties. Recommended Policies: • The County shall explore options for funding of wildfire prevention measures, including funding support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 70 of 220 136 • The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of Wildfire prevention. • Update references to Independent Fire Districts. Lighting Standards A recent policy guide created at the request of the Board, entitled "Collier County Lighting Standards", describes the importance of proper lighting for the health and welfare of County residents: "Well coordinated and designed lighting systems are an effective way to enhance the feeling of security and comfort throughout the County."This policy guide became effective in 2017, and is intended to be updated periodically as standards and conditions change. It applies to County facilities such as roads, parks, public facilities and utility sites and will be incorporated into new and retrofitted lighting at all such locations. Consistency, economy and best management practices (BMP's) are underscored. This policy guide mirrors a longstanding desire of Golden Gate Estates residents to protect their rural environment from light pollution. It is important to Estates residents for environmental reasons- both natural and human environments. Safety, aesthetics and the natural environment are fostered by best management practices lighting standards. r v.. fS Yr_. k %t Photo courtesy of the International Dark-Sky Association/FAU Currently, the GGAMP provides specific guidance for street, parking and recreational lighting including appropriate fixture types such as "low pressure sodium" lamps. Appropriate shielding is also called out.These standards are well intentioned but in some cases limiting in that lighting technology changes more frequently than the Master Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 71 of 220 137 The desire for "dark sky" lighting standards in the Estates was strong- 90% of the public polled supported "dark sky" lighting standards.The public was not polled as to a voluntary or a regulatory approach. Given the County's leadership role in researching and updating standards for its own facilities, this research can greatly benefit the Estates residents, both directly as public spaces are improved, and as a template for broader application moving forward. As the County transitions its lighting at new and renovated locations, more feedback and best practices can be discovered. In addition, a study of commercial lighting county-wide is planned. Given these advances, the recommended lighting policies for the Master Plan should reflect a flexible and updated approach. Broad language may be most suitable. More specific provisions will be incorporated into the LDC or referenced therein. Growth Management Plan Policies Related Existing provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 5.1: Provide for new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers. Policy 5.1.1: Consistent with public safety requirements, street, recreational and structure lighting within Golden Gate Estates shall be placed, constructed and maintained in such a manner as to prevent or reduce light pollution. In implementing this Policy, the County shall apply the following standards: a. If a streetlight or an area light is required, it shall be of the type specified to protect neighboring properties from direct glare. Area lighting shall be shielded such that direct rays do not pass property lines. Low-pressure sodium lamps are encouraged while halogen type lamps are discouraged. 1. Where required, the street lamp shall be of the high pressure sodium type and have a "cobra head with flat bottom" style or be fully shielded so that light is directed only downward. Street lamps shall be mounted on a wood pole at a height and wattage recommended by the appropriate electric utility and as appropriate for a rural area. 2. Parking lot lamps shall be low-pressure sodium type lamps and shall be mounted so that they point downward without direct rays extending past the parking lot, building entrance, walkway or other area intended to be illuminated. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 72 of 220 138 b. Where lighting of recreational areas is required, such lighting shall be mounted so as to focus illumination on the areas intended to be illuminated, and to limit the amount of light that extends outside of the intended area. c. This Policy shall not apply to Tract 124 and the north 150 feet of tract 126, Unit 12,Golden gate Estates, located in the southwest quadrant of the Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards Neighborhood Center. Objective 5.3: Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Recommended Policies: • Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC. • County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards. • The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach agreement on roadway standards and security lights. • The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non-residential uses, and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden Gate Estates consistent with its rural character and specific lighting zone classifications within. • The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential development. Septic Tank Service Golden Gate Estates is a very low density subdivision, where maximum allowed density is 1 unit per 2.25 acres. Given the cost and in-feasibility of supplying centralized water and wastewater service, residential development relies on well and septic systems. Centralized service was considered during the "East of 951 Services and Infrastructure Horizon Study" (2006). However,the estimated cost per parcel for water and wastewater($112,000)far exceeded the benefit. Maintenance of septic systems in the Estates requires periodic pumping and removal of septage, among other maintenance costs. Residents expressed the concern over cost of service and legal disposal during the public outreach meetings, suggesting that the County should provide a processing facility within Collier County to keep costs and compliance within check. In addition, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 73 of 220 139 transport of this material outside the County typically involves more road miles traveled compared to in-County disposal. In a broader initiative, Collier County has embarked on an initiative to create a "Bio-solids Management Facility" (BMF). The BMF would ideally result through solicitation for a build, design and operate entity selected by the Board, providing efficient and compliant processing of bio-solids, oils, grease, septage and similar by-products. The likely location for this facility would be the Resource Recovery Business Park located near the landfill. The outcome of the BMF initiative is expected to result in cost effective and environmentally sustainable treatment of these waste streams, producing energy and high quality fertilizer by-products. The BMF solicitation is currently in Step 2 of the solicitation, having narrowed the search to three qualified forms. Step 2 proposals are due in 2017, and an award of contract is anticipated in early 2018.The selected entity will operate the facility for a minimum of 25 years, and design the facility so that it is expandable for future needs. Septage collection and treatment is part of the RFP; its efficacy is yet to be demonstrated. Growth Management Plan Policies Related existing provisions in the GGAMP: Objective 1.2: Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service. Objective 1.3 Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area. Objective 5.2 Balance the provision of public infrastructure with the need to preserve the rural character of Golden Gate Estates. Recommended Policy: • The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio-solid processing, either directly or through a public private partnership. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 74 of 220 140 Preserve Exemption Currently the GMP and LDC require a portion of the native vegetative present on property to be set aside as preserve when property is developed. Exceptions to this requirement include single-family home sites situated on individual lots or parcels, single lot splits or where property is used for agricultural purposes. Subdivision of land into three or more lots or parcels requires approval of a subdivision plat, which in turn triggers the requirement for a preserve, among other requirements. As the platting of the Golden Gate Estates predated this requirement, no preserves were required as part of its establishment. There are a limited number of lots within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision (depicted as the Estates Designation on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM))which could be divided into three or more lots, each a minimum of 2 1/4 acres size. Analysis by staff shows a total of 75 lots remaining in the Estates Designation, north of 1-75, which could be subdivided as such (6.75 acres or more). These lots range from 6.78 acres to 12.97 acres, with all but two of these lots less than ten acres in size. Lot splits allow 2 parcels from a single tract, and because a re-plat is not required, lot splits fall squarely within the exemption to a required "preserve" area. Environmental staff believes it excessive to require small preserves for the remaining few lots that could be subdivided into three '\ or more 2.25 acre single family lots. If subdivided as such, preserve requirements for all but two of these would be less than 1.33 acres, assuming they were entirely covered with native vegetation. Long term viability of these preserves is also a concern given their small size and location within a large single-family subdivision, with no other preserves or greenways to provide connection. Moreover, preserve exemptions for a limited number of 3 way splits would be consistent with the requirements of all other(12,000+) undeveloped Estates parcels. Related existing provisions in the GGAMP: Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 6.1.1: "...native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following minimum preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria...except for single family dwelling units situated on individual parcels..." Note;As interpreted by the LDC, "the single-family exception is not to be used as an exception from any calculations regarding total preserve area for a development containing single family lots" (Sec. 3.05.07 B). Recommended Policy: • The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 75 of 220 141 Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations A. Golden Gate City 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote compatibility. • Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City. • Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City. • Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing. • Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning programs. • Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development and redevelopment strategies. • Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation. • Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City. • Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeking business creation and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City. • Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent development pattern. • Add target industry uses to the Activity Center. • In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subistrict remove the one acre project minimum. 2. Transportation and Mobility • Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability. Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the MPO's Walkability Study. • Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within or adjacent to the Activity Center. • Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and continuity for future pathway corridors. • Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 76 of 220 142 3. Environmental Stewardship • Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water and Sewer District Implementation Plan. B. Golden Gate Estates 1. Land Use and Economic Vitality • Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations described below. • Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that upsizing will be granted, but provides an opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs. • Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor(Oaks area). This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows application without amendment to the GMP (5 parcels affected). • Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane roadway (or greater), as identified in the LRTP. • Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. • Adjust the Collier Blvd.Special Provisions to allow the same conditional use locational criteria as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates. • Allow conditional use applications at any location in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to also amend the GGAMP. • Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial, conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity that reflect the rural character of the area. • Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for "park and ride" uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. • In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and the RLSA, the County should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 77 of 220 143 • Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners within a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be reasonably anticipated. • Following the completion of the Randall Boulevard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use. 2. Transportation and Mobility • The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR 951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times, cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this policy. • Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and 1-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes. • The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO's 2045 LRTP to submit a revised Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at 1-75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd (T 49, R 28, S 31-34). • The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including a cost/benefit analysis,within 2 years of adoption of this policy. Alt.:The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020. • Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinated among the County's Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO. • The County will consider public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval,for"park and ride" uses,to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and response program activities. 3. Environmental Stewardship Water Resources • The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives in Golden Gate as financial and staff resources become available. • The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the County. • The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with adjacent parcels,to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates.Within Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 78 of 220 144 2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed and undeveloped lots. • The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board. • The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management (DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and undeveloped properties. • The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, builders, real estate professionals and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner's financial and personal interests as well as area-wide impacts. • Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with Watershed Management Plan objectives,and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other review criteria. Fire Control • The County shall explore options for funding wildfire prevention measures,including funding " support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue. • The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of Wildfire prevention. • Update references to Independent Fire Districts. Lighting • Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC. • County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards. • The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach agreement on roadway standards and security lights. • The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non-residential uses, and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden Gate Estates according to its overall rural character and specific lighting zone classifications within. • The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 79 of 220 145 encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential development. Other • The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio-solid processing, either directly or through a public private partnership. • The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 80 of 220 146 Appendix A Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy Public Outreach Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 81 of 220 147 Introduction The Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) public outreach process included extensive public engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. As the GGAMP has the three distinct areas of Golden Gate City, the Eastern Estates (east of Collier Boulevard) and the Western Estates (west of Collier Boulevard), staff focused outreach to provide individual attention to each area. In this way,staff was able gauge the public's perspective on unique differences in values and priorities. In part, these values can be visualized with the outcome of the first set of workshops where staff engaged the stakeholders to envision the future. A series of questions were asked through surveys that were distributed during the workshops and were posted on the dedicated GGAMP restudy website. The following word clouds summarize the values and expectations of those who participated in the process. The surveys and word clouds formed the basis for the communities' vision statements. Staff first drafted the vision statements based on information provided,and at following public workshops the participants refined the statements. The goals, objectives and policies of the GGAMP should recognize and implement these vision statements. Golden Gate City Vision Statement "Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, shopping parks, shopping and ervices within a vibrant, neighborhood walkable community." _, -citv_CeNte t. culture downtown a arksspo atioM-0 communItfeallithildaela �MI 1 g1 le od molesa� .n- education clean e., mem „.:, d Mine , residential 'Kstwila blU ive--Wer sidewalks et, rivet_ �� rind ro lir '_ -, ar.e Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 82 of 220 148 Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement cacommerrcial nodes "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community 1 rge loss nl gie-family with limited goods and services in neighborhood f a ordahl _ fay traiflem centers, defined by a rural character with an outdoor l MI uretnimes appreciation for nature and quietallenwnYe�.. surroundings." si ential pro_conunertilli re raperVACV lout-densityqulgtc u�-1 v ng environmentpeacsftl l recreation Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement "Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, ° Tafil am-es large lot residential neighborhood in a C un nlillet natural setting with convenient access to IAlleartOWfl!!!flUUI the coastal area." nO H-'CI .a..�t.wrY re la run! lrg ' ev ment 1 iieiVlibIWbIIlFi6C 1 gtestateCes tow-density Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 83 of 220 149 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Eastern Estates - Introduction Public Workshop, April 20, 2016 As guests of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Introduction: At the invitation of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association(GGEACA),Collier County planning staff introduced the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, and particularly as it pertains to the Eastern Estates (east of CR 951) area. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next generation. Meeting Summary: Michael Ramsey, President of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association opened the meeting. He greeted elected and appointed County and District officials, as well as various candidates for County Commission Districts 5 and 3. Approximately 125 community members or stakeholders attended the meeting. Mr. Ramsey described the purpose of the meeting as an introduction of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan update process, and asked residents to not get sidetracked with other specific topics that are not a part of the GGAMP. As an example, the issue of fracking should not be discussed, as it is not a Master Plan concept. Commissioner Tim Nance provided an overview of GGAMP in the context of other Planning Restudies and the importance to the Golden Gate area residents. He reminded the group of the relevance of the"green map",in that Over 75%of the County's area is already in conservation status, and that the Rural Fringe Receiving Areas are among the last development areas left in the County; they can complement the Estates if carefully planned. He indicated that all four Restudy areas would consider the same important elements to help achieve consistency between Restudies: land use; transportation/mobility; water; environment; and economic vitality. He reported that an Oversight Committee has been appointed to help direct public involvement, consistency, sustainability and economic vitality, and introduced Jeff Curl, the Oversight Committee member representing the Golden Gate area. Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation,and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content includes an update of relevant issues in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 84 of 220 150 r Restudy, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high-level visioning exercise for the future of the Eastern Estates. Consistent among all Restudies is the planning wheel-a process matrix that describes present plans, public outreach, staff data and analysis, development of alternatives, republication, ultimately with recommendations that reflect stakeholder consensus, and finally re-initiation of public outreach. The process may include several turns if the "wheel" prior to formal public hearings. A reflection of the current - --- progress -progress of the Rural Fringe -' - _i Restudy included the fact -,...,.1.";' ' that there was broad support " ' ., ti`' among stakeholders to incentivize uses that are notiraf41, " ..L. presently adopted- most particularly free-standing ;„ -- � j employment centers and sports venues. GGEACA and attendees were encouraged to attend future Rural Fringe meetings-as close neighbors with commercial and mobility issues;they are true stakeholders in that process.The nexus among three Restudy areas, all within 3 miles of North Golden Gate Estates, was also noted, highlighting the total commercial activity in the area that would benefit the Estates while adding no further Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers. A balance is needed among all commercial centers and activities. The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an overview of currently scheduled meetings, which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. A brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as pertain to the Eastern Estates, were listed under the matrix described by Commissioner Nance. Interpreting the current goals of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Estates, an "existing vision" was derived and described as a low density residential community with rural character, limited commercial services, safe and efficient roadways, and emergency services coordination. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does the Eastern Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you —.. suggest to improve the area? Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 85 of 220 151 Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written comments can be found here. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web site as a survey questionnaire for those that wished to provide input in that manner. Following the exercise, participants were encouraged to share their ideas.Various themes emerged, particularly the preservation of the rural character of the Eastern Golden Gate area. Some spoke in support of a sense of place, including renaming/rebranding the Eastern Estates and the streets, creating institutional and commercial architectural standards that are more suitable for the rural character. Other areas of importance were protecting important watershed areas, and creating greenways. Residents also wanted to discuss the Rural Lands West project, the Habitat Conservation Plan and noted fracking was a concern. Commissioner Nance addressed these topics and noted other venues and agencies will be covering these issues more thoroughly. The Community Planning agenda item on Golden Gate Area Master Plan introduction, concluded at 8:40;the GGEACA meeting agenda items resumed at this time. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page-86 of 220 152 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Western Estates - Introduction Public Workshop, May 11, 2016, 6:30 PM Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: Collier County planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update to the GGAMP.The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to the Western Estates(west of CR 951) area. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next generation. Approximately 60 people attended. Meeting Summary: Greg Ault, Principal, AECOM, as consultant for public outreach, began by discussing his role in the process and the importance of area-wide planning as we think about future generations. He introduced his staff and County staff, and described his favorable impressions of the area from the point of view of a non-resident. Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation,and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content includes an update of relevant issues in the four area Restudies, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of the Western Estates. Consistent among all Restudies is the planning process- one that looks at current provisions and conditions,asks what can be improved,alternatives for improvement, and ultimate decision-making by the Board of County Commissioners. Important focal points include permitted land uses, transportation issues, environment, and economic vitality. Citizens were encouraged to use on-line resources to supplement their understanding and provide input when surveys become available. Mr. Van Lengen presented the idea to study GGAMP in three separate segments: Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. There were no objections raised to this approach. The history of the GGAMP was discussed, including the fact that ten amendments to the plan have occurred since the last major restudy was completed in 2003. After describing the organization of the GGAMP document, it was noted that the major provisions related to Goals, Objectives and Policies were identical to those of the Eastern Estates; low density, rural character, infrastructure and emergency services needs. Residents might consider whether they wish to emphasize a unique vision and goals. Unlike the Eastern Estates (approximately 50% built out), the Western Estates is 88% built out. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 87 of 220 153 With respect to Land uses, permitted uses and conditional uses were described. Also noted was the special language in the GMP describing the limitation on additional conditional uses along the �sr Golden Gate Parkway. j The vast majority of the citizens who attended appeared to live within close proximity to Golden Gate Parkway. Accordingly, there was significant comment from the m _ _ attendees related to the fact that they do not wish to change any of the current land use restrictions related to Golden Gate Parkway. Mr. �P Greg Ault asked for a show of hands in favor of no change to the land '� uses on the Parkway. There was • nearly unanimous agreement, as shown in the photos below and by virtue of the responses received in the visioning session. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does the Western Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area? Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written comments is shown below. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web site as a survey questionnaire for those who wished to provide input in that manner. Attendees expressed a strong desire to maintain the low-density residential character of their neighborhood with no commercial uses. Below is a summary of questionnaire responses: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 88 of 220 Ind I. The Western Estates will be Distinctive for: e Large lots near town with quiet, open and peaceful character e Rural beauty with traditional neighborhoods consisting of dead-end streets where neighbors know one another e No commercial uses or special uses, maintaining uncluttered thoroughfares & Natural habitat with areas for wildlife and environmental protection e Single-family living for local working families e Agriculturally and livestock friendly per allowances II. The Western Estates will be a premier location for: e Peaceful living with private single-family homes e Beautiful gateway to the City of Naples 0 Quiet estates residential living e Family and neighborly atmosphere safe for children Low traffic e Small town feel e Wildlife and agriculture e A remote animal services substation to support domestic animals found in the area e Accessible to services while maintaining a rural character e Well maintained infrastructure A predominantly residential community with supporting uses including senior housingalong arterials. e Maintain distinction from Golden Gate City III. How does the Western Estates area complement Collier County? e Untouched and quiet nature maintains the charm of Naples area e A respite from commercial blight e Peaceful living close to town & Provides a non-gated, peaceful, estates-living neighborhood between the City of Naplesand Golden Gate City e Serves as the gateway to Naples e Gives long-term residents a place to raise generations e Maintains the value of environmentally friendly neighborhood with little commercial uses ¢ Unit 29 should be its own neighborhood, rather than part of Western Estates ¢ Clean, crime-free area 0 Maintains true to the existing master plan e Provides affordable living for year-round residents Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 89 of 220 155 a High value residential housing with limited commercial and special uses f Desire to be the "Pine Ridge Estates" of the area IV. What is the full potential for your community? o Safe, cohesive neighborhood for families o Desire to maintain privacy 0 Maintain the existing character, no need for further enhancements or intrusions o For the area of Unit 29 to be sub divided into its own area similar to Pine Ridge Estates o Commercial and additional uses will only destroy the potential o Country living close to town o Enhance the "Gateway to Naples" 0 Most desired residential acreage in Collier County ¢ Ability for growth of environmental protection services o Addition of public services including parks and libraries with small, neighborhood commercial development to support local neighborhood V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years,what would the headline say about the Western Estates? o "One of the best places to retire with friendly people" "Unique and faithful community that supports the integrity and charm of Naples" o "A great and convenient place to live" & "We are not a part of Golden Gate City" ¢ "Local homeowners rejoice over being left alone" o "A pearl of beauty that truly complements Collier County" 0 "A wonderful residential community to live in" a "Commissioners gave in to their supporters and turned it into another Pine Ridge Road" o "This community stayed the same" o "Premier Estates living 3 miles from the beach" a "Beautiful corridor to the City of Naples" o "Excellent quiet location close to town provides solitude from busy work life" o Depends on how much "commercial" money changes hands with commissioners 0 "This master plan has not changed in 50 years. What a wonderful place" o Hardly anything-this area is quiet. o "Estate living still exists" 0 "Close to everything in town while maintaining privacy" Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 90 of 220 156 VI. What three things would really improve the future of the Western Estates? ¢ Not amending the master plan o No commercial uses o Maintain privacy o Maintain traffic flow without addition of lights or stops o Enhance Golden Gate Parkway west of 1-75 into a lush landscaped corridor serving asgateway to Naples o Uncouple the 4-block area from the GGAMP o Increase wall height for 1-75 to reduce noise permeation o Enforce existing laws and ordinances o Small localized sub-neighborhoods with neighborhood commercial development that supports rural areas o Establish additional wildlife and environmental preservation areas o Provision of public services and access to schools, museums, parks, etc. o To never build a RaceTrac in our area o Create a name/identity for our neighborhood E Re-study traffic impacts of E75 interchange ¢ Consider traffic light at 66t Street SW ¢ Water feature at SW corner of Golden Gate Pkwy and Livingston is a very welcome,positive feature o Sidewalks a Nature conservancy o Community gardens The workshop concluded at 8:35 p.m. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 91 of 220 157 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City- Introduction Public Workshop, June 8, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The Collier County Community Planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy,which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to Golden Gate City and environs. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next generation.The meeting was noticed and 3 electronic signboards were placed in collector roadways in the City for a period of three days. Approximately 25 people attended. Meeting Summary: Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation,and stated that this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an introduction. Content included an overview of all area restudies, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of Golden Gate City. The presentation explained the interrelationships tir between studies and the t , timing of each. Discussions also included the process, . I identifying current plan provisions of importance to v the community, identifying . . opportunitiesfor improvementand incorporating the community's vision and values to bring forward to the Board for its consideration. The role of the Growth Management Oversight Committee was also covered. The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an emphasis on website content and various opportunities for interaction and input and an overview of currently scheduled meetings, which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. A brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 92 of 220 158 pertain to Golden Gate City, were described under the 2 major portions of the GMP: Goals, Objectives and Policies, and Land Use Designations. Interpreting the current goals of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Golden Gate City, an "existing vision" was derived and described as a recognition of distinct neighborhood areas within the City,the value of sub-area plans along with City-wide plans, consideration of a GG City Land Development Code, the importance of connections to the greater Naples area, and a reference to utility expansion. Various Land Use categories were described and discussed, most notably the Mixed-Use Activity Center, the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict and the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict. The Golden Gate Parkway entryway into the City was also discussed. Questions and comments related to GMP and zoning overlays followed. Of note were comments related to the desire for a focal point within the Activity Center or nearby, roadway concerns and beautification. Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after implementation, as envisioned by residents. Key subject areas are land use, transportation, environment, economic and social activity and identity. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does Golden Gate City complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the area 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area? Consultants from AECOM also provided examples of streetscapes, walkability and City entryway features to stimulate imaginations. Overall, citizens seemed most interested in enhanced community facilities, infrastructure,and expression of art and culture native to the area.Specifically, a recommendation was made to extend the private utilities water to greater portions of the City (not wastewater), small business incubation, international food and arts locations, and the use of existing canals for recreation such as kayak and paddleboard. Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these questions. A total of 35 questionnaires were returned. Below is a summary of questionnaire responses: I. Golden Gate City will be known for: Cleanliness o Affordability o New Growth and Development o Celebrated Diversity o Safety Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 93 of 220 159 II. Golden Gate City will be a great location for: e Raising Families e Affordability e Community Services e Mobility e Recreation III. How does Golden Gate City complement Collier County? Diversity e Center of Activity e Accessibility to workforce IV. What is the full potential for your community? Unifying to accomplish goals & A place of flourishing families, business, and community services Safe and effective for all modes of transit ¢ A downtown destination V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the Western Estates? e Clean safe and friendly with a lush landscape F Third fastest growing city in the state of Florida Golden Gate notes first million-dollar home sale e A great place to raise a family e Number one most inviting community Golden Gate wins state championships in sports, music, arts and more & More full-ride scholarships provided to residents per capita than anywhere in Florida Community rallies to improve image & The remarkable turnaround and revitalization of Golden gate e The city that met the needs of its people VI. What three things would really improve the future of Golden Gate City? Code enforcement e Safety of mobility (pedestrian, bicyclists) e Infrastructure e Creation of a CRA e Reduced public transit headways e Creation of a community trolley 0 Lighting e Preservation of green space ¢ Increased homeownership Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 94 of 220 160 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City Public Workshop, October 13, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate City Public Workshop was attended by several Golden Gate residents, county staff members, and local elected officials. The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement derived from the results of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally, an audience polling session was conducted to obtain attendee feedback. Meeting Summary: Attendees revised the draft vision statement to read: "Golden Gate City is a safe , diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable community." Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling are attached. Dialogue included: • active code enforcement day and night as opposed to the current complaint-driven code enforcement model • safety for all dimensions of Golden Gate City • additional lighting • limits to additional density • concern for the limited service area of potable water infrastructure and high costs associated with water infrastructure within existing service area o representatives of FGUA cited need to maintain and repair existing aging infrastructure prior to expanding service areas o understanding the importance of this discussion, the Golden Gate Civic Association offered to invite FGUA to a future civic association meeting where they could focus on the infrastructure concerns specifically • desire for additional distribution of commercial in the north area of Golden Gate City (Green Boulevard) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 95 of 220 161 • support for enhanced and uniform development rules for commercial and mixed-use areas • additional entertainment and recreation options for young adults • support for citizen-driven planning efforts. Golden Gate City Workshop: 10/13/2016 Do you live in Golden Gate City ■No ■Yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ■Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate City? •Developer/Representative ■Elected Official M Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in Golden Gate City? • Unsatisfied ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How Satisfied are you with the ■Somewhat Satisfied locations of existing commercial uses in Golden Gate City? Very Satisfied 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 96 of 220 1R2 Do you think Golden Gate City should have its own unique standards for architecture or landscaping? Do you have adequate health care resources in Golden Gate City? I I ■No Would you volunteer one evening per month to serve on a planning committee? Not Sure �■■■ � .Yes Do you agree with existing policies about citizen-driven planning efforts? Do you support a more uniform set of ■■ development rules for commercial or mixed- use areas? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% in Retail What type of commercial use is most •Personal Services needed in Golden Gate City? if Dining ■Offices ff Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Government Services What type of institution is most Places of Worship needed in Golden Gate City? Adult and Child Care Centers •Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 97 of 220 163 •Expanded Should home-based businesses change in ■Reduced any way in Golden Gate City? Stay the Same •Not Sure 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Never How often do you walk to get somewhere in ■Monthly Golden Gate City? t Weekly •Daily 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Do you have school-aged children that ■No walk or ride bikes to school? Yes ■■ I don't have children 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Street Lighting Of the following options,what is your top priority for improvement in Golden ■Traffic Calming Gate City? Sidewalks •Bike Routes/Lanes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 98 of 220 I C,4 Have you ever used Collier Area Transit(CAT) •No service? •Yes i i 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How satisfied are you with gateway design for Golden Gate City along Golden Gate Parkway? '� , •Very Unsatisfied How satisfied are you with the current ■Somewhat Unsatisfied CAT service times and schedule? k Not Sure •Somewhat Satisfied $Very Satisfied How satisfied are you with the current CAT routes? x ' . eTh 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ' 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 99 of 220 165 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Western Estates Public Workshop, October 20, 2016 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Western Estates Public Workshop was attended by several Western Estates residents, county staff members, local elected officials, as well as developers and their representatives. The client team introduced the current GGAMP. Greg Ault presented a draft vision statement derived from the results of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally, an audience polling session was conducted to obtain attendee feedback. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Western Estates in the context of the entire GGAMP and the urban area of Collier County. He noted the Western estates is a little more than 10% of the area and population or the Eastern Estates, but is 86%developed compared to 47%in the East. Also discussed was the structure and content of the Master Plan. Permitted and conditional uses were reviewed, and the locational restrictions for conditional uses were presented.Attendees agree that the corridor along the south side of Immokalee Rd.should be unified under a designation allowing C-1 uses. The concept of additional CU locations at major intersections was presented, along with incentive-based lot combinations. Attendees revised the draft vision statement to include the terms "natural", "large-lot/estate-lot", "limited-commercial/non-commercial" to read: "Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area." Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling are attached. Dialogue included: • requests for transparency in notifications of conditional uses • requests for information regarding future plans for county-owned parcel at Vanderbilt and Collier Blvd • outlook and vision for attendees with properties fronting major arterials as well as the 1-75 interchange is very different than others Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 100 of 220 166 o higher noise levels o higher traffic o less desirable to residential buyers o the word "commercial" is undesirable, but residents need the services that commercial brings with it • desire to incorporate pedestrian/bike trails/passive recreation using creative thinking with limited R.O.W. • lack of traffic lights along Golden Gate Parkway makes left turns difficult during rush hours • existing Parks& Recreation facilities' programming is at maximum capacity and unable to accommodate all desired users • call to resist external pressure to change or develop further • desire for more inclusive dialogue relating to areas outside of the Golden Gate Parkway corridor • strong opposition to any commercial uses • concern for poor or lack of cellular reception in the Western Estates • mixed support to allow rental of guest homes • strong support for incentivized voluntary small-lot combination program • desire for the recognition of smaller"sub-areas"that comprise Western Estates Golden Gate Western Estates Workshop: 10/20/2016 Do you live in Golden Gate Western Estates? ■No Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 101 of 220 167 •Less than 1 Year •1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden ■5>10 Years Gate Western Estates? ■10>20 Years ■Over 20 Years IN I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 11 Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Western Estates? E Developer/Representative ■Elected Official U Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Retail What type of commercial use is most II Personal Services needed in the Western Estates? IN Dining ■Offices ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% e Reduced Should home-based businesses change in If Stay the Same Not Sure any way in the Western Estates? Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 102 of 220 1RA How satisfied are you with the neighborhood identity for the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of group housing options for seniors or persons with special needs in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with cellular reception/service in or near the Western Estates? ■Very Unsatisfied ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How satisfied are you with the ■Somewhat Satisfied availability and locations of religious institutions in or near the Western I Very Satisfied Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Western Estates? I i How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Western Estates? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 103 of 220 169 i Do you have adequate access to ped/bike trail system in or near the Western Estates? 1111111111111111111 Do you have adequate access to public spaces in or near the Western Estates? Do you have adequate access to ■ neighborhood parks in or near the Western Estates? Do you agree that raising livestock and crops should be allowed in the Urban Estates? Would you volunteer one evening per month 1111 ■.■ to serve on a planning committee for the Golden Gate Area? NM Would you be in favor of a voluntary"small ° 4. lot combination"incentive program? ,_.. Should there be a change to allow rental of I •No your guest house?(Do-over) Not Sure \ 04i .1 •Yes Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? Would you support an Interchange Activity .■ Center at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and 1-75? Would you support office or conditional uses along Immokalee Road? Do you support conditional uses at any other locations not currently allowed? Do you support conditional uses at major MIIIIPM intersections? III 1.11 Do you support office uses at major • intersections? •""*.• 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 104 of 220 170 /"\ ■No Would you consider a voluntary Not Sure association for the Western Estates? ■Yes,sub-areas E Yes,as a whole 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Never How often do you walk to another 1111111111111J11, ■Monthly destination? ■Weekly •Daily 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Bus How do your school-aged ■Car children get to school? Bike or Walk I don't have school-aged children 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 E Not Enough Light How do you feel about existing public street lighting in the Western Estates? _ Perfect Amount Too Much Light 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 105 of 220 171 ■Street Lighting Of the following options,what is your top priority for improvement in the ■Traffic Calming Western Estates? Sidewalks ■Bike/Ped Trail System 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 106 of 220 172 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop, November 3, 2016 UIFAS Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop was well-attended by approximately 130 Eastern Estates residents, stakeholders, and county staff members. The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement that was produced as a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling session was then conducted to obtain additional feedback. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview on the Master Planning process, demographics of the area, existing public facilities, existing approved GMP locations for Neighborhood Centers and conditional uses, and ----' coordination with the RFMUD restudy in providing nearby 4 :10 opportunities for retail, xi" � _1 F 4=r service and jobs for Estates = ' residents. Transportation �t • - study areas were discussed 1 as were watershed and . � other environmental j topics. ti The following draft vision statement was presented to workshop attendees: "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings." Upon presenting the draft vision statement, attendees were asked to provide feedback and potential revisions. Responses included the following terms and subject areas: • No interference • Nature/natural/environment/park/recreation Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 107 of 220 173 • Family-oriented • Health and safety • Code enforcement • Rural/country-living • Protection of natural character • Desire for services including: postal, medical, governmental, community and recreation • Access to retail goods and personal services • Desire to change the wording "limited" presented within the draft • Acknowledgment of watershed/sheetflow • Sidewalks, bus stops, and refuge for school-aged children Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling session are attached. Additionally, attendees were encouraged to provide additional comments and feedback using written comment cards. Dialogue and comments received during and after the polling session included: • desire to preserve foliage on properties and only clearing necessary areas for wildfire protection • concern for the high volume of heavy equipment operating within and traveling through the Eastern Estates • mixed support for additional conditional uses including churches and assisted living facilities general satisfaction with availability/locations of social organizations mixed satisfaction with availability/locations of child care/adult day care, religious institutions, group housing options, assisted living facilities, general dissatisfaction with cellular reception/service • desire for roadway expansion and additional connectivity to the west • mixed support for additional commercial land designations, with general support for small shopping centers as opposed to large centers • call for effective code enforcement • desire for equestrian and other recreational trail networks Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 108 of 220 174 • request to prohibit fireworks and pyrotechnics in an effort to protect wildlife and prevent wildfires • requests for improved drainage • strong support for an 1-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard • general support for industrial areas or business parks to provide jobs and support trade near to the Eastern Estates • strong support for non-residential architectural standards specific to the Eastern Estates • support to allow rental of guest houses • overwhelming support for an incentivized small-lot combination program • general support for an incentivized transfer of ownership program Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop: Instant Polling Results, 11/03/2016 Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? ■No ■Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Less than 1 Year ■1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden ■5>10 Years Gate Eastern Estates? ■10>20 Years Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% " 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 109 of 220 175 /"\ ■Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Estates? 111Developer/Representative ■Elected Official ■Other 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 110 of 220 .1-7G "'1 How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of group housing options for seniors or persons with special needs in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with cellular reception/service in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of religious institutions in or near the Eastern ■Very Unsatisfied Estates? •Somewhat Unsatisfied "'"1 Not Sure How satisfied are you with the •Somewhat Satisfied availability and locations of child care eim and adult day care in or near the •Very Satisfied Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Eastern Estates? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 111 of 220 177 ■Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in the Eastern Estates? I Dining ■Offices ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 112 of 220 178 Should there be trails and greenways in the Eastern Estates? Should there be usable public spaces in the Eastern Estates? Watershed Concept 2:Would you support a voluntary transfer of ownership program for undeveloped parcels identified by a watershed committee? Watershed Concept 1:Would you support an incentive to owners who wish to combine a 1.14-acre lot with an adjoining lot? Do you support an 1-75 connection in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard? ■No P".•Not Sure Would you use a Transit Park&Ride or Ride !Yes Sharing Facility? Should there be a change to allow rental of your guest house? Do you want specific architectural standards for non-residential uses in the Eastern Estates? Should there be more neighborhood commercial centers throughout the Eastern Estates? Should there be a larger commercial center central to the Eastern Estates? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 113 of 220 179 Is there a need for an industrial area or ■No business park to provide jobs and Not Sure support trade in or near the Eastern Estates? ■Yes,nearby-not in Yes,in the Estates 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Reduced Should home-based businesses change in ■Stay the same any way in the Eastern Estates? tt Not Sure ■Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Allow everywhere ■Allow along arterials Should potential Conditional Use Only at select locations applications change in any way in the Eastern Estates? ■Only certain kinds at additional locations They should not change 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Not Sure Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 114 of 220 180 Golden Gate City Commercial Property Owners Meeting February 16, 2017 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Introduction: To better understand the Golden Gate City commercial properties opportunities and constraints, a public workshop was scheduled specifically for these property owners. Staff mailed a meeting notice to all owners of record with property designated existing or future commercial use. The meeting was well-attended by approximately 60 property owners,various county department staff members, the Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development staff, and County Commissioner Burt Saunders. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Master Plan restudy process. Anita Jenkins, Principle Planner, discussed the previous Golden Gate City public workshops and specifically the vision statement the Golden Gate residents drafted for their community. Staff described the different • commercial land use districts within Golden Gate City and how - -1 it these districts applied to their property. To invite discussion related to improvements that could be made to the Master Plan, staff asked questions related to future plans for = � commercial properties, and what obstacles in redevelopment had been identified. Property owner's provided the following comments: • Wants to redevelop within the next five years (Santa Barbara district) to do medical. o Problem is traffic safety concerns along Santa Barbara, o LDC requires project minimum of 1 acre rather than 1 parcel. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 115 of 220 181 o It would be helpful if the rezoning to commercial happened because properties are being advertised as residential rather than commercial. o Would like to build more duplex or triplex; city water is not available but would like it to be. o Thinks septic is a good optional because of the cost to install central sewage • Development standard and setbacks need to be amended to accommodate change from residential to commercial. • Plan for affordable housing in the in the residential area in the Golden Gate City. o When rezoning property it was discussed how to capture pass by traffic to be viable commercial. What happens to the displaced people when switching from residential to commercial? o Vertical mixed-use was discussed and identified as an option to maintain residences within commercial properties. • Golden gate parkway discussion that nobody is required to redevelopment the property. Can it be kept as residential if the owner does not live in it? Big concern so that owners can keep property regardless of who lives there. • Concerns about too many parcels changing from residential to commercial which will entail to pushing out those who want to stay residential. • If a CRA what percent would go into the pool? o It varies as the property values increase. Sliding scale based on the value of the property. • How many properties would have to agree to transfer from residential to commercial in Golden Gate section. o Mike Bosi, Zoning Director, discussed possible restrictions for creating a PUD. Parcel number would vary based on the LDC codes such as parking and square footage. • Traffic control to protect residents if conversation rate increased. • Would like more cafés and restaurants in Golden Gate City. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 116 of 220 IR9 • Realtor participating in the meeting provided perspective that if a community is more mixed-use the property values will increase • Promote remodeling without putting restrictions, better to let the owner based their remodels based off being grandfathered in rather than having to meet current LDC codes. • Discussion how the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce can help Golden Gate City by promoting pad ready sites on their website. • Commissioner Saunder's provided concluding remarks encouraging redevelopment of the Golden Gate City commercial areas and mentioned the potential for utility conversion and state funding to help off-set costs. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 117 of 220 183 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop, February 22, 2017 UIFAS Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Initial Recommendations Public Workshop was attended by approximately 31 Eastern Estates stakeholders,and county staff members.The client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a revised vision statement that was produced as a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling session was then conducted to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended GGAMP policies specific to the Eastern Estates. Meeting Summary: Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, presented information on the status of the restudy, prior meetings, area demographics and key topic areas. Anita Jenkins, Principal Planner, presented results of visioning from prior meetings, including the community's consensus on its distinctive qualities. Audience polling was conducted to obtain level of support for potential new policies and existing policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience polling session are attached. Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and feedback through written comment cards and group dialogue. Dialogue and comments received during and after the polling session included: • Conditional Uses at arterial intersections o Desire to preserve arterial intersections for potential future commercial as opposed to conditional uses since they are the most desirable to commercial property developers. o Need for larger conditional use parcels to be compatible with the surrounding community. • Transportation and mobility o Desire for an increased rate of road paving. o Concern for increased congestion on Everglades Blvd with a potential 1-75 interchange. o Increased need for designated refuge/waiting areas for students waiting for school buses. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 118 of 220 184 o Desire for the interchange to be aligned with RFMUD receiving areas due to future increased population densities. o Concern for the future character of streets adjacent to a potential interchange. o Desire to limit access to or from the interchange. • Desire for larger buffers and setbacks for non-residential uses. • Need for appropriate lighting at rural intersections, without over-lighting entire corridors. • Need for reflective street signage and way finding o Strong concern for an increase of built guest homes and the overall effects on the community and population density if a policy were changed to allow for the lease of guest homes as well as adverse impacts on infrastructure, watershed, and code enforcement. o Desire to make senior centers and wellness centers a conditional use. Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop— Instant Polling Results: 02/22/2017 Resident Which option best represents your !Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Developer/Representative II •Elected Official - Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates? ■No Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 119 of 220 185 How long have you lived in Golden ■Less than 1 Year Gate Eastern Estates?(do-over) •1>5 Years 5>10 Years How long have you lived in Golden ■10>20 Years Gate Eastern Estates? a Over 20 Years *I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (This space intentionally left blank.) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 120 of 220 186 Retain existing policy to pave lime rock roads. The County will develop rural architectural standards for commercial and institutional development in the Estates. Neighborhood centers may be increased in size to accommodate stormwater,septic and buffer requirements. Accommodate growing demand for employment,goods,services,and entertainment with provisions adjacent to the Estates. I Add new provision to allow communications towers. ■Strongly Disagree •Somewhat Disagree • Not Sure Add new provision to allow Group ■Somewhat Agree Homes(7-14 people). •Strongly Agree Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections.(do-over) Add new provision to allow Conditional Uses at arterial intersections. Retain existing policy to preserve the rural character of the Eastern Estates. Retain existing policy allowing for livestock and crops. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% /"1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 121 of 220 187 The County will consider a TDR program for natural resource protection. The County will promote the combination of 1.14-acre or similar "small lots"into adjoining lots through incentives Retain existing policy that the County will encourage"dark sky"lighting standards. IIIIRetain existing policy that the County will consider incentives for wetland preservation. Retain existing policy to conduct wildfire F. mitigation education and prevention • ■Strongly Disagree programs. ■Somewhat Disagree The County will update setback and Not Sure buffer standards for non-residential uses r ■Somewhat Agree in the Estates and for adjoining uses in the RFMUD and RLSA. Strongly Agree Retain existing policy to coordinate a future 1-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard. Retain existing policy to increase north south and east-west route alternatives. Retain existing policy to create a greenway plan. Retain existing policy to schedule(or update)and fund bridge improvements. P.", 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 122 of 220 1RR /"..1 Do you support the ability of owners to rent/lease their guest homes. Mill, The County will create new lighting standards within the LDC. III ■Strongly Disagree The County shall continue to work toward the goal of providing a septic ■Somewhat Disagree disposal facility located in Collier , Not Sure County. •Somewhat Agree The County will continue efforts to D Strongly Agree support independent fire districts and Florida Forestry Service in public education, planning, and resourcing related to wildfire prevention and response. ,"'\ The County will consider dispersed water storage and watershed connectivity to,through,and from the Estates. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ..-1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 123 of 220 189 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Golden Gate City Public Workshop, April 26, 2017 Golden Gate Community Center Introduction: The GGAMP Restudy Golden Gate City Initial Recommendations Public Workshop was attended by approximately 10 Golden Gate City stakeholders, and county staff members. The county staff introduced the current GGAMP and public outreach to-date. An audience polling session was then conducted by the client team to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended GGAMP policies specific to Golden Gate City. Areas of focus included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environment. Meeting Summary Audience polling was conducted to obtain consensus for potential new policies and existing policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and feedback through group dialogue. Dialogue during and after the polling session included: • Code Enforcement — While discussing the information on page 10 of the PowerPoint, some of the attendees recommended that code enforcement be added as an additional "focus" idea. Some of the attendees were concerned with the way that environmental code — such as the removal of invasive trees—is enforced. • Architectural Review — Some of the attendees voiced that they would like to establish a review board to oversee architectural standards. • Stormwater improvements. — After the conclusion of the meeting, there was discussion of opportunities in future construction for stormwater systems improvements. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 124 of 220 190 Golden Gate City Workshop — Initial Recommendations: 04/26/2017 Do you live in Golden Gate City? ■No If Yes II 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% •Less than 1 Year ■1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden 5>10 Years Gate City? •10>20 Years ■Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City �\ 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% \ •Resident Which option best represents your II Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate City? Developer/Representative •Elected Official •Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 125 of 220 191 Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards, including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove 1-acre rezone requirement. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards,including vertical mixed-use. Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict: Remove prohibition on rental housing. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards,including vertical mixed-use. •Disagree No Opinion Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: IS Agree Remove prohibition on rental housing. Consider provision in zoning overlay to allow property improvements even if not to some of today's development standards (ex:parking,landscape,setback,etc.) The County should consider one or more zoning overlay(s)to reduce the cost and complexity of individual rezone petitions. Mixed-use provisions and Land Development Code standards should strive for uniformity Commercial sub-districts should be simpler and more cohesive,emphasizing mixed-use and supporting redevelopment opportunities.(do-over) _ -- 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 126 of 220 192 Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict: Retain Plan language related to pedestrian connectivity and alternative modes of transportation. Explore feasibility of CRA, Business Improvement District(BID),or Innovation Zone within Golden Gate City. Adopt appropriate tools for business enhancement,such as incubators or accelorators. 1.11111Enhance community cultural assets, international focus,and community identity. ` h - j Enhance community participation in area and sub-area planning through a county- fostered initiative with the ultimate goal of self-sustained community planning. ■Disagree No Opinion Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: M Agree Should certain light industrial uses be allowed if adding jobs to GG City? Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: Do you agree with the uses within this Subdistrict? Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: Should the boundaries of the Subdistrict be expanded? Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict: Increase height to allow 3 stories adjacent to Golden Gate Parkway. Golden Gate Professional Office Subdistrict:Expand uses to C-3 (commercial)and residential. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 127 of 220 193 Develop a program requiring removal of all exotic vegetation using Golden Gate City as a pilot. Continue stormwater outfall and connectivity improvements for flood control. Seek appropriate grant funding opportunities for conversion of septic to sewer service. Continue canal/outfall water monitoring •Disagree for surface and groundwater No Opinion contamination as it relates to septic. •Agree Study potential for utility service .., conversion from Florida Government Utility Authority to Collier County Water Sewer District. Express need to conduct a pedestrian bridge connectivity study over canals. Identify and prioritize traffic-calming locations. "-"N 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 128 of 220 lad Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: ■No Should the Uses include"light industrial"if compatible with neighborhood? No Opinion Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 129 of 220 195 Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220 196 Office of Business and Economic Development Research Memo: (April 18,2017) Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP)1 Overview: Collier County's Economic Development is inclusive of Golden Gate City particularly with respect to retail and commercial business. However, various sources reveal that there is limited Industrial land which has been retarding the County's capabilities for investment attraction and expansion2. This update provides a great opportunity to create an environment to bring more development to the area covered by the Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP). Big Boxes are increasingly becoming vacant big—box stores i.e. 'dark boxes'3 at a time when the GGAMP remains heavily focused on Commercial use. Commercial Zoning is defined by Florida statutes4, to include activities predominantly connected with the sale, rental and distribution of products or performance of services while industrial-use means activities connected with manufacturing, assembly, processing, or storage of products. Industrial-use facilitates greater value-added activities associated with improved jobs and wages, while lower value-added investments usually promoted by commercial use activity, are generally subject to greater job termination, and this seems the opposite of the vision for the GGAMP. Industrial areas would indeed serve as a major economic boost for the county and in the Golden Gate area. However, industrial zoning would require buffers and other ways to separate business use from the residential areas. Heavy industrial-use has been associated with negative community impacts including environmental pollution. Proposing Mixed-use, or allowing certain light-industrials uses as a conditional-use would be a great way to update the GGAMP. Conditional-use would allow for county staff to review and ensure that each proposed use will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods. The main objectives for Golden Gate City could be further promoted and facilitated where the GGAMP includes mixed use and conditional use zoning that promotes light-industrial-uses and business parks in Goals 4 and 5 of the plan. This could also enable greater investments in some of Golden Gate City's currently unused and underutilized `big-box' spaces e.g. Sweet Bay, Sears and K-Mart. Points: • The 44 respondents included in the GGAMP survey6 indicated they wanted Golden Gate City to: o facilitate new business as a top priority for improving Golden Gate City's future; 1 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=66933 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=764 3 http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bbtk-factsheet-blight.pdf 4 https://floridaldr.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/relevant-florida-statutes-definitions.pdf 5 Light or limited industrial zoning is intended for lands appropriate for low-intensity, light and medium industrial activities.Typical uses include assembly and fabrication industries,warehousing,distribution centers, administrative offices,and business support services that typically do not cause noise, air,or water disturbances or pollution.(see http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fairfield/html/Fairfield25/Fairfield2506.html retrieved April 18,2017. 6 https://docs.goo2le.com/forms/d/17Yols-i6vU-PMxD6RLNvPoW6NbkZFNfjwGJzBWWRgBo/viewanalytics Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 131 of 220 197 Office of Business and Economic Development o be distinctive for middle-class workers and new growth; o be a premier location for investment; • The Office of Business and Economic Development(OBED) reviewed the GGAMP and encourages more mixed or conditional-use zoning that promotes light-industrial activities and business parks. Goals 4 and 5 could be revised to include specific reference to advanced manufacturing, including automated apparel, light assembly and 3D printing, as well as call centers. • Several large retailers, including Payless, K-Mart, Sweet Bay and Sears are closing a significant number of stores in Collier County. That provides an opportunity for timely amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) development standards and permitted uses that could help to bring new businesses to the area. For example, Sears in Chicago has repurposed a 127,000 square-foot store into a multitenant data center. This could be replicated in Golden Gate City if developers were allowed the proposed flexibility in development standards. Currently, there is vacant commercial and retail space, and a revision to the LDC to include mixed or conditional-use developments that promote light- industrial activities and business parks could help to meet resident's needs. Throughout the nation, transforming plaza districts to mixed-use developments is a growing trend (see http://newsok.com/article/5545159 and http://mixeduse.sochaplazas.com/work/ ). Revising the GGAMP to allow such transitions could help improve the area's economic competitiveness. Some tracts within Golden Gate Area are designated as Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Zones and mixed-or conditional-use could aid in their development. Action: OBED to- • coordinate with Zoning Division, GGCRA-MSTU and other affected parties at meetings prior to the public workshops this summer to work on discussions and drafting considerations for incorporating greater mixed-and conditional-uses that promotes light- industrial use and business park activities in Goals 4 and 5 of the GGAMP; and • participate in the GGAMP Public Workshops. http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/06/former-sears-kmart-stores-become-data-centers/ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 132 of 220 198 From: Michael Currier<mcurrier@govmserv.com> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 11:10 AM To: VanLengenKris Cc: Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita Subject: RE: Golden Gate City and FGUA Attachments: GG-MAP SERVICE AREA-W&WW-UPDATED_2011.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Kris: I am not aware of FGUA sponsored line extensions since purchase in 1999.The most recent line extensions were constructed and paid by development; Publix on CR 951 and Collier schools. From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 11:29 AM To: Michael Currier Cc: Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita Subject: Golden Gate City and FGUA Hello Michael: Many thanks to you and Donna for attending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy public workshop last evening. I appreciate that you shared maps of your served area for water and wastewater service in Golden Gate City. I have two follow-up requests: 1. Can you provide those maps in PDF format so that the detail and color is more evident? 2. Can you share any examples of extending service to new street areas and how it worked out? For example, number of new residences included, cost per customer for impact fee and connection charge, etc.? Have you made any new connections in the past 10-20 years either in GG City or in your Service area just west in GG Estates? Thanks for helping us understand the underlying issues and business plans of FGUA, and thanks too for planning to meet again with residents at an upcoming Golden Gate Civic Association meeting. Respectfully, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239)252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 133 of 220 199 From: DelateJoseph Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 1:00 PM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG City improvements Attachments: GoldenGateCityStormwaterDrainageSystemlmprovementPlan_CurrentConditions_2016.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NW1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SW1.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged This is a multi-year project that may take 20 years from start to finish. It is a maintenance project to replace the stormwater pipes and catch basins (stormwater inlets) in the 4 square mile GG City only. There are no ponds or new improvements planned. The total estimated construction cost is$15M in 2012 dollars. This amount obviously will be higher by the time is fully constructed due to inflation, construction cost increases, etc... The design costs are approximately 15-20%so that would add an approximate$3M to the 2012 total. Funding will be in small amounts as it is available and budgeted on a yearly basis. The County has requested a$1M FLA legislative earmark for this upcoming session but that is only a possibility of receiving funding. Attached are maps of the 4 Quads plus a relatively recent current conditions map that is mostly up to date. As a side note,we like to call it stormwater management, not drainage or flood control, even though the graphics say otherwise. Thank you. From: MoscaMichele Sent:Thursday, October 06, 2016 2:04 PM To: DelateJoseph Cc: JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG City improvements Hi Joe, The County's Community Planning staff would like information about the stormwater improvements slated for Golden Gate City(refer to below email). I provided them with the below excerpt/information from a recent presentation given by Jerry. In addition,the 2016 AUIR identifies funding for the project in fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 for"DC" —design, permitting,and construction. GG City Outfall Replacements • Proposed Funding in FY 17: $500,000 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 134 of 220 200 • Four-square-mile area of Golden Gate City • Replacement and improvements to existing aging infrastructure: ➢ Replaced old catch basins with ditch bottom inlets with grates ➢ Installation of sumps at catch basins ➢ Re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion When you have a moment,would you please provide Kris with the requested map(s)or graphics and any other pertinent project details. Thank you, Michele Wlichie(e1�. JVlosca,AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Department Capital Project Planning,Impact Fees&Program Management.Division 2800 N.Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL 34104 tel.239.252.2466 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:40 AM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: GG City improvements Hi Michelle: You mentioned the outfall replacement project for GG City stormwater, ($.5m, FY 17). Do you have a map of the improvement locations,or graphics from studies to show improvement areas in flood control for certain blocks?Also, are there any other future stormwater improvements in the next 5-10 years? Thanks, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division,Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. /Th 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 135 of 220 201 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 3:08 PM To: 'Sandra Mediavilla' Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Attachments: text GGAMP City Downtown Center Comm Sub.pdf; FLUM Downtown Commercial Subdistrict.pdf Hello Sandy: Thank you for your inquiry. I am attaching language and a reference map currently contained in our Comprehensive Plan within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan section.This material dates back to 2004.The Subdistrict containing your address is called Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. We are in the process of a "restudy", which means we want to obtain public comments and make changes reflecting public consensus and changed conditions.The area shaded on the map indicates one of many Subdistricts that was identified more than 10 years ago for redevelopment.You can read the language describing the intent. The Future Land Use (FLU) designation is a bit different than zoning. I believe your property is zoned residential. Nevertheless,the FLU would give a property owner the right to request a zoning change,subject to compatibility with surrounding areas and other considerations. As you will be unable to attend the meeting, please feel free to let me know whether you agree with this designation. I infer from your comments that you would prefer that addresses along 23d Ave SW not be a part of this FLU designation. Please feel free to confirm or expand. We will provide written comments to the hearing bodies after we assemble initial recommendations for change. Meanwhile, please feel free to contact me with further questions and comments. Very truly yours, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division,Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies From: Sandra Mediavilla [mailto:SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us] Sent:Thursday, February 02, 2017 2:04 PM To:VanLengenKris<KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan Kris: I am a property owner within the City area of Golden Gate. I received your letter yesterday regarding the GGAMP and informing me of the meeting to be held on February 16, 2017 at 5:30 pm. Unfortunately, I work until 5:30 therefore will not be able to attend the meeting. But let this email serve as my comments on the information contained in your letter. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 136 of 220 Your letter indicates that my property(which is clearly residential) is"allowed to have commercial uses". I am hopeful you are not referring to the residential portion of Golden Gate City. I live at 4340 23rd Ave. SW. I have owned the house and resided in the house since 1976. While the entire area and population of Golden Gate City has greatly changed over my 41 years in the area, I cannot and will never agree to this residential area becoming in any way commercial. I am hopeful that when you refer to "commercial property owners",you are referring to those areas of the City which are already commercial in nature, i.e. 951,the Parkway, Santa Barbara Blvd. etc. I cannot imagine that any portion of the residential areas of the City of Golden Gate would be deemed or somehow turned into a commercial area.As it is now, I live in an area which is now filled with people who are not of the nature as when I first moved into this neighborhood. If I were able to afford it, I would remove myself from this area to an area more to my liking. If this is not the case, please let me know and I will see if I can get the time off to attend your meeting in person. I look forward to hearing back from your office. Thank you. Sandy Sandra B. Mediavilla Florida Registered Paralegal Parrish,White&Yarnell,P.A. 3431 Pine Ridge Road, Suite 101 Naples,FL 34109 Phone: 239-566-2013 Fax: 239-566-9561 E-mail: SandraMediavilla(&napleslaw.us A Please consider the environment before printing this email '41;11§7 a PARRISH, WHITE YARNELL, P.A. attorneys at law Both Sandra Mediavilla and Parrish, White & Yamell, P.A. intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorizea disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. if you have received this communication in error,please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Sandra Mediavilla immediately at(239)566-2013. Thank you. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 137 of 220 203 aramsuvww.•, GOLDEN GATE PRESS STATEMENT RE: POTENTIAL COUNTY ACQUISITION FOR STAFF USE This transition [of the Golden Gate Utility System]follows the original FGUA vision and historical practice -of partnering with local governments to acquire private utility systems, move them to public ownership and improve their condition to a high quality municipal standard. The FGUA has an agreement with the local or"host"government wherever we are[now in 14 Florida counties]to convey these systems to those governments when they desire. The Golden Gate system was among the first acquired by the FGUA when it was formed in 1999.The Golden Gate system was one of several systems purchased from Avatar Holdings, Inc(Florida Cities Water Company). Other systems acquired with Golden Gate included Barefoot Bay(Brevard County), Cerrollwood(Hillsborough County), Poinciana (Osceola& Polk Counties),and a system in Sarasota County. Since the inception of the FGUA,there have been a number of utility systems acquired and -- then conveyed to local governments. When purchased by the FGUA,the Golden Gate system can be described as"troubled" by its physical and financial condition. Its high customer rates are directly attributed to the initial cost to purchase it from the private owner and the capital improvements required to bring it to its very good current condition.As the FGUA prepares to turn the utility over to Collier County,the system has strong finances as evidenced by the 2015 credit ratings of"A2" by Moody's and "AA"from S&P. Further, it has been recognized with awards from the Florida Water Environment Association and the Florida Water and Pollution Control and Operators Association in recent years for its quality operation and safety practices. We are pleased to have served our mission of improving the system, providing very good customer service and putting it in the best possible condition for it to become part of the county utility system. We look forward to working with Collier County on what we hope will be a seamless transition. Last Update-June 26,2017 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 138 of 220 204 Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220 205 From: MottToni Sent: Friday,April 01, 2016 5:28 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: DowlingMichael Subject: 1983 Agreement-GAC Land Trust Attachments: 1983 Agreement.pdf; Reserved and Available List with Folio 2016.xlsx Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Kris, Sorry I missed your call. Please find attached the 1983 Agreement between Avatar Properties Inc, fik/a GAC Properties Inc. and Collier County. Michael Dowling is the liaison with the Golden Gate Land Trust Committee. Also attached is the list of remaining properties. I'll be out of the office next week Monday through Wednesday and perhaps we can meet and discuss and questions you may have after that. Just let us know. Thanks Toni A. Mott, Manager, SR/WA Collier County Real Property Management 3335 Tamiami Trail East - Suite 101 Naples, FL 34112 Telephone Number: 239-252-8780 Fax Number: 230-252-8876 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. • 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 140 of 220 206 00842677 E83 te 18 AN a 22 • COLLIER COUNTY ...._• RECORDED ArEDrsrr 64' THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 15th day of November, a I='(D ,-' 1983, orogen AVATAR PROPERTIES INC., f/k/a/ GAC PROPERTIES INC.. a co C Florida corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Company", and COLLIER ca cn mum, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter N referred to as 'County', acting by and through its Hoard of County Ootttaissioners. WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, the Company entered into a Consent Order with the Federal Trade ammission dated July 23, 1974, which in Section III, Paragraph E. provided for Company to donate 1,100 acres of land to 0 County, in the subdivision known as "Golden Gate Estates", to he used -0 o to provide facilities for such things as recreation, utility and .a- Ca community service for the existing al esidents and visitors of rn ca naa r Collier County, and to provide-~ ' cof(re 3� fu improvements within the area known as/,�GOidm =.d� ' ' d herein; and V* EAS, the afo ii resent Orderm was aended , ny and the Federal Trade ,E d= in a Modifying Orr issued>.ofiL \ April 17, 1979 the if OrGonparry a yaug- der no longer required the to deed to Countfy the f1,10( Gp in dada' tes; an WHEREAS, the County has acknoke d' eoeipt o previously ch4d land from the CompariX, 7 the' - - t ,cr s conveyed by y'io 1,061. safd I _t S ; WHEREAS, 3 ) an_ the' ty� i rsby mutual merit to s recognize that of�s -0•61�•a by te. parry,�o the County remains e 4ential need to enable the Minty to:meet the f present and future' " is needs of the Golden Gate ';yid WHEREAS, the'1paept has determined that the p �ands stmt of that cerin Agr r�da October g, 1977 have been t t.rally ek satisfied by various acCsiip.ti e Company, ince g 1p limited to exchanges of purchasers o f -a""a ;;"'f^-q - ` �c secs, and expenditure and tendering to - a £fin•- . •^'canal maintenance and water retention facilities; ARE, in consideration of the aforesaid premises, it is mutually convenanted and agreed between the Company and the County as follows: 1. The Company hereby reaffirms that it will donate by special warranty deed 1,061.5 acres of property in Golden Gate Estates to the County. Golden Gate Estates is made up of the property shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. 2. The Company and the County mutually agree that the following described lands will be conveyed in accord with the following schedule: a) On or before December 1, 1983, the Company will convey to the County the lands listed in Exhibit -Be encompassing approxi- mately two hundred ten (210) acres. These lands are within the area marked I as shorn in red as set forth in Exhibit "C" hereto which is incorporated herein by reference. W1,IJEt C.,• r.OF -7-,,_-1_ WI 'This i i11 .J TRU.qerm�arcd 5�C/l.i / F i .1Cm77o ) / 14 ;a:r.2c n6� @fl ate Area Master Plan Rgt/t1.6i'¢@ 'l ite Paper Page 141 of 220 Co,a:aabies.Fonda 3.3!:34 ^,. i 207 1 00 052 000492 OR BOOK PAGE b) On or before December 31, 1983, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred twelve (212) acres within the area marked II as shown in blue as set forth in Exhibit "C". c) On or before December 31, 1984, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred ten (210) acres within the area narked III as shown in brown as set forth in Exhibit "C". d) On or before December 31, 1985, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred fifteen (215) acres within the are marked IV as shows in green as set forth in Exhibit "C". e) On or before December 31, 1986, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred fourteen and five tenths (214.5) acres within the area marked V as shorn in ye'I ccs as set forth in Exhibit "C". 3. The Company and County will meet in October of each calendar year referenced in Paragraph 2 so as to mutually establish and agree upon the property to be deeded fro n Oampanyls.invexntory to the County for that particular year. In r th t ie c and County are rmshle to do agree then _,and-the -SLS £ ,free upon a mutually ,�. _ � ,� y acceptable ' f arbitrator to settle't 'di` l a as to property to be drum.�td ie County by the Company for t particular year. In the event that the- y and the County are unable to`agree as to a mutuall3f a le nt arbitra r,\then thea 0.... and the County 4grce�abide by arbi ti .a the i- i Arbitration Associationes r "ve"-a] in elce to what propertied shag bee donated t o the C,aity ie • n 3 u 4. The C ` mer , ,-' ai it , to 'e eli' Countythirty30)' re an C yel'• k-eon�eyabor R'tie 1 �,a r k ,• Commitment showi .'�to be good and insurabl_ •jectl to and zoning laws, =,- ons, reservations, 1".,",,=4 " r,.. ea--..aaep t of record, taxes fort ce of the year followin (-CT/ of conveyance and s ,- s. If the county has ld ft 'e objections, they must - '-•. in writing toi a n forty- five (45) days from Cour . recei- c f.,t . ._;Q In the $ event that the title shall notto beb...•• .= d insurable, o- Company, at Coma's option, uey cure such defects and shall have sixty (60) days in which to do so, which additional time will extend the conveyance date herein provided. If after reasonable diligence on i. Company's part, said title shall not be made good and insurable within the time provided, the Company shall have the obligation hereunder to substitute other inventory land in Golden Gate Estates of a similar r` nature and acreage. The Company and the County will mutually establish • and agree upon the property to be substituted in accordance with the above. 5. The lands deeded to the County pursuant to this Agreement shall be used only to provide governmental facilities for existing and ;.'9 future residents of Collier County, with all capital improvements to be physically located within the geographical boundary of the area knows; as "Golden Gate Estates" and any proceeds frau the sale of dedicated lands as provided herein shall be utilized for capital projects, asi. �( • Golden Gate Area Master Plan -�'6fite Paper Page 14222 of 220 1 n 9ns OCI052 OD0L93 OR BOOK PAGE provided herein, to be located within the area known as •Golden Gate Estates*. The governmental facilities which can be constructed upon said property or with the proceeds of the sale of the property include fire protection facilities, police facilities, public schools, libra- ries and recreational facilities and equipment necessary for the oper- ation thereof. Neither the property donated nor the proceeds free the sale of any dedicated property shall be used for the purposes of ac- quisition, construction or maintenance of roads and bridges, or similar projects. If it is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that the County has allay the lands or any part thereof to he used for any ptzpoee other than the aforesaid, the ownership and title thereto shall revert to the many. The conveyances provided for herein shall be made by the Company to the County regardless of whether a present or immediate need exists for such acreage in the year of conveyance. The parties hereto recognize that the progress of development in Golden Gate Estates, ar esee.,.thneed for facilities, is not dependant upon the •. - :dine - ern. The company shall have the r.! .t * :a . " • •`"},wand mineral rights for thea,..,_.�, 'be donated hereunder, _: `• the right of roanonable ring" , an,�r d egress. In the event tha' 41e e..• or- ation for or explo tatio)( Y r pil or minerals on sub'.e 1 results in daAaag 'there o - in a dimiru n in value .f subject property, thefa 'fy ful y the Cony f. such or i agr i 7 6. The e• 1ty •Zr . to �:t� i a • .. e..:t tf..or and all revere �.- - by .tue�of� e ;f any •a••- y I I described herei r .• ti t 1 • ,=,- of s collected so tha it , be determined that said nirrees ve ,, utilized only for •. provided herein. dt 7. It is -..; and agreed that the Coun�y l s i right to sell or trace 4eeoquired hereunder. Weever ty shall not sell or trade' -� 0% of said lands -: a go year. - The County does hereby agre,,that ' ' ie-,byre shall be subject to the same limitatio""n=s tr.-7,".1! e - In .0•'blic pure-c • within Golden Gate Estates as described in Paragraph 5. Funds acquired from the sale of the lands shall be used for governmental purposes as described above and shall be teed only to acquire other lands, equip- ment, materials or for the constructing of improvements as hereinbe- fore described in Paragraph 5. Before any lands may be sold or traded, the County shall have an appraisal completed by an M.A.I. and the .. contemplated conveyance may be consuamated only if: (a) the sales price is ninety (90%) percent or more of the appraisal fair market value or, (b) the appraisal fair market value of the property to be ■, received in trade is ninety (90%) percent or more of the appraisal fair e market value of the lands to be traded by the County. All appraisals herein shall be undertaken and dated within ninety (90) days of the closing date of the particular transaction. Upon such sale or trade the Oonpany shall quit-claim deed the reverter interest of O e. referenced in Paragraph 5 to County. n= Golden Gate Area Master Plan R1E2EI1tlitip WTfite Paper Page 143 of 220 ‘. 209 1 0MI052 000494 OR BOOK PAGE 8. It is understood and agreed that the Q,apany shall have the right of first refusal to acquire any property the County desires to sell or trade under Paragraph 7 above. The County shall notify the C a any of all teens and conditions of any such sale or trade and the COmpany shall have the right and option for thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice to elect to acquire the property for the same cconsideration and upon the same terns and conditions. If the property is subject of a trade, the County shall, through the appraisal referenced in Paragraph 7, establish the fair market value of the property and the Company shall have the right to acquire the property to be traded for said fair market value amount. The (bqiany shall have thirty (30} days frac the receipt of such notice to respond to the County by notifying the County of its desire to exercise the right of first refusal. If the right of first refusal is not exercised by Company within the stated period, the County shall have the right to sell or trade the property to suc third-party,but only at the price of sale and upon the terms,arm-.74;1Rnso i icated to the Company. Ma sale p til the foregoing recluire _ � lied with b,? the aright of first refusal shall rth the land, and failure of C�y to exercise such r ht i4(aqraneTasephallin not effect the tgnpany- s right to exere4se that right any case then tev arising.\ The ' �„,,• status of title to 4: ..t.... y er `er with u right ofirst .t refusal optic?, ref er ": {. n ka.ha at the time of •• epee! f the pr y t �•• he�int . II T County conf i• t each ' � act Bred for`+al or e shall be el igk ; r�nce of`a ....._1... ..o it. ,,q , k 9. In vi premises and in > aon o the . i fS obligations and% abilities hereunder, the. y red`. Vases the Company, its rporation and their subai es. r tany and 1 all obligations a:..nsibilities, as set forth in,)de. t dated October 4, 1977,. . ... 'of which is attach& e o' ked Hchibit "Dr', and incorpoeed y c . ,-„ 10. The Catpany and the'' lit- atually sharing in revenues from the sale of excavated spoil materials in the Golden Cate Estates area, and it is mutually understood and agreed that during the duration of this Agreement, the ('o my will continue to have such rights as the Company can convey, at no cost therefor, to utilize such • spoil materials that renin available from time to time, for fill purposes on the various land parcels conveyed hereby, if such is deemed by the County to he needed. This Agreement will terminate on December 's 31, 1986, except for the provisions of this Paragraph 10. , 11. All amen dments, alterations, modifications or changes to this Agreement to which the parties hereto mutually agree, shall be in , writing and duly signed by authorized representatives of each party. In the event notice is required to be sent to Company or County pursuant to an amendment, alteration, modification or change, or pursuant to compliance with or default of any obligation set forth herein, such notice shall be delivered by Certified tail to: Golden Gate Area Master Plan RtIttlialMffite Paper Page 144 of 220 -1 , 210 , O !' 1 O52 000I, 95 OR BOOK PAGE COMPANY: AVATAR PROPERTIES INC. c/o Avatar Holdings Inc. Attention; Legal Department 201 Alhambra Circle Coral Gables, Florida 33134 COUNTY: QXLIFR amu Y E and of County Ommnissioners Collier Cautity Courthouse Naples, Florida 33942 FAL TRMY; BION: FEDERAL TRADE CCIMISSION Bureau of Coasmner Protection Enforoanent Division Washington, D.C. 20580 12. Oampany affirms that it is duly incorporated and in good standing in the State of Florida, and that the execution and performance of this Agreement is in its corporate paupers, having been duly authorized, and is not ink ofthe law or the terms of its charter, by-laws or othep:• •. -`_I . agreement to which it is a party or i.t £4yt eats or other writings subs.inty with this Acg �, '- ter in connection with Aunt are or shall be true, corek , lete, valid and gehttui. Count u pts that it has every fight enter into thil Agr-- -nt ~~°- .; 13. The *us .; the State of 7 . da hall - n the m stru tion and intetpre - 'on .s t '. --, t I . i 14. 'Ibis'is :- 're ,�-n to - _. ',to`•- -- the 111 parties here ,ati„ ct - .H fpr.• y -. above, and th s aper- -- y '^:gr- `' , under 15. Other -- set forth herein, es that there are ni' " ...- gs, representations w4r. ,„oral t or written relatir -• 0 Agreement. -. - 16. It is her f .‘ law, custom or , --moo contrary notwithstanding, thati -ve. n+ r all tines to enforce the conditions and ag :-'I*. ed in strict accordance with the teams hereof, notwithstanding any conduct or custom on the part of the Company in refraining frau so doing; and further, that the failure of the Company at any time or tines to strictly enforce its rights hereunder, shall not be construed as having created a oust® in any way or manner contrary to the specific conditions and . 4 agreements hereof, or as having in any way modified or waived the same. 17. If it should beanie necessary for either of the parties hereto to resort to legal action or arbitration under this Agreement, W . -5- Golden Gate Area Master Plan RggaRYMItite Paper Page 145 of 220 a 211 1 0D 1052 000L96 - OR BOOK PAGE the non-prevailing party shall pay all reasonable legal fees, mets and other expenses incurred ty the prevailing party, including attorneys' fees at trial or appeal level. 18. Invalidation of any provision or clause in whole or in part by judgment or Court order shall, in noway, effect any of the other provisions or clauses which shall runain in full force and effect. IN>yRRNESS 9KF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be wed according to their proper authority and seal, this day .t 7Ztr rs , 19 R3-. AVATAR PR(PTIFS INC. witnesses: (CORPORA'T'E SEAL) - 'Id 71 By: A`moi,.. , • i �u •• . . i ('J � _ �J ��,k,�w�f ..... • V Attest: A''-'7:6'.7c� t J "6,2-----,-----:./- .- .+sc..c zsi+ i/ z<c:011 ` I '" . . . . ... ,',....s A =CRS ` 7 ol - •• yo ; ` i .".._.z I / 4 - . ." test: cw L rpt ' lam J. .._ , w :S' y F 4 - ( ) ' - .. i k\L:::c4,), (.,,,j J ( I F...41 T • •-. -: f , .. ., 7''' it,,,\‘' A t.,,, 17-NT 1)/0 l'-)\-\i''' ''''''''"'------------'-,-?,., '''<<-I e.C 4 Lir cy.,,..u,„--/ .i ,..., -6- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Ra`11. 1 tW ite Paper Page 146 of 220 1, ' 212 i EXHIBIT "5" UNIT TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 386- S. 75' of N•. 150' 1-1-3- 17/ 6 39D N. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 7 81 Entire Tract 9.11 11 107B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.17 a , • 11 139D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 `'�' OJ 13 20D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.17 ca CD cm 13 144C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.17 14 114D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 14 127 Entire Tract 5.77 15 35B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 16 84C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 1718C 1 oCkp 7',,� 1.13 CD 17 3652(`''\ 1.13 GI co 17 89 CPEntire Tract \ 4.62 m `' 17 10 . ,, �7\Sof E. 150' 1.13 18 D I 75' of S. 5+ ' 1.17 18 93 1 _ ;,W. 1.13 18 55 E� e 'r.ac ' 4.43 18 6 o a: 150' 1.13 1$ N. 75' : :: 80E. 75' n:_ ' (•' 1.13 20 2 Entire Tract y n �' 8.78 20 17A W. 105' of W. 184 1.59 20 8ID Y1.13 20 134C 7 .I., t� 1.17 23 315 W. 75' of E. 180 ' 1.13 23 58W W. 180 ' of 330' 1.75 23 75A W. 105 of W. 130' 1.63 23 BOD E. 75 ' of E. 150 _._ 23 1190 :J. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 23 142A N. 105 ' of N. 180' 1.63 23 143A S. 105 ' of S. 180 1.63 24 49C E. 75' of 150' 1.13 24 52B W. 75 ' of E. 180' 1.13 24 688 W. 75 ' of E. 180' 1.13 --- /:, 2y 7°'1 _. 75' W. 1804 , Ip,QJclgn Gate Area Master Plan R1E23tfitiMffite Paper Page 147 of 220 213 1 UNIT TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 24 97 Entire Tract 4.42 24 106C E. 75' of W. 150" 1.13 24 126A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.63 • 25 25B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 25 26A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 ca Q rn 25 28A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 0 0 CI cn 25 28C E. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 , 25 77A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 26 13A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 27 308 E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 27 53A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 27 96C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 0 0 28 35D E. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 b G) co 2898D o ' ' 1.13 rn o0 33 103D4 - 0 ,N 1.13 33 104B ." W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 CV 48 43C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 - 48 12 ,I �75 0 . ' N 1.17 __ 49 6 S _ 8 \1.59 49 1 ;S) 1(1:::14):7f-l!!!' )4 49 1T(N_ErEi..1760 50 1 S. 75' of N. :0' ,#1.17 50 23 N. 105' of N. r. ' 1.59 Y1J 50 24D E..1 N. 75' of N. 15 1.13 50 66A ` S. 105' of S. 180'. S / 1.59 50 103D ' �°p 1.13 51 3D , o - : 1.17 51 10D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 51 35D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 e 51 43C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 1. 51 69D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 e 51 50B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 • 51 107C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 . 95 A Entire Tract 4.09 95 38B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 r -- 95 47D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 95 53W W. 180' of 330' 3.92 95 95D W. 75' of W. 150' _.13 95 105D E. 75' o' E. 150' -- . 12 ._;Y Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rt3 itlatl ffilfite Paper Page 148 of 10/•'•/83 1i 71A 1 r.eutilnli 0 - ag } O. UNIT . TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 95 106C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 96 - Road R/O/W - S32, T48S, 29.28 "1 R26E 96 121 Entire Tract 4.52 97 10 Entire Tract 5.67 0 0 cm 193 15A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 =I m 0 193 16C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 o cn c N 193 21B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 488 S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 54B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 193 72D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 193 93A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 0 193 94D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 .ma o �. D 44,- 193 i35e�r 3.00 m co 194 27A ,,I1 05 T :,•,..,1\11\,,N:'°11.59 194 27C N. 75' of S. 150' .).-.1.:\ 1.13 194 30A ' of S. 180' 1.59 S i� 194 34 ''' 5' • W. 1 0 ' 1.13 194 :I: «... -. �-a .13 la:231 194 S. 75 oill . IL 1 .13 194 8 0' /F .13 t 194 ' 9217': W. 75' of E. I ' .13 195 85 Entire Tract r 61 4.77 t 195 115E \\I"-- S.•-75' of N. 180' - C) 1.13 195 131N Pp . 150' of 330' 2.50 195 133S 3.00 195 1355 S. 1� `"z f 336' 3.00 4 t i t Golden Gate Area Master Plan R MYRite Paper Page 149 of 220 ^ '1 a 1 215 L ■ f1: 1o57 000500 RECORDER'S MEMO: Legibility• of writing. Typing or Printing .Or BOOK PAGE unutisfartory in this docwuent PAGE when rexei 1. rYi ALt .Y,fi. uYJ& a 'PYt, i`aV -. _ ,•i _ ---Y :_L" iF..-..1.—_•.,.•...--.—:..- -. .� .-rte •UNITS B`! NUMBER -77� -:,-_ _ _ - :r>, _ - "• • _ — _ __ `••• -.-v. - _- -- �l.. i • - _ t.:.: ,-. Y1M1te'•` lC�r��t:..',ri:.-. -�r_f3ir�—. . r �T.^CY •. -•---•-;.•,-,..::-=......:::-...--..-........7:—....... :-.-i.'..1• ..A,l.V .,�-..1(4•Y"rw• FLiainv -.G•�. t.fr!'�.-.,• : _'�} �.�a-sc. ::-c-.si^�-, ?iaL•o: s 'Y._ ..r.:.Tgi•L�.._��: _-. r -•'T!��.. _ate '-- `� : - ---c-,..... : • _it, - ?-• . 7r _ 4_-. . = - -..i:.Y•-te : ,-'- Ssti• - Y S' :a �L_^-,.. ,li,._T.i .JL.:r-::'....!,Z..",'"...,a,, . - .- •.- - .- t;... - • �l r clime . -�• : ,. LA CUNTY_ .. -- _ -- _ .-'.g s T . .• .......,..:.7: ..,...„....., ,-..„-:.. b i O Q • _ .„„,„,, . .. .. . . _ .. . i7— A . Y I s - — SrUtr,OSn Sire .. Li 4 - - SAT-ROAD 8:6-- ,fes. A, R _ ----,,,- -(4,.., 1 ,.. . i airitri---Itt----, twin . . . ...... 5.-..� ss f a• I t. ee- u ( w �.d: -_.-t$flIBIT "P1-", _`. 1Pi1. , ,r .". r u "u u .A — I" •.EXHIBIT -"Ci`' '_ x' I- r a--:-. m • I . , pair — •. •- _ _ila _ •=E11 _ - 'r-.9 iran STA !G Q- • L- - iteiv- eLrnigiiu ti; r.iouoeaooat MS untse t.• rgra I I I . ' —-Erna , • rt . �1 73'. - t .-.-.. , 51 • �C • • i --- ,, l`;i�g,e. R 11"F. to ns : 1 : C\'VV•V1�_fl\\.r3 ,._ ,9ss:utAtnr. Blvd.X ' ';'.,). !MOM - .- curaculnis . ., titi,.. .,.,-e . ze- m %:.‘:st:.3 - . C Cl . , i fe • . ._ : N • Y t v _ �\ �r i�b�4r`p yds, SGrE r Golden Gate Area Master Plan R' @W6ite Paper Page 150 of 220 216 EXHIBIT 0 . _ 't: ;tcct. .... _ _ _..-. ("rh Company" h-v,. rco. te:.:c _ ._ :>....,. of ...;..ri:y .v. issiotlftrs rte. of Collier County. Florida ("...._ ';..:)ntyr,) co accept, in principal, s program for the completion of the roads and canals in Golden Gate Estates and the eventual acceptance of . such roads and canals by the County. This Agreement is o . c7, -- subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court. o GA _ The Company estimates the total dollar value of its `"' planned expenditures to be $3,100,000. This total is broken down into four categories as per the- attached Schedule A. The Company would propose to fund $300,000 to the County to be utilized for capital improvements, maintenance (73 and restoration wort: in tt - = -n ate Estates canal. system. -u o. The Company pr-..0.--s =e r i telt' $300,000 or rn c' ?�•'� ° �/ such sum as is . - .421 to accomplish - e c�c ring and - restoration o th�o..)e canals lying South of e:•ra Boulevard c__ and North o Ta am (w iic "-- ,a s are oss Thatched on Exhibit/ a e ., _ i -The Gimp ti to tat o' s r. o and reme- dial effo .e r��a 1. t .. road- iicl t the raising of toa elevations on certa `. road pre71.ently 1 r South of Stealt oulevard and fort Taiap izr i.l (as t identified by =r ke. lines on Exhibit 2 ziptickevou wOuld cost approximately $1,' The Company prop* --sI n of 500,00 or such sum as is necessary to accomplish the raising of — road elevation sa.:4 ine estimated cost of the road restora- tion and remedial efforts for unaccepted completed roads, •• (which work could be deferred until the County determined to have it accomplished) is approximately $700,000. The Company proposes to fund this $700,000 to the County for use for capita] improvements, restoration and maintes.:nca rs as required by the Golden Care road system. - KFCIyRUF:ti'S '`tEJi[1: giJtIU Tyt'inK or P'intrn> ,f writing, thi^ d.N.nptenT irn-:rti�fia.�tnry in ,Aron ifPrii4rt• Golden Gate Area-Master Plan Rt t1 t ' jte Paper Page 151 of 220 217 I Iitjt•ci::.1C" by the Count.y s a:. or :J ..J _i�ia:i, -.:1.;'. : The Company would be agreeable to the $300.000 canal fund referred to above and the $700.000 road fund referred. to -above comprising► a singlie $1,000,000 fund for use by the a 0 CD County for capital improvements" and maintenance of roads to _ • a c=0 and/or canals in the Golden Gate Estates area. CD c tv The Company proposes to spend approximately $1,200,000 for water management (retention) and related structures to enhance the overall water management of the Golden Gate . Estates Area. The details of the proposal which at present contemplates•a 500 acre plus or minus retention pond with eo -0 o controlled discharge will be refined and.wor"ked out with the n cn County Engineer and el engineers N.;„ engaged by the C �. . . e Comps _ •ri or to corn- • .*,mencement of nAti7t#tion thereof. ,`` • The Company ; r cses dWaproxi.mat" l y. 00,000 on drainage anti dike work in =d. t 'n tto33L at sett ort above, i f - including. e •• p- .r_n.,r c . 1t. - thei peri- meters" of kh -1 n to Es a ea. As st*pd •rev�oucly, the •mp-np is . to initial ‘ tz771 approval ofl. ; bove concept, which , _ ce•`t its the . acceptance by tion of the entire e.. Estates t canal system (wz xception of the, ouch of Stewart Boulevard a .. N 'Irlf •'.st ._, . • upon the tender of the sum of $300, Trustees of (:LC to the County. Impliunderstanding cit in the request is the that an application for acceptance of those canals South of Stewart Boulevard and North of Tamiami Trail will he .17 accepted by the County upon the completion of the clearing; )q*1 • 4 J ECllfiitER'S MEMO: Legibility of writing. Typing or Printing unatisfartb ry in this do.'uutent Golden Gat Area Master Plan RtitItlittrmWite Paper Page 152 of 220 •\ i 918 i . :1m. recto at ion l:u . conCe piaCL`C ner�.:. _.. L!:::':::3:' ann cm.e..i :.ion ccas is.cnr .:? ; .. originJ1 __.,_ .- .--.,:,.-.1, • KE IT RESOLVED) chat Lhc faragoi.r.;, prue,_. is ..crcay approved in principal. subject Lo further re=int:me . DATED: October -4, 1077 1 OARD. OF COUNTY CO:-;: ISSIO.;LFS ATTEST- COLLIER CO�:•._Ti", FLORIDA tlILi.# .I. .,G.�.t, ierk 4/ --- ',/_—..".../. zeti.X....•,71,„. f o..aAr.a er - "j -• `' .4 Chairman . _ .... 7. E . ' t (� . _ n • • CAC CORPORATION t 1•73.rpessed: - ,1 r f Q.'.cn ,,or / _ .�-^: " " ` 'Co-Trustees ilo /b\'''''''' .,`$ d PI i 1 rn aa -- 1 i Lf \took - \\ \\-1.!1?„,, ,...) ifil.i• \1/41.- __,,. :///...... . \< ,,,Ii..„.r • ,,,, • ~ �, i S' F' D' D . t RECORDER'S MEMO l#ribility of writing. Typing or Prin'ini un=ati.fartory in this debt ent when rtrriar.l. Gold a e rea aster Plan RIEkituitty@'W6fite Paper Page 153 of 220 1 t 219 1 • 0r, 1052 000504 OR BOOK PAGE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 1. Canal Maintenance $600,000 This provides for cleaning of North Arca 32+ Biles 0 approximately • $300,000 and clearing of South Canals • (South of Weirs) @ approximately $300,000. - 2. Road Restoration Remedial $1,200,000 efforts on unaccepted Roads, plus raising certain South Roads to Construction Standards. A. Raising est. cost $500 B. Restona"n medial fo 3. Yea J� ted (Retention) $1,200,000 �� `, • / / c--: \--.....„..nr-4. ;Draainagah „pirk $ 100,000 ' i (7I'0‘vti 1 \ $3,100,000 , . A .' C"). ,,, ,j'' t i i E , 1F-4 Vic" - .._,f 17-raci /4') i I '+,...,k I -s',...-/ /-Cy y > ' ' �: • • • • • �, o $ ki';. • f Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rtattlin6Mite Paper Page 154 of 220 111 - 11 1111111 HI 1111 I I II 111111111 II I I Iii d d d da a a a a a a- -. - _ Q W W W W W- = =- 0 11 1111111 - rN` ills 111111111N .fir � � � .r-� ��h ' Q - oIII - O O O 00 - _ - - FFT.: - - 1111 11111 II I 1111111111 1111 0 8000111 00 111111111111 ti P P 1 I 111111111 II ■00©OOoo00000000000000000®00000®®®000 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 155 of 220 From: Heidi Liebwein <heidi.liebwein@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:08 AM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Golden Gate Growth Management meeting at Collier Extension Good morning, During the meeting it was said we were to go on the website and provide feedback. I tried and was not successful as to where,so I am sending my thoughts in this email. I do not think you should build in Golden Gate,the people who bought out there were aware of the drive when they bought out in Golden Gate. IF they are willing to accept being very rural and the drive in to retail stores,then that is how they wanted it,or they would not have bought out so far. Please do not build in Golden Gate. Thank you, Heidi Liebwein Property owner in GG 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 156 of 220 222 From: Susie Mahon <susiemahon@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Golden Gate Estates We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw-but now it's a "sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents-they don't all show up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents-people being stupid and running into our fence or mailbox-then they leave.The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm -it's very difficult to get out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers?-all the landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds-Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson,Case and then there's American Farms-some of their trucks are now double semis.The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out in front of our house. Also,all these trucks are going to tear the roads up. Also,would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little-some of the vehicles/trucks are so wide they hardly fit in the lane. Thank you,Charlie and Susie Mahon Sent from my iPhone 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 157 of 220 223 From: Ron and Lilianne <militorl@rogers.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Rural Golden Gate Good afternoon Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with 47th Ave N.E. 47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road. The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area Thank you Sincerely Ron and Lilianne Milito 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 158 of 220 224 From: castillaglass120@gmail.com Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 12:05 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future Plan recommendation Please open 1-75 and Everglades Exit the ramp is there,we need acces Thank you Angel and Ingrid Castilla Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 159 of 220 225 From: Octavio Sarmiento Jr<sammyosjr@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:06 PM To: JenkinsAnita Cc: Kitty Paz Subject: PARADISE FACILITIES Attachments: BROSURE_0301.pdf; collier_2016_sde031519696081546.jpg; EMAIL_0305.pdf; LETTER_ 0304.pdf; patio and legalization-Model.pdf 1 (6 files merged) (2).pdf; PROPERTY APPRAISER_0302.pdf; SURVEY.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Anita, How are you? Hope you are doing well, we spoke on the phone few times in reference of a Church and now we also have this other Project that we had start prior, We are now also informing you of the intend and plans of Extension to the Existing Home Care Facility. I am attaching letter, documentation of the Home Care Facility, Parcel ID, Site Plan, Additions and Expanding Plans and more, so you can be aware of our intentions. Plans of expanding and adding from Six Residents to a total of 14 Residents and we love for you to add us and help us, so we can count with you and the County to be part of this new changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan, that will allow us to Expand. We like obtain that window of opportunities and continue our project, which then will continue with SDP building permits and others. Let me know if there is anything else you may need from us. My best Regards Thank you Octavio O T v o SARMIENTO JR : G A M NT PermitC u l t 239-601-0485 sammyosjr@yahoo . com -- m.permitandplans.com 1100 Commercial Blvd # 1I. 8 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 160 of 220 99R From: JenkinsAnita Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 7:55 AM To: ScottTrinity; WilkisonDavid Cc: VanLengenKris Subject: FW: Future of Golden Gate Estates Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged FYI -sharing issues identified Original Message From: Susie Mahon [mailto:susiemahon@comcast.net] Sent:Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Golden Gate Estates We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw-but now it's a "sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents-they don't all show up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents-people being stupid and running into our fence or mailbox-then they leave.The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm-it's very difficult to get out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers?-all the landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds-Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson,Case and then there's American Farms-some of their trucks are now double semis.The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out in front of our house. Also,all these trucks are going to tear the roads up. Also,would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little-some of the vehicles/trucks are so wide they hardly fit in the lane. Thank you, Charlie and Susie Mahon Sent from my iPhone Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 161 of 220 227 From: ScavoneMichelle Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 4:07 PM To: militorl@rogers.com Cc: VanLengenKris; WilkisonDavid; JenkinsAnita; ScottTrinity; KhawajaAnthony;AhmadJay; WilkisonDavid; PutaansuuGary; LulichPamela Subject: RE: TO 6153/RE: Future of Rural Golden Gate Mr.and Mrs.Milito, Thank you for providing your comments.We appreciate your input. Staff will be reviewing all input received and forwarding to appropriate staff for future planning and programming as funding availability permits. On behalf of Staff, Michelle Scavone,GMD Operations Coordinator From: Ron and Lilianne [mailto:militorl©rogers.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Rural Golden Gate Good afternoon Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E.which intersects with 47th Ave N.E. 47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of lmmokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road. The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area Thank you Sincerely Ron and Lilianne Milito Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 162 of 220 228 From: Jayne Sventek<jsventekl@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 6:27 AM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Possible improvements Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Good morning... Thanks for the update on the meeting, unfortunately, I have out of town guests coming that day. If things change we hope to attend. My question concerns cell phone towers,which I have been questioning for over fifteen years for our area. It doesn't matter if it is ATT or VERIZON, our area which is directly off 951 between Pine Ridge and Vanderbilt, have limited cell signal. In fact,we built in 1990 and not much has changed near us. When we pass Logan and head towards 951 on Pine Ridge Road, passing Temple Shalom,the signal has always cut out and becomes garbled. My friends know my location while driving when I am on the phone as I pass. Also,the fairly new Publix at 951 and Pine Ridge, is known for no signal once you step inside. Even our street has limited cell reception and we have a unit in our home from ATT to boost cell strength. It is a microcell tower,they call it. I have contacted at numerous times, both cell companies and they inform me a tower is governed by county rules and regulations. They can only be installed on a school,fire station etc grounds. This needs to be looked into and see what areas need the tower, not the best spot for the tower, held by the county. I welcomed one on my nearly three acres years ago. I am not sure if this issue is on the agenda, but needs to be looked into. Come and ride with me for a day and hear how bad the signal is. Is there an agenda at this point,you may send to residents? Thank you and I wait to hear from your office. Have a great day. Mrs. Patrick B. Sventek 4680 First Avenue SW Naples, FL Sent from my iPad 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 163 of 220 229 From: Michael R. Ramsey<michael.r.ramsey@embargmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 2:05 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: JenkinsAnita; Jflan241 @aol.com; petergaddy@gmail.com; 'Tim Nance' Subject: RE: Estates bridges The 3 bridges that went through the MPO and were approved for funding and construction,were in the original bridge study from the E of 951 Horizon Report and recommended by all Emergency Response Agencies are: 1. 8th St. NE at Cypress Canal 2. 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal 3. 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Main Canal As these 3 bridges move through engineering and permitting they have acquired more construction cost and it appears that we may get only 1. The extra costs are coming from items such as sidewalks and tiebacks causing additional permitting costs especially in mitigation The #4 bridge needed is a t 10th Ave SE over the Faka Union Canal. This bridge is needed because south of the Golden Gate Blvd the residents on Desoto and Everglades do not have the ability to have Emergency Agencies respond to them in 8 minutes. In many cases the response time is 15 minutes or more. Second there is only 1 evacuation route on for residents of Desoto. This bridge would allow more evacuation options for residents of both Everglades and Desoto south of Golden Gate Blvd. Third the Bridge would allow more access to Palmetto Elementary School as an Evacuation Shelter. Ramsey From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 8:50 AM To: Michael R. Ramsey Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: Estates bridges Mike: At last night's meeting,you mentioned "three bridges"that the GGEACA determined to be high safety/evacuation related.The first one you previously provided to me: 10th Ave SE between E'glades and De Soto. Can you please identify the others. We plan to speak with Transportation Dept.about a number of issues,and would like full input and clarity on the GGEACA recommendation. Thanks, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 164 of 220 ')'1n From: Carol Pratt<tjack730@aol.com> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 6:43 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Wildlife and Greenway To All Whom This Concerns: Although wildlife and green spaces weren't the biggest consideration in GGE community development, it was prominent none-the-less (in the"clouds",these were some of the larger words). With the many road extensions and expansions slated in future development, now is the time to make plans for wildlife, which many of us in GGE value and consider a quality of life issue. Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension (VBX) has been continually moved forward on the list of projects in the county. Do you know existing natural wildlife corridors will cross this road once it is extended? I hope the county will plan for wildlife underpasses on VBX, and also consider other safeguards to protect the multitude of species which inhabit this area, including protected species such as fox squirrels,gopher tortoises,and Florida Panthers. For all future roads, plans should include the safeguarding of wildlife with underpasses,fences,through education, etc. As you well know, it is easier and more cost effective to get ahead of something like this,then to try to fix something later. Currently,Jim Flanagan (Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, of which I am also a member) and I are trying to get signage to warn drivers to be on the lookout for bears, panthers, and other wildlife on the roadways.This will also inform newcomers of the existence of bears and panthers in the county,which still comes as a surprise to many GGE residents. Signage of this nature should be a part of the Master Plan. A greenway has been brought up many times in the discussion of the Master Plan. A bicycle and pedestrian trail could be made alongside VBX. An independent trail is what I am suggesting- not a narrow path which is actually part of the road. I hope you will put,or keep, wildlife conservation as a part of the GGE Master Plan. If you need more information on anything I have written, please let me know and I will provide it. It has been my experience that the majority of people living in GGE want wildlife as part of their community. Thank you for considering my thoughts and suggestions. Sincerely, Carol M. Pratt 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 165 of 220 231 \tttr 1ti� r{ • The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Ch ic.org 11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting Discussion— Rural Golden Gate Estates Issues Growth Management Plan Update November 2, 2016 Kris VanLengen Collier County Growth Management Department Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager GGAMP ReStudy - Rural Estates Mr. VanLengen, The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association held a working session on 10-08-16 in preparation for providing input to the GGAMP ReStudy. The following concepts were presented for discussion and reviewed at our 11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting. We present them to you for discussion and incorporation with the public comments for the GGAMP ReStudy. Further consideration and discussion is also suggested for the challenges and opportunities to allow for"agricultural past-times" and agricultural-related "eco-tourism"in the rural areas. As well, further definition and discussion of home-based businesses and recognizing the impacts to neighbors and infrastructure for certain business operations._ The following concepts are consistent with a low-density, low-impact, rural residential community. Further definition of"rural character" and "self-sustainability" will help better define the concepts of community character and practical application that many people who consider Golden Gate Estates their home and why they moved here. The large-lot,low-density woodlands/agricultural environment associated with this unique place is rare among community choices - such is rare in Florida real estate as well as across the United States - and what makes Golden Gate Estates so desirable. Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management ReStudy Respectful Ramsey,President Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association On behalf of the Board of Directors Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 166 of 220 232 02 November 2016 Page 2 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.orp A. Complementary Land Uses 1.) Formal Low Density Overlay for the Rural Estates—eliminate densification of E zoning Benefits: DRGR/Watershed over 90,000 acres at no cost to the taxpayer Complimentary to Corkscrew Community and Sending lands in RFMUD and RLSA • Well Field Protection—county and municipal (Naples) • Community Character • Secondary habitat transition between Conservation land and development 2.) Incentivize the recombination of 1.14 acre lots (legal non-conforming) Development credit (voluntary TDR program) for use in urban density and infill? See also GGW1P 3.) Update LDC regarding compatibility requirements, setbacks, and buffers for all non-residential uses in the Estates including but not limited to Convenience Commercial, Churches, Schools, utilities. 4.) Update LDC regarding land clearing regulation and setbacks, for all uses to be consistent with Wildfire safety and management recommendations established by the Collier County Fire Districts and the Florida Forest Service. 30 feet of defensible space and acceptable setbacks for all Estates lots to allow access of emergency vehicles and equipment Consideration: Completion of the Estates Community Wildfire Protection Plan 5.) Establish appropriate Setbacks and Buffers and compatibility standards for all adjacent RFMUD and RLSA land uses. Previously recommended changes permitting non residential land uses in the RFMUD must be applied so as to preserve the rural residential character of Golden Gate Estates. To that end, it will be essential to establish appropriate buffers and transitional uses, together with appropriate controls over the location of utility service lines and transportation corridors. To achieve these goals the following recommendations are submitted: a.) Projects directly abutting residential property shall provide, at a minimum, a one-hundred (100) foot wide buffer in which no parking or water management uses are permitted. Twenty- five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer type C as outlined in the LDC. A minimum of fifty (75) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or created native vegetation and must be consistent with appropriate subsections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The 100 foot buffer shall not be part of a setback, but will be a separately platted tract. Setbacks shall be a minimum of 50% of the height of any structure other than single family. b.) A solid masonry or concrete wall 8' high and on a 3' berm at the development (RFMUD) side of the 100' buffer shall be required. The buffer area shall be supplemented where needed to assure an 80% opacity is reached within one year. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 167 of 220 233 02 November 2016 Page 3 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990594 Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org c.) All lighting shall be consistent with the Dark Skies initiative. Parking lot lighting shall be restricted to bollards except as may be required to comply with lighting standards in the Land Development Code (Ordinance#04-41, as amended) and other governing regulations. d.) Rural roadways as typically used within the Golden Gate Estates neighborhoods shall not be used for access or utility conveyance to any new development. Appropriate truck route management tools need to be employed to limit Community impact from adjacent development. All adjacent RFMUD and RLSA residential and commercial uses should be considered. 6.) Develop Rural Architectural Standards 7.) Develop Rural Median Landscape Standards B. Transportation and Mobility -Roads 1.) Complete the study for a New I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. Consideration: Restricting expansion of Everglades Blvd. to 4 lanes to service Estates needs. RLSA growth Management planning should address appropriate right of way and developer contribution to meet RLSA transportation needs for the predicted population growth (est. 300,000+) in this planning area. No unreasonable impact on the established low density Estates. 2.) Prioritization of the improvement of Wilson Boulevard North to commercial services, and the Wilson Extension south to White Lake Boulevard to link Golden Gate Estates to North Belle Meade Receiving lands and future economic development. Provide a needed road corridor to the north, south, and west. Wilson-Benfield Corridor Study. 3.) Extend White Lake Boulevard east to the proposed new I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. 4.) Complete the Green Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor linking North Belie Meade Receiving lands to CR 951 and points west. Consideration: Extension of Golden Gate Parkway rather than Green Blvd., to improve connectivity and reduce the need for excessive Eminent Domain through the Estates. 5.) Complete the Randall Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor to the RLSA. S Curve Concept review. Consideration: Improvements to intersection of Randall Blvd and Immokalee Road are a critical infrastructure need and the choke-point of Randall/Oilwell/Immokalee Rd. Consider an emergency declaration to accelerate needed improvements at this intersection due of impending transportation failures. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 168 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 4 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Ciric.orr C. Economic Vitality— Commercial Development 1.) Commercial Goods, Services,Jobs for the Estates provided primarily from zoning in adjacent areas including: Orange Tree PUD, RFMUD Receiving Lands (846 Partners, N. Belle Meade), and RLSA (Rural Lands West) 2.) Possible focused Commercial Overlay within the Estates adjacent to existing Commercial in the Randall Blvd. /Oil Well Rd. area east to the intersection of Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. * Along Randall Blvd. adjacent to Publix (already zoned/) * Randall Curve/Golden Gate Land Trust 40 acre parcel across from Orangetree * Wilson Blvd. /Immokalee Rd. intersection 3.)Update Standards/Size of Convenience Commercial parcels in the Estates to provide sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water retention D. Environmental Stewardship/Watershed Management Water Resources Management: 1.) Incentivize single family Water retention/detention and Dispersed Water Storage in the Estates to retain/detain stoi in water and promote groundwater recharge. Ponds, swales, other 2.) Support completion of the North Golden Gate Watershed Improvement Plan. GGWIP to improve drainage, support aquifer recharge, integrate with Picayune restoration. 3.) Consideration of ASR Wells in Receiving lands, especially Sec15 T49S R27E to retain/detain water from the Golden Gate Main Canal. 4.) Development of the C-1 Connector Canal and weirs to divert storm water east from the Golden Gate Main Canal to points south and east. 5.) Update regulation of impervious surface/percolation on different size Estates Lots. a. Special treatment (more restrictive) for legal, non-conforming 1.14 acre lots 6.) Review impacts and unintended consequences of a recent Ordinance (1 acre impervious rule) requiring berming and containment of water on residential properties as this impedes natural sheetflow. Intent of ordinance may have an urban coastal zone purpose and intent, however rural woodlands interface functions differently 7.)Plan for County Septic Disposal Facility to facilitate proper maintenance and legal disposal of septic waste and encourage responsible, legal management of waste from private on-site sewage treatment and disposal systems. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 169 of 220 235 02 November 2016 0 Page 5 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Ciric.org Environmental/Conservation: 1.) Develop policies that discourage the migration of climax predators from conservation lands and RFMUD and RLSA Sending lands into the residential interface in Golden Gate Estates other and adjacent areas. 2.) Consider the development of a Voluntary TDR program and Bank to facilitate the transfer process of development credits granted for the recombination of 1.14 acre lots and wetland lots that are fundamentally unbuildable and included in the GGWIP overlay 3.) Consider Dark Sky lighting standards for rural areas for lighting at transportation infrastructure, commercial development centers, conditional use areas, and for residential standards. 4.) Consider planning for future landfill in RLSA area given the planned population, proximity of waste disposal to eastern-drifting center of the County's residential population, and expected life and capacity of existing Collier County landfill. General Perspectives for Consideration: General recognition, distinction and acknowledgement that one size does not fit all relative to County-wide application of standards of law and community character. Consideration: Urban Coastal Zone functions differently than eastern rural areas, and as such, review processes for growth management plan changes and Land Development Plan changes should take into consideration the local application and applicability and evaluate for unintended consequences and diverging, inconsistent and incongruent intents of such changes. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 170 of 220 236 \ru9r . The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org 28 November 2016 Kris VanLengen Collier County Growth Management Department Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager GGAMP ReStudy- Rural Estates RE: Follow up on 02 November 2016 letter regarding GGAMP Mr. VanLengen, The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association have received more input after the 03 November 2015 GGAMP workshop regarding the Eastern Golden Gate Estates future growth. Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management Restudy. Respectfull M amsey,President Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association On behalf of the Board of Directors Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 171 of 220 237 28 November 2016 Page 2 0c uJ The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.org Surface Water Management/Drainage This is considered to be the highest priority for determination for the Rural Estates and is dependent on the water management through and around the N Belle Meade Area of the RFMUD. The continued buildout of the Rural Estates and the RFMUD north of I-75 and west of the RLSA,will significantly increase impervious surface area and storm water runoff. Concurrently,there is concern for protecting groundwater recharge for the multiple areas that depend on Rural Estates groundwater resources.This issue directly effects future Residential property protection,Economic Development,Water Resources,Wildfire Protection and Transportation Design. The planning effort that needs to be undertaken would update the drainage of water from the Rural Estates to the Henderson Creek Canal. Both Marco Island Utilities and Rookery Bay are looking for more water. Economic Diversification/Development This would be the second prioritization after future surface water management has been reviewed. Economic Diversification/Development within the Rural Estates is small commercial nodes at selected intersections with each node totaling approximately 80 acres maximum. Planning of the Rural Estates nodes and zoning will be significantly influenced by the larger commercial diversification/development in the adjacent areas of the RFMUD and RLSA. The Rural Estates seeks coordination of with the RFMUD and RLSA with the larger commercial areas. Also,the design,planning and zoning for the Rural Estates Small Commercial Node areas with be greatly influenced by drainage and ground water availability. Transportation Design These would the 3rd area of Prioritization after Surface Water Management and Economic Diversification/ Development have been reviewed. These are to be added to the recommendations in the First Letter of 02 Nov 2016. These recommendations should be added to the GGAMP for Rural Estates because they are not discussed or transmitted in any other part of planning for the Rural Estates. These recommendations are not to replace the MPO efforts. a. No expansion of roads from 2 lane to 4 lane,East of Everglades Blvd. b. Prioritize transportation design that moves traffic North and South within the Rural Estates. a. Prioritize installing a bridge on 8th St. SE @ Frangipani. c. Prioritize expansion of Randall Blvd,2 lanes to 4 from Immokalee Road to Everglades d. Do not allow"S"curve from Randall to Oil Well. e. Prioritize Future I-75 interchange at or east of Desoto Blvd. f. No more"chicanes"or other traffic slowing designs that prevents school buses or other vehicles from safely traveling a 2 lane road in opposite directions. Cell Towers More locations should be identified for Cell Tower Construction. Residents favor improving cell tower coverage. Prioritizing land zoning for this development is needed. 1 acre Impervious Rule This rule was imposed on residential development in the Rural Estates without study or discussion. This rule requires singly family lot owners to implement surface water retention if the amount of impervious surface on their lot exceeds 1 acre.This rule needs to be eliminated. The impacts of these rule are: a. Significant increase to the road drainage swales /"\ b. Significant increase to the Big Cypress Basin Canals without planning c. Ecolcogical damage to adjacent wetlands by drying them out,preventing water flow. d. Significant increase in wildfire danger by draining wetlands faster in the dry season. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 172 of 220 ",qu Collier Soil & Water Conservation District Dennis P. Vasey, Chairman 14700 Immokalee Road, Suite B Naples, Florida 34120-1468 February 17, 2017 Mr. Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager County Manager's Office 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112-5746 Dear Mr. Ochs, The Board of Supervisors believes that wetland parcels constitute a valuable resource for carbon sequestration. Ecosystem enclosures 1, 2 and 3, attached. The District has a keen interest in parcels purchased to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the residents of Collier County. Specifically, the Board of Supervisors believes that Conservation Collier Program parcels, when evaluated for their carbon sequestration value, could serve as a bank for funding maintenance and salaries, annually, and provide a substantial water quality and incentive opportunity for mitigation purposes in response to code enforcement and permit activity. The District reviewed the "Wetlands and Climate Change" article in light of using county-owned Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels to provide Transfer of Development Rights incentives from a "Bank." To create the Bank would require a list of Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels. Once provided, the District would create and manage, under an Interlocal Agreement, a log of wetland sequestration value, prepare documents of sale of whole or fractional share sales, and undertake monitoring activities. Sincerely, Dennis P. Vasey Attachments: a/s Cc: The Honorable Penny Taylor, Chairman, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, STE 303, Naples, FL 34112 Mr. Steve Carnell, Department Head, Public Services Department, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, Naples, FL 34112 • Vacant Nancy Richie Dennis P. Vasey Clarence Tears Rob Griffin Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 Web Site: http://www.collierscd.org Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 173 of 220 239 4 fi111 GY IF "x NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS M.James Burke •Christopher L. Crossan • Norman E. Feder•J. Christopher Lombardo•John 0. McGowan February 14, 2017 Leo Ochs, County Manager Collier County Manager's Office 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112 Mr. Ochs: Please allow this letter to evidence the support of the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District for the approval and construction of the following bridges currently contained in the Golden Gate Estates Bridges project: • 10th Avenue S.E. between Everglades and Desoto • 8th Street N.E. from Golden Gate Blvd.to Randall Blvd. • 16th Street N.E.from Golden Gate Blvd. to Randall Blvd. • 47th Avenue N.E. from Immokalee Road to Everglades Blvd. The connectivity that these bridges would increase public safety with enhanced mobility allowing for faster response times for emergency services(EMS, Fire, CCSO)and improved evacuation routes during hurricanes, wildfires or other natural disasters. These bridges are supported by both the Horizon Study and the Bridge Study (2009). We ask that Collier County Growth Management seriously consider approving these bridges within the Golden Gate Estates Bridges project which will assuredly enhance life safety for the residents and communities in the area. Sincerely, James Cunningham Fire Chief Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 174 of 220 240 Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220 241 From: Chris Henning <chenning@continentalfin.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:06 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: rrosin@peat.com; ELLEN ROSENBERG (ellenrosenbergdesign@gmail.com) Subject: RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Mr.Van Lengen: To carry forward from our previous discussion,we own 2 parcels in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan-Urban Estates. These parcels are 6715 Golden Gate Parkway(currently a residence) and the approximately 7 acre parcel(as referenced here-the"Undeveloped Parcel")at the north-west corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. Our objective with these parcels is to develop a commercially-viable project. Our group purchased the Undeveloped Parcel in 2007 with the intention of building a medical office building for Anchor Health.At the time, one of the partners formerly associated with our group, Paul Zampell,was in the process of building a medical office for Anchor Health on 951. Paul believed that Anchor wanted to proceed with our parcel as well. Unfortunately,after acquiring the Undevleoped Parcel,Anchor Health,the prospective tenant, decided that it no longer wanted to expand its office locations and withdrew from the project. Having lost our intended tenant and unable to locate an alternate medical office user,we ordered a market study which identified healthcare as a use which would generate sufficient demand to support development. We incurred significant architectural and planning costs in the course of coming up with a mix of assisted living, memory care,skilled nursing, and independent living units on the property.The PUD did not support alternate healthcare uses so we sought zoning relief which ultimately was tabled shortly before Mr.Joseph Rosin, Mr.Zampell's original partner, passed away. The Undeveloped Parcel is one of 2 parcels designated as Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict on the "Future Land Use Map." Note that though referred to as "Future" on the map, it is the land use zoning currently in place for the undeveloped parcel. We are limited to a single story structure of not more than 35,000 square feet, and the only permitted use is for medical office. Unfortunately,the limitations imposed make this parcel nearly impossible to develop and none of the prospective purchasers who have contacted us, are interested in the current zoning. We would like to develop this property for commercial purposes consistent with other properties in the area, such as the CVS across the street from us.The corner parcel across from us to the south on Golden Gate has,to our knowledge, been acquired with the intention of commercial development.As more residents move to the area, it is only natural that signalized corner parcels such as ours be developed with retail uses to support them. We appreciate your consideration and would request either that the Commercial Infill Subdistrict restrictions be changed, or that the Development Parcel be moved to a new designation that would allow for more commercial options than currently exist. Should you have any suggestions in terms of participating in the general master plan review process that is going on, please let us know. Sincerely, Chris Henning III 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 176 of 220 242 847-291-3700 From:VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday,June 10, 2016 3:43 PM To:chenning@continentalfin.com; rrosin@peat.com Cc: jenglish@barroncollier.com;dgenson@barroncollier.com;JenkinsAnita Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Chris and Robert: We discussed a property of interest to you approximately 2 months ago. It is located in a future land use designation: Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict. It is zoned PUD, and located in the northwest quadrant of the Santa Barbara and Golden Gate Parkway intersection. As an update,we began a series of public outreach meetings,all introductory in nature, pertaining to Rural Estates, Urban Estates and GG City.We will resume in the fall with topics more granular in nature,such as comp plan and zoning subdistrict overlays.A meeting summary of the Urban Estates introductory meeting can be found at: http://www.colliergov.net/you r-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/com mu nity-planning-section/golden-gate- area-master-plan-restudy/public-workshops . 1. My notes indicate that you were considering sending an e-mail at some point to express your points of view. 2. I thought you might be interested to know that we met with Barron Collier engineers/planners,who expressed an interest in development in the SW quadrant of the same intersection. In case you think there might be commonality of interest or perspective, I have copied them on this e-mail and you may wish to contact them directly. Sincerely, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239)252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 177 of 220 243 From: WeeksDavid Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:13 PM To: wconfoy@comcast.net Cc: VanLengenKris Subject: RE: MEETING Mr. Confoy, How about June 24 at 3:00pm? I would be joined by colleague Kris van Lengen, Community Planning Manager. David We. ... David Weeks,AICP,Growth Management Manager Collier County Government,Growth Management Department Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL 34104 phone:239-252-2306; E-fax:239-252-6689 email:davidweeks@colliergov.net;website:www.colliergov.net From: wconfoy@comcast.net [mailto:wconfoy@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday,June 04, 2015 1:55 PM To: WeeksDavid Subject: FW: MEETING Dear David Thank you for accepting this email requesting your time to visit with some of your fellow Naples citizens for discussion of the upcoming review of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Specifically we represent the neighborhoods that would be affected by any change proposed to Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara. We hope to present our reasons for opposing such changes as not being in the best interests of the surrounding Communities at large. We have a roll up display showing each property owner along this gateway&will demonstrate why the residents on both sides of the street wish it to maintain its residential character. Many of us have lived here 20, even 30,years, have our families close-by&wish to maintain the Master plan as it was written by the County. Yes, it might be a bit early but the summer is upon us and our schedules never seem to be in sync. Better to give you an early look see into what is ahead,than when it is right upon us. We know that the outsiders are working towards the opposite goals & have been visiting persons like yourself to support&endorse a re-zoning change—a change to which we are totally opposed . Obviously we hope to show you why&solicit your support when the time arises. Dan Brundage,Tom Collins& myself will attend;we sometimes have two others&will give you their names when they confirm their availability to us. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 178 of 220 9dd We are generally available any weekday in mid afternoon. Right now we can all be there this month between the 23rd and the 29th in the mid to latter part of the afternoon.An hour or less is requested. I don't believe you would be disappointed in what we can show you. Thank you Bill Confoy-- 262-0802/643-0001 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. e"! 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 179 of 220 245 From: Carlos Vasallo <cvasallo@comcast.net> Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 4:18 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Western GG Ests Hello Thank you for the meeting last night and keeping us informed and involved. I would like to know what the county's plan is for the property it owns at the southwest corner of Vanderbilt Bch Rd & Collier Blvd. Last night there was a question about a nature trail/bike path and lack of land for it. You might recall when Collier Boulevard was expanded a few years ago a rec. path was added on the East side of the CR951 canal using the easement. Some units, for example units #1, #2, #95, & #32 have a canal at the end of the streets, using the existing canal easement a loop could be built from Vanderbilt Bch Rd to Pine Ridge Road with a nature/bike path on both sides so residents from both sides could use it. Please add me to your email list for future meetings. Thank you, Carlos Vasallo 4381 5th Ave NW 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 180 of 220 246 eGradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects May 1, 2017 Mr. Kris VanLengen, AICP Via Email: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net RE: Tracts 103 (east 180'), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 Dear Mr. VanLengen: We represent the property owner of the above referenced parcels located at the SW quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and 13th Avenue S.W. The parcels total approximately 12.5 acres. This property had a pending Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) amendment in 2014, which the property owner requested it to be placed in abeyance, in order to participate in the re-study process. An aerial location exhibit is attached for your convenience. We wanted to provide you with some additional information regarding the parcel as a follow-up to our meeting on April 4, 2017, which we believe will demonstrate that this property should be re-evaluated for the potential of non-residential land uses as part of the re-study effort. Under the current GGAMP, the site is designated Estates, and based on the existing criteria, the site is only eligible for one dwelling unit per 2.25 acres. The site is ineligible for even Transitional Conditional Uses. The property owner recognizes that the property's proximity to the quasi- industrial FP&L PUD, and the newly 6-lane segment of Collier Boulevard, renders it illogical and incompatible for very low density residential uses. The property owner had previously proposed to amend the GGAMP to re-designate this property as an additional Neighborhood Center, with additional restrictions on buffer and setback standards for the 12.5+/-acre property. It has been our consistent contention that the property is not appropriately designate for only low-density residential dwellings due to the changing neighborhood conditions with the expanded Collier Boulevard and the increasing number of vehicle trips that utilize this major roadway corridor serving the eastern areas of Collier County. An economic analysis had also been prepared in support of the amendment, which demonstrated that the demand for additional office and retail services could be supported by the growing population of both Golden Gate City and the Estates area east of Collier Boulevard. Additionally, with the then impending expansion of Collier Boulevard to a 6-lane arterial roadway, additional pass-by trips were anticipated, also contributing to the market viability for office, retail and service uses. In our prior discussions with Growth Management staff, they were not supportive of an amendment to the GGAMP that would result in retail and office development on this site. They did; however, support an amendment that would re-designate this site as a Conditional Use Sub- District which would then permit the owner to submit a Conditional Use for a variety of non- Q. Grady Minor&Associates,P.A. Ph. 239-947-1 144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com • •-• _ - _ _ u_ - _• G • - _•- •. 1 •.•- • Mr. Kris VanLengen RE: Tracts 103 (east 180), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 May 1, 2017 Page 2 of 2 residential uses. Some of these land uses would include churches, schools, day care, group housing/group care, private schools and social/fraternal organizations. In our most recent discussions with you, you too acknowledged that the site may no longer be appropriately designated to only permit low density residential development. In that meeting, we discussed the possibility of possibly modifying the Transitional Conditional Use section of the GGAMP in order to permit this property to qualify to apply for a conditional use. The GGAMP already acknowledges that these conditional uses can be good transitions between non-residential and residential land uses. We believe that a minor amendment to paragraph 3e), Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria would be appropriate to specifically indicate that this property would be eligible to seek a conditional use of the E, Estates zoning designation. The amended language could read: 5. The east 180 feet of Tract 103, Tract 119 and Tract 120, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates are eligible for conditional uses as identified in Estates zoning district. We would appreciate your consideration of this minor change to the GGAMP as you continue your re-study efforts. We believe the unique location of this parcel adjacent to the existing FP&L PUD, which permits not only electric generating substations, but also open equipment storage, maintenance and fueling facilities and any other use deemed appropriate for FP&L(since the FPL plant is no longer subject to local zoning restrictions) is incompatible with very low density residential use. The property too, is located on a 6-lane arterial, which contributes to the incompatibility of the site for residential use. Attached are photos of the FPL plant, the subject property and its intersection on Collier Boulevard Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Attachments c: Via Email Larry Brooks Bruce Anderson GradyMinor File Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 182 of 220 94 From: Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:51 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. Dear Mr.Van Lengen, I,too live on 68th Street S. W. and am VERY opposed to Edwin Koert's plan for my neighborhood. I would be at the meeting tomorrow, but am in Kansas City dealing with family matters. This man is only concerned about making a buck. He does not care at all about our residential neighborhood I implore you to deny his request to re-zone so that he can make our neighborhood look like Pine Ridge Road. We are not Miami, nor do we want to be! You may contact me at:239-777-4085 if you need more information. Thank you for your time in this matter, Barbara Coen 2780--68th Street S.W. Naples, FL 34105 barbcoen@comcast. net 239-777-4085 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID On May 10, 2016 3:51 PM,VanLengenKris<KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net>wrote: Dear Ms.Turner: Thank you for your interest and comment. We will preserve your comment related to Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Western Estates. If you wish to be added to our distribution list for meeting announcements, etc., please let me know. Respectfully, Kris Van Lengen,JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 183 of 220 249 From:Angela Turner[mailto:ajturner37@hotmail.com] Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>;-VanLengenKris<KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Cc: barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall<dan.dagnall@gmail.com> Subject:GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am hoping that that promise will be kept! Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway. We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with -- ANY commercializations. We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway. Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is, especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a stop light would cause more accidents". We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again, Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization. The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic nightmare. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 184 of 220 Subject:GG Parkway From: ajturner37thotmail.com Date: Wed,4 Jun 2014 19:37:33-0400 To:fredcovle@colliergov.net Commissioner Coyle, We,the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security. Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can actually achieve what they are asking for. Thank you. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From:Angela Turner<aiturner37@yhotmail.com> Date:June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT To: "edwinkoert@msn.com"<edwinkoert@msn.com> Subject:GG parkway Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before, and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the safety of our children. 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 185 of 220 251 Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off 175. That part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage and making our homes less attractive. Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose not to use the Pine Ridge amenities. Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own any properties at the "proposed"sites for first modifications. Mr. Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the owners,as well as the original company that purchased the parcels that Wildcat I and II,whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4 million and 2 million with a description that says "Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station,church, retail shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is baiting a proposed buyer and misleading! Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time to actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten the responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go for these changes. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad On Jun 3, 2014,at 4:36 PM,edwinkoert@msn.com wrote: To all who has responded: The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend anyone, but to inform all of the property owners 4 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 186 of 220 �G� located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our activities to have the corridor rezoned to a commercial application. Believe me,your view"for or against" our rezoning activity does not offend me. Everyone has an opinion, and as such, yours, as- well-as your peers, is just as important and will be considered too. I am an old Florida Boy from youth -7-years (the East coast- Hollywood/Ft. Lauderdale through high school 1958) My homestead address is now a retirement community off of 1-75 Exit 240, known as Sun City Center. However, I, as-well-as Brent have two each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting GGPkwy,and as such, I am in the Naples area quite frequently. My specific properties are on the West side of 1-75,fronting GGpkwy, one on the North side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot prints in the Naples area goes back to the early sixties. To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I am attaching two graphic diagrams. The diagrams include all of the properties fronting the East and West Side of 1-75, including our suggested modifications. The PDF diagrams can be enlarged by increasing the zoom percent within the PDF. Also, attached a a letter containing our thoughts on the development of the area. You may wish to review them,or discard them. While reading the WORD document you may wish to have the diagrams available. We do make the information available to all. As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700- mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded, and I thank you for your input. Sincerely, Edwin H. Koert 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 187 of 220 253 239-289-4420 edwinkoert@msn.com <GGPkwy- East Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy-West Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy-032414-Hard look at the North and South Sides.doc> 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 188 of 220 7R4 HELP PRESERVE THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHO "'BE INVOLVED* May, 2016 To:Concerned Citizens, You are being contacted because you live in our neighborhood and signed a petit community leaders to prohibit the allowance of any commercial rezoning effc approximately two mile stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Boulevard. Enclosed are the following: 1. A Notice from Collier County Government of a public meeting/worksho (:30 o.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. See the IT meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of obtaining the corn concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Mast( changes could potentiallyinclude amendments to the Master Plan that commercial development or apartment buildings along Golden Gate Par Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. 2. Questions and Answers Concerning the Proposed Commercialization Parkway. This information was previously distributed to you by our neighbo response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate. Parkway to so their efforts to commercialize the Parkway. WHAT TO DO: ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETINGIWORKSHOP, AND FUTURE MEETINGS CONCERNING TI PROVIDE YOUR INPUT AND SUPPORT. YOUR PRESENCE AT THESE MEETINGS WILL G TOWARD EXPRESSING THE RESOLVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID THE NEGATIVE WOULD RESULT FROM ZONING CHANGES ALONG THE PARKWAY. PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, YOU MAY RECEIVE NOTI( MEETINGS BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, BY CONTAC LENGEN AT 239-252-7268 OR THE EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO SEND AN EMAIL, WHETHER OR NOT YOU ATTEND THE MEETING, WE ENCOURAGE YOU LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN TO: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY OPPC CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARI LIVINt STON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. I AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAININC RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARA( NEIGHBORHOOD." TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. IT IS OPPOSITION 10 BE HEARD. 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220 255 Collier County Government Growth Management Department Contact: Connie Deane Zoning Division Community Liaison 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 239-252-8192 or 8365 Naples, Florida 34104 colliergov.net twitter.com/CollierP10 facebonk.com/CollierGa vontuhe.com/CollierGol April 27, 2D1.6 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Area Mast4 Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on Area Master Plan (GGAMP), The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning documer Gate area that shows the vision for the community in the next 10 to 20 years. The plan cor growth, what it should look like and how land uses should be arranged to live, work. shop The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Houleva will be held at 630 p.m. on Wednesday, May 11 at Golden Gate Community Caner, 4 Parkway,Naples, Florida 34116 It is critical to the success of the Master Plan that the residents of this area participate in deG vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed. Agendas will he posted prior at htins://www.eolliergov.net/CMPrestudies, During the coming year,there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and al on the tiCiAMP, including advertised public meetings,digital forums, website informatio web content. All interested panics are invited to visit httns://www.eollieroov.net frequently, to see the background materials, current planning efforts and areas for direct pul county planners may research and gather the issues and concerns important to all stakeholi email updates or to provide comments,please email us at: GGAMPRestudvacolliereov.: Two or more members of the Board of County Conunissioners, City of Naples City Coto Marco Island City Council or any of their respective advisory committees may be pi participate at these workshops. The subject matter of these workshops may be an item for action at future meetings of these boards, councils or agencies. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or o accommodations in order to participate in these proceedings, should contact the Collier C Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E.,Naples, Florida 34112,or 239-25 as possible, but no later than 48 hours before each of the scheduled events. S accommodations will he provided at no cost to the individual. 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220 256 Questions and Answers Concerning the • Upon announcement that the 1-75 Proposed Commercialization of Golden [:ate planned.. the residents expressed Parkway development of the interchange might commercial and conditional uses consistently made their concerns knc leaders, and the response from such tiVhat is being nronosed? !here is an effort underway to been that the impacts of adding the change the Collier County Growth Management Plan, and surrounding residential neighhtirheitt thereafter the County's zoning ordinance,to allow commercial and the neighborhood would be pro uses along Golden (;ate Parkway between Livingston Road development; recognizing that intent: and Santa Barbara Blvd (the "Corridor"). The proponents of development. In fact, in consideratit this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at largi front on Golden Gate Parkway. The proponents of leaders put in place significant harrie commercialization are proposing to ultimately rc one the rezoning and the expansion of ettnditig entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors, developers and What barriers are in Slat commercial interests. The proponents are pooling their money commercialization of the Corridor' to hire attorneys, engineers and other professionals. The has been for a long time, zoned proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential 7onin�, elassificatic�n land. Their first step will be to propose an amendment to the commercial uses; and the Growth Ma part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known as long time. designated the Curt the Golden Gate Area Master Plan {the "GO AMP"), which neighborhood to he used for primarily guides future land us decisions and presently prohibits commercial uses along the Corridor. in December 2007.contemporaneous the 1-75 interchange, the Board of Why should this chane to the Growth Management Plan consistent with a ureal deal of coni be resisted? if the proponents are successful in changing the consideration, adopted an amend= �� GGAMP,it will pave the way for the Corridor to he filled with contained the following policy stateni commercial uses; very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. in order to "Recognizing I facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant residential nature of if changes to the roadway system in the neighborhood arc being surrounding the planned 1-7: proposed. The proponents want to create a system of hack Golden Gate Parkway, a: roads along the full length of the rear boundaries of the lots restrictions on conditional fronting on the Parkway to facilitate access to commercial Conditional Uses Suhseetiut establishments. They want to eliminate direct access to Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the Gate Park--way for many of the existing streets. They want to fnrihcr commercial wiling install additional traffic lights along the Parkway and funnel _.. abunint! Golden bate Pai all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The i.ivint;rctcn Road _ and commercial establishments, including gas stations, Boulevard. No new comma convenience stores, retail establishments and offices will be permitted on properties attract additional traffic and congestion to the area, including accessing Golden Gate Part transient traffic from 1-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. IP improvements and utility facilities. such as scv,ct and water, ew{.e tit,rr fur that e.a'rstitrg will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Coi additional traffic. These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrict, which is lo would likely span multiple decades, as has happened on Pine northwest co,iter of the Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community, Golden Gate Parkway and and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding B01110ardf neighborhood. will be significant. And there is no present demand or need fir additional commercial establishments in ;eco,as a result of the same the area that tan justify these adverse impacts. The same Board of County Commissioners types of businesses and services as are being proposed are requirement regarding conditional use already nearby. "Recognizing Is this a ne%% issue fur the surrounding neighborhood? No. residential nature of tl ii is not. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have --,.,,,,.,a;,,,, .i., 1,102:,„o,l i_-r' 9 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220 257 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara . of local area neighborhoods we Boulevard, except- [there is a limited anticipated, The only changes that ha exception for Dal4d Lam-ence Center, are those which were anticipated. Center Point Community Church and provisions of the CdiAMP restricting essential .setvice_s-f. Further no properties adopted m anticipation of :such chan abutting streets accessing Golden Gate area;actually, in anticipation of the pr Parkway within the above-defined segment to hear as a result of those changes_ shall be approved for conditional uses except" [there is a limired exception for The proponents will also assert that thq David Lawrence Ctnner, Center Porn: desirable places to live. Some prop Community Church and essential services], Parkway, neeognizing the value of the have made sizable investments in hu As mentioned above, the Growth Management PlatKiCi.AMP their homes to make them nice plac is intended to guide future land use decision making. +Adenine of the Parkway and increase Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their property will ul amending the above provisions of the GGAMP. Amending "rommercitir and arc therefore hold the VAMP is an expensive and time consumine,process,and their property_ Some proponents miuh amendments must be approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of blight along of 4 votes) of the 5 member Hoard of County Commissioners. favorable to their cause. A clear sign The goal is to keep these substantial harriers in place and to that the area will remain residential w prevent commercialization, the health and viability of the entire n an even more desirable urea for all Nu Why is this happening nilw? Property values have been commute through. rising. The proponents of commercialization see an opportunity to sell or develop their lois and reap large What can volt ( ...----. financial rewards. There have been changes in local government leadership; and the proponents are hopeful that The good news is that there are signi the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the propos resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled, in order to achieve their objectives. They believe, perhaps, the lime is ripe. Those are the real why there should be any change to the reasons. CiCiAMP. On the other hand, the government leaders to maintain t However. the proponents; will assert that they are unfairly appearance and utility of the Corridt restricted by the current provisions of the GCiAMP. Yet, surrounding neighborhood and protect while the community undertook the process of considering the residenb has not been tested. li i! future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to spe; through public hearings, the proponents were alinesi entirely influence in order to resist the pressure absent, On the other hand, those interested in avoiding die bear by the proponents of commerciali: commercialization of the Corridor spoke out. And there was strong community-wide sentiment to keep the Corridor You can expect to be invited by : uncluttered by commercial uses. involved. You may he asked to sign government leaders, write letters. atte Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to to"properties abutting streets aCteSSiT12 Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this prices within the above-defined segment" (i.e.. the side streets) bearing upon the outcome. You are en, Unfair? matter with people residing insi neighborhood; to encourage the Furthermore,many of the proponents have purchased their lots conunercialihation of the Corridor. along the Con-idor subsequent to adoption of the current provisions .of the (.G MP blowing well that they were Traditionally, the Naples community al purcha.sing a lot in a residential area - designated to remain a in favor of maintaining the predominan residential arra. of the Corridor. They have put in c colunimialiation. The proponent The proponents will assert that a change to GGAMP is Golden Gate Parkway will not prevail necessitated by significant changes to the surrounding area the suirounding neighborhood act as it resulting from the 1-75 interchange. other roadway and it does not matter. Please take . . .. 10 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 192 of 220 ')RA From: Elizabeth Foster<elizabeth@judithliegeoisdesigns.com> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 12:22 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Fwd: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study Sent from my'Phone Date: October 28, 2016 at 10:58:55 AM EDT To:<GGAMPrestudy@colliergov.net> Subject:Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study To Planning and Zoning Division, Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to Livingston Ave: We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted. Thank you, Elizabeth Foster 2711 68th St.SW. Naples FL34105 239-777.8818 Elifoster@hotmail.com � I 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 193 of 220 259 From: Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:16 AM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy To Whom it may concern: I have lived on 68th Street S.W. since 1989. In that time, I have watched the construction of 1-75 Exit 105,the Golden Gate bridge over Airport Road, and the development of a huge apartment complex on the corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Livingston Road. I love my residential area and I am against letting it be taken over by companies like Race Trac and other commercial uses. I am also concerned about any more large apartment complexes being constructed due to the already massive traffic concession that exists now. I wish I could attend one of the three workshops to discuss my views, but I have conflicts all 3 dates® Thank you for your consideration of my opinions, Barbara S. Coen 2780 68th Street S.W. Naples, FL 34105 Phone: 239-777-4085 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 194 of 220 From: Tony Ojanovac<amoappraisals@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed To Whom It May Concern, I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP. I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial.There is no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels. We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone. Anthony M. Ojanovac Cert.Res. RD7070 AMO Appraisals, Inc. Sent from my iPhone 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 195 of 220 261 From: Daniel Jenkins<dwj2790@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 2:35 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Golden Gate Master Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mr. VanLengen, I am writing you to express my strong apposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or Apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the QUIET, RESIDENTIAL character of our neighborhood. Thank You, Daniel W. Jenkins 2718 68th ST SW Naples, FL 34105 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 196 of 220 From: Kevin Keyes<kevinkeyes99@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:00 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: GGAMP I wish to make known my opinion to any changes to the Golden Gate Area master plan along golden gate parkway between Livingston road and Santa Barbara boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. Sent from my iPhone 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 197 of 220 263 From: eflenney@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:26 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan This correspondence serves as my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I oppose any type of commercialization along the Parkway, or any type of apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of my neighborhood; as it was meant to be. Elizabeth Lenney 3220 66th Street SW Resident at this address 21 years 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 198 of 220 From: boystrave117@comcast.net Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 3:26 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Commercialization of GG Parkway Follow Up Flag: Follow Up Flag Status: Flagged We wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the"Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We are interested in receiving notices of future meetings. Thank you, Carmen and Jorge Lopez 2831 64th Street SW Naples, FL 34105 tim1 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 199 of 220 265 From: Jo Gennis<josephinegg@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:24 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: GoldenGate Master Plan This email is to notify you of my opposition to ANY changes in the Golden Gate Master Plan (along Golden Gate Pkwy.,between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara Blvd.). I oppose the commercialization and/or apartments along the Pkwy. We must keep the"estates zoning" ( as promised )to keep our neighborhood 100% residential. Currently, large single family homes are being built and sold in this area. Many of the older homes have been upgraded.Children who grew up here, are now adult homeowners. This is a prime residential area and we want to keep it that way. Sincerely, Larry&Josephine Gennis 271166 St. S.W. Naples,F1.34105 Sent from Jo's iPad 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 200 of 220 • From: dapbrock@comcast.net Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 5:56 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: dapbrock@comcast.net Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan -Opposition to Commercialization We wish to make known our strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet residential character of our beautiful neighborhood. Please keep us informed of any changes- proposed or otherwise - at the address below. Thank you. Derek and Pam Brock 2845 66th Street SW Naples, Florida 34105 dapbrock@comcast.net Derek- 239-404-3848 cell Pam-239-961-5136 cell Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App 1. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy white Paper 12/19/2017 Page 201 of 220 267 From: Whitney Murphy<wnofl@aol.com> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 11:20 AM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Oppose Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway I wish to make known my strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I strongly oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. Please add me to the Collier County Government email list so that I may receive notices of future meetings regarding this matter. Thank you very much, Whitney Murphy 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 202 of 220 From: ohmantrisha@aol.com Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:08 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: GGAMP I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 203 of 220 269 From: JenkinsAnita Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:23 AM To: Tony Ojanovac Cc: GGAMPRestudy;VanLengenKris Subject: RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) Tony, Thank you for taking the time to attend the meeting and provide your written comments in the email below.Your involvement is very much appreciated and your comments will certainly be maintained as part of the record. We have added your email address to the distribution list and will notify you when the next public meeting is scheduled. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or would like additional information. Sincerely, Anita Jenkins,AICP Community Planning Section Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-8288 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Original Message From:Tony Ojanovac[mailto:amoappraisals@gmail.comj Sent:Wednesday, May 11,2016 7:04 PM To:GGAMPRestudy Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) To Whom It May Concern, I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP. I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway(between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd)commercial.There is no need whatsoever for this proposal,as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels. We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone. Anthony M. Ojanovac Cert.Res. RD7070 AMO Appraisals, Inc. Sent from my iPhone Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 204 of 220 97n From: Lisa Pearl <lisampearl@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:24 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: Lisa; Scott Pearl Subject: Opposition to the commercialization of the parkway Dear Kris, We feel very strongly about voicing our opinion and concern for the proposed development along Golden Gate Parkway. My family and I wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We fully opposed the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the estates residential zoning which protects the quiet residential character of our neighborhood. Please protect our town and the families that have called Naples home for over 20 years. Scott, Lisa, Zachary and Riley Pearl 2690 66th Street Sw Naples, Fl 34105 Downing Frye Realty 239.248.2705 LisaMPearl@gmail.com 2014/2015 Platinum Award Winner www.NaplesHomeSpecialist.com 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 205 of 220 271 From: Eric Solomon <elsolomon65@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 12:22 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: Jessica Horowitz Subject: Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway Dear Mr.VanLengen We have lived at 2760 66th St SW, Naples since August 2013. One of the primary reasons we purchased that particular piece of property was the longstanding developed residential nature of the community and its proximity to all Naples has to offer. It is important that our voices are heard at the County level. Unfortunately we are affable to personally attend tonight's workshop regarding the commercial rezoning efforts due to prior commitments. To be clear we wish to make it known that we vehemently oppose any changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose commercialization of the Parkway and/or apartments along the Parkway.We are in favor of maintaining the Estates Residential Zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We welcome all opportunity to be heard. If you wish to speak with us directly my cell number is (239)293-7138 and Jessica's is(239)293-6954.You are of course also welcome to email us anytime and would be most appreciative if you would include us on all correspondence pertaining to this matter on a go-forward basis. Thank you for your time. Eric Solomon &Jessica Horowitz 2760 66th Street SW Naples FL 34105 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 206 of 220 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 9:25 AM To: 'Don Stevenson' Cc: Mike Bosi (MichaelBosi@colliergov.net); JenkinsAnita; FrenchJames; SawyerMichael; WilkisonDavid Subject: RE: GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway??? Attachments: GGAMP Upcoming Workshops News Release final 4-20-16.pdf; Golden Gate Area Master Plan 2nd Workshop News Release 5-11-16.pdf Dear Mr. Stevenson: Thank you for your interest in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy("Restudy").Your communication will be retained for the record,and we will add your contact information to our e-mail distribution list. The attached notices should help explain the nature of the Growth Management Plan Restudy.These notices were provided as press releases to local news outlets and posted on the County's website.At the request of several residents, this notice was also e-mailed to those residents.As the Restudy ideally involves all 36,000 households in the Golden Gate Area, it was not financially feasible to provide letter notices to all homes. We were pleased to provide an introduction to the Restudy to a group of residents in the Estates area west of Collier Blvd. on May 11, 2016.As you will note,the nature of the project is to examine all aspects of the current GGAMP, determine whether its provisions reflect the values and vision of residents and stakeholders today, and provide observations and recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. We hope that you will visit our website noted in the attachments,to be updated frequently, so that you can review the current plan provisions, communicate with staff, and plan on attending future meetings as approved by the Growth Management Oversight Committee. To our knowledge,there has been no recent rezone proposal for Golden Gate Parkway properties. Yours, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239)252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies From: Don Stevenson [mailto:Don@DonStevensonDesign.com] Sent:Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:38 PM To:VanLengenKris<KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> Cc: FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; HillerGeorgia<GeorgiaHiller@colliergov.net>; HenningTom <TomHenning@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; NanceTim <TimNance@colliergov.net>; FrenchJames<jamesfrench@colliergov.net>;SawyerMichael<MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>;WilkisonDavid <DavidWilkison@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>;WeeksDavid <DavidWeeks@colliergov.net>;jenkinsanita@colliergov.net; BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net> 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 207 of 220 273 Subject:GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway??? Importance: High Dear Kris, I have been sent communications stating that the GGAMP is exploring a change in zoning to allow commercial uses on Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. My personal home is located on 66th street SW, literally one lot away from Golden Gate Parkway. My family an I are adamantly opposed to any changes to current zoning of the parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. This topic has come up previously by varied developers and we have opposed them every time they surface. I am not sure if you are the person in charge of the upcoming workshop or not, but I received your name in connection with the proposed workshop to discuss rezoning of the Master plan associated with the Golden Gate Parkway area between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I will be reaching out to all of my contacts in the Collier County Growth Management Division to voice my opposition, as well as all of the county commissioners. Over the last 20 years I have been involved in countless development projects, PUDs, SDPs Replats and Rezones in Collier County,many of them residential and commercial rezoning projects, therefore I'm very experienced in the process. For the record,No Public Notice was Mailed to my home address which indicates that the public meeting may have not been properly advertised per the Collier County requirements. This is extremely alarming to say the least, especially knowing that the various developers have been trying to sneak this type of zoning change by the residents of this area for years now. I will be in adamant opposition to any change to the parkway zoning, and use all my professional resources, my experience and my company resources to make sure our neighborhood zoning remains unchanged. Commercial applications are not the right use for this area, it is and always has been zoned residential and estates. The traffic impact study reports (TIS) for this --- section go GG Parkway will also show the danger to the public if any commercial development is considered for this area in question. Please help to keep our residential neighborhood and our children safe from the dangerous traffic and social impacts of a change of this nature to the current zoning. During the installation approval process of the I-75 Interchange installation in December of 2007 the county commissioners adopted language into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) that specifically and undeniably restricts any new modifications of improvements of Commercial development on the stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. other than the existing Center Point Church and The David Lawrence Center. Please review the Master Plan language that was adopted in 2007 and forward this information to the county commissioners and your supervisors for review. Please keep my email on your communication list regarding any items or communication related to and changes to the GGAMP between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. Thank you for your time. Don Stevenson, President Don Stevenson Design, Inc. Lotus Architecture, Inc. AA#26001786 2950 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 16 _.. Naples, FL 34103 Phone: 239-304-3041 Email: Don@DonStevensonDesign.com Web: www.DonStevensonDesign.com 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 208 of 220 /.-1 /Th 3Pa a 209 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 9 275 From: Angela Turner<ajturner37@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM To: TaylorPenny;VanLengenKris Cc: barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall Subject: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am hoping that that promise will be kept! Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway. We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with ANY commercializations. We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway. Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is, especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no,a stop light would cause more accidents". We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again, Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization. The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic nightmare. Subject: GG Parkway From: aiturner37@hotmail.com Date:Wed,4 Jun 2014 19:37:33-0400 To:fredcoyle@colliergov.net Commissioner Coyle, We,the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security. Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can actually achieve what they are asking for. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 210 of 220 Thank you. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From:Angela Turner<ajturner37@hotmail.com> Date:June 4,2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com> Subject:GG parkway Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before,and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the safety of our children. Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off 175. That part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage and making our homes less attractive. Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose not to use the Pine Ridge amenities. Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own any properties at the "proposed" sites for first modifications. Mr. Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the owners, as well as the original company that purchased the parcels that Wildcat I and II,whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4 million and 2 million with a description that says "Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station, church, retail shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is baiting a proposed buyer and misleading! Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time to actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten the responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go for these changes. Angela Turner Sent from my iPad 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 211 of 220 277 On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:36 PM, edwinkoert@msn.com wrote: To all who has responded: The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend anyone, but to inform all of the property owners located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our activities to have the corridor rezoned to a commercial application. Believe me,your view"for or against" our rezoning activity does not offend me. Everyone has an opinion,and as such,yours, as-well-as your peers, is just as important and will be considered too. I am an old Florida Boy from youth-7-years (the East coast- Hollywood/Ft. Lauderdale through high school 1958) My homestead address is now a retirement community off of 1-75 Exit 240, known as Sun City Center. However, I,as-well-as Brent have two each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting GGPkwy, and as such, I am in the Naples area quite frequently. My specific properties are on the West side of 1-75,fronting GGpkwy, one on the North side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot prints in the Naples area goes back to the early sixties. To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I am attaching two graphic diagrams. The diagrams include all of the properties fronting the East and West Side of 1-75, including our suggested modifications. The PDF diagrams can be enlarged by increasing the zoom percent within the PDF. Also, attached a a letter containing our thoughts on the development of the area. You may wish to review them, or discard them. While reading the WORD document you may wish to have the diagrams available. We do make the information available to all. As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700- mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded,and I thank you for your input. Sincerely, Edwin H. Koert 239-289-4420 edwinkoert@msn.com <GGPkwy- East Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy-West Side of I-75.pdf> <GGPkwy-032414-Hard look at the North and South Sides.doc> 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 212 of 220 278 HELP PRESERVE THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOE *BE INVOLVED* May,2016 To: Concerned Citizens, You are being contacted because you live in our neighborhood and signed a petitic community leaders to prohibit the allowance of any commercial rezoning effor approximately two mile stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Boulevard. Enclosed are the following: 3. A Notice from Collier County Government of a public meeting/workshof 6.30 n.m.on Wednesday May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. See the ret meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of obtaining the comr concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Master charges could potentially include amendments to the Master Plan that commercial development or apartment buildings alone Golden Gate Park Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. 2. Questions and Answers Concerning the Proposed Commercialization o Parkway. This information was previously distributed to you by our neighbor response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate Parkway to soli #'"\ their efforts to commercialize the Parkway. WHAT TO DO; ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOP, AND FUTURE MEETINGS CONCERNING TH PROVIDE YOUR INPUT AND SUPPORT. YOUR PRESENCE AT THESE MEETINGS WILL GC TOWARD EXPRESSING THE RESOLVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO AVOID THE NEGATIVE WOULD RESULT FROM ZONING CHANGES ALONG THE PARKWAY, PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, YOU MAY RECEIVE NOTICI MEETINGS BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, BY CONTACI LENGEN AT 239-252-7268 OR THE EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO C SEND AN EMAIL, WHETHER OR NOT YOU ATTEND THE MEETING, WE ENCOURAGE YOU* LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN 1 TO: KrisVanlengen@colliereov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY OPPO1 CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARK' LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALI; PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. I AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET, RESIDENTIAL CHARAC NEIGHBORHOOD_" TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. IT IS - OPPOSITION 10 BE HEARD. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220 279 Collier Count . Government Growth Management Department Contact: Connie Deane Zoning Division Cnmtnunity Liaison 2800 N. Ilorseshoe Drive 239-2524192 or 8365 Naples, Florida 341(14 ergov.net twitter.com/Collier PIO facehonk.com/CollierGal you tube.cumiCollierGov April 27, 2016 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Area. Master Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on 11 Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning documen Gale area that shows the vision for the community in the next 10 to 20 years. The plan cons growth, what it should look like and how land uses should be an-anaed to live, work, shop The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Boule.ar will he held at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center, 47( Parkway, Naples, Florida 34116 It is critical to the success of the Master Plan that the residents of this area participate in dciu vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed. Agendas will he posted prior t at htlus://www.colliergov.netIGMPrestudies. During the corning year,there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and sh on the (iGAMP, including advertised public meetings, digital forums, wehsitc information web content. All interested parties arc invited to visit https://r,rww.colliereov.net/' frequently, to sec the background materials, current planning efforts and areas l r direct pub county planners may research and gather the issues and concerns important to all stakehold email updates or to provide comments,please email us at: GGAMPRestud4'Acolliergay.n Two or more members of the Board of County Commissioners, City of Naples City Coun Marco Island City Council or any of their respective advisory committees may be pre participate at these workshops. The subject matter of these workshops may be an item for action at future meetings of these boards, councils or agencies. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or of accommodations in order to participate in these proceedings, should contact the Collier Ct Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, Florida 34112_, or 239-25r as possible, but no later than 48 hours before each of the scheduled events. Su accomtnodations will be provided at no cost to the individual. 6 Page 214 of 220 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 7c n Oucstton.s and Answers Concerning the Upon announcement that the 1-75 ' Propoied Commercialization of Golden Gate planned. the residents expressed Parkway commercial of the interchange might I commercial and conditional uses. consistently made their concerns knox !enders, and the response from such I What is being; proposed? There is an effort underway to been that the impacts of adding the I change the Collier County Growth Management Plan, and surrounding residential neighborhood thereafter the County's zoning ordinance,to allow commercial and the neighborhood would be proti uses along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road development; recognizing that interelu and Santa Barbara Blvd (the '`Corridor'). The proponents of development, In fact, in considerador this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at large, front on Golden Gate Parkway, The proponents of leaders put in place significant barrio commercialization are proposing to ultimately rezone the rezoning and the expansion of condition entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors, developers and What barriers are in place commercial interests. The proponents are pooling their money commercialization of the Corridor? to hire attorneys, engineers and other professionals, The has been for a long time, zoned proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential zoning classification it land, Their first step will be to propose an amendment to the commercial uses; and the Growth Man part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known as loris time, designated the Cirri the Golden Gate Arta Master Plan (the "GGAMP"). which neighborhood to be used for primarily i guides fixture land use decisions and presently prohibits commercial uses along the Corridor. In December 2007,contemporaneous t the 1-75 interchange, the Board of ( Why should this chaetae to the Growth Management Pian consistent with a great deal of comm be resisted? If the proponents are successful in changing the consideration, adopted an amendnten GG.AMP,it will pave the way for the Corridor to be filled with contained the following policy.r'taietne commercial uses; very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. in order to "Recognizing di facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant residential nature of da changes to the roadway system in the neighborhood are being surrounding the planned 1-75 . proposed. The proponents want to create a system of hack Golden Gate Parkway. as roads along the full length of the rear boundaries of the lot~ restrictions on conditional fronting on the Parkway= to facilitate access to commercial Conditional Uses Subsection establishments.They want to eliminate direct access to Golden Crate Area Master Plan. then Gate Parkway for many of the existing streets. They want to further commercial zoning install additional tragic lights along the Parkway and funnel ahuttinp C'rolden Gate Parti all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The I.ivin}i,sten Road and S commercial establishments, including gas stations, F3riutevard. No new tutnntsn convenience stores, retail establishments and offices will be permitted on properties a attract additional traffic and congestion to the area, including accessing Golden Gate Park- transient traffic from 1-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. /Tit( improvements and utility facilities, such as segs[ and water, emotion for that existing will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Coir; additional traffic.These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrict, which is hoc would likely span multiple decades. as has happened on Pine northwest confer of the i Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community. Golden Gate Parkway and and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding Bvtrlc t urdj. neighborhood. will be significant. And there is no present demand or need for additional commercial establishments in Also,as a result of the same; the area that can justify thea;, adverse impacts. The sante Board of County Commissioners t types of businesses and services as are being proposed are requirement regarding conditional uses ,,-- already nearby. "Recognizing ti. is this a new issue for the surrounding neighborhood? No, residential nature of tht it is not. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have r,,.,..-.,,,,a;.,,, ,r,a „d„„,,,,.{ r_,r: 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220 281 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara of local area neighborhoods vier Boulevard, except [there is a limited anticipated. The only changes that hav CNC 47tiOn fOr David Lawrence Center, are those which %vere anticipated. Center Point Community Church and prolAsions of the GGAMP restricting -ssentiai services]. Ftu-ther no properties adopted in anticipation of such chang abutting streets accessing Golden Gate area; actually, in anticipation of the prcs Parkway within the above-defined segment to bear as a result of those changus. shall be approved for conditional use except- [them is a limited exception for The proponents will also assert that the: David Lawrence Center, Center Point desirable places to live. Some prope Community Church and essential services]. Parkway. recognizing the value of theit have made sizable investments in hufl As mentioned above, the Growth Management PlamGGAMP their homes to make them nice place is intended to guide finure land use decision making. widening of the Parkway and increases Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their properly will ult. amending the above provisions of the GGAMP, Amending 'Commercial and are therefore holdit the GGAlviP is an expensive and time consuming process,and their property. Some proponents might amendments must be approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of blight along tl of 4 votes) of the 5 member Board of County Commissioncnt. favorable to their cause. A clear signa. The goal is to keep these substantial harriers in place and to - that the area will remain residential we prevent commercialization, the health and \lability of the entire ne an even more desirable area for all Nap Why is this happenine now? Property values have been commute through. rising. The proponents of commercialization see an opportunity to sell or develop their hits and reap large What can von d financial rewards. There have been changes in local government leadership: and the proponents are hopeful that llhe good news is that there are signif the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the propon( resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled, in order to achieve their objectives. A They believe, perhaps. the time is ripe. Those are the real why there should be any change to the reasons. GGAN1P. On the other hand. the government leaders to maintain th However, the proponents will assert that they arc unfairly appearance and utility of the Corridoi restricted by the current provisions of the GriAMP. Yet. surrounding neighborhood and protect t while the community undertook the process of considering the residents has not been tested ii is future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to speal through public hearings, the proponents were almost entirely influence in order to resist the pressures absent. On the other hand, those interested in avoiding the bear by the proponents of commercializi commercialization of the Corridor spoke out. And there Valli strong community-wide sentiment to keep the Corridor you can expect to be invited by yi uncluttered by commercial uses. involved. You may be asked to sign r government leaders, write lelLerN. atter Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to m to"propenies abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this process within the above-defined segment- (i_e.. the side streets) bearing upon the outcome. You are ene, Unfair1 mutter with people residing iusid neighborhood; to encourage thee Furthemore„many of the proponents have purchased their lots commercialihation of the Corridor. along the Corridor subsequent to adoption of the current provisions of the GUAlv1P, knowing well that they were Traditionally, the Naples community an, purchasing a lot in a residential area - designated to remain a in favor of maintaining the predominant' residential area, of the Corridor. They have put in pl commercialization. The proponents The proponents will assert that a change to GGAMP is Golden Gate Parkway will not prevail necessitated by significant changes to the surrounding area the surrounding neighborhood act as ill resuluna from the 1-75 interchange, other roadway and it does not matter. Please take ti , . 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220 nnn From: vkeyes239@aol.com Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:34 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: GGAMP I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 217 of 220 283 From: Jim Duffy<jim@jimduffyconstruction.com> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 10:59 AM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study To Planning and Zoning Division, Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to Livingston Ave: We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted. Thank you, Gloria L. Cooley James P. Duffy 2760 68th ST. SW Naples FL34105 239-272-6881 Cell Jamespduffvacomcast.net 0 X This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 218 of 220 ')4A CHEFFY PASSIDOMO ATTORNEYS AT LAW EDWARD K.CHEFFY 821 Fifth Avenue South ANDREW H.REISS Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer Naples,Florida 34102 Board Certified Business Litigation Lawyer Board Certified Business Litigation Lawyer Telephone: (239)261-9300 WILLIAM J.DEMPSEY JOHN M.PASSIDOMO www.napleslaw.com Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer R.BRUCE ANDERSON JOHN D.KEHOE NICHOLAS P.MIZELL Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer DEBBIE SINES CROCKETT LOUIS D.D'AGOSTINO BRIAN J.THANASIU Board Certified Appellate Practice Lawyer Board Certified Real Estate Lawyer DAVID A.ZULIAN MARIA VIGILANTE Board Certified Construction Lawyer CLAY C.BROOKER Board Certified City,County and Of Counsel: Local Government Lawyer GEORGE L.VARNADOE DIRECT DIAL: (239)659-4942 Tbanderson@anapleslaw.com November 1,2017 Via Email: krisvanlengen@colliergov.net Growth Management Department Attn: Kris VanLengen Collier County Planning Manager 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,Florida 34104 RE: Golden Gate Master Plan-Transitional Conditional Uses Dear Mr.VanLengen: Wayne Arnold and I represent LDJ Associates, Ltd., the Larry E. Brooks Trust and Larry E. and Maria R. Brooks who own 12.73 acres located on Collier Boulevard between 13th Avenue Southwest and the Florida Power and Light PUD. This property is the subject of a GMP Amendment application to be designated as a Neighborhood Center Subdistrict to allow intermediate commercial uses. That application was put on hold pending the update of the Golden Gate Master Plan. We have reviewed the draft White Paper for the Golden Gate Master Plan regarding Transitional Conditional Uses ("TCU"). We support the Staff recommendation to amend and require nonresidential uses on only one side of a property that would be eligible to apply for a TCU along the West side of busy 6-lane Collier Boulevard, as is allowed on the East side of Collier Boulevard and the rest of the Estates. We note that the"Transitional Conditional Uses" Section 3d of the Master Plan presently excludes from TCU eligibility: "Site shall not be adjacent to permitted Essential Service as identified in Section 2.6.9 of the Land Development Code, except for libraries and museums". Electrical transmission and distribution lines, substations, and emergency power structures are Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 219 of 285 Permitted Uses in most zoning districts. The FPL PUD (copy attached) allows those uses in addition to customer service and commercial buildings, open storage of materials and equipment for construction and maintenance, and truck parking and fueling facilities. Attached are four photos of some of the uses and structures that are a part of the operations on the FPL PUD property including a large new two-story operations service center building that is under construction. Also attached are the architectural plans for this new building. The FPL PUD is so much more than just a simple neighborhood electrical substation. We would request that the Transitional Conditional Uses be amended to add as an exception(along with libraries and museums) "electrical substations operated in conjunction with onsite commercial or industrial uses". The subject property is uniquely situated in that it is not adjacent to a neighborhood center, yet has a quasi-industrial land use located contiguous to it. From a planning perspective, the currently permitted use of very low density single family residential development is not compatible with the adjacent land use, and an opportunity to obtain approval for limited non-residential uses through the conditional use process would afford the property owner the ability to obtain a compatible land use. As noted in the white paper, Collier Boulevard has been 6-laned, further making the site incompatible for very low density residential development. The conditional use process requires public hearings and informational meetings,which insure that there will be public input once a specific use is proposed for the site. The conditional use process also allows the Board of County Commissioners to impose conditions of approval in order to insure the use is compatible with surrounding uses. We believe that providing the opportunity to obtain a conditional use on the property is the appropriate planning process. We respectfully request that you consider our proposed language and include this letter with its attachments in the backup materials for the Golden Gate Master Plan update that you prepare. Please feel free to contact Wayne and I if you have any questions. Sincerely, R. Bruce Anderson RBA/nung CC: Larry Brooks Wayne Arnold Enclosures Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220 286 EXHIBIT TrelilICOCH planning.mingering Traffic Impact Statement Grace Romanian Church Conditional Use (CU) Zoning Collier County, FL 06/26/2017 Prepared for: Prepared by: Grace Romanian Church Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1090 31st Street SW 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: 239-398-2527 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee—$500.00 Collier County Transportation Review Fee—Small Scale Study—No Fee Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. es`°0N J. T RF$�I, ee`�P•''G..o • Z: No 47116 :i•-• : ▪ *; * ;* ®-0: ;Cte 1,• ®•• STATE OF /,QJ "soq�/ON AV- Norman J.Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 This item has been electronically signed and Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA sealed by Norman J.Trebilcock,PE using a SHA-1 authentication code. 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Printed copies of this document are not considered Naples, FL 34110 signed and sealed,and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies. Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 12 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Table of Contents Project Description 4 Trip Generation 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment 6 Background Traffic 9 Existing and Future Roadway Network 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis 11 Improvement Analysis 13 Mitigation of Impact 13 APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 16 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition 23 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits 26 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 13 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Project Description The subject project is a proposed institutional facility located in the southeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection.The subject parcel has a total area of approximately 6.25 acres and lies within Section 11,Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.This parcel is partially vacant land with one single-family residential structure (ref. Fig. 1—Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan). Fig. 1—Project Location Map rJ PROJECT Go gle As illustrated in the Master Site Plan, the conditional use zoning application proposes to allow development for a multi-purpose church related building and accessory recreational area. For purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2022 planning horizon. The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project's proposed trip generation. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 14 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 The associated church multi-use amenities are considered passive incidental to the sanctuary use and are not included in the trip generation analysis. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Total Size Code Proposed Conditions Church 560 i 15,000 sf(300 seats)* Note(s): *Size and seating capacity for sanctuary;sf—square feet. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on April 26, 2017, via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist). Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. Trip Generation The project's site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE rates are used for the trip generation calculations. The ITE — OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition. Based on ITE recommendations and consistent with Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture and pass-by trips are not considered for this project. The estimated project weekday trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 15 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Conditions)—Average Weekday Proposed Development 24 Hour Two- AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Way Volume ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Church 15,000 sf(1) 137 5 3 8 4 4 8 Note(s): (1)Sanctuary;sf—square feet. In agreement with the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this analysis, the surrounding roadway network concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour traffic as illustrated in Table 2A. The site access turn lane analysis is based on the projected higher traffic generator for LUC 560 - Church: AM and PM peak hour average weekday compared to Sunday peak hour of generator. In addition, a Sunday peak hour of generator trip generation comparison is provided between two variables: sanctuary Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the number of seats. For the LUC 560 — Sunday peak hour of generator, the number of seats variable is the conservative estimate of the two trip generations and it is used for the purposes of this report. As illustrated in the ITE LUC 560 — Additional Data, the Sunday peak hour varies between 9.00AM and 1.00 PM. The estimated Sunday peak hour trip generation is illustrated in Table 2B. Table 2B Trip Generation (Sunday Operational Conditions) Proposed Development Sunday Peak Hour of Generator ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Church 300 seats1�1 92 91 183 Note(s): (1)Sanctuary. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 16 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with Collier County Transportation Planning staff. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3, Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour and is graphically depicted in Fig. 2— Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Project Traffic Distribution for Peak Hour CollierDistribution PM Peak Hour Project Roadway Link County Roadway Link Location of Project Traffic Volume ill - - Traffic Link No. Enter Exit Collier Blvd. 30.2 Vanderbilt Beach Rd.to 35% SB—1 NB—1 Golden Gate Blvd. Collier Blvd. 31.1 Golden Gate Blvd.to 35% NB—2 SB—2 Pine Ridge Rd. Golden Gate Blvd. 17.0 Collier Blvd.to Wilson 30% WB—1 EB-1 Blvd. Note(s): la)Peak hour,peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 ----..., Fig. 2-Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour , -- - - -P-RaTE C-T—T-RA RF I C DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE • 1 . . rt,_,--. • . D I Peak 35% Peak Direction SB Direction ER ‘ge -\.C.' __3,.. 1 _ A if, Peak Direction NB i ,., ....-, PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY . PM PEAK HOUR I NB 1; SB 1 . . , A —Peal—T—' Direction SB Direction EB --> • <---> u. . 1 7. A WB 1; EB 1 Peak Direction NB vl NB 2; SB 2 I , . , { i . ic Go gie Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 18 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from annual peak hour, peak direction traffic volume (estimated from 2008 through 2016), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2016 AUIR volume plus the trip bank volume. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the future horizon year 2022. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project(2016-2022) 2022 Projected 2022 2016 AUIR Projected Pk Hr,Peak Dir Projected Pk CC Pk Hr,Pk Dir Traffic Background Hr,Peak Dir Roadway Link AUIR Roadway Link Background Annual Growth Traffic Volume Trip Background Link ID Location Traffic Growth Factor w/out Project Bank Traffic Volume # Volume Rate (trips/hr) w/out Project (trips/hr) (%/yr)* Growth (trips/hr)Trip Factor** Bank***� Vanderbilt ___ Collier Blvd. 30.2 Beach Rd.to 1,200 2.00% 1.1262 1,352 166 1,366 Golden Gate Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 1,867 2.00% 1.1262 2,103 40 1,907 Ridge Rd. GoldenCollier Blvd.to 17.0 1,660 2.00% 1.1262 1,870 0 1,660 Gate Blvd. Wilson Blvd. Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate-from 2016 AUIR,2%minimum. **Growth Factor=(1+Annual Growth Rate)6.2022 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2022 Projected Volume=2016 AUIR Volume+Trip Bank.The projected 2022 Peak Hour—Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation,which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2016 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5- Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. Collier Boulevard improvements are currently underway and are adequately reflected in the 2016 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 19 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 AUIR. As no future improvements were identified in the Collier County 2016 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Exist Peak Dir, CC AUIR Roadway Link Exist Min. Peak Hr Future Roadway Link Standard Project Build Link ID# Location Roadway Capacity LOS Volume out Roadway Vanderbilt Collier Blvd. 30.2 Beach Rd.to 6D E 3,000(SB) 6D Golden Gate Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 6D D 3,000(NB) 6D Ridge Rd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd.to Blvd. 17.0 Wilson Blvd. 4D 2,300(EB) 4D D Note(s): 2U=2-lane undivided roadway;4D,6D,8D=4-lane,6-lane,8-lane divided roadway,respectively;LOS=Level of Service Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 110 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—T1S—June 2017 Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service(LOS)—With Project in the Year 2022 CC 2016 Peak Roadway 2022 Peak %Vol Min LOS Min LOS AUIR Roadway Link Dir,Peak Link,Peak Dir,Peak Capacity exceeded exceeded Roadway Link Dir,Peak Hr Hr Volume Impact without with Link Location Hr Capacity ID# Volume (Project Vol w/Project By Project? Project? Added)* ** Project Yes/No Yes/No Vanderbilt Collier Blvd. 30.2 Beach Rd.to 3,000(SB) SB-1 1,367 0.03% No No Golden Gate Blvd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd. 31.1 Blvd.to Pine 3,000(NB) NB-2 2,105 0.07% No No Ridge Rd. Golden Gate Collier Blvd.to Blvd. 17.0 Wilson Blvd. 2,300(EB) EB—1 1,871 0.04% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report;**2022 Projected Volume=2022 background(refer to Table 4)+Project Volume added. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connections to the subject site are proposed to be provided as follows: one existing to remain right-in/right-out access on eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard; and one full movement access on southbound Weber Boulevard. For details see Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph — urban conditions —the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) is a 4-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. Based on FDOT Index 301, design speed of 45 mph — urban conditions—the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Weber Blvd is a 2-lane undivided local street under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 30 mph in the vicinity of the project. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways—40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways — right turn lanes shall always be provided: and (c) when new median openings are permitted,they shall always include left-turn lanes. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 111 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. The estimated project trips at driveway locations are illustrated in Appendix D: Project Turning Movements Exhibits. Site Access—Eastbound Golden Gate Boulevard A dedicated eastbound right-turn lane is warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criteria and volume threshold. There is an existing right-turn lane approximately 260 feet long. The proposed project is expected to generate 64 vph right-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. At the minimum, the turn lane should be 235 feet long (which includes a minimum of 50 feet of storage). As such, the existing right-turn lane is adequate to accommodate projected traffic at this location. Site Access—Southbound Weber Boulevard The proposed project is expected to generate 28 vph left-turning movements during the Sunday peak hour of the generator. It is noted that the Collier County roadway network peaks during a typical work week day. As such, the estimated project's peak hour traffic occurs on an off peak day. In addition, Weber Blvd. is a low volume roadway serving surrounding residential properties. Based on the fact that the generated traffic is not a high warranting volume and occurs on an off peak day, it is our recommendation not to provide a left-turn lane at this project access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points—turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. As part of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Golden Gate Boulevard (CR 876) intersection improvements, the Weber Blvd. connection onto Golden Gate Blvd. will be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out access. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 112 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2022 future build-out conditions. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. Based upon the results of turn lane analysis performed within this report, no turn lane improvements are recommended at the project accesses on Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points — turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 113 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 114 • Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 i 4- z I @° I L a I Z z 1 I61 0 o a iii cc cc 1 4 IUJ 35 - ra i a` .W 1w O Fw UJ w0 (a, 07 Z z Z1 z Co Co j t ❑ ❑ Q w W a Z' a o o o , 9 : yam�.+. w - ------ - -' -.---- I -- . V'Otos ti383N1 " a 3 II 11=11. ! IIS � 1-:i s I z I z UJ w ❑ I �c =:1 .E , o ❑ m I IgIII ¢r, i.J m w jw.moi i )- ! ff 1 I II._ a....- I P J_ if'. %_ ! fl a I W 1 j Wi [LI a „ (III > W W ❑ I 1 N W j� I wO wO Z t ISI ;=ffi;i ;---1 f�T---2 , w o QQ _ ❑ W i74 J�• 4 a O. f _ o 2 :I 1 �F � l� = b 5 ❑ LL o o $ Iry'I I-' 2 M ; n i ❑ 'll CW7a '.i e C I ! IN. I N g i I I • z, 1 4 .. `'I 1)Iaa ; 1 w L w '-- ----• 1- - - ----' I .1 i ? I _ `/ I r A S i� I_ z LU _ --, I- o w w a z .4 ~ ix } I I Z~ZW}N C' F 1 l J CO FF W ZSS0 i ).¢ W �jw I { IV Q w Q 2 `: QomQ..J a'z fn N O NIL p., L ?4i,. I I FQ w Qw 1 5 I'. o ZaZ d 1�•• Ella- cc w i I.1 NJ ti i i 4 +5 .• WQN Jm t0 I V W QCw !I 1 w y i1 `I lel' ,LI01 g J <� ❑-- �. -1 0 ❑ \` 1 !� I I I C a n I,\I- . U Li LI __��__ _r1 ' LJ !' i V3tf71N3W3OVN AN t131VM LL -..— - _ . _', -, L FI Eivi1VNV0 —_---------'-----------------------_.------------------.._..___—._--------------i AVM-IO-1I4 IIU ONVA3lfOS a311100 1 I 2131,/M 03do13A3c) (1N31^20VNVIN 1,131VM 03d013A30) (1VLLN301S3N A1IWVd 31DNIS o3d013A301 31V1S3 S31VJS3 S31V.S3 (1VIJN3015 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 115 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (6 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 116 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—lune 2017 INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply,or N/A(not applicable). Date: April 26,2017 Time: N/A 1 Location:NIA—Via Email People Attending: Name,Organization and Telephone Numbers I 1) Michael Sawyer,Collier-County Growth Management Division 2) Norman Trebilcock.TCS 3) Ciprian Malaescu,TCS Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title:Norman Trebilcock.AICP.PE Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions.PA Address&Telephone Number: 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202,Naples,FL 34110:ph. 239-566-9551 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager Organization&Telephone Number.Collier County Transportation Planning Department Ph:239-252-2926 Applicant: Applicant's Name:Davidson Engineering,Inc. Address:4365 Radio Road,Suite 201.,Naples,FL 34104 Telephone Number:239-434-6060 Proposed Development: Name:Grace Romanian Baptist Church—Rezone Location: Onthe east side of Collier Boulevard(CR 951).south of Golden Gate Boulevard and west of Weber Boulevard.(Refer to Fig.1) Land Use Type:Church ITE Code#: LUC 560 Description:Proposed 15.000 sf building with 300 seats. Parcel has an existing residential structure that will be demolished to allow for the new development. Zoning Existing:E—Estates Zoning District Comprehensive plan recommendation:No change Requested:Rezone—Conditional Use(CU) Page 1.of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 17 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Fig.].—Project Location Map. PP CAECT J Findings of the Preliminary Study: Study type: The Golden Gate Boulevard existing full-movement opening at Weber Boulevard South is scheduled to be reconfigured into a right-in/right-out connection. Since estimated project net new traffic volume is less than 50 AM or PM 2-way peak hour trips. this study qualifies for a Small Scale TIS —no significant operational or roadway impacts or work within the county right-of-way. The TIS will include AM-PM peak hour trip generation, traffic distribution and assignments, significance test and roadway link analysis. Site access points tum lane analysis Will use,conservatively,the higher of seats vs.square footage for the independent variable for trip generation. Roadway concurrency analysis—PM peak hour weekday traffic Site Access Analysis—Sunday Peak Hour of Generator traffic. Internal capture and pass-by reductions are not considered for this study. Study Type: (if not net increase,operationalstudy) Small Scale TIS Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS• ❑ Study Area: Boundaries west Collier Boulevard, north — Golden Gate Boulevard, east —Weber Boulevard Additional intersections to be analyzed:NIA Build Out Year 2022 Page 2 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 118 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Planning Horizon Year: 2022 Analysis Time Period(s): Concurrencv—.Weekday PM.Peak Hour; Operational—Sunday Peak Hour of Generator. Future Of Developments:N/A Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE 9th Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:N/A Pass-by trips: N/A Internal trips:N/A Transit use:N/A Other: N/A Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: 2022 Methodoloev&Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates: Collier County traffic counts and 2016 AUIR Site-trip generation: OTISS—ITE 9th Edition Trip distribution method: Empirical Engineer's E stirn ate—refer to Fin.2 Traffic assignment method: proiect trip generation with background growth Traffic growth rate:historical growth rate or 2%minimum Turning movement assignment:Estimate—site access—refer to Fie.3. Fig.2—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage ROJECT TRAC=K' DISTRIBUTi0N BY PERCENTAGE gia PROJECT) < Ella EMI s Page 3 of 6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page l 19 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 ___... Fig.3-Project Turning Movements by Fercnntage 70% - — _ - _— — DIRECTIONAL LEFT/TT-1 LT T •- •-•-:.-- .. IL - ,:•,_.,', __ , ,Tr TURN APPROXIMATELY' • ' I I I II ,I-7-7-7T' I, "IIT.0.0'i' 1 1' `d . . 0 2 MILES EAST OT WEBER SI VT). S . 1' ik• 11 i 4, ILI I t _ . ----7— '' l• I i -1 , 'i • I 1 DEi/E-v.10E1.I- . -- • ' 1 , , OW,Cefil,PG -77 ,zr..:L!, H _ _.--, ...".- . --,...v,WOW. -1—1' _ _I,1 5%) 'i- k; I :if;fift`' a,.o,,,,,,lorm• -- -- —1, i.' HT_ ' __I I 1 •,,_2, ' .1.: net 1 Kb,LN.N81,_ (10' if , 115,,,r--, I s,' •7 _, _.' ' - --- -. (10 . . , - i,trsory , 1 E q PROJECT TURNING ! . ! MOVEMENTS Y , . 1 PERCENTAGE i . I . 1 1 (25'4)Tr ..:. -----4 I l' ._._ r .',..,...Ln -1;:l I I ITS'S,I .17_.+•.....":4 .--. ,...' fr 1 rr 7.77."41 BO 0 ,....,_z_t. Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A i Queuing:N/A I Access location&configuration:N/A Traffic control:MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs: N/A On-site parking needs:N/A Data Sources: CC 2016 AU1R;CC Traffic Counts Base maps:N/A I Prior study reports:N/A 4 Access policy and jurisdiction:N/A Review process:N/A Requirements: Miscellaneous: N/A Page 4 of 6 ....---..\ Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 120 Grace Romanian Church–CU Zoning–TIS–June 2017 Small Scale Study- No Fee X Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1500.00 Methodology Fee$500 X Includes 0 intersections Additional Intersections-$500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and Hurst be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the application. SIGNATURES NDYvu.12v.T✓ebilD0012 Study Preparer—Norman Trebilcock Reviewer(s) Applicant Page 5of6 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 121 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee.Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review,Analysis Review,and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodoloev Review-$500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement,including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s),distribution,assignment.and review of a"Small Scale Study" determination. written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review"-$750 Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:optional field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation.distribution,and assignment,concurrency determination,confirmation of committed improvements,review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of "sufficiency"comments/questions. "Major Study Review"-$1,500 Fee(Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of traffic growth analysis.review of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis.review of site access and circulation,neighborhood traffic intrusion issues,any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates,and preparation and review of up to two rounds of"sufficiency"comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the "Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews" $500 Fee Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 6 of 6 1 �„, I Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I 22 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition (2 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 123 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 • Project Name: Grace Romanian Baptist Church No; Date: 4/262017 City: State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Client Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: ITE-TGM 9th Edition WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR LAND USE SIZE Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 560-Church I 15"' f 69 66 5 S 4 4 Reduction I 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 Pass-by 00 0 D 0 0 r` Non-pass-by 68 68 5 3 4 4 — — Total ___....69._. 5 3 _ 4. _-4.,._.__—_ 68 Total Reduction D 0 Cl 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 Total Pass-by D 0 0 0 0 0 Total Non-pass-by 69 68 5 I 3 4 i 4 l Fee FN,.,0100 .... - PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ANALYSIS NAME: i Weekday 1 LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VA,R IASL E 0. 560-Church 11000 Sq-Feet Grosj,v` 15 Weekday L J Average 69 68 137 LJ 911 PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ANALYSIS NAME: AM Peek Hour } LAND USE INDEPENDENT SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE �I 560-Church q Y v Average �L J 5 3 8 1000 S Feet Grose v 15 Weekday, Hot 0.56 PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH ANALYSIS NAME: l PM Peak Hour i I LAND USE INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SIZE TIME PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL C 560-Church 1000 Sq.Feet Gros 15 L Weekday Peek HoL2 Average �,.u V 4 4 8 —_. 0.55 _ Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 124 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Project Nmne: Grace Romanian Baptist Church-Sunday No: Dare: 41612017 City: StatelProvince: Zip/Postai Code: Country: Client Name: Analysts Name: &Rion: ITE-TiGhl 0th Rites SUNDAY-GENERATOR LAND USE SIZE Entry SEE 560-church 92 91 Reduction 0 0 Interne! 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 Non-pass-by 92 91 560-Church-1 161i, 89 92 Reduction 0 0 Internal 0 0 Pass-by 0 0 Non-pens-by 99 92 PROJECT NAME: GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH-SUNDAY ANALYSIS NAME C Sunday--Generat IAND USE or INDEPENDENT TIME HI SIZE PERIOD METHOD ENTRY EXIT TOTAL VARIABLE _., ----. C.,, 560-Church I Seats kpe 300 Sunday,Peak Hour Ell Average 92 91 183 _ ... _ (.,.., 560-Church-1 T003TciTeeit Gros 1_ F ,.n, Average .5 S7u'r7dt7"---y,Peak Hou L-filli 1289 92 181 .04 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 125 Grace Romanian Church—CU Zoning—TIS—June 2017 Appendix D: Turning Movement Exhibits (2 Sheets) Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 26 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 ---. 1,;111 li -„,... c F00-, 0 ''.0 1-10. < 1.,....... 1.4; We-- NV >7( < -.0- _0 o..., IA w 1.-- — LU Z ! 0-- H ta. _...1 En 1 Ce ;1---- w if ' .., , w z c.,„ . i "I Li °•••r.`i; 0 wi 0 .... ---.,r, Li j co I 1 n 0 LL ? .- ,, _ ,?.• !' s-1:3A-a 00,E, F„..,..•, ---c--.:, sz___...,_ _. _1–--1, , i - , / r '„----CD ......,v,' '.'1 \\•.,‘-,- '.•,,..r,'''''"o' :- •""'' I \ • jil ‘., \\T.. • . . - R ill '• \ \)`. \'' 1 s \ , , .1i\ , . „I - •• ' -- \. • •' \ . - - ' 81213SaNd 32:10V 69L'a I' ' F.,7 F'•°4 ° ;IL ' r9 11114 r-,.i laTti:'"1 I I ..:' T.' C.1k 1 I -,—m—i---l—i-J-'. / _ ,.a ......., ,- 1 t,,, -- b- • - r• 12 Zrz¢ 1 ,;'''''''„Z:,,:'.; -,:' 11.11 s; 'e• I ,i.. i , ‘ ,I, • ',',,/ .-, • --V' ' "." 77- - . •7- • I- 7, ,,,- . ,- - . 1.00.11.FEF ' "..,... ',.__I ',,.//',:_/ " ".. r.r//'' • , • . / I "' . .. i 7j1141-1 ,84.33 —1—' 1 1E4' 0' 'l' 0 II t'i 0 ., — 1_ 3-in Lu,e a 0 s I c_-f h" --v. 7 ___ w Li-Etz.o ntreN-4._ ...H t- il ,' li-7- ---r- ,! t5=0=3 cr E fr- .5 ',`": Z uj.S=T3,11.• 11;3 g. (.- --1 _100),„i0,--.1,111, cc DJ It ti<coP-R,,,Luin q . : [u.i&cr 5 '''°8 ,:i -4 . 0<0 2 if_01 u. co - l .000c ° ° t ) I • - . . ...., . . . ,•. , . . . . . . I ,••••I III U . 1 . 1 I it_.---1' - --*..,. I ri F '',.,. --4, -11 i ? - - . I tS .. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page 127 Grace Romanian Church-CU Zoning-TIS-June 2017 411i F.' z a- Z a D z >-• z 0 . CC Ca D co D (i) CC 0 1- 1— H i CO p I..... Z Z 0 0 LU a. - — tti 2 --) LL1 0 > ........ • co D0 ct -t• /4* .' .__ . ______ , ;-- . 1 _ '-' .• =•.,..., 's'CIA-19 1:13 — Inc,-,m a,..4,-1 94.1 - _ , t--- -- ' 7•.' - !------ ! -2 7+: 1 \71',-----, ' TE: t 0-73 , I ----,t- '. — ---- 1'..-... T L 5 - IJ •,:f," 111 C \\.,\ , --aA-bk.3\S3131:1.3210V 66E0 i li : I I ' \ , I ' V'? - 8 --,.->' \ I . I 1 I 1 I 1 'N' (-' r'''') III'I jg g. II ''" --.. — - — - 71/410)7,.Ui 1 igt it 7 Ill 1 '-'-' ' /i"zt 2 U-1 1 i ,1 a',.,,,-1- -, - ,-- - //".1 Z(DLL/I -, ", I iil r co _ _ ,IL:Iri!::/_if:- -J-/ / z,igl, //,7-' - :/' ,:.] -,_, t,f c..7)__ ' -, 1 ,•.',: 1 i.,,Z NI. — 1 Ct, /._, r, T‹ rc ' 'Ai / ' ,4„.._ ,-/ /,/,,.....4 / J./ ;,- to—' I ' jr..... . .. . .. , .. .-- -,- -,! , , . , Pi .e•33 L. 16A - RI V) 0 ' a UJ , inz 0,,z5 CO LU> i'/.1 TSL. 2=PcLrezROco . . uj LI re.I-K _,..._,_ .-.1 z Lu ,3,..-.•. , t, , •, = co LU it ,1 i. 1Wre-'Cla(5)(.30 ,..,CC,..,...7 •-<0 -. _ u) - ) • -. ' ' . . • • 1 z '...i I' l *ail U II 'I IU II i 1 U I . II I ...LI 1 i \L - -...... -.. , , 1 I i I,. . .L.____/ .,____iI - :t I—1.4"7' ' .' - ---'-'''sr ' —r-- -- ' -,:to.'; i k.6 .0.' c,, .,--t; r pWE ...._ Trebilcock Consulting Solutions,PA Page I 28 pAviasoni EXHIBIT"R" COMPARATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)ANALYSIS The proposed development known as Grace Romanian Baptist Church is a ±6.25-acre property located in Section 11, Township 49 South, and Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is bound by Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951) to the south, 15t Avenue Southwest to the west, Weber Boulevard South to the north, and Golden Gate Boulevard to the east. The subject property is currently zoned as Estates.The subject development consists of two properties to be combined with access points on Weber Boulevard South, Golden Gate Boulevard, and 1st Avenue South. For this analysis, the site will be conceptually developed to the maximum standards using the current project zoning and the proposed zoning amendment. The currently zoned lots consist of the following residential uses at build-out: Single Family Residence (1,201—2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Single Family Residence(1,201—2,250 sf) 2,250 sf Total: 4,500 sf The newly proposed Development (proposed zoning amendment) consists of the following at build-out: 'Church 300 seats Total: 300 seats The Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan establishes Levels of Service for the following: Arterial and Collector Roads Surface Water Management Systems Potable Water Systems Sanitary Sewer Systems Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Parks and Recreation Facilities Public School Facilities Each of the areas will be examined for the proposed developments in this summary report. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAVIDSQN Arterial and Collector Roads Significantly impacted roadways are identified by the proposed highest peak hour trip generation (net new traffic) and is compared with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2016 Annual Update Inventory Report,the peak hour for the project's adjacent roadway network is PM. Therefore,the PM Peak Hour Trips were calculated using gross square footage for the proposed GPMA (Church at 15,000sf) and dwelling unit for the current zoning (Single Family Residential at 2 units) as this represents highest and best use scenario. Table 1-Project Trip Generation (Net New)—Average Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips Development Enter Exit Total Proposed GMPA 4 4 8 (Total non-Pass-By Trips) Current Zoning 1 1 2 (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) Proposed Net New Traffic (Total Non-Pass-By Trips) 3 3 6 Net Increase/(Net Decrease) Based on the roadway network link analysis result, the proposed development at build-out is not a significant or adverse traffic generator for the existing roadway traffic at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development generated trips without adversely affecting the adjacent roadway network level of service. Surface Water Management Systems Currently,the neighboring sites are developed with single family homes and not permitted with an agency for storm water management. General development will warrant an environmental resource permit (ERP) through South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The District's requirement for development is to attenuate 1.5 inches over the entire site during a 25-year, 3-day storm event prior to discharging offsite. The post-development discharge rate for this project allows 0.15 cfs/acre. These are minimum requirements despite the type of development proposed; therefore, neither project will pose a significant or adverse effect on the overall storm water management system. Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Currently, the site contains a vacated house with all utilities privately owned and maintained. The proposed non-residential site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAVIDSON ENGl;l EE EPG Per Policy 1.5 of the Capital Improvement Element section of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the potable water system level-of-service is based on population growth. The proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth;therefore,the proposed use will have no impact on the potable water facility's capacity. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Solid waste is provided by Waste Management, a private contract provider. Commercial accounts are charged by the service provider directly with rates set by the Board of County Commissioners through contract negotiation with the provider. Parks and Recreation Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Parks and Recreation Facilities. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Public School Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Public School Facilities. The use will not impact school attendance. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by either of the proposed build-outs. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 DAVIDSON Fire and EMS Facilities The proposed build-out will have no measurable impact on Fire and EMS Facilities. It should be assumed that newer buildings will be constructed to current NFPA and building code standards which may reduce the likelihood of related calls. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out conditions. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict Exhibit"R"-Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com July,2017 EXH I BIT Go ler CoRnty Public Utilities . ment Engineering & Project ManagementMsiOn June 16, 2017 VIA: E- AIL Jessica Harrelson Jessica@davidsonengineering.com Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Water and Wastewater Service Availability Project: Grace Romanian Church Parcel #: 36760800006, 36760720005 Dear Jessica: The subject project is within the Collier County Water-Sewer District's (CCWSD) water and wastewater service area, but wastewater service is not readily available to the project. Water service is readily available to the project via an existing 36" RCP water main along the east side of Weber Blvd S. Potable water is available for domestic use,fire protection, and irrigation, subject to the provisions of LDC 4.03.08 C,the Collier County Irrigation Ordinance (2015-27), and other applicable rules and regulations. Connection to the CCWSD's water distribution system will be permitted only after the GMD Development Review Division's approval of hydraulic calculations prepared by the Developer's Engineer of Record in accordance with the Design Criteria found in Section 1 of the Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities Standards Manual. Source pressure assumptions for water distribution system design are prescribed in the Design Criteria. If you have any questions, you may contact me at (239) 252-1037 or EricFey@colliergov.net. Respe5tfylly, 'c Fey, P.E., Sent r Project Manager CC: Steve Messner, Division Director—Water, PUD/WD; Beth Johnssen, Division Director— Wastewater, PUD/WWD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD Public Utilities Engineering&Project Management Division e 3339 Tamiami Trait East,Suite 303 a Naples,Florida 34112-5361•239-252-4285 a FAX 239-252-5378 r::::,,,,.,, e pAVIDSCN.1 EXHIBIT "S" UTILITY STATEMENT The proposed site will connect to the existing 36-inch Collier County watermain within Weber Boulevard to provide fire and potable water utilities to the site. The property will provide privately owned and maintained sanitary sewer. i , ---L.t 1 ,-z > no>Fr FA F--"---i- _ _ _ Golden Gale BLVD W ;+ £ . 'y' _ ' -+ -�"' 4x'tx artF'�w1dr: ir fes. ; 4 . ,-,-,---1. ..;LI, s. l''''''' : -/4E,4Pli ,t‘', , ' ,,•.'' If-C1'--",1; '''' ,,,t1 ..;,..:1-4,, ‘.-- ,l! - 4,„4 i 1,7?,01.- ' ' 1 'I 4 :.'", ,,,,,t,.‘,'-', r,-- ,- ,,...., ..44-.--. ,',,t, ,,,,.,,..,,,..,:-.4-# ' 4.- ---,..-.-- . i f- -; -rw, - 1 ..: . 7 1" .7*,-„ ,',,i;,:,,"..;:.,- , ..;-... _ ,,,,/ r -- .i..,tt'-)',1 & ''` —1--°-,-; -sitw4.-t- i - A;p '--.,7. � `b� m _ ^a '*4-'4:77, t : { a@t ace _f Alit I. - ' ' --4),—M„ W $ $N. 3 , � S S t — -, s fit. L ' .1T`` ' y -: ` 1stAVE 5W__ • d l - - .r - '- t .1,-..,-,-.- , ` .. ,� . l t � <`s# , "", i.y- - *r.wn -..,..;:i;,,as COLLIER COUNTY UTILITIES—GIS EXHIBIT - Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAVIDSON EW lt.*CF.lt�t_- Narrative & Justification of the Proposed GMPA Amendment EXHIBIT "T" The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. 163.3187 Process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: Response: The property for the proposed amendment is±6.25 acres in size. (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. Response: The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small-scale amendments adopted by Collier County does not exceed 120 acres. (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However,text changes that relate directly to,and are adopted simultaneously with,the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. Response: The proposed amendment involves a text change that is directly related to a request for the adoption of a small scale future land use map amendment. (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). Response: The subject property is not in an area of critical state concern. (2) Small-scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAPI©SON Response: Acknowledged. (3) If the small-scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal,state,and local environmental permit requirements are met. Response: The proposed small scale development does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity. (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. Response: Acknowledged. (5)(a) Any affected person may file a petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to ss. 120.569 and 120.57 to request a hearing to challenge the compliance of a small scale development amendment with this act within 30 days following the local government's adoption of the amendment and shall serve a copy of the petition on the local government. An administrative law judge shall hold a hearing in the affected jurisdiction not less than 30 days nor more than 60 days following the filing of a petition and the assignment of an administrative law judge.The parties to a hearing held pursuant to this subsection shall be the petitioner,the local government, and any intervenor. In the proceeding,the plan amendment shall be determined to be in compliance if the local government's determination that the small scale development amendment is in compliance is fairly debatable. The state land planning agency may not intervene in any proceeding initiated pursuant to this section. Response: Acknowledged. (b)1. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found not in compliance, the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the administrative law judge recommends that the small scale development amendment be found in compliance,the administrative law judge shall submit the recommended order to the state land planning agency. Response: Acknowledged. 2. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is not in compliance, the agency shall submit, within 30 days following its receipt,the recommended order to the Administration Commission for final agency action. If the state land planning agency determines that the plan amendment is in compliance, the agency shall enter a final order within 30 days following its receipt of the recommended order. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com jriTrt DAVIDSON CWGCL I..._.. Narrative & Justification of the Proposed GMPA Amendment EXHIBIT "T" The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. The subject property consists of± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. 163.3187 Process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment. (1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: Response: The property for the proposed amendment is±6.25 acres in size. (b) The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small scale development amendments adopted by the local government does not exceed a maximum of 120 acres in a calendar year. Response: The cumulative annual effect of the acreage for all small-scale amendments adopted by Collier County does not exceed 120 acres. (c) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government's comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However,text changes that relate directly to,and are adopted simultaneously with,the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. Response: The proposed amendment involves a text change that is directly related to a request for the adoption of a small scale future land use map amendment. (d) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). Response: The subject property is not in an area of critical state concern. (2) Small-scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com DAVIDSON .NC Nc[LiNG Response: Acknowledged. (c) Small scale development amendments may not become effective until 31 days after adoption. If challenged within 30 days after adoption, small scale development amendments may not become effective until the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission, respectively, issues a final order determining that the adopted small scale development amendment is in compliance. Response: Acknowledged. (d) In all challenges under this subsection, when a determination of compliance as defined in s. 163.3184(1)(b) is made, consideration shall be given to the plan amendment as a whole and whether the plan amendment furthers the intent of this part Response: Acknowledged. Policy 5.3: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map; requiring that any changes to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary; and, encouraging the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural designated area, which will better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of agriculture and other predominantly rural land uses,and provide for cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Response:The proposed SSGMPA does not contribute to urban sprawl. The subject property is within the existing urban service area and will not require any special or additional costs to provide necessary services. The property has been contemplated for residential and limited non-residential conditional uses per the existing zoning and future land use. The proposed addition of a religious facility land use (through addition to the Conditional Use Subdistrict) will place no greater burden on community facilities than did prior uses of the property. Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to,the surrounding land uses,subject to meeting the compatibility criteria of the Land Development Code(Ordinance 91-102,adopted October 30, 1991,as amended. Response:The subject property,and its potential land use,shall be compatible with and complimentary to its surrounding land uses. The proposed Conditional Use Subdistrict is bordered to the north, east south and west by residential land uses and zoning opposite existing right-of-ways. Collier Boulevard,Golden Gate Boulevard, Weber Road and 1st Avenue SW all directly border the subject property. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com 4 DkVIasora Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Response:The proposed SSGMPA will be a companion petition to a conditional use application that will continue to provide appropriate connections and interconnections. Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict July,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG\PlanninglGIS12017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-ATTACHMENT H(HALF-MILE PLANNING COMM.).mxd LEGEND N L MN IDATA&ANALYSIS ® W�i�E rn GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT r PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES S IUrban Estates L .Rural Estates 1 1 ,4 � 9 corkscrew crew 1 ' 44 1 – fl -` . I _.r�. IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 • IMMOKALEE RDICR-846 , , • P I 1 1� rth Naples > l ® � 12 Urban Estates I.i' 0 11 Ii 1 -® l .., VANDERBILT BEACH RD. 1 I 1 r 1 , EII __ * 1 m z �., GOLDEN ATE BLVD 1 o... _ __ Rural Estates r 131j _ _ k I— I , wl W �__ PINE RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD Ce I co i a P ® GREEN BLVD .. . — 16TH AVE,SW , co (� _ o a 1. I s i Q rill- T�� `I f ) 2 Centr I Naples I� a 3 eIr+e. o m r- -.-.r Q ra y ti� ,,,;.4/4.,.2- I � } it ^_es m 6_ - ....,e-.4,44-,\..,,..,1 '�i ILA- ', CR 66 GOL'�EN GATE- /,--`-- - 1 y Is — 0 0.25 0.5 RCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2016) SMILES <t DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USE SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA ' _ NAPLES, FL 34104 ND DAVS®N PHONE: 239-434-6060 ATTACHMENT U: PLANNING COMMUNITIES Z:\Active ProjectsVG\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG1Planning1GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT U(PLANNING COMM.).mxd NI 4' LEGEND W"=:6- E in 1DATA&ANALYSIS AREA CM SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES I S' on North Naples I ME Urban Estates I Central Naples I Golden Gate 1 Rural Estates 1 Corkscrew 4..,.3.6.4=a' 9 Cogkscrew I II 1 I 1 1 1 1 IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 % IMMOKAL EE RD/CR 846 - 1 North Napliw 1 § ':E+� S ,+its wcM1„ fl4,£t q;�NH.,a ' ""xjan Q 12 Urban ES tes 1) VANDERBILT BEACH RD. Karl Estates r, GOLDEN GAT BLVD Q F co gla z Q� C7 w p WCt Ct co PINE RIDGE RD .. WHITE BLVD i w � c7 l J I( r ED 9 ) ' ' Lu '73 cc Oco I Ni 16THAVE.SW 0 > GREEN BLVD °. Ni —? m I Q 3 Golden Gate 1 l 0 01 2 2 Central a _les m MILES SOURCES'•COLLIERCOUNTY;'GEOGRAP.HIC,NFORMAT(ONISYSTEMS(2017)1 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH , 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT U: PLANNING COMMUNITIES ENGINEERING ,e CMS=MI�1..®®SP`Z ®®® ®MIS®�V= LEGEND &_,DATA&ANALYSIS AREA ` r. { GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES n _ FLUE DISTRICTS/SUBDISTRICTS '" AG-AGRICULTURAL C-CONSERVATION EM CD-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT 1 ES-ESTATES Mil MUA-MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTERS1 RFN-RURAL FRINGE(NEUTRAL) i RFR-RURAL FRINGE(RECEIVING) I I RFS-RURAL FRINGE(SENDING) i I I UR-URBAN RESIDENTIAL VANDERBILT/951 COMMERCIAL 1 % 1MMOKRLEE RD/CR 846 _ O . 4 �I -J. I u 1 `- i'1 \Cli 11 ct o _�� ' ' ' :7,'",:i440',i--,1142itifilr,i',"i'-t: ,"i;.-;,,;.:,;-'. '':,.*AR-61 , , �i - ; VANDERBILT BEACH RDS co 1 HI I m r Z - GOLDEN GATE BLVD $ f i 1 g QOy 1 I 114 �� r� PINE`RIDGE`RD WHITE BLVD i e;..-..g �� s y ) I O : Ps p' lex 1 GREEN BLVD LLI , .1 z PI 16TH AVE SW O ____,..,j,Y 1 Qm I � ` b _ Jg ar° � ' k : �" J 1 , _ O I w.4. 1 1-- I- 1 I 02 �. ' w..._ _ N IT i 1 .. II „-,. . . �" 'moi w I" ;CR 886/GOLDEN`GATE' F Ac`% , $if 1 W_44- E ligl < LI Q S SNn��►Ol01P MILES " \1 SOURCES:COLLIER OUNTYY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH 4365 RADIOROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES,FL 34704 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE:239-434-6060 EXHIBIT V: FUTURE LAND USE T1 ISUBJECTSITEI ZONING MAP: GGE22 CCs' EXHIBIT W ----12— i _- - - wucn_,,6 11`1F r _ DIXDCN CATL:. 6D 12 1n AVENUE SW07x6,07 « E "1 16 15 17 le 47 21 so 70 23 e Ws 111 112 . Ile 14 P° 14 ,° . n . 33 110 In 63 13 30 35 W 61 22 67 le 22 24 SD 110 115 we 12 12 21 44 53 es5 „84 117 LOT x 1.021 Stn AVENUE SW „ a « W 773 0p6 151 n• 5 ,01 65.. 65. n. U4 U5 : E In 320 39 us 42 54 el ea n 54 113 tea 129 In 123 2 g 24 41 i 66 73 El stit 5g . En fa 37 44 53 00 29 76 w 22 WI 114i 117 E E _ ° n72 " o 1 SIN AW NUE SW 1 W s . n p 401 In ' 23 96 30 42 65 58 n 74 of 20 123 100 110 122 . BB 30 15 68 23 100 125 ° V TM AVENUE,SM a . a 66 n w n I. 127 WI 1,b_ . u . m n . . Iw ,. ,m 11 1 . .n W . w n m sl 12 UNITS co., 4 5 :JO 1'6 • WM.ID MD.313115O Ere REFEBENCE BY 020114.41422 NO.0,41 Or _&4411ii4i ' WE COMM W COLDIK 85031102.MOWED 2.1115 W.20.. SnN INDEX -S.P7A^$.9egg IRUMS "6E "' "° % s;} aa¢ 6,m, UMW COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA °.. °n,• ° a 2;aza4.4gaa�# 6. 07...66 617253. g;858 CZEB COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION „d;;dA Jmd ib TWP 466 RNG 26E SEC(S)11&12 6.28 MAP NUMBER: n „ • 5 ' I. GGE22 Z:1Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 9511DWG\PIanning\GIS\2017-04-24 GR SSGMPA-EXHIBIT U(PLANNING COMM.).mxd LEGEND *--.09:"'=- in(DATA&ANALYSIS AREA ,, EM SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES t S4 North Naples Urban Estates ,�. „„: Central Naples Golden Gate 1® ;, Rural Estates l Corkscrew 9 Co kscrew M E I I I I IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 ® IMMOKALEE RD/CR 846 I I ort Napl 1 ® j 0 DO 12 Urban Estates t ;,7.'44-12-1 I .P VANDERBILT BEACH RD. I , ; 8 oral Estates 1 C3 _,-,,, ' ' '. i I 1 i 1 GOLDEN GATBL/D } CO I u- z Q x a £ -71 ; t �� O ( I W r[ 01 PINE RIDGE RD WHITE BLVD - U ix i IAz - M O� I O GREEN BLVD O ` 16 TH AVE.SW CO 0J 0 z 1: m i , 1 a 3Golden Gate 0 1 2 Central Napless m 2 MILES SOURCES:,COL'LIER(COUNTY'G_EOGRA_P.HIC, FORMATIONISYSTEMS}(2O17)1 1 ==== ===® =®ag..in=maszn®rem========= WI LEGEND , L(DATA&ANALYSIS AREA GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT PROPERTY:6.25 ACRES FLUE DISTRICTSISUBDISTRICTS Vim;AG-AGRICULTURAL F. _ C-CONSERVATION L'il CD-COMMERCIAL DISTRICT I ES-ESTATES MUA-MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTERS i V.,,,,-, RFN-RURAL FRINGE(NEUTRAL) RFR-RURAL FRINGE(RECEIVING) I ?RFS-RURAL FRINGE(SENDING) UR-URBAN RESIDENTIAL I ,` r VANDERBILT/951 COMMERCIAL „„„.i...,,EE RDICR 846 _. �_ �L ,.... _..,O , , , . .... Q7 a If \ ' �� ' VANDERBILT BEACH RD. LI, - ' H 1 i i i co Q Ea I § Z'' GOLDEN GATE BLVD ' ( o� I I I 1.4Z -pl 6`9 PINE`RIDGE'RD WHITE BLVD VD Iy O � �, _ , i w ( I h o 1 I } ii co n ,� # I� , o GREEN BLVD """`"' ix w . �" IN 16TH AVE.SW oul F. tirj 1-••,,w ,....,,,' co _7 t ---,V.:$'. 1; tJ _=========== = ; " ,,,. m 177 f'1,-,-;------- 4 t : '1-1- _ I-. N e , GC # m - ,�`` -. 1 ._ s 9 w�/-,� , R 886/GOLDEN`GATE < Pl' � � S -I Care —4 A1S �r �P 0 1 2MILES I 4 A/n�NMlOe 1 �'� SOURCES:COLLIER(COUNTY,GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION'SYSTEMS,(2017)% 1 Im v_ DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH NAPLES, L 334-,,SUITE 201 CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT SSGMPA DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT V: FUTURE LAND USE ENGINEERING 1'\ !SUBJECT SITE! ZONING MAP: GGE22 2 1 EXHIBIT W j �! .RIF 9W,cvnRu :17r.' � _ 6gDCN Gx BdNLYARR ,Y ,, » m » . . . , op,... u » r » » m E m u ,n AVE1�E s« 111 111 111 114 14 Po 14 ,. » » m m 110 111 12 11 3 I3m 2 UV J\ 3RD AVENUE SW „i a » » ,. m 107 "3 • o65 v » U g U4 5 m N, 1< ,,. » 1 o mao a as » ., n » n a m too o ,» m a g a. 41 6 .. 73 ITI I6. >m ,: $ 121 22 37 44 62 20 0 76 33 e2 NA las 117 I24 5.AVENUE SW o • 30 se 71 • ® ,u ` 0 A ill sa 72 21 10 123 ' v 791 A�4MIE,SW a » a m n • • 1• IV lb 1•I' 1 w a » a s m n n w » ,a ,» m 11 L ' a v u ® » n is ,_I UNITS 4 Cf£27 5 105 15 TO CENT.1110 105 15 A R.127115 0071012731010 ATLAS _& RUM.,o 37 REFERENCE Err ORDINANCE No ,or 0141flii i ra CLOT Rm,Eh PLR:.00270 LE ai 200 AiiiiiI,IE i &MOMN"mmt .a ., g qMMyy=ii Aqi',{ e* a....1M COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ragra rat or ii Ral.h 64§ga COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION ,aaoe wMa ' ,v a 1 i.A?dbA JRAAb MED aux 7µp 496 RNG 26E SEG(S)11&12 ii y 1.d {J' MAP NUMBER: m -- o Soo GGE22 • ZONING MAP: GGE20 GGE19 GGE19 y._ I. - 1st • . . . - . . 6 i L.r nwE.E SY III iiiii ii ' = „ „ n„, .,,.,.9E99iv, U32 i NLLN. 99., 222222 ` aaa � .. w., EI .. E . ., ,., ,,, u :.I"i n.AVENUE PA w. w 3. 9 „ • ',AMMO 11009 99.111 aa I, BY..N9REt9NE ,�+� ., „ ., . ., "' J o 9 10 9 GGE28 GLEN THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A PAGE OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS REFERRED TO AND ADOPTED SUBDIVISON INDEX Z BY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO.04-41 OF THE 2qq,e : COUNTY OF COLLIER,FLORIDA.ADOPTED JUNE 22.2004. COWER COUNTY,FLORIDA o :9 o r 1S¢: AS AMENDED BY THE ZONING NOTES AND SUBDIVISION ,r„r„ "x.e-=; INDEX REFERENCED HEREON. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION .. enoum.,.�.. « w ,'04R$g'- amanita OM II ... ::222�.: BY CHAIRMAN TWP 49S RNG 26E SEC(S)B&10 `6a'$S4i ATTEST CLERK I i I I MAP NUMBER: o,.....9.ann n B .. GGE20 4/2412017 • MSS 316365 ZONING MAP: GGE21 ` ; , VANDEPEILT BEADII ROAD (ARA RNFSNLLE RD) I I I 2 r',` ,. ,`a a', « w e. a .Mt W w n n. i n 1 if- m,w L ', „ 1 n m w W 112 53 i i i m w m i m a m m III I. ``` T1N AVENUE IW ! ' 111 a « n ., 47 a m w w ne na +a f :, u ,. a 1w „ V\\aETm-i g `` u a « n 61 ,n ,u n I'. 5M LVENUE 0 . i I " „ be ---,11-- ,e sm.' a m / U6 a ,. 3 r ,w 1w V r « E8 5., N n m w 0 m m 4 10 n, ,N m• W E . a En 33 ,. \ B'mi` i Se a N n m 03 10 MD AVENUE NW `'N. e . 27 a w a PI 1m 123 W . a a m n m w IPS 1ST AVENUE N ,, a m « 1 - UU,ne,.,.a wP,1,:.,w, w 2 , UNITS cOWEN CA`C BOUM.%) 3 Ja J 6 n.B0 TO 00111-4 10103 A 100 Cr 1UE wNaN..mWc 4.11-. 201350TO 1 MONO,B.N EMPIN2 Br elWWN1¢Ne.a-++r ME mUNn n COLLINS nnwA MCP.AA[u mo. INDICATES SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY li AP SUBDIN61pN 110E. 3. tow Pa PB ,,,,� P. P. sI a. nWErN COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1., B § COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 412011 921200. m .. i d TVP 495 RNG 26E SEC(5)1&2 Asst CMS EscPI MAP NUMBER: N _.,..----_ .. GGE21 DAVIDSON ..i lN6.F:f eJ EXHIBIT "X" DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST PROPERTY OWNER: "Grace" Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. PERCENTAGE OF OWNERSHIP: 100% REGISTERED AGENTS: • Adrian Roman—President/Secretary • Adrian Ungureanu—Director • Gheorghe Lup—Director • Mihai Simut—Director • Daniel Pop—Director • Vasile Valean—Director • Vasile Brisc—Treasurer/Director Grace Romanian Church-SSGMPA Conditional Uses Subdistrict May,2017 www.davidsonengineering.com ❑❑ECIA❑ E❑CE❑❑ION❑ ❑O CON❑I❑IONA❑ U❑E ❑OCA❑ION CRI❑ERIA ❑ GRACE ROMANIAN ❑A❑DID❑CHURCH COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD O 07 J J O LEGEND j/ CONDITIONAL USES PREPARED BY:GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION 0 250 500 1000 SUBDISTRICT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE:4117 FILE: SCALE IN FEET ADOPTED:XX,XX,2017 BY ORDINANCE NO.2017-XX(CP-2017-0 NIM INFORMATION AFFIDAVIT F COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, at least 15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner's list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance (Signature of Applicant) State of Florida County of Collier 1 The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this Vi day of x} 2017 by , who is personally known to me or who has produced as identification. , 1 i f (Signature of otary Public) 6V (Notary Seal) Printed Name of otary or* JESSICA HARRELSON p e ra Notary Public-State of Florida COMMissiun#FF 954332 My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 vof ;`o d through National Notary Assn. CU- P120160002577 SSGMPA- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 'N'apirs Battu News NapiesNe _Acorn Published Daily Naples,FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News,a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida;distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida;that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed.Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na- ples,in said Collier County,Florida,and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County,Florida,for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.# DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 1764054 MEETING OCT 11 MEETING OCT 11 Pub Dates September 26, 2017 (Sign/?/7t&t ure of affiant) KAROLEKANGAS . �� Notary Pudlc-Rate ofFtodda Sworn to and subscribed before me Commission lGG126041 This October 04,2017MyComm'6iplres1ul29,2011 '.. landed t rough MrdMmgAtm qoymer (Signature of affiant) ACOSTA, ROMO CARLOS ALBERTO AJITHKUMAR,ELEZABETH S AMBROSE,GAYLE L DORIS A ACOSTA 510 13TH ST NW 3815 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W X85 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34120---5027 NAPLES, FL 34120---3040 LES, FL 34119--2929 BAZHAW, BRENDA K BORRELLI,JOHN R BROUILLARD,JOHN J&ERIN L 3830 1ST AVE NW 201 WEBER BLVD S 13535 COLLIER BLVD NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 NAPLES, FL 34119---2929 BUKOWSKI,THADDEUS A BUKOWSKI,WANDA CLEM,ANDREW&SHAWN 71 WEBER BLVD N VINCENTA BUKOWSKI EST 4110 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 8380 WHISPER TRACE LN#J105 NAPLES,FL 34119---2635 NAPLES, FL 34114---0000 COLLIER CNTY CORDER, MICHAEL A&LAUREN K D'AGOSTINI, DOMINICK J C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3821 3RD AVE SW MARTHA L D'AGOSTINI 3335 TAMIAMI TR E,STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34117---3027 220 PARK AVE NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 SOUTH PLAINFIELD, NJ 07080---0000 DORTA,CHARLES MANUEL FERREIRA,OSCAR F&ADELA GARGIULO SR,JEFFREY DEWEY JENNIFER DORTA OSCAR C FERREIRA VALERIE BOYD 81 WEBER BLVD S 6000 COLLINS AVE#527 4055 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3037 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 ILDEN SR, BILLY M&TERESA W GRACE ROMANIAN BAPTIST CHURCH HA,CUC 4040 1ST AVE SW OF NAPLES INC 20 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34119---2600 6017 PINE RIDGE ROAD#84 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 HALLOCK,SUSAN C HENRY,JEFF HICKEY, BRENDAN F 3960 1ST AVE NW 161 WEBER BLVD S 3870 1ST AVE NW NAPLES,FL 34119---2612 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---2714 J D&R L EDIE JOINT REV TRUST JORDAN,WILLIAM S JOSE,ANU 13555 COLLIER BLVD 4111 1ST AVE SW JULIA JOY NAPLES, FL 34119---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2640 100 TRAPHILL DR MORRISVILLE, NC 27560---0000 KEEFER, DAVID KELLY TR, RENATE S KENNEY,JOHN&STEPHANIE DEEATRA MARTIN-KEEFER RENATE S KELLY REV TRUST 4110 1ST AVE SW 3898 1ST AVE SW UTD 8/06 NAPLES,FL 34119---2641 NAPLES, FL 34117---3000 291 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3033 KLEIN, RICHARD KYLE LONG, MARIA E LOUISE V TAYLOR REV TRUST "ARV MARTICA KLEIN 3835 1ST AVE SW 627 GORDONIA RD 1 1ST AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---3013 MARZUCCO, MERISHCA MASSARD, RENE J MCCANN,JAMES&BEVERLEY 3791 1ST AVE SW 1460 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 103 4111 3RD AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---3011 NAPLES, FL 34105---3128 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 MILLER TR, PATRICK K MILLER, ROBERT C MOUNTAIN, BRIAN J TERRY B MILLER TR 40 WEBER BLVD N 21 WEBER BLVD N UTD 2/2/99-UTD 2/2/99 NAPLES, FL 34120---3054 NAPLES, FL 34120---3039 210 WEBER BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---3034 ONDERKO, RONALD A&DEBORAH J PAULICH IV,JOHN &DANIELLE PEREZ, HECTOR&JOHANNA 4075 1ST AVE SW 260 WEBER BLVD S 3980 1ST AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---2611 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34119---2612 PIDGEON,STEPHEN ROTH,STANLEY F&RUBY J SEARS,WILLIAM M 3961 1ST AVE NW 190 WEBER BLVD S SONIA E MOLINA NAPLES,FL 34119---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---3036 2 PRESTON ST NORTH BILLERICA, MA 01862---2428 SPILKER,CHRISTIAN&KELLI THOMAS, KEVIN J TOBIAS, DAVID 4035 3RD AVE SW JENNIFER E HITE PO BOX 1236 NAPLES, FL 34119---2935 3830 1ST AVE SW ISLAMORADA, FL 33036---0000 NAPLES, FL 34117---0000 VAN DE WERKEN,GARY Golden Gate Estates 181 WEBER BLVD S Area Civic Association NAPLES, FL 34117---3035 PO Box 990596 Naples, FL 34116 a Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting P VI DSC I www.davidsonengineering.com September 25, 2017 Dear Property Owner, Please be advised that the Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. has filed formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W Da co 1st AVE SW In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, we are holding a Neighborhood Information Meeting to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the request. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida, 34120. Please contact me at (239) 434-6060 ext. 2961, or via e-mail at fred@davidsonengineering.com, if you have any questions regarding the meeting or the proposed project. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment [PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use [PL20160002577], for a ±6.25-acre property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Uses Subdistrict, and permit the required zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility,or place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. r 1 PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W CI J m 1st AVE S W o U J Ca - L CD I s WE VALUE YOUR INPUT The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting, held by Frederick E. Hood, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, Inc. on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m., at the Collier County-Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida,34120. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail to the individuals listed below: Frederick E. Hood,AICP Fred Reischl,AICP Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Davidson Engineering, Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Growth Management 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34104 Phone:239.434.6060 Phone: 239.252.4211 Phone: 239-252-5715 Email: Fred@davidsonengineering.com Email: Fredreischl@colliergov.net Email: Suefaulkner@colliergov.net c Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON www.davidsonengineering.com MEMORANDUM October 23,2017 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Fred Reischl, Principal Planner FROM: Jessica Harrelson,Senior Project Coordinator RE: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU -PL20160002577 NIM Meeting Minutes A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Wednesday, October 11, 2017, at the Collier County - Estates Branch Library, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W., Naples, Florida,34120. The following individuals,associated with the review and presentation of the project,were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Sue Faulkner,Collier County • Fred Reischl, Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting by marking a presentation, reading the following: • Introduction: o Good evening. My name is Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering and I am the land development consultant representing the applicant, Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples, o The applicant is seeking both a Conditional Use and Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment application to be reviewed by Collier County for the development of a church. o Here with me tonight is Jessica Harrelson,the Project Coordinator with Davidson Engineering,and Adrian Roman,the President&Secretary for the Grace Romanian Church. o Fred Reischl and Sue Faulkner, with the Collier County, are also in attendance tonight. They are the reviewing planners for Collier County Growth Management. o Per the land development code,tonight's meeting will be recorded.At the end of my presentation I will be happy to answer any questions you may have regarding the proposed development. 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 DE DAVIDSON ENGt"-IECRING • Size and Location: o The subject parcel is approximately 6.25 acres and is located at the Southeast corner of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevards. • Purpose of the Applications: o Two separate applications I mentioned earlier have been filed with Collier County and are being reviewed by several County departments at the same time. o First, is the application to amend the County's Growth Management Plan. The County's Growth Management Plan describes the vision for the future of the County and helps to regulate where particular land uses are developed, and to ensure that those land uses are consistent with the goals and objectives that the County has in place. As the County grows and continues to develop, the Growth Management Plan gets amended from time to time. o Based on the size of the subject property, we have filed a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment, or SSGMPA. The SSGMPA will amend the future land use zoning of the subject property from Estates Mixed Use District- Residential Estates Subdistrict,to the Conditional Use Subdistrict, per the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. o The Estates Zoning District permits churches as a Conditional Use,therefore a second application, identifying all the required elements for a conditional use request, per the County's Land Development Code, has been filed. This application will also provide more specific details and conditions of approval for the subject property. Examples of conditions can be handled with the Conditional Use request are specific to setbacks, building height limitations, landscape buffers, etc. o The approval of both applications will allow the proposed church to be consistent with both the Collier County's Land Development Code and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan's vision for the future. • Details of the MCP o As you can see from the proposed master plan, the applicant is seeking to locate a sanctuary as the only principal building on the property with an accessory recreation field to the south. o The proposed sanctuary and accessory field have been designed and placed as close to the Collier Boulevard right-of-way to provide the most distance from adjacent homes to the east and south. o The building pad is bordered by parking and a circulation drive. o Additionally,to provide the most amount of screening from the adjacent homes,we have placed the property's proposed water management and preserve areas along the eastern portion of the property. DAVIDSON o N G IN T, ttINC o The remaining property boundaries will be subject to the County's landscape buffer screening requirements between residential and non-residential land uses. o The means of ingress and egress to the property will be along Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South. o Per coordination with County transportation staff, these are the two access locations that have been requested. o We held an informal NIM about a year ago to gauge the community's feelings about the proposed project. o At that time,the concept plan was slightly different with one more access point to the south along 1st Avenue SW. o Since then,the applications have been reviewed by Collier County and we were asked to remove that access point. o While the application is still in review,additional changes can be made based on the feedback we receive from you all and from Collier County staff. o Although this layout looks official,this is not an approved plan yet.We still must finish our review with Collier County before moving forward. The following concerns were stated and questions were asked: 1. Concerns with the additional traffic along Weber Blvd,with also making the point that there is a nearby park, two existing churches and elementary school in the area. 2. County not willing to install traffic calming devices along Weber Blvd. 3. Why can't a bridge be constructed off CR 951(Collier Blvd)to the site, instead of accessing the property off the residential streets? - Fred Hood replied that this was something that could be considered, but the direction of County Transportation, regarding access points to the site, was followed. 4. What are the trip counts, hours of operation? How many accessory uses/buildings? - Fred Hood replied the design of the site is for a maximum 300-seat sanctuary to house the applicant's congregation only, with no plans for additional services or to lease out the church to other congregations. Fred noted that the recreational field could be open for the enjoyment of the public's use and was something that the church was considering offering the community. He also stated that there were no additional accessory uses being considered and the Conditional Use application was to allow for the church-use only. i IA d1.' DAVIDSON Erd<,EN Lt 8144 5. Concerns of outside services,such as child care and alcoholic counseling services. - Fred stated the outside services brought up were not being considered, and would require a separate application to be filed. 6. The applicant then spoke about the congregation, and why they chose the Estates location. 7. An attendee then spoke in support of the church. 8. Is a PUD being sought? - Fred replied that no, a PUD was not being considered and explained the Conditional Use. 9. When are the services? - Fred and the applicant replied with the services days/times. 10. What is the traffic count? - Fred replied that the Sunday peak-hour was 183 trips. 11. Discussions of traffic, ingress &egress are held. 12. Building heights? - Fred stated the site would conform to the current development standards& went over height and setbacks. 13. Are dark skies proposed? - Fred replied that was something the church would look into and take into consideration. 14. Is there the possibility for the church to expand on this parcel? - Fred went over the required open space,storm water,parking areas, etc.for the site. 15. More discussions regarding traffic, ingress &egress continued. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 6:13p.m. End of memo. 12D Tuesday,September 26,2017cp�aaples Daily News .7_,-u'^ii??4,'i. -TA- ' `mss I ` , !x..- P I tJ la .a;,,u,.� P a lbn FORMULAWE BYAnCyARSngTUrCoKmS,s,n0 LAeaton: aaNecaolitaonWyrdisabilityd rercnauxitary iUahceprtty dsee 3F0NFT5STWEO1F35STl/4OW thru$100,000.Please call Estrella meeting may call the Cky redeemed according to law, SW3/p4.37 AC OR 764 PG 658, Sam(239)595 4021 VARIANCE PETITION 17-V7_ requeslesitists atOi leceasttwo b s218-18'8inss84t ththe h gphest bidder satldthe Colunty,Flo it da.eing in Collier 20)BOUTBU.4RDMODELS Consider a Resolution days beforethe meeting date. Collier Conti Administration �, 310,330,CBR,350&436 1 '' determinleg Variance Petition BulidinB 7th Floor Room 711 ot Name in which asssed: I NRrouts 17-V7 for approval of a Publish: Tuesday,September 1:00 P.M.on MonOay,October BARBARA LEE-THOMAS I Y x - - _ variance from Section 56.124 26,2817 16,201X to allow more than 5096 a the N0 1765855 Unless the property described _ gross floor edea toe service Dated this 21st day of August, re said certificate shall be 's'.,v'i" all a ll ofabon to 6e devoted tO sales -. i,�-�. i DWIGHT WI redeemed y will tie to law, BOAT AND YACHT DETAIL tobeccdrind simila gfoods, CLERK OF HE CII the property will be sold to SeaSde Madpe PERSON IN GRAY CAR tobacco and 5linlmr grocery NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT the highest bidder at the (739)641-7184 involved In accident on 9/21/37 itemswhere less than 509613 TAT(DEEP Building 7th Floor Room ob at Sea CAPTAIN'S LICENSE m (239)774-0081 y 7-Eleven, Inc., a Texas NOTICELO 15 HEREBY GIVEN Deputy Clerk 1:00 P.M.on Monr}ay,October CAPTAIN'S LICENSE 9th Strakion and located at Ave that LOURDES M OR CHARLES Donna Rutherford 16,2017. Naples O77-435 31 - %\, N hreet North&8607th Ave following taxhcertlflcatte hes Septeember 5,12,19,26,2017 Doted this 8th day of August, Oct.9th 877-4353187 ---"=-- Texas etitionerpp: 7-Eleventidn , Inc. a filed said certificate for tax No.1732049 2017. Location:r697a9th Street North deed to be Issued thereon. NOTCE OF us GEED FOR DWIGHTE. iia THE MARINA AT Certificate number,year of TAX DEED &8607th Ave North Issuance,description of CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FACTORY BAY i Agent John M.Passtdomo property,aptl name in which NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that azseasetl lsaz follows: TAX EASE FUNDING 2016-1 Dips/DCnna pap erte Marco Wand LEGAL NOTICE TEXT AMENDMENT I7-73 LLC holder of the followlnq Deputy Clerk Slip will accommodate Consider an Ordinance Certificate Numberr 10-5586 tax certificate haz filed said Donna Rutherford e W 19'Wide;a, Notice Is hereby given that II) Di IsIchapter 58 etOIOg rty issued a hereon. Cedto be, September Si 12,19,26,2017 Direct Accss tto Guk... tBhoard�wilill Pholdlna meeting wmpacesprotec4inngandrlod Dscription: GD DDEEN01TGATE number thyearnof Cissufance. No.1731962 No Bridge Issue; beginning at 8:30 a.m., use competibilky. EST UNIT 77,TR 136 LESS THE description of property,.and Concrete Rooting Docks; Wednyesdey,October 11,2017 Petitioner.Staff E 200FT OF THEN 200FT AND name m which assessed Is as Cllubhouse;PumM7p Oat• Eighth Streetl South,Naples, DsMctn:Airport Overlay 205FTT said propertY06eing in follows: p�R,118{. w� Reduced for Quick Sale Flodda,34102. Collier County,Florida. Certificate Number.15-5209 111e es $55,000. TEXT AMENDMENT 17.74 B.va v r..✓r Cell Paul (239)253-4755 The public hearings ee be Consider an Ordinance Name In THIRD seORT Descrirttyion: WELL 6Do07 considered ot that meeting amending Chapter 2,Olvlslon FIFTH THIRD MORTGAGE Desorption:-WELLS Bbe B are: 4, Design Review Board COMPANY LOTS -ear sold property being no `C;". - and Section 16-82, Section in C011lerConty, WANTED ALL MOTOR HOMES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 16-316 and Set 16-321 Unless the prop�erty described Florida. AND CAMPER Cash Paid' ("°789-753°' 54789-7530.. ACPdMonoEsNitdDieMgENT an omCPpAOe!ienavce rro atehrwde erodes. rocesotsdafoordrrsdihnaianoces redeemed crteeccortll be shtoalll abwe NmOn whPhOaz seed +gt I :e" anA1metdomententditiotepreesoarioSaffioephgChoerdybAddeinisotatoe DANNY CAMP" PlaCe OWRYAUTRPCOENSACEJ CmpahetnslvWithPlaFl0ritlLOtatromCitywde BdPM7onFMloonrdaRoOm7oet Un1lso3dhepovGarty dalilce tlbee M1itleawayrvc°ndos.com Stotute Section 163-3191. ALL INTERESTED EARTIES ARE 16,2017. adeemed according t°law, GennoPRICE erties of Nay Anent City de aples HEARD.TO APPEAR AND BE Doted this 8th day of August. the h ghest bidder,at dthe Germain Properties of Naples Agent:City of Naples Planning 2017. Cooler County Administration Q STORAGE: ants. COMES Department Any person who tlemade to Buildingg 7th Floor Room713at `c.Jiu RVs, boat, auto. Covered aFpeal any tledsion made by DWIGHT E.BROOK 1:00 P.M.on MonOay,October avalla6le. (239)693-0447 17-CU4 NAL USE PETITION anis Board with r pact Ls CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT CDURT 16,2017. IT-CU4 any matter considered at this Consider a Resolution hearing will peed a cord By:/s/Donna RUthertord Doted this 14th day of August, `'',' Petition in9 CU4, Anal Use of the proceedings aptl may Deputy Clerk 2017. Y ani br-tat on,, Petition 17-CW, pursuant tie eol Is ma e,wlan erecord Donna Rutherford [.a� -D to Section 58-933(7) of e d Is made,which record (5eap DWIGHT E.BROOK Real Estate the Cotle ot Ordinances,tf include the testimony a d September E.12,79,26,2017 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT allow outdoor storage of ewdence upon hlc the No1732011 ,<D�-. and gnyo `. automobile inventory with appeal is tp be heard. AnY BY:/s/Derme Rutherfo .2,141:7 328 Black;w/new screening e;ml acceseory Person with a duds and NOTICE OTA GEEDTON FOR Deputy Clerk use to the permitted use of qumng auxiliary aids and TAX DEm Donna RmhertOM 2ports package; Indoor storage of eatomobiie %PAT?s for this meeting mayy (Spa() u ii $19,500.(239)919-4230 or inventory,pi s,Mcrty owned 203 the wkiv Clerk's oa id st NOTICE FLORIDAHEREBY GIVEN thehat September 5,12,19,26,2017 (239)298-1656 by IT of Naples,Inc,aFlonda 213-3015 witlr requests atleast FNA RILLC holder of he No.1731998 ® u 2017 BMW 640 M Sport Pkg Corpomtion and located at two bilinss days before the following tax certificate has 5Kmiles;White&black 2725 and 2745 COdporate FllgM meeting date, filed Smd certificote for tax NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR n rtlM1le top.SB1A00. Drive. deed to he Issued thereon. TAX DEED (239)"8-42"; or 2981656 Florida Cor oPrtlonples,Inc,a NAPLES PLANNING ADVISORY of ssuance, d scriptioneof NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that rtr w ;` Corpolrate2Flight Drlrinve 2745 Pub September 26,2017 assessed is as fol ows:which Tie holder of the foll2°w ngi A em:John M.Passidomo, ND 1765642 tax certificate has filed s e 20L71NFload d;s ip 000 ml. Chaffy Pas3idomo Legal Notice Certificate Number:l5-4688 tertfficath for tax deed to be drive,loaded;only Soo mi. issued thereon. Certificate blue xt/ten Int,DVD$70K VARIANCE PETI71ON 17-V6 Notice of latent to Designate Descr y lD#:689418/DOB2 umber,-year of Issuance L�.�,,7 olio(Pd$83K)(239)222 9091 Description: QUAIL M UNIT name Fpt w of sassed,_ as I'71II(�YOLIYS at Consder a Resolution Executive Dreotor az Senor 17 V6, pursuant to Section Dsi noted Position with the 246•said property being in follows: . .. Ya. R --aJ& AVA g Collier Cu sty.Florida r..- s6-93(c)(U of the Code of Florida Retirement System: DOD4E GRAND CAnAVAN dock ande3, t allow fora Certificate Number:15-171 �(:�' 6 - , 10"lowered 4. firs ramp r Van&With beyk dna eoat xit to ashore Notice th hereby Iaiven that RICHARName inwhich GIESaeeissetl: PropertY ID#:00317400001 `F downs.(239)494-8267 beyond the maximum shore the North Collier F re Control Desalptiom 3 47 29 5 1165FT wgili- nomlal dimension of Z5 fent and Resoe District Intends fora combined pier aptl boat to designate the 05 se re tit . lift in the Aquamne Shores position of Executive Director NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING subdivision, for property as Senior Manag9ement AClesslcs TOP em I PAID?fp, locations Jeff Het tt ' 5ervlte Class Deignated &Sports Cars.(239)221-3000 Lnoatoner:J1 Hewitt Position with the Florida LOcotion:221 Aqua Court Retirement system, to be Please be advised that formal applications have been submitted to Collier anted!TEO'All AIf7O5- A9errb civin&Calvin Marine effectiveu onaP royalofthe County, seeking approval of a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Wanted) OP 236.295Top$ CONDITION Inc. Florida00s or giestion. FREE PICKUP 239-265-6140 CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 3houlde be addre s diotu Amendment [P1.20160002584/CPSS-2017-1] and a Conditional Use D^YC i1t TRERS. n-ars Chief Financial Officer Becky [P120160002577],for a±6.25-acre property,located at the southeast comer TOP PRC (239)682-86 ri consider a oesolution Bronsdon at(239)-552-1322. of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. determining Conditional Pub: September 26 and CORVET7E5 WANTED Use Petrt(on 17-CU6, October 3,2017 Top dollar. 0 or today.Call pvrspant to section s8-s03 000763491 The intent of the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment and 991-809-3660 Dr 941-923-3421 M the Code of Ordinances to allow the retail sale of G Real Estate Conditional Use applications is to add the subject property within the Estates STMOTORS secondhand merchandise in 7RusrEo the Hc-Highway commercial Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict,and permit the required All V hici s w d N anpolit0airl waylocated 05 866 gg�e'smfgace re..l zoning for the ability to entitle and construct a church,religious facility,or Rod or Jim(239)174-7360 PeUtiuner.Paul Scrogham �,_ place of worship,as provided for in the Estates Zoning District. 1ocalfieds alit- 'art— TARPON TARPON BAY REALTY ,„ ,'` NOTICE OFITIOUS O • REGI�IFICTITIOUS EDF NAMEAIOUPROJECT (.611"1111111144114111)MOST �1 NoticeUnder Fictitious Name LOCATION Law Pursuant to Section MI 865.09, Florida Statutes Golden Gate BLVD W NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that the undersigtied,TARPON BAY DEVELOPMENT LLC desiring p 4' �' ` " t0 engagge in Cosiness under >I the flctltious name of TARPON � *� `, BAY REALTY located MO'?Bar GO $ O® 1402,in the County Lee, e # in Bonita Springs, Florida �® ., 34133•(mends to register the 3 .. 1 to 1st AVE SW • said name with the Division U D of CoroPePa 1pa3 of the J Florida Department of State• 1 Nepiessee,Florida Dated ot ® Naples,Florida,September le, zp2017. m XI. TARPON BAY REALTY Pub:September 26,2017 ` t-` No.1763111 ▪ Manage your subscription Y.. , Find a newsstand to Notice of WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Naples Planning Advisory buya paper °°°rtlMeellag p p The meeting listed below will The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting,held by be heldr,the toy Council Chamber,735 Eighth Street Frederick E.Hood,AICP,of Davidson Engineering,Inc.,representing Grace • Place an obituary,classified South,Naples,Florida. Romanian Baptist Church of Naples,Inc.on Wednesday,October 11th,2017. �10/1�ijdn eo amck P aP ad or press release Agenda andmeeungpacket The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m.,at the Collier County-Estates Branch are available from: Library,located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W.,Naples,Florida,34120. Submit news City erk's Of3ce,City Hat• 239-213-1015 Citywebsite,mtP//www. If you are unable to attend this meeting but have questions or comments,they • Submit a letter to the editor napeunee oat can be directed by mail,phone ore-mail to the individuals listed below: Formal action may betaken on ▪ Report a problem insage aiat"eln yersunewn deddee,a peal aoy derision Frederick E Hood,ACP Fred Reischl,AICP Sue Faulkner,Principal Planner made eb Fire Cay C000e! Davidson Engineering,Inc. Collier County Growth Management Collier County Growth Management wigs pea this ane tter www.naplesnews.com/customerservice ieerea at this meeting(pr 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 2600 N.Horseshoe Drive 2800N.Horseshoe Drive hearing)will eed a record Naples,FL 34104 Naples,FL341D4 Naples,FL 34104 of need proceedings ver may nd to ensurethat a verbatim Phone:239.494.6060 Phone:239.252.4211 Phone:239-252-5715 Naples Battu ewes Tec zi i the proteedrng is Epic);Fmd®davitlsonengiwereg.com Email:Fredreischi©cslriergov.net Email:Suefaullmertdcolliergov.net News atle,which raandd mantles the testimony and evidence ru,«meuv.,owrxmwu upon which the appeal Is to Beplember26,2017 NO-1764054 be Aeartl. Any person with a 0 l0 `NI 01 Ui .P W N ham-+ O CO 00 '...I Ol C!7 11a W N I-, ‘,,,D ----. .. •,, ' \,..). . (..)-\ --_----) . m I GI > ---- 11 r� '� al t� a -1 " r fr. ® P� -F. V LA oslV 72 cn Niiiiiiiiiiii OHNoN ili liii el m tr 4 D • v R a In (c, C' zu rt N C .„,0 Z:\Active Projects\G\GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH-CR 951\DWG\Plan ning\GIS12017-04-24 GR SS -E GMPAXHIBIT E(AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd s' .r., ".. Ali WE _ _ ' .; , ..1wi _ " ,i' ` S s } i'•Zik ' � ` > _ 4.. 4.x " -ti " ' s $ ! 4 . h -'S: ;A 'N ":�.w ^"FE - .£::.. . , '� ssivr � - -, `tom" ...�,- x t' _ - . `- it . «. _.' 41.,:„ ;.=---FZ' f � " : - >4F i xre s- '' ~�2 - -,-4-f!-, : `'- ;',.iia-- ; i.�s.` .5. sY'',.-•=fir a4 _" 4 :t .ai <a s f ikiii . • — .-.. ',,,s1. .1::-:...-,,kt,.. 't-'4,-- -,S-4.-VA, '-! 44-1---t :-, , , - ' -':-?i:':--:.,- --. , --- :. „.,, 1.4'4-:'• -,;'-.t-,f- _-:r4.;,,, ;_. -, . lit?:,,- .. ; �t;n '.• .'. ,u '7,,,,, s1} ;-: '.t :i.. ,"s" 7..;.t ;.,, ' •,..:..***--: is_ .. a .,,s ._ } :.,£��, jam- :�.`=y". ' ' .r�/';F-?�� ,.,. : �� r ',�- :.Z_ �*!'�, ori". � �ttlqir � '�"`` • % v _ . 'i :�:;: - _ "":s;,h °tom: .:-:?- 5;;;-44-t:41 � �•:%:' k' - "- �" sem[' 4.syr' ,.-,!.--t. �" ,:. 'sl <� - ,;..".fir: ` :} : T[ �: �,t '� --= ` r-�`:-.:1-•, i�: > ' , . f�. _ ATE BLVD. GOLDEN GATE ' . R. >( a- '' t- t -„sus' t. ":�;. z.. , _ - fp.. r', -,V :1'4•':,"�. . •".��", �� ," %p4:'r.:^ . " �:. r _ trz.... . , -. ;.---. , -4- ---:,--i-t.:.;.-.4r-,..,-. :.,.-4'!.---;3---4: r.'=---V ------.`0"-''- 'I, , O . .�.f. �.. "�i 's"�:_- z�-s.,: _� f r r- , ; ,, :. :?- ,- ? �"e-i"' r 4- z_.R-, - - '" <s... r t -,,,..:4',',.,,,, , J =��,. :err ,gta: x zjc"��t .. . "'� t1J4; . �s �24' - _,. --mss' , 4 .'” `t A, x V... , .-, u.��"u. ,_.. � ,"' `;fin' _. ." . . j ':«_ r �{" - �:�� f' '' _ i �t ',-..:14:. 'y'. _ 4 - ..,, - +[',+'lid` _ :+, ."£.,.. .. rr j_.. .._-... -. .. __ _ - -. - --\-...;c.•;.-:;:'".-77. �� fis mix " .. ;F�. «. _ . LEGEND - .;" /��p�GRACE ROMANIAN SSGMPA SUBJECT � K^ i'- ♦' ,'+: ' :::.;,s r.y;" .:::" E P•- PROPERTY'6.25 ACRES _ ;y� M ` ,, '. ':. <' � ". ".;Z_:" ;.- _ - ---- --' 4.-L i` .}" "..' Aolittejai '''-1 FEET -2_i 0_ -: .''''11- --` ='`S U,RCES:COWER,CO TY•GEOG-RAPHIC INF_ORMATION SYSTEMS 2077,) I — ,.:,? � . DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. ROMANIAN I-II-I 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 GRACE CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT BAPTISTCSSGMPAURC -"' NAPLES, FL 34104 DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 Note: EXHIBIT F.1: AERIAL EXHIBIT 2017 Aerial obtained from Collier County Property Appraiser. w Fa.F ESTATES ESTATES ESTATES w 3 (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) O W W ❑ .� s a i 1 :::;.n., Mre",GOLDEN GATE BLVD. / I RIGHT-OF-WAY -- —_,. 1 I �fl �� ''''' '1"--F-rer A aF I ry;\\ gz � e = g w a ! DEVELOPMENT ` 3 �\ AREA OUTLINED � O ..mom,..,..,—�1--I FOR SANCTUARY/ =r. / i 8 > I .)? � MULTI-PURPOSE V AV vV a p g BUILDING �tl\,� \ \ !iEw ❑ ¢ 300 SEATS MAX w \ 'vc °1"F LI g a �,E \j\---s.- -T-\'-,:=K7,'''\ \ ' .TL_1_ ESTATES s `F`a - \\\h\ 'S• s, ±. , I (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) a(\11 ,It It ��7 PRE�� ;� •Iit r Y Z ••� ACCESSORYwpm \\�\ mi r 'g '\\ �: RECREATION AREA \� X I rc I U I o 6 J \ :\�\`1 is ESTATES E ESTATES 0 rn i\ - \\\'}‘; (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) R6 (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) g g \ 0.30 ACRE SEPTIC (��D3z j a m As DRAINFIELD V\� Izddd ❑ \ (RESERVED) I\\ \ �gi g \ ••• \. \ • '- ao al 8 I .(_ 7 r�. 0 .v ». vvw2."1ST AVE SW °mss, RIGHT-OF-WAY -'""-` '- ESTATES ESTATES ! SCALE IN FEET .i N I (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) (DEVELOPED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTUIPR$L ,ARY-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ( m 1oF 1 J - 1 ' 0 6. I. t I* I (CHAPTER 8,COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s)must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15)calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s)must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hear:rig. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code,Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s)must be securely affixed by nails,staples,or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post,or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s i NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER ----. BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY,PERSONALLY APPEARED Frederick E.Hood,AICP,Senior Planner WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER CU-P1;70160002677 and SSGMPA PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 • \ it‘ \\ 1\ 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 SIGNATURE OF APPLIeNNT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX Frederick E.Hood,AICP,Senior Planner Naples,FL 34104 NAME(TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY,STATE ZIP STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 6th day of April , 2018 , by Frederick E.Hood,AICP . personally known to me or who produced as identification ..................---..-------. and who did/did not take an oath. n ( 6 I Si sq, ,:( JESSICA HARRELSON II cl , '--• ature of Notar4Pu lic stie Notary Public-Stale of Florida t ' .; Commission 0 FF 954332 -\\a*n 40 My Comm.ExpinIS May 18,2020 C ,..,7% Bonded through National War y Assn r-.. ---\M- tinted Name of Notary Pu lic .—... My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) GRACE ROMANIAN CHURCH CU-PL20160002577 SSGMPA-PL201600025841 CPSS-2017-1 • P"'"'• ' e t4 , It. * EA EM N PIANA'RE9ENOMNT A jr,i '�w x '� +� SCALE GROWTH pWlIC NEARING REWESTNNi A SMALL SCALE GROWTH CONDITIONAL USE ; r ASARAGEMENP PIAN AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE !. rt 11 WV%IL91.0r1!WQq yI I JIt.•112. T 41LLJ11V111 MI + , nVIeY,..w.uM1l1!IIW:PWT"-MIr.IL�n PINIe1MZJ7i toff inn lRD B1 T111. 111'pllrl\'IM V.ILVVn.as u,fIJ,Vwn11 i q\\IlnlrX wrVE rwr� . ,x ,n\nfl Iwi linD VIIIIAlIV11IIlD111111171(0\Nn1Nt\IR61Nt) "+•. ,,\St,.r ` , ` .+•.•'., +,'.,.ru +r. u,,ru,.ntev.u,l,a41r>L4'N1 _I ctLlr.�\4�oJ,i 111 - T A L IwI.Y , 1 u m u n L . ' f _ a II Jam '. '^'M,_, 4 R. . • .µ -.7,...,..„,.:,,,,-. -'"4.� v..:... ,,�.�1i i/ :s �.C' a �:'- .. . ''4Y .. a ,aril"... ,� y. c ' r t -�, • PUBLIC HEAR9NS REQUESTING A SMALL SCALE GROWTH +.,/ti t t MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL US fl11111\p w:1rrA.PLSVIMoeI O UMENR..ND CONDITIONAL I1,11 ,.+ . 11.1111111-1 N'V1%.\\V V'ID1MI6101R'Ml UWI1PD 1111111\11 f11\IVn,1111."I&1, d f 4 I .. ., . - .-,.. • . r'. . , , . •:- I 9..*;..:•--•:Ir._ . .,... . .... ,...... .. •,.. _ . . , . • . . . . . . L x , ..,._„:„_,,..:„. ' e .'7.•-';',.;;14'•-•.:''.''' .•!.77.liir.,714: -,.7.-i:- -:, •'''' '-,i'7.:4.'..„3,04 '.-,•;ii.::.1tEtt'4**i ' '.-'-'7,-Z'''.,..f..-4",-,-„:--'-"'-f:;;,. •.--74.1.1'?„$' .-.,' _,-, - - - ., -.,,..,..flet,...-1.".'1 o'` - : ; - . 1.',:r-1* afr, ♦1' - o 4 �" rag ae.s..aa, eX` y5t srb° � t _s: `aa�. <V _, it Y . ,-;€ ¢3 �d � � 4.1 szF ¢zZ ¢- ! u � .' w - -r 3,rz0L0.1W ¢O Qf." r!f / r- QC)▪ o7i �V .:ttGE--,r - m down' . zuw z x z WrQOO - ..-:. y -w90>' Uviz, O o. OqQs -' CC ;y pZ2UJ�F7dQ O ¢Co. az � Twz�xwx wr px a'Q ' 4L-1 u -d,<-1 E E- u .- jt 1 1 o z oI ��yrZ5 1zzozoo. - _ - ,, cLou F 7 11W.IM et=;x _ - = N� i O�0 e3� ua e:a Q CO �� w '� 4, Qp�F tee, }wZoo4. ¢ A Fit -/ - :J , _inr'.t, ,--2,:..,..,,-.._, Orr',-, ,;is.., ' ` ., f_" „ ..=:.7,:.-4=--; _ _ _ Y. Q _. , .. `'C dF 6`Jvo <-c-',7 n ' h Q n ,za '-_ - 7-_,_-----..l - ¢ LJ~2 r :J CI 47 yR • :3 --.,.."T..--/-: .:-.1";../- /.v _ - Yl _ W F.U W W C C mac. ` 7,_ al U •. ,7 - r y 5 'Qa�S yZ, cin4p�Z S. C . '� o C.7 ,.;¢ ▪ F,.� ,1 n'. i « - = - U i u i-ccary ;AAC ▪O� ! - - xv - A - r.-- -,,o S vi3,i? o - - ,-,:._,,,7.7.---:"...... nw • !_ _ Z. ▪ _ Q1�i 1- - - s - u.& - - _ ! ::-,,,,- 1;41”, F z 0 •? '441114., ' 4 ...t.- -, ,£. _s. serr▪ ;rr_ / / - F W 5 r▪ i▪ ,n z - -fix •-▪� : s }�� / ....-.•," = - '` ?,,,•'J ES "="-=_-_▪=---;.•• "-- - CC 0_ • - v3�y�V =j - . i0 U - N° c;rzz ';-?,''',=-,_-,`..:--4 Z 7 7 - <, - %iltfn V3 - r - C32 rc'x _ CfjWgOcz¢dmt-� - wuj64—=sI -- 2�� sopa 67x- .c _ ,.y.� - �. WN p,..�ZF Q Ii C.F a x z- �re� eG° oz ��c z u.1 SC = < Q O.' - t.' J i. Lam! -/r -! '- , _▪, a , �N/ - FCC --� Jx l C� / -,-.:c,'7."--7.2:-.7..-:-::--- - \ 4 r Z 'WJ ~, /_ _ l-/ ▪ -' =Iii ' 7 '.;.77-,==.7.,= =.7::-,,, -r - ; 2 2 .•.fid C r = �' / ▪- - _.. ,=.,..122-2.,;_„...,= r a r r� j� • _ r / 00 ___ , ^ - -_ .. � Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting D'A's I[�S O N www.davidsonengineering.com ENG ! NJEERI ° Gy May 10, 2017 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Use Subdistrict Dear Mr. Weeks, Attached, is an application for a Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (SSGMPA) and the required submittal information, for the request of an amendment to the Estates Mixed Use District - Conditional Use Subdistrict. The intent of this request is to provide the applicant with the ability to entitle and construct a church, religious facility, or place of worship, as provided for in the Estates Zoning District.The subject property consists of ± 6.25 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Collier and Golden Gate Boulevards. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, 1 Sof �p F� Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 . WCivil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSONEER@NG g g•www.davidsonen i neerin com July 6, 2017 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict 2nd Review Dear Mr.Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. SSGMPA Application 3. Text Amendment Language, as Exhibit "C" 4. Aerial, FLUCCS and Soil Maps, as Exhibit "F" 5. Zoning Maps,as Exhibit "H" 6. Surrounding Future Land Use Exhibit, as Exhibit "I" 7. Public Services Map, as Exhibit"K" 8. Conceptual Site Plan,as Exhibit "0" 9. Boundary Survey,as Exhibit "P" 10. Level of Service Analysis, as Exhibit "R" 11. Project Narrative, Evaluation and Justification Criteria,as Exhibit "T" 12. Planning Communities Map, as Exhibit "U" 13. Future Land Use Map,as Exhibit"V" 14. Future Land Use Inset Map, as Exhibit "Y" Comprehensive Planning's Comments related to the Application Form: 1. Page 3 Ill. Description of Property: G. Surrounding Land Use Pattern — Reference is incorrect — not Exhibit '0', but Exhibit 'I'. Exhibit'0'is a site plan. Response: The surrounding land use patterns are shown on Exhibit "0" with a 300 foot radius of the subject property. 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 DAVIDSON tNCt('tEE ING 2. Page 4 IV. Type of Request: C. Amend Future Land Use Map(s) ...TO Estates Mixed Use District—Conditional Uses Subdistrict...-Add the"s"to Uses. Response: The application has been updated to add the"s"after Conditional Uses Subdistrict. 3. V. Required Information:A. Land Use—Reference is questionable for"Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning)with subject property outlined - Exhibit 'V' is a good map for showing surrounding land use, but Exhibit'D'is listed in the"List of Exhibits" as the'Location Map'. Response: The application has been updated to reference Exhibits "D"and "H"for the general location map showing the surrounding developments(PUD, DRI's and existing zoning). 4. V. Required Information: B. Future Land Use and Designation — Exhibit 'I' and 'V' were referenced for providing a map of existing Future Land Use Designation for subject property and surrounding area with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property, however neither exhibit shows an acreage total. Response: Exhibits"I"and"V"have been updated to include the subject site's total acreage. 5. Page 5 V. Required Information: E. Public Facilities — Arterial and Collector Roads — Reference is incorrect — not Exhibit'R', but Exhibit'Q'the Traffic Impact Statement. Response: The Application has been updated to reference Exhibits "R"and "Q", as both exhibits outline information related to the LOS. Comprehensive Planning's Comments on Application Backup Documents: 6. Exhibit 'C' Proposed GMPA Amendment Language — Add "A. Estates — Mixed Use District" underneath the first "***TEXT BREAK***" and then add another "***TEXT BREAK***" underneath the "A. Estates — Mixed Use District". Capitalize "Use" in # 5, first line. Add a parenthetical reference to the map exhibit at end of sentence,e.g. "...Golden Gate Estates, Unit 4(See map titled )." Response: The proposed GMPA Amendment Language, as Exhibit"C",has been updated as requested. 7. Exhibit'F-2' NRCS Soils Mapping—Please add the total acreage of the soil#14. Response: The Soils Mapping,as Exhibit F.2,has been updated to include the total acreage of soil#14. 8. Exhibit 'H' Surrounding Zoning Districts - There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property's boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a 's' on the title for the map to"Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA..." +t ........, DAVIDSON NI-'IN::.,NEEF.1r,'..0 Response: Exhibit "H"has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site. Additionally, the title has been updated as requested. 9. Exhibit 'I' Surrounding Future Land Designations -There is no marking on the map to indicate the 300 feet radius from the subject property's boundaries (similar to Exhibit K), please add. Please add a 's' on the title for the map to be "Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA..." Please modify the legend to show the Estates Designation as 'Estates—Mixed Use District'. Response: Exhibit "I"has been updated to include the 300 ft radius from the subject site and the legend has been updated to indicate 'Estates—Mixed Use District'. 10. Exhibit 'K' Proximity to Public Services - Please add a 's' on the title for the map to be "Grace Romanian Baptist Church Conditional Uses Subdistrict SSGMPA...". The word 'Sheriff' is misspelled (just one 'r') in the legend, please correct. Response: Exhibit "K"has been updated to include the additional "s"and the misspelling of sheriff has also been corrected. 11. Exhibit 'N'Alternative Site Data &Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) Two additional sites were reviewed for this analysis: Addie's Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) and Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). The Sungate CPUD site can accommodate the church and is approved for this use without further planning action, however,the analysis stated that the proposed location provided more viable accessibility. The analysis also stated that Sungate ---.. CPUD lacked immediate accessibility. The Addie's Corner MPUD site, although it can accommodate the church use,the analysis stated that the intensity is currently limited, and therefore,the MPUD might require an amendment to the existing zoning (to guarantee the intended commercial square footage). The conclusion of the analysis was that the access to both alternative sites does not provide viable accessibility, and therefore, the proposed location best meets the needs of the Church. Staff would like to see further elaboration of the conclusions in this analysis including a provision of a definition of'viable accessibility' and 'immediate accessibility'. Response:After further review of the subject properties it was determined that access was not a limiting factor for either alternative sites. However, further research identified developer commitment requirements within the Sungate PUD and we have provided additional supporting documentation to ensure the selected site at C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Boulevard is a superior site for the development. These additional items include the limited square footage for commercial use and requirements to provide water management for adjacent properties within the PUD and C.R. 951 right-of-way. Additionally, the Addie's Corner PUD was eliminated from the analysis due to the recently amended PUD that would limit the commercial space to 4.32 acres, which is less than stated key criteria for the property. The minimum 5.0 acres was selected as a key criterion to ensure the future development would be able to construct a mixture of permitted land uses within the property;for example, accessory uses to the church, and multi- purpose fields. Please refer to the updated Data Analysis Report identifying Sungate as the only alternative site to the C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Blvd property with supporting documentation identifying our selected site as the best choice. DAVIDSONqi 44, ENS NEELINS There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: ® In "Contents"—Add an 'a'-Data&Analysis ® In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 3—Capitalize and add a 's'—Conditional Us es Subdistrict ® In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 6 — "...provide due process ..." consider a different word choice. ® In"Purpose and Focus," paragraph 2, line 4—add 'dwelling unit' ® In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 3, lines 1&2—Reword—the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict ® In "Alternative Site Analysis." Paragraph 2, Line 3—Change"permittable"to"permitted" ® On Attachment 'D' Existing Congregation Location—Since you are proposing to build a 300-seat church, where do the rest of the parishioners live? Response: The referenced spelling errors have been corrected throughout the document. 12. Exhibit 'T'—Narrative and Justification of the Proposed GMP Amendment 1.c.—In response to Ch. 163.3187 (1)(c), Please revise your response to indicate the amendment does include text change that is directly related to a map change.Though the statutory provision reads, "goals, policies, and objectives", it is applied as any change to the text of a comprehensive plan. Response: Exhibit"T"has been updated to indicate that the amendment does include a text change that is directly related to a map change. 13. Exhibit 'U' Planning Communities —This was incorrectly labeled as Exhibit 'V', however the List of Exhibits identified it as Exhibit'1J'. Please correct the label/title. Response: The Planning Communities Exhibit has been properly labeled has Exhibit"U". 14. Exhibit 'V' Future Land Use—The label/title is missing the 'V'. Please correct the label.Although there is only one existing future land use on the subject site (Estates), please incorporate a summary table showing the acreage of the Estates within the subject site(see the application V.B.). Response: Exhibit "V"has been updated to be correctly labeled and the summary table also shows the acreage of the subject site. 15. Exhibit 'Y' Conditional Uses Subdistrict inset map—Please add a 's' on the end of Uses in the map title. Staff believes the map title ending with "Special Provisions" is incorrect and should be removed from the title. This application is to amend "3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict, e. Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria"—not"3.b. Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Boulevard Special Provisions." Response: The title of the inset map, labeled as Exhibit "Y", has been updated per the email correspondence with Sue Faulkner on June 28th,2017. n, 0 DAVIDSON N Cil N!EE€:INC 16. General Comments: • When uploading documents for submittal in the future, please include each of the Exhibit labels. Staff had to go back and rename each of the documents by adding the Exhibit labels. Response: All Exhibits labels have again been provided for each document being submitted. • Please submit all maps in color for future hard copy submissions. Response: Acknowledged. 17. Environmental Planning Sufficiency Comments The subject property is 6.25 acres. Vegetation in the canopy consists of a mix of slash pine, cypress and cabbage palm. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use(CU)for the project. A listed species survey was conducted in March 23, 2017. No listed species or signs of listed species were observed on the property. Several wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata)were observed in trees on the parcel and will be retained or relocated on site in accordance with the requirements of section 3.04.03 of the LDC.The general provision for protection of listed plants is included in CCME Policy 7.1.6. Letters from the Florida Master Site File dated March 8, 2017, list no previously recorded cultural resources on the subject property.The site will be subject to the requirement of accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by CCME Policy 11.1.3.The provision is also included in LDC section 2.03.07 E. The subject property is not located in any County well field protection zones. The proposed GMP amendment will have no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Response: Acknowledged. 18. Transportation Planning Sufficiency Comments: Please note: This petition request is sufficient for review; however, transportation planning staff is requesting changes to the master plan and CU (Conditional Use) language (the CU language is provided for information not as part of changes for the GMPA). The petition is sufficient for review; however,the number and location of the proposed third access onto 1st Avenue SW needs to be removed. Access onto local roads is limited by Access Management, plus the location at the extreme southwest corner increases the amount of traffic and length on the local road. Please remove this access from your request and the TIS. Informational comment: Provide as part of your CU request (not this GMPA)the following commitment: For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service ..._ ,,,,,,,,of E DAVIDSON NC;INEERINN provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing and at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Division Director,Transportation Engineering or his designee. Response: The third access off 1' Ave SW has been eliminated, and the Conceptual Site Plan and TIS have been updated accordingly. Additionally, the language referenced above will be requested as a Zoning Condition of Approval,within the proposed Conditional Use Resolution. 19. Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Sufficiency Comments: Per GMP/CIE Policy 1.5, the potable water system LOSS is based on population. Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. So, the proposed use will have no impact on potable water facility capacity. Please revise Exhibit"R" accordingly. Response: Exhibit"R"has been updated to state that the proposed non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. 20. Collier County Attorney's Office Sufficiency Comments: Please provide Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, with subject site shown. This will be an attachment to the ordinance in addition to the text and Conditional use map. If you already provided it, please email it to me. Response: Per correspondence with Sue Faulkner, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, showing the subject property, will be updated and provided by County Staff. The acreage you provided is 6.25.The acreage according to the property appraiser is 6.64 acres. What is the correct number since the survey does not have the acreage on it? Response: The correct site acreage is 6.25 as shown on the survey. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, Frederick E. Hood, AICP Senior Planner Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com October 23,2017 Mr. David Weeks,AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict 3rd Review Dear Mr. Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data &Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to comments issued August 18,2017: Exhibit 'N' Alternative Site Data & Analysis (Justification for the Location of the Proposed Amendment) — One alternative site was reviewed for this analysis: Sungate Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD). Sungate CPUD's Ordinance #09-06 does not list churches as a permitted or accessory use, nor are there any conditional uses associated with this CPUD; therefore, the CPUD would need to be amended to permit a church use. There may be other locations that might be able to accommodate a church 'by right'. Staff feels additional work is still needed with this Exhibit 'N'. Upon review of your criteria that are being used for the analysis,we have the following comments: • Please consider using additional criteria (such as 'property must be undeveloped', specific site dimensions are needed, not just property size in acres, price of the property,etc.) • Since the actual proposed site is not zoned commercial, nor is it proposed, the criterion "Eligible for C-2 or higher zoning"doesn't seem appropriate • Please consider including non-commercial zoning that might allow a church by right, or with a Conditional Use (properties that would not require a GMPA), such as non-residential uses in an Urban Designated area allows for churches. Also, Agricultural/Rural Designation or Mixed-Use Activity Centers allows community facilities such as churches. • Please explain your reasoning for locating with frontage on an arterial or collector roadway — is visibility important for this church? Response: The Data&Analysis(Exhibit N)has been updated to address the above comments. 4365 Radio Road Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 Sarasota,FL 34236 P.(941)309-5180 DAVIDSON zN0 NE_>.ii.G There are a few spelling errors in this exhibit and some questionable wording, please correct or reword: • In "Contents"—Add an 'a'—'Data &Analysis and Trade Area Analysis' • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 1, line 6—"...provide due process..." consider a different word choice. • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 2, line 4—add 'dwelling unit' • In "Purpose and Focus," paragraph 3, lines 1 & 2 — Reword —the proposed location is not currently within the Conditional Uses Subdistrict • In "Alternative Site Analysis." Paragraph 2, Line 3—Change"permittable"to"permitted" Response: Spelling errors have been corrected throughout the Data&Analysis(Exhibit N). If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, +'Y Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAV I D S O N ENGINEERING www.davidsonengineering.com March 1, 2018 Mr. David Weeks, AICP Planning Manager Collier County Development Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church of Naples Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 Application to the Estates Mixed Use District-Conditional Uses Subdistrict Dear Mr.Weeks, We have provided the following updated documents for review and approval: 1. Response Letter 2. Data &Analysis (Exhibit N) We offer the following responses to the sufficiency letter issued December 4, 2017: • Please consider creating a map to show the three site locations discussed in Exhibit'N'. Response: Please refer to Attachment "F" within the Data & Analysis for the aforementioned site location map. • Please consider creating a table to quickly compare the criteria of the three sites for inclusion in Exhibit 'N'. Response: A table has been added to the Data&Analysis. Please refer • Please consider elaborating on the sentence in paragraph 4 on page 4 of Exhibit 'N'to clarify for readers the "ongoing Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy". Response: The Data&Analysis has been updated as requested. If you have any questions regarding this application, please do not hesitate to contact me at 239.434.6060 or via email at fred@davidsonengineering.com. Sincerely, 3_____...S \ Frederick E. Hood,AICP --` Senior Planner 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 - P:(239)434.6060 F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 -- Jessica Harrelson From: Fred Hood Sent: Tuesday,April 10, 2018 12:32 PM To: ScottTrinity;Jessica Harrelson Cc: KhawajaAnthony; SawyerMichael;AshtonHeidi Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Trinity, Understood. I know this is an important issue for the neighbors in the area. We have provided them with this reasoning that Weber has not been looked at in the past for traffic calming.We will speak to this again in our presentation at the CCPC and BCC hearing in the future, but I also wanted to make sure you all were aware that this issue will likely be discussed by the local residents at the time of hearing. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to set up a quick call (when you have some time)just to go over some specifics that they (the neighbors) asked us about. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior PLE-nrLer DAVIDSON Main: 239.434.6060 fred(a�davidsonengineerinq.com ErtrF rw.dav dsoneno PnGerino;.cor Naples, FL Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This a-maii,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sore use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing;or copying os'this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From:ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent:Tuesday,April 10,2018 10:49 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@ davidsonengineering.com> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com>; KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>; SawyerMichael<Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>;AshtonHeidi<Heidi.Ashton@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP)Manual that is utilized by County staff includes a list of roadways in Collier County not eligible for traffic calming. Weber Boulevard is included on that list. Therefore, Weber Boulevard is not eligible for traffic calming initiatives. https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=75968 Please see Exhibit A of the attached document. 1 Respectfully, Trinity Scott Transportation Planning Manager # CT •unty Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees&Program Management Division NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 Phone: 239.252.5832 Trinity.Scott(a�colliercountyfl.gov From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent: Monday,April 9, 2018 12:32 PM To: KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaja@colliercountyfl.gov>;ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com> Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Thank you,Anthony. Trinity, Please let Fred and I know if you would like to set up a call to discuss. Jessica Harrelson Senior Planning Technician Original Message From: KhawajaAnthony<Anthony.Khawaia@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent:Sunday,April 08, 2018 8:00 AM To:Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>;ScottTrinity<Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com> Subject: Re:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) program is managed by our planning section I copied Trinity Scott on this email to provide you with a response. Anthony N. Khawaja P.E. Chief Engineer of Traffic Operations Growth Management Division 2 2885 South Horseshoe Drive<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0> Naples, FL 34104<x-apple-data-detectors://0/0> AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@CollierGov.Net> Tel: (239) 252-8260<tel:(239)%20252-8260> On Apr 6, 2018, at 3:21 PM,Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»wrote: Good afternoon Anthony, Per the email chain below, can you please confirm if there are any traffic calming options for Weber Blvd? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Planning Technician <image001.jpg> Main:239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://Www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL ( Sarasota, FL From:AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent:Tuesday, November 07,2017 3:22 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net»; KhawajaAnthony <AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net<mailto:AnthonyKhawaja@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <M ichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<ma ilto:M ichaelSawyer@colliergov.net» Subject: FW:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber F red, See Mike Sawyer's email below. I recommend that you contact Anthony Khawaja in Traffic Operations. He can tell you whether there are any options for traffic calming on Weber. Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 (239)252-8400 From:SawyerMichael Sent:Tuesday, November 7, 2017 3:13 PM To:AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net» 3 Cc:ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net<mailto:TrinityScott@colliergov.net» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Heidi, Weber does not qualify for our Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) because it currently has a rural cross section instead of the required urban cross-section. Additionally there are no sidewalks on Weber which to a degree is another consideration in the NTMP program. Also,there are is no budget/funding for traffic calming in Collier County. There are road segments-streets in the estates which have traffic calming devises however my understanding is that these were special BCC directed efforts or improvements associated with other roadway improvements projects such as new bridge construction. In this case it is possible the Planning Commission could recommend a traffic study be performed by our Transportation Operations staff regarding excessive speed and trip counts and evaluate any potential improvements. This study and improvement evaluation could then be considered by the BCC in their review of this petition with fact/study based information. Let me know of follow-up questions and/or concerns. Thanks, Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning, Principal Planner Collier County Capital Projects, Planning, Impact Fees& Program Management 2685 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 (239) 252-2926 From:AshtonHeidi Sent:Tuesday, November 07, 2017 2:37 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Cc: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Fred, I did not speak to Fred Reischl. Traffic calming on public streets is handled by traffic operations,outside of the PUD. I will see if I can find out who you should contact. Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 4 (239) 252-8400 From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com] Sent:Tuesday, November 7,2017 2:16 PM To:AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net» Cc: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE:Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Heidi, This was an issue that was brought up at the NIM.As I recall, Fred R. and myself fielded questions about what could be done to calm the traffic along Weber Blvd. Members of the public had stated that they weren't getting anywhere with the County to install traffic calming measures to curb the speeding up and down the road that they were seeing and experiencing. In an email from Fred R.on October 13th, he mentioned that any calming measures on specific streets may be looked and at discussed at the BCC level and that he had spoken with you about researching whether these were items that we could add to the CU application; maybe as zoning conditions of approval to be voted on by the CCPC and the BCC.The thought was to identify some measures that would make the adjacent neighbors feel better about the proposed non- residential use being permitted along the Weber Blvd right-of-way.This would obviously need to be voted on, but I think his intent was to see how you felt about this or any other measure being added to the ordinance or the new proposed subdistrict. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <image002.jpg> Main: 239.434.6060 fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure,dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From:AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, November 03,2017 11:05 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»; ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net>> Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com»;SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net<mailto:MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net»; MessamMarlene <MarleneMessam@colliergov.net<mailto:MarleneMessam@colliergov.net>> 5 Subject: RE: Grace Romanian CU-Traffic calming on Weber Jessica, I have been copied on some emails but I am not working on this issue. Who wants to place traffic calming?What type of traffic calming? Has anyone approached Transportation Operations to discuss this? Heidi Ashton-Cicko Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Office of the Collier County Attorney 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-8400 From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 10:01 AM To: ReischlFred <FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»;AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net<mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net» Cc: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>> Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred and Heidi, Have you had the opportunity to research the possibility of adding traffic calming devices, along Weber, in conjunction with the Conditional Use? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator <image002.jpg> Main: 239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent:Wednesday, October 18,2017 8:41 AM To:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com»; Fred Hood <Fred@ davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Not yet... Heidi is out. Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 6 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <image004.jpg> From:Jessica Harrelson [mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com] Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 7:17 AM To: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net»; Fred Hood <Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com» Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, Do you have an update on the research being conducted on the traffic calming? Thank you. Jessica Harrelson Senior Project Coordinator <image002.jpg> Main: 239.434.6060 jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:jessica@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday,October 13,2017 2:10 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com>> Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Mike said his preference would be a single access along Weber. He said chicanes or other horizontal traffic calming would be OK, but they must be authorized by the BCC. Heidi is researching to see if this can be done in conjunction with the CU. Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <image004.jpg> From: Fred Hood [mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com] Sent: Friday,October 13, 2017 2:04 PM To: ReischlFred<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net» 7 Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, I spoke with our client earlier. It's their preference that we retain two access points.Their reasoning lies in the concern that we would be creating a bottleneck at the ingress/egress point along Golden Gate Boulevard,and that that may cause even more of a headache for the traffic flow along the Boulevard. It's not a hard no, but it is a concern that they and I share with causing a bigger problem to the Boulevard. Does Mike S. share any of that concern? I'm sure we can come to some agreement that would be a combination of calming and access that would make the neighbors happy. I think we should keep the dialogue open about this issue. Thanks! Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <i m age002.j pg> Main: 239.434.6060 fred@ davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail, along with any files transmitted with it, is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure,dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From: Fred Hood Sent:Thursday,October 12, 2017 12:44 PM To: 'ReischlFred'<FredReischl@colliergov.net<mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net» Cc:Jessica Harrelson<Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com>> Subject: RE: Grace Romanian Fred, We'll reach out to the client and get their feelings on this. It may not be an issue for them, but let us confirm. Thanks, Frederick E. Hood,AICP Senior Planner <image002.jpg> Main: 239.434.6060 8 fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:fred@davidsonengineering.com> www.davidsonengineering.com<http://www.davidsonengineering.com/> Naples, FL I Sarasota, FL Disclaimer:This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended receipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, retention, disclosure, dissemination,forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or attachments is prohibited. From: ReischlFred [mailto:FredReischl@colliergov.net] Sent:Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:35 PM To: Fred Hood<Fred@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Fred@davidsonengineering.com»;Jessica Harrelson <Jessica@davidsonengineering.com<mailto:Jessica@davidsonengineering.com» Subject:Grace Romanian Hi Fred&Jessica- Is one access point (GG Blvd)acceptable to the church? -Fred Fred Reischl,AICP Principal Planner 239-252-4211 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 www.colliergov.net<http://www.colliergov.net> <image004.jpg> Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 9 KendallMarcia From: jak34117@comcast.net _ ant: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:46 AM o: SaboJames;FaulknerSue Subject: GGMPA-PL20160002584 & CU-PL20160002577 -Grace Romanian Baptist Church Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Planning Commissioners: Thank you for allowing me to speak before you on May 3rd, 2018, in opposition to your Agenda Items`9.F and 9.G; more specifically, Petition Numbers PL20160002584 and PL20160002577, an amendment to the Golden Gate Master Plan and a companion Conditional Use authorization, to allow for a church at the southeast corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. Again, my name is John Kelly, and I am representing myself as a 23-year resident of Golden Gate Estates Unit 4, Tract 12. Please recall that you also heard frommy mother, Renate Kelly,who resides within Hedrich Harbor which adjoins my property. Again,we thank you for accepting our verbal statements of opposition. As you're aware, the subject items were continued to your next regularly scheduled meeting on May 17, 2018. It was my understanding that this delay was to allow the petitioner time to draft conditions of approval that would in effect ameliorate the effects of a non-residential use in Golden Gate Estates, an agricultural/rural residential zoning district. I'm both confused and concerned as I have just recently learned that if the petitioner desires to accommodate the Planning Commission that they may be required to conduct a second Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM); however, should they desire to move forward without a second NIM, they're able to do so provided they bide by their original plan. In other words, the 'ommunity loses. That being the case, I must renew my steadfast opposition to both the Golden Gate Master Plan ` mendment and the Conditional Use resolution. Be it known I am not specifically opposed to a church; rather, I am opposed to any use that will generate more traffic than that of three single-family residences at the subject location; as the LDC allows one single-family residence per 2.5 acres within the Estates Zoning District. The only other use I would offer no opposition to is that of a model home. Please be reminded that Weber Boulevard South is presently bveing used by the motoring public as a high-speed CR-951 by-pass road. Additionally, Weber Boulevard South is the primary means of accessing 1st Avenue Southwest which already serves the following: • Max Hasse Community Park • Big Cypress Elementary School • Jehovah's Witness Kingdom Hall, with two worship centers capable of performing simultaneous services; note, this use was approved with the condition that an emergency access to 1st Avenue Southwest be gated off—that gate is open and has been open for at least a month. • Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church and Child Care Center, which by all appearances is not yet conducting formal worship services for whatever the reason. The most current approved site plan reveals the church was to be developed in phases with 280 total seats. As the church has been built it is likely the use will be allowed to continue and will ultimately evolve into a successful church As I stated before you on the May 3rd, this community is being inundated by high-speed traffic and the street was .t designed for such. Traffic increased dramatically when the traffic signal serving the right-hand turn from itorth bound Collier Boulevard to east bound Golden Gate Boulevard was converted from right turn on red to no right turn on red from the far-right lane. This action can be safely remedied today with minimal action; however, 1 the County will lose that luxury should the County grand the subject petitions. As traffic is already horrible and we already have a church not operating to capacity it is ridiculous to further exacerbate the situation. Here is the solution... - _ 4 L. .6 3 s m. in .y a Ism The area within the purple borders are the properties to be combined for development by the church, they are presently 2-legally conforming properties. Each property should have access as indicated by the yellow arrows. "Within the blue border is what should be used as a turn lane; however, it is presently marked as an ingress fo- ie larger property. As this is one 5-acre parcel, it need only be afforded one access point; were the property tc, be divided, an alternate means of ingress/egress could be developed. The area in blue should be a turn lane that merges into Golden Gate Boulevard. Again, this corrective measure will be lost should the petitions be approved. I remain concerned that the petitioner should have had no expectation that the properties in question could be developed for a church upon purchasing said properties as the use is not consistent with the Golden Gate Master Plan. The applicant's representative stated on the record that churches are an allowable conditional use within the Estates Zoning District. This is not entirely correct as the Collier County Land Development Code(LDC) Section 2.03.01.B.1.c. states, in part: "For Estates zoning within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in the GMP restricts the location of conditional uses." It is this constituent's belief that the Golden Gate Master Plan, being an element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, should not be eligible for change without great study as the documents represent the County's Future Land Use. Plan.At present, Collier County is engaged in a major restudy of the Golden Gate Master Plan and this process should not be surpassed on a piece meal basis. Please let the re-study process play out. Both the petitioner and staff point to the Restudy to indicate the community desires to allow for conditional uses at the subject location. I don't believe that the property would have ever been mentioned within the restudy had it not been for the petition before you; the opposite side of Golden Gate Boulevard is an improved residential property. Were all Estates residents polled, I'm of the belief they would vote to keep the Estates as it is today without any change; the process will prove me right or wrong. I ask that you let the process play out. Please note the subject properties are located within what is described as the Eastern Rural Estates; in fact, it is the entryway to said area. The vision statement for the Eastern Rural Estates reads as follows: "The Golden Gate 'eastern Estates is an interconnected, low density residential community with limited goods and services in.— .;ighborhood centers, defined by rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings." The County's Staff Report related to this project states hat, in staffs opinion, if this petition is approved it will increase 2 the likelihood of a similar petition being submitted for the property across Golden Gate Boulevard. Is this really in keeping with the aforementioned vision statement? T+is somewhat interesting to me that the applicant indicated that the subject property was selected due to proximity _1 members and affordability. As I indicated previously, I remain concerned that the applicant originally desired a much larger facility at an alternate location. Although the applicant had all approvals in place to construct a church, with educational facilities and a residence, the church chose to sell the property. Now the church acts as if they should be approved as this is the only property they can afford. Interestingly, the church has failed to disclose that as per the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office their portfolio includes an additional Golden Gate Estates property as well as an improved commercial property at 6645 Willow Park Drive. A search using the Cityview Public Portal reveals a Zoning Verification Letter having been issued to provide an affirmative response as to if a church would be a permitted use at the subject location. Their testimony to the Planning Commission was not very forthcoming. I'd also like to address a concern of Chairman Strain's. Chairman Strain indicated that he would likely support a church at this location, subject to a number of restrictions, as it could be less intense than anything that might come forward in the future. I was also asked if I knew what transpired between the County and the Jehovah's Witnesses when they were previously denied a use. Please simply note that being adjacent to a property within a Public (P) zoning District an amendment to the Golden Gate Master Plan was not required as it is in this case. Absent such an amendment there should be no expectation that the use would be considered, the same is true for the Cypress Wood Presbyterian Church. With respect to the Conditional Use Application. Until our current unrest with traffic, this community has been peaceful and for the most part quiet.Aside from the traffic generated by church worship services,we're concerned that churches typically have outreach programs and may sponsor other activities that may include the use of gmplified sound and speakers. As such, we'd ask that a church be regulated as to the hours and that there be no .tivity after 9:00 PM. We would also like to see the area go dark at night and use low level lighting when necessary. I'd also hope that the Planning Commission seek a commitment that the petitioner will seek no administrative waivers or deviations from he development standards contained within the LDC. Additionally, we'd ask that uses be severely limited; no day care, no educational facilities, no special events such as festivals, revivals, summer camps, car washes, garage sales, farmers markets, and/or food truck competitions and the like. Restrictions as to lighted signage on Weber Boulevard South would also be appropriate, the community desires none. Lastly, should you find in favor of the petitioner's request, it is hoped that you will do all within your power to limit traffic within our neighborhood. In closing, I'd ask that you not support the subject Golden Gate Master Plan Amendment as based upon the arguments I have presented herein. The applicant's own traffic engineer pointed out to you why stop signs are not likely to be seen on Weber Boulevard South. I have provided you with the best traffic calming instrument, a dedicated turn lane off of Collier Boulevard. This solution is only possible if the properties remain dedicated for residential use.I'd suggest that not every corner property on an arterial or collector road within this County should be commercialized. There will always be some less than desirable properties within this County and such properties may be the last to develop; alternatively, the market will adjust and such undesirable properties may just be those that are also affordable. Lastly, please recall the outcome of the recent Summit Church project off of Napa Woods Way; it's my belief that the subject property is far less desirable for a conditional use of this magnitude. Your consideration and objectivity are very much appreciated. espectfully, John Kelly 3 KendallMarcia From: ferro63@aol.com ent: Monday, May 14, 2018 5:03 PM o: FaulknerSue Cc: Maurizio Ferro Subject: Petition Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mrs Faulkner I understand that you are the comprehensive planner for petition SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU-PL20160002577. As resident of Weber Blvd I urge you not to approve the building of a church on the corner of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S. This area is already congested with overflow and speeding vehicles from Collier Blvd trying to avoid rush hour. Considering the fact that Weber traffic flow to Collier has been blocked at Golden Gate Blvd from recent road median construction I find it disturbing to even consider such location for a church congregation and subsequent congestion that would certainly have a monumental negative effect at the intersection of White Blvd and Weber Blvd S. . ask that you would carefully consider the impact this proposition will have and reject such location for the common wealth of this, once peaceful, neighborhood. Regards, Maurizio Ferro Sent from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Ed Laux <elx@att.net> -- ant: Monday, May 14, 2018 9:22 PM o: FaulknerSue Subject: Proposed church at Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Ms. Faulkner, As the planner for the proposed church rezoning I urge you to understand what this will do to traffic on Weber Blvd S from a homeowner's perspective. Traffic has increased considerably since the shutdown of Golden Gate Blvd as an access to 951 from Weber S and the addition of a church in a residential zone will exacerbate the situation considerably. Please don't be deluded in the thought that most of the traffic will be on a lightly-traveled day (Sunday): the church will be holding functions (some very large) on all days of the week and during all times of the day regardless of what the church might tell you to get their zoning approved. It will be an absolute nightmare for the residents on Weber who have already been hit broadside with median extension on Golden Gate Blvd. Weber Blvd has a 30 mph speed limit but in all honesty those signs should simply be taken down and replaced with nothing since the majority of vehicles don't obey them anyway. Add the trash that is thrown out of cars along with the trucks with no mufflers whatsoever and you have a street that is chaotic on a slow 'lay... and now there's a proposal to make things even worse??? If you want to be an effective planner... one who is trying to serve the community at large while not destroying the lifestyle of those already in place... I ask you to seriously consider vetoing this plan. As well, if you are seriously interested in the well being of those on Weber S you should consider speed bumps along the entire stretch of road. If you don't think they're necessary you are more than welcome to sit on my covered front porch for an hour or two and watch the Weber 500 for yourself: do that during rush hour and you will nix the rezoning immediately and add the speed bumps. The offer is a serious one, refreshments provided on the house. Take care and please be thoughtful with your decision... our front porch is waiting for your arrival Ed &Judi Laux 720 Weber Blvd S Naples Fl 34117 239-455-4580 (H) 239-682-1205 (C) elx@att.net KendallMarcia From: Jan Lopata <JL240z@hotmail.com> ent: Saturday, May 05, 2018 12:43 PM o: McDanielBill; FaulknerSue Subject: RE proposed zoning change on Weber Blvd S. Sir: I am a resident in the area between White Blvd and Golden Gate Blvd.off South Weber Blvd. The zoning is residential estates and has been since before I moved here over 15 years ago. I have lived in Naples since 1957. I selected this area as it was nice and a basically rural area compared to the down town area that was, even 15 years ago, getting to be over built and crowded. I know that this is just normal growth but it gets old after awhile so I chose to have a bit more elbow room and here is where I chose to build and retire and want to stay. I am sure you are aware of the proposed church that is planned to be built on the corner of Weber Blvd S and Golden Gate Blvd. Also fronting on Collier Blvd as well. Since it requires a zoning change to conditional use or whatever allows it I think the proposal still requires approval of the County commissioners by vote. The planning commission seems to be in favor of the change at this point. Weber Blvd has seen a huge increase in traffic thru this residential area and it gets worse every year. The daily traffic by parents bringing their children to and from the Cypress middle school and the people who use it to short cut the traffic on Collier Blvd. The owner of the property for the proposed church, to my knowledge isn't a resident here. That property has been for sale the whole time I have lived here and the owner has tried several times to get the zoning changed. He was denied all those times. The residents have spoken and made themselves clear that they do not want the zoning changed. The owner is not vested in this community because he owns property cant sell for whatever profit he wants. I am sure there is more history behind that, but its not fair for the iwner to make the people who live here 24/7 pay for his mistakes. The proposed entrance on Weber will make traffic on Weber a significant daily increase. The entrance should have been planned off Collier Blvd. regardless of the cost to the developer. It is possible it cant be done due to the proximity to Golden Gate Blvd. , so they figured its ok to dump all the traffic generated by the church into the neighborhood. The statement that it will only increase on Sunday is wrong as it also has proposed a day care center and there will likely be many events especially on all the holidays as well. This will likely add traffic in the evening hours as well. They even propose a farmers market. The proposed drain field is adjacent to wells and would be a health issue. When that was pointed out to the Commission at the meeting, one of the commissioners made a joke about it. I was told Collier County also purchased land near enough to it for a planned well. At the planning commission meeting they also tried to add other uses beyond the original plans hoping to get them added without documents including a residence for the pastor. There are probably even more changes the Weber Blvd. and area residents aren't aware of yet that will somehow find a way in if the zoning change is approved. What isn't included could be approved just by doing an insubstantial change to the documents once the zoning change is done. This is a residential area and should stay that way. The zoning change should not be allowed as the church would have a negative effect on the neighborhood. They even used the argument worst case scenario by using which would you rather have a 7-11 or a church. They already tried to get a 7-11 type store once before and it was denied! I don't remember what other zoning changes were attempted but they were denied as well. If you would like I can find out for you. I will also forward copies of this email to the other Commissioners and ask for their support. There was a comment made at the meeting that we would be hard pressed to stop a church. That makes it sound like its already approved. We are not anti church, we just )n't want any zoning changes that will make negative changes to our neighborhood. This is not a win/win ,ituation. The land owner wins but the residents loose. The church comment would be valid if the zoning was already in place but its not and shouldn't be. I haven't found out if a church gets any reductions in permitting 1 and impact fees or property taxes and zoning fees either. So I wonder how much revenue the county loses if it does get built. With in about a 2-3 mile radius there are 3 or 4 churches already. The one on the corner of Vanderbilt and Collier often hires off duty cops on sundays to direct the traffic so the religious attendees can -et out of their parking lot. At this proposed site the access/exit on Weber will likely cause a traffic jam on deber when they all leave. The access/exit on Golden Gate Blvd can only turn right and go east or turn onto Weber where they will encounter the Weber exit. Its going to be like when the people exit a movie, they all leave at once. I think all I have said is just the tip of the iceberg. Its only going to get worse. The county principle planner is Sue Faulknersue.faulkner@colliercountyfl.gov. The petition number is SSGMPA- PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1, and CU-PL201600002577. We the residents of this area need your support to defeat the zoning change to allow the church. Thank you for your attention and help. Jan Lopata Naples Fl 2 May 1, 2018 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA & CU To Whom It May Concern: I, Melania Budiu Hotaranu would like to express my support of the proposed the Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (Petition#: SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and the companion Conditional Use applications (CU - PL20160002577) for parcel numbers 36760800006 and 36760720005. I believe the project as proposed by the applicant, and their representatives at Davidson Engineering, is something that I would prefer over commercial or more intensive residential development in this location. I believe that the church and their representatives have been open to conversations about their project and the traffic issues that have been on the minds of other residents in our neighborhood. Please accept this email as support of the Grace Romanian Baptist Church and their proposed 300-seat church and associated accessory uses. —. Sincerely, MELANIA BUDIU HOTARANU 3541 1st AVE SW NAPLES,FL 34117 May 1,2018 Re: Grace Romanian Baptist Church SSGMPA & CU To Whom It May Concern: I would like to express my support of the proposed the small-Scale Growth management Plan Amendament(petition#SSGMPA_PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1) and the companion Conditional Use applications(CU —PL20160002577)for parcel numbers36760800006 and 36760720005. I belive the projectas proposed by the applicant, and their representatives at Davison Engeneering, is something that I would prefer over commercial or more intensive residential development in this location. I belive that the church and their representatives have been open to conversations about their project and the traffic issues that have been on the minds of other residents in our neighborhood. Please accept this email as support of the Grace Romanian Baptist Church and their proposed 300 seat church and associated accessory uses. Sincerely, CRISTIAN HOTARANU 3541 1St AVE SW NAPLES, FL KendallMarcia Subject: FW: Romanian Church Original Message From: Denise Smith Imailto:dmsmith1652( yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02,2018 11:26 AM To:WeeksDavid<David.Weeks@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Romanian Church Mr.Weeks, We live on Weber Blvd. and we want to express our opposition to having this Church being built in our neighborhood. We love where we live and don't see the need for another church. We appreciate the County Commissions and Planning Department to review our opposition. Regards, Ted l3ukowski Denise Smith Sent from my iPhone Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 KendallMarcia From: Carla Trombly <crtrombly@gmail.com> -- . ent: Monday, April 30, 2018 3:34 PM o: FaulknerSue Cc: Teddy Subject: Rezoning on Weber Blvd S Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good Afternoon -We're the residents of 641 Weber Blvd S and this is a written statement that we're in opposition of the re-zoning of the vacant property at the corner of Golden Gate Boulevard and Weber Boulevard South,for the purpose of building a church. Unfortunately we cannot attend the meeting on Thursday May 3rd but wanted to make sure that as residents of Weber Blvd S, that it was noted that we're not in favor of this re-zoning. Please reference petition number SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 and CU-PL20160002577 Thank you, Carla &Thomas Trombly 1 KendailMarcia From: Glembin <jglembin@embargmail.com> 'ent: Monday, April 30, 2018 2:04 PM o: FaulknerSue Subject: Petition SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1& CU-PL20160002577 To whom it may concern: I will not be able to attend meeting on Thursday May 3'd, but I want to have my opinion heard. As a resident of Weber Blvd S, I do not want to see the corner of Weber Blvd S and Golden Gate Blvd zoned for anything other than residential purposes. Weber Blvd is already the street all people use to get to Big Cypress Elementary School as well as Max Hasse Park. In March the Collier County Sheriff's Office did a traffic study on the south bound traffic on Weber Blvd S. Please review this report. In the two week period which included a slow week because of spring break for the local schools, we had over 10,000 cars and the highest speed was over 80 mph!!! This was only SOUTH BOUND traffic, it would be twice as much if north bound traffic was also included. That is a lot of traffic for a residential street. Another large traffic concern is the amount of traffic that would be forced to travel on 1st Avenue SW. The speed limit on this street is 25 mph, and that is frequently ignored. Anyone wanting to access this property from the East would have to come down 1st Avenue SW to get to Weber Blvd S to get to the property at the corner of Weber&Golden Gate Blvds. There are no left turns allowed from Golden Gate Blvd onto Weber Blvd as there is a concrete median there. Weber Blvd S. is already over trafficked. In addition to the school and park traffic numerous people use our street is a ,hort cut"to avoid Collier Blvd. However most of these people DO NOT obey the posted speed limit. We have repeatedly asked for speed patrols our street. I respectfully request that you deny the use of this property for anything other than residential use. Thank you, Donna Glembin 780 Weber Blvd S. 1 Kendall Marcia From: Marianne Varma <mgvarma5@gmail.com> sent: Sunday, April 29, 2018 6:48 PM FaulknerSue Subject: Petition#SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 This note is referenced to the above petition and #CU-PL-20160002577 There is a public meeting on Thursday, May3rd at 9:00 at the County Commissioner's Chamber on the 3rd floor. We (my wife and I) live at 530 Weber Blvd S. We agree with NOT allowing a church to be built on the corner of Golden Gate and Weber Blvd S. We would want to petition against an amendment of rezoning the property. Due to our physical disabilities we would not be able to attend. Thank you. Edward Weaver Sent from my iPadO 2 1 KendallMarcia From: Gary VanDeWerken <garyvandewerken©yahoo.com> ent: Friday, April 27, 2018 12:39 PM o: FaulknerSue; SaboJames Subject: Re: SSGMPA-PL20160002584/CPSS-2017-1 CU-PL20160002577 > On Apr 27, 2018, at 12:36 PM, Gary VanDeWerken <garyvandewerken@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Sue, > I live on the corner of Weber and 1st ave S.W. where they are proposing to build this church with 300 seats. Im totally against any commercial building in this area Its right next door too me its zoned residential and it should stay residential, lye lived on Weber for 32 years and would have not bought here knowing somebody wants to change zoning. > I looked at the site plan they want to put this church on septic system, that doesn't work for me high volume run off and sewer water leaching into ground water, this will destroy surrounding drinking water, my drinking water. > Not to mention the area where this property is situated will cause major traffic concerns, putting more traffic on Weber Blvd S that has been over loaded with school traffic that backs up 1st ave all the way to Weber Blvd S and 1 block down Weber Blvd. We also have Max Hasse Park and 2 other churches located around big cypress school, and people speeding over 70mph to bypass the traffic lights on 951. Roll over crashes in my front yard destroying my property something has got to be done and putting more traffic on Weber Blvd S is not the answer. -- Not to mention my property value would greatly depreciate. And you don't want to bottle neck traffic on Jolden gate Blvd or 951 this is the main access for Golden Gate estates. This project or any project is not a good idea for anyone living in the Estates. >Thank You > Gary VanDeWerken > 181 Weber Blvd S > Naples Fl 34117 > 239-825-8035 1 Hello Ms. Sue Faulkner, I was asked to contact you in reference to this possible amendment located at the property at the corner of Collier Blvd and Golden Gate Blvd. The public hearing request is in reference to the building of a church there. (Please see attached photo below) I'd like to submit this letter, as I cannot personally attend the hearing, as a petition against the building of a church. My family and I live on Weber Blvd South just about a block away from this property. Modifying the amendment to allow the building of a church at this property, which would cause a lot more vehicular traffic, is definitely not what Weber Blvd South needs. Weber Blvd S is already used as a thru street for rush hour traffic Monday through Friday from Collier Blvd morning and evening, as well as for Big Cypress Elementary School Monday through Friday when school is in session, morning and afternoon. During the peak of these times, I refuse to walk on the sidewalk with my children along Weber Blvd S because of the consistent traffic speeding highly above the posted 30mph speed limit. I'm even very nervous about checking my mailbox. The Collier County Sheriff's Office has been requested numerous times to conduct speed enforcement along the road. There is no raised curb along the road and the sidewalk is only just feet away. In addition, recently new traffic patterns at the intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S, as well as the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd, have denied traffic from making left turns. The intersection of Golden Gate Blvd and Weber Blvd S has a raised median in place, but the intersection of Weber Blvd S and White Blvd has a painted median which many people consistently violate to make a left turn from Weber Blvd S to travel east on White Blvd. If the building of a church is granted there at that property, there will be an increase of vehicular traffic during church functions as well as on Sunday. That will be an additional day, making it 6 days a week of vehicular that travel on Weber Blvd S. My family and I politely request that this amendment is denied for the building of a place of worship, and to remain for residential structures only. Thank you. The Osbornes 161 Weber Blvd South Naples, FL. 34117 ti ii'' rr get P"t BLIC.NEARING REQUESTIN MANAGEMENT �' PLAN AtE� E(T"(2`tyf7pN/#�SSG{•n �pL�2fl16(QT(Ht2cg4/ (�� / *y?= i t E a.k y(yD B Y H A s a' °:11 a ULA P, c,,Y�P,A.pt,NC E. till {JC'1 no,r; �fQ.A� fM - . �/T •,+ � a6'PFT1 t{? SSGhfPI PL2COUN s 4fc11,12,7:2 07 1 ANI) gar ' { { RA BAPTI TCHH OF/MAPLE""#IN . '� r.'r�S,. , `.�+.3+."1N RI �@ P` fISl ` r a E.,.:,:°,0. .` '9 � � J+ � ;Eur` � o '.Pt R Y 8®D i �° t r�� "r' ,°,=�r� I#:f�Ta a c. �z. '; '°' a� a�e ��,x�°_�v`a�,°as9� . a� ,�..�.�� !i � ,.„.� ��@ > aru4d x°d ue as dud w a , • TC7� �ui ,...;40:k1-.,,,41,k:,... E� � r x�r CO�C b � t�[D 5 } �� ,�a z r alga &C3ARf>C1FGt?GMT ` # �'� 7 ' , ik n�P3,92S2"23t36 :" c4 NACiCR � . fi, � a � 'durxn�rvsst4s;cx s-3 e�` �' * � � ,,,(:„,::4,111',':.,11:11.),... �a"" 51/1e'hf'ttlh. t!'.. ;114.7,,, !'.. „FAST hTCPttTCRfi � be <' }�J�ry '"� ' }�� a � � Y �{� n ��' ....ay "aR +i ,�Afl= t"` `4+SZ i74 '� �4�"', i �,tky�i°A° �+"A'�� Q ae 12• r � EMAIL 'AM SS u � ,�K . a w �tt:t+aid 65 �iia�+a�Jk6�ar" a The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, Inc. , z P.O.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 1 ,` www.estates-civic.org 05 June 2017 Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 RE: GGEACA Declines Request for Community Meeting regarding proposed Project: PL20160002584, Grace Community Church at 3899 1st Ave. SW; PID 36760720005 & PID 36760800006; and companion PL20160002577. Dear Sir/Madam Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA) has received your request to hold a community meeting with regarding the proposed project of Grace Romanian Church. GGEACA understands this project to be applying for a Zoning Change, Growth Management Plan Amendment and a Golden Gate Master Plan Amendment. We appreciate being included in the proposed changes that may affect the Estates community. We have taken the information you have provided and evaluated it with our group. Concerns for traffic and the need for comprehensive planning in the community are the purpose for the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy. Amending the Growth Management Plan through amendments like this is counter to the comprehensive planning being undertaken. As well, there are serious concerns with this project's traffic circulation, traffic impacts to the area, and the impacts to the gateway to Golden gate Estates At this time we have come to the conclusion that it is inappropriate to meet with your group concerning this project. The reason we have come to this conclusion is that the Golden Gate Master Plan is currently undergoing a comprehensive update and we feel it is inappropriate for this project to be considered during the update process. Furtheiuiore, it is GGEACA's position that no applications of this type shoul be considered until after completion of the Golden Gate Master Plan Update. Sincerely, Michael R. Ramsey PresidentGolden Gate Estates Area Civic Association http://www.estates-civic.org Michael.R.Ramsey@embarqmail.com c: Board of County Commissioners, Collier Co. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Noticf:is hereby giver t'iat the Collier County Planning Commission,wit hold a public meeting or September 20,2018 commenc'rq at 9:00 A.M.in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber,Two f soar,County Government Center,3299 East Tamiarrri Mail,Naples,FL. The purpose of the hearing is to cons car AN ORDINANCE OF Tim BOARD OF(::tit N'1 Y C:;OMMISSlONERC OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 119-05. AS AMENDED, nu; col.I.il.R 1:(11!♦F1' GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CHI•: UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,Fl ORION,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE:GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE.LAND USE MAP BY REVISING 111F.[ON Di IONAI. USES SUBDISTRICT'10 Al,l11W HIR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE (iF w(RSIIIV. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOL'f,F.4'ARD AND C 1)LLIER BOULEVARD IN SF C:1ION It,TOWNSHIP 49 5O$:111, RANGE. 26 LAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND lI RTHERMOR:E, 16.0:Olt'MFN3HNG TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT rO .1II1.. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONO%llC OPPORTUNITY: PROVIDING FOR SI:YER:LBH.IIT AM) PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 'PL20161111l25841 A RESOLUTION OF TILE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL[:SL TO Al 1(IW A C.HLR€.H WITHIN AN ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT lo SFC:i WS 3.Oa.)T.T1.ts.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON TILE SCN1I RE%ST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND CoLU11tR 110011,1:FARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY',FLORIDA. IPI,21116110011771 PROJECT LOCATION • .I Corn Mee BLVD W iv ist AVE SVA tJ 0 d m L All interested pa-ties are invited to appear arid Po heard, Cop=es of the proposed ORDINANCE 8 al RESOLUTION will he made available for ;nspection at the GM) Zoning Division, Comprehensive II Planning Secion, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples. between the hours of 8'00 A.M. and 5:00 PM Monday through Friday:Furthermore,the materias will he made available for inspection at the Col:e- County Clerk's Office,Fourn Floor,Colmer Courty Government Center,3289 Last Tarniafn Trail.Suite 40' Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing, Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the:CMD 7oning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Written com=ments no filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to September 20,2018 will be read and considereM at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any der.skin made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considerer:at such meet rig or'earirp,he iv II reed a rcc::'d of that proceeding and fo,such purpose ne may need.o ens•.lrn_tha:a veroanm record of the proceed ngs is made,wh:Th record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. li you are a person with a d saoility who ne eos any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding.you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the=vision of certain assistance. Please contact the Cale-County Fac lilies Management Division,located at 3335 Tam+ami Trail East,Suite 101, Neuters,FL 341 1 2-5356,(239;252-9380.at lease two days prior to the meeting. Assisted lisIvh iu devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Off cc. Merit P.Strain,Chairman Collier County alarming Commission rviloe,tts,Wit .'ti 12A 1 FRIDAY,AUGUST 31, 2018 11 NAPLES DAILY NEWS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission,will hold a public meeting on September 20,2018 commencing at 9:00 A.M.in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber,Third Floor,County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,FL. The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY REVISING THE CONDITIONAL USES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH OR PLACE OF WORSHIP. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 6.25 ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 1PL201600025841 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW A CHURCH WITHIN AN ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. 1PL201600025771 PROJECT LOCATION Golden Gate BLVD W ��u�Ul�knfiiri (17 o co 1st AVE SW rL *+' All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCE & RESOLUTION will be made available for inspection at the GMD Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday.Furthermore,the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office,Fourth Floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail,Suite 401 Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing. Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the GMD Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning Section.Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to September 20,2018 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division,located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 101, Naples,FL 34112-5356,(239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P.Strain,Chairman Collier County Planning Commission August 31,2018 ND.2098848 0 PROOF O.K.BY: 0 O.K.WITH CORRECTIONS BY: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY•SUBMIT CORRECTIONS ONLINE ADVERTISER:BCC_COMPREHENSIVE PLANNI PROOF CREATED AT:8/22/2018 12:18 PM SALES PERSON: Ivonne Gori PROOF DUE:- PUBLICATION:ND-DAILY NEXT RUN DATE:08/31/18 ND-2098848.INDD SIZE:3 col X 9.25 in