The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Agenda 11/07/2019 GMPA-PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 (GGAMP Element) COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CYCLE 2 AMENDMENT (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 oc w w J Q Y IL WELL RQ _ Project aa z z z Location J p 7 J W m Clerks Office CCPC: November 7, 2019 [continued from October 17, 2019] BCC: To be determined TABLE OF CONTENTS 2018 Cycle 2 GMP (Full Scale) Amendment Transmittal Hearing CCPC: November 7, 2019 [continued from October 17, 2019] 1) TAB: Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report: PL20170002897/CP-2018-3; 2) TAB: Resolution DOCUMENT: Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit "A" text (and/or maps): PL20170002897/CP-2018-3; 3) TAB: Projects/Petition DOCUMENT: Petitions/Applications PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 4) TAB: Legal Advertisement DOCUMENT: CCPC Advertisement 5) TAB: Correspondence DOCUMENT: Email Correspondence 9r9tv STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: November 7,2019 RE: PETITION PL20170002897/CP-2018-03, 2018 CYCLE 1 LARGE SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDZ- PL20170002898) [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] ELEMENT: GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN(GGAMP) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Jessica Harrelson,AICP Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 Patrick H.Neale Patrick Neale&Associates Attorney at Law Certified Circuit Civil Mediator 5470 Bryson Court, Suite 103 Naples, FL 34109 Owner/Applicant: Candice M. Jolly&Neil P. Elliott 2560 Oil Well Road Naples,FL 34120 Bonnie L. Jolly Walsh 2400 Oil Well Road Naples,FL 34120 Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 1 of 12 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The±20.16-acre site is located on the south side of Oil Well Road(CR858)approximately 3,800 feet west of Everglades Blvd., in Section 18, Township 48 South, Range 28 East. (Rural Estates Planning Communi Y17lY * R ' 1 I.. ! � � � F47.0.,,-,".i....! irmont! 1 �. �N•,"4�s t� Lam.__-� �—r. 39hAf ENE _ -_ ,, - F� I _— _ _ r � it � !. ., r 1 it -___ __. ® .M r� EMMANUEL,,- E A GE LICAL JJJ' �� _LJT ER ORCHAVEINEGi1ANGE 7"."""0. TG' �1. , 4: - . i C05 ► . r • RArlc �' prop �d + 1 i ' } -, A1. L. - ? ; Y-:-: A'JE NE—_ TT. I -7 a. i i i I / r"--, --,- : - REQUESTED _ .. -�ACTION: The applicant proposes a large-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP)to amend the Estates—Mixed Use District by creating the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. This proposed Subdistrict will allow three uses: Child Care Center(150 students maximum), Educational Services (private K-12 and/or charter school, 775 students maximum), Equestrian Riding Academy (150 students maximum). The amendment also includes adding the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict Map and amending the GGAMP Future Land Use Map. (See Resolution Exhibit A for the text and maps). [Note:The GGAMP was amended on 9/24/2019,based on the Board directed Re-study,to create three Sub- Elements;however,these amendments are not expected to become effective until sometime in November. Staff will revise the Resolution as necessary for the BCC hearing.] PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this Growth Management Plan Amendment is to amend the GGAMP to create the±20.16- acre Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict, consisting of two tax parcels fronting on Oil Well Road(CR 858), to allow two conditional uses (CU) not allowed on the subject site as it does not comply with CU locational criteria in the GGAMP (private schools and daycare), and one use not allowed in the �,., Estates designation (Equestrian Riding Academy). Keeping of horses is an accessory use in the Estates Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 2 of 12 Zoning District, up to a maximum of 2 horses per acre, but this does not include commercial boarding or training. Educational plants that have an agreement with Collier County Public Schools are permitted as essential services; however, a private school is listed in the Land Development Code(LDC)in the Estates Zoning District as a Conditional Use. Child care centers are also listed as a Conditional Use in the "E" District. The applicant is requesting to create a Community Facility Planned Unit Development(CFPUD)with the companion rezoning petition. The companion CFPUD (PUDZ) zoning petition (PL201700002898) will accompany this petition at the Adoption phase of the GMPA and is requesting the same uses and intensities as in the GMPA. A CFPUD will permit both a Child Care Center and a Private or Charter School without a Conditional Use. Although an Equestrian Riding Academy use is not listed specifically in the LDC under the Community Facility District, there are several outdoor recreational uses listed under Conditional Uses (such as tennis facilities,public pools, golf driving ranges, and archery ranges). SURROUNDING ZONING,FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION,AND CURRENT LAND USE: Subject Property: The+20.16-acre subject site is currently zoned Estates District. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use designation of the subject site as shown on the FLUM is Estates Designation,Estates-Mixed Use District,Residential Estates Subdistrict. The site is currently developed with two single-family residences and facilities for horses. Surrounding Properties: \.'" North: Immediately adjacent to the north,across Oil Well Road(CR 858),is a mixture of single-family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots that are designated Estates,Estates-Mixed Use District,Residential Estates Subdistrict and zoned Estates District. Further to the north and the northeast and northwest is a mixture of single-family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots with the same FLUM designation and zoning. The lots vary in size from 1.14 acres to 5.15 acres. South: Immediately adjacent to the south is a mixture of single-family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots that are designated Estates, Estates-Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict and zoned Estates District. The lots vary in size from 1.14 acres to 2.73 acres. Further to the south is a mixture of single-family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots with the same FLUM designation and zoning. The lots vary in size from 1.14 acres to 5.00 acres. East: Immediately to the east is a 13.97-acre tax parcel containing a single-family residential dwelling unit. It is designated Estates, Estates-Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict and zoned Estates District. Further to the east and southeast is a mixture of single- family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots with the same FLUM designation and zoning. Lot sizes vary from 1.14 acres to 5 acres. Approximately 600 feet directly to the east is the 21.72-acre Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church of Naples, Inc. CFPUD, designated Mission Subdistrict, with permitted uses that include a church (1,000 seat maximum) and related social services; a 300-person child and adult day care facility; job training and vocational rehabilitation;and a 450-person private school. All of the foregoing uses are limited to not-for-profit and operated with the church. Total site development is limited to 90,000 Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 3 of 12 square feet. Alternative development are single-family residential dwelling units as allowed in the Estates District. According to the most current Property Appraiser's Aerial photo, the CFPUD is currently developed with only an on-site lake on the southwest corner of the property, an athletic field in the northwest corner of the property, with a paved entrance way from Oil Well Road, and parking for approximately 24 cars. West: Immediately adjacent to the west is a mixture of single-family residential dwelling units and undeveloped lots that are designated Estates, Estates-Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict and zoned Estates District. Lot sizes vary from 1.14 acres to 6.79 acres. Approximately 1,100 feet to the west(on the west side of the Golden Gate Canal)lies the 616- acre Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD (located on both the north and south side of Oil Well Road). This MPUD permits a variety of housing types (1600 total dwelling units at a density of approximately 2.8 DU/A), golf courses, indoor and outdoor recreation, and excavation and off-site hauling. The Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD allows for higher density as part of the Settlement Area District FLUM designation. The Orange Blossom MPUD permits 44 commercial acres up to a maximum of 200,000 square feet for retail,office and personal service uses. Within the MPUD there is a Community Facility(CF)tract,with a maximum of 20 acres, that permits a variety of uses including: parks, golf courses, drainage — water management, government administrative offices,public or private schools, educational plants, and childcare centers. Currently, the CF tract is undeveloped and shown on the Collier County Property Appraiser's site as owned by Collier County Real Property. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The applicants stated in Exhibit"R"Narrative&Justification,there is a need in the Estates for the requested uses outlined in the petition(child day care centers,a charter elementary school or private K-12 school,and an equestrian riding academy), and they submitted data and analysis to document these needs. They are requesting an amendment to the GGAMP to allow zoning for these uses with the creation of the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. Per the Land Development Code(LDC),Community Facility District uses are described as public facilities, institutional uses, open space uses, recreational uses, water-related or dependent use, and other such uses generally serving the community at large. The petition stated,"The purpose and intent of(CF)district,per the LDC,is to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan(GMP)by permitting nonresidential land uses as generally identified in the urban designation of the future land use element. According to the petition, "while the subject property is not located in the Urban designation within the GMP, its location and surrounding neighborhood characteristics meet the intent of the urban designation's need to provide community facilities." The petitioners submitted a market study with their application that indicated that there is a demand for all three requested uses and that the uses would be supported at this location: child day care center, a charter elementary school or private K-12 school, and an equestrian riding academy. The Market Study, Exhibit "M", reviewed the inventory of child day care centers; public schools, parochial schools and charter schools; and other equestrian facilities. The study went on to predict the demand for each use based on U.S. Census information, future population projections, current school capacities versus future population growth, and information from the American Horse Council and American Horse Publications. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 4 of 12 Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent GMPA Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3177: Section 163.3177(1)(f): All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys,studies,and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05,including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area's proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a) 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: (a) The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. (b) The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. (c) The character of undeveloped land. (d) The availability of water supplies,public facilities, and services. (e) The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. (f) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples. FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 5 of 12 (g) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s.330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. (h) The discouragement of urban sprawl. (i) The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. (j) The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: (a) An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. (b) An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils,topography,natural resources,and historic resources on site. (c) An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. STAFF ANALYSIS The owners of the subject site submitted a petition requesting an amendment to the GGAMP to allow zoning for the uses listed below through the creation of the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. The ^ petition included data and analysis to demonstrate a need for the following uses in their surrounding 1 community and submitted this petition in the hopes to be able to provide these uses to the community: 1) Child care centers limited to 150 students 2) Educational services limited to Private School(K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students 3) Equestrian Riding Academy limited to 150 students Currently the subject property is designated Residential Estates Subdistrict and zoned Estates District. Permitted uses in the Residential Estates Subdistrict in the GGAMP are generally limited to single-family homes at a maximum density of 1 Dwelling Unit (DU) per 2.25 Acres (A). Multi-family dwelling units, duplexes,and other structures containing two or more principal dwellings are prohibited in all Districts and Subdistricts in the Estates Designation. The Estates Mixed Use District only allows limited low intensity retail, office, personal services, and institutional uses in certain designated locational areas, and the conditional uses of the Estates District are subject to stringent locational criteria. By creating the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict,all three uses will be permitted,with no conditional use applications needed. The subject property fronts Oil Well Road, a 4-lane divided arterial roadway. This is one of the main thoroughfares serving Golden Gate Estates (GGE). The segment of Oil Well Road from Immokalee Road to Everglades Blvd.is constrained and will remain 4 lanes. The FY2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Plan shows funded plans to widen the Oil Well Road segment from Everglades Blvd.N.to Oil Well Grade Rd. from a 2-lane undivided roadway to a 6-lane roadway. The GGE Tracts fronting on Oil Well Road are smaller than the typical GGE Tract(330' x 660' =5 acres);they presently vary from±230'to 260' in depth (roughly 1.74 — 1.97 acres). Given the narrower depth and smaller size, future road widening, and this Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 6 of 12 introduction of new uses,there is some concern that this petition might be an impetus for future requests to allow new uses in this area, especially the parcels to the east between the subject site and Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church of Naples CFPUD. This centralized Estates location of the subject property should lend itself well to serving a large area of the Estates by allowing easy access for the residents to the proposed uses. There will be a right-in/right-out and a left-in access developed with this project. The Traffic Impact Statement Addendum dated February 21,2019 stated this project with the three uses will generate 916 AM peak hour trips generated and 345 PM peak hour trips. Transportation Planning did not express concern with this projected number of peak hour trips. There is one approved (Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church) Community Facilities Planned Unit Development within the Mission Subdistrict in the Oil Well Road corridor and one CF tract in the Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD that allows CF uses. However, the CF Tract in Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD is owned by Collier County. The only facilities that have been developed to date within the approved CF sites is an on-site lake and an athletic field on the Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church CFPUD site. The GGAMP Restudy considered land use issues at a macro level. The White Paper did not identify any particular issues for this Oil Well Road corridor and no recommendations for land use changes. Day Care Centers According to the petitioner's Market Study,there are three locations within the study area that are currently operating a daycare facility that could accommodate 50 or more children — one is at the Louis Hasse Community Center on Golden Gate Blvd. W., and two centers are in Ave Maria. Currently there is a Voluntary Pre-K program at Corkscrew Elementary for 4-year-old children, but no day care facilities for younger children. In addition to the approved CF location(Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church)listing a child and adult care facility as a permitted use with a maximum of 300 persons—and must be not-for-profit and affiliated with a church within the subdistrict,Orange Tree MPUD is zoned to allow child day care services(classified as C-1 in the LDC)under the following inclusionary language: All uses that are permitted uses in the C-1 thru C-3 zoning districts of the Collier County Land Development Code at time of SDP application. Orange Tree is located approximately 5,000 feet west of the subject site. No day care center is currently operating within Orange Tree MPUD. Orange Blossom Ranch's CF tract permits a childcare center,but no center is developed at this time and the CF tract is owned by Collier County Real Property. There is one more possible location for a child care center in the vicinity at Randall Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict. The purpose of the 56.5-acre Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict in the GGAMP is to provide commercial goods and services to the surrounding area. This subdistrict is approximately 3.4 miles from the subject property at the intersection of Randall Blvd. and Immokalee Road and allows most C-4 (General Commercial District)uses, including child care. After conducting our staff analysis of the request for a child day care center,staff concurs there is a probable need for this use and can support this request. Attention should be given to ensure that this use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood during the CFPUD application. This includes insuring child pick up and drop off at this facility is well-removed from Oil Well Road and noise is mitigated to lessen impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 7 of 12 Educational services limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students A recent Land Development Code (LDC) amendment (Ordinance # 2016-27) recognizes "Educational plants" as an essential service allowed as a permitted use in the Estates; however, public schools without an agreement with Collier County would require a Conditional Use in the Estates Zoning District. According to the LDC, child care centers, as well as private schools and parochial schools (including educational plants)are all permitted uses in the Community Facility District without a conditional use. Staff reviewed the surrounding area for currently existing school supply. The following schools are labeled as within the study area of the petitioner's Exhibit"M"Market Study: 1. Corkscrew Elementary 2. Corkscrew Middle School 3. Palmetto Ridge High School 4. Palmetto Elementary School 5. Estates Elementary School 6. Big Cypress Elementary School 7. Cypress Palm Middle School 8. Sabal Palm Elementary School 9. Laurel Oak Elementary School 10. Oakridge Middle School 11. Gulf Coast High School The Market Study listed 6 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, and two high schools, all Collier County Public Schools. The Market study looked at enrollment capacity for each of these schools and compared them to projected enrollment through 2024. The Market Study shows that two high schools (Palmetto Ridge High and Gulf Coast High Schools) and a couple of elementary schools (Big Cypress and Laurel Oak Elementary Schools)as being over capacity in the next five years. The first three schools on the list above(1-3) are all located less than 2 miles from the subject property on Oil Well Road. Corkscrew Elementary is projected to be just over capacity in 2024. Corkscrew Middle School is projected to be significantly under capacity in 2024,and Palmetto Ridge High School is projected to be over capacity by approximately 300 students in 2024. However, Collier County Public Schools has undeveloped land inventory in the area(including two locations within the study area) and has the ability to increase capacity onsite by sending students to an adjacent school zone that has capacity. Transportation Planning did not express concern with the projected number of peak hour trips (916 AM peak hour trips and 345 PM peak hour trips). Even at the macro level at which GMP amendments are reviewed, Staff has compatibility concerns regarding a 775-student Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School and concerns about changing the character of the area. Staff does not support this use as part of the petition. Equestrian Riding Academy There are a number of conditional uses listed in the Community Facility District that pertain to outdoor recreational facilities. Although an Equestrian Riding Academy is not specifically listed in the CF district, the Estates designation recognizes the desire of the Estates residents to own and ride horses and permits up Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 8 of 12 to a maximum of 2 horses per acre. The equestrian riding academy use is similar to other uses listed under conditional uses that are typically outdoors in that it might create a similar attraction to residents as other outdoor activities listed, such as tennis facilities and public swimming pools. However, staff sees a distinction between private stabling of a few horses and stabling and training/riding horses as a commercial enterprise. The concerns are for compatibility and change to the character of the area by introducing a new use not presently allowed anywhere in GGE. Staff does not support this use. Just as a note,although the area surrounding the subject site has a semi-rural residential character, Staff has received more than a dozen emails from residents that they support and desire to see the proposed uses at this location. No communication has been received in opposition to this project,including from the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association. Goal 5 of the GGAMP is to balance the desire by residents for urban amenities within Golden Gate Estates with the preservation of the area's rural character, as defined by wooded lots,the keeping of livestock,the ability to grow crops,wildlife activity,low density residential development, and limitations on commercial and conditional uses. Throughout Staff's analysis of this project on the previous pages,we have commented on issues with each of the requested uses that might create a challenge to achieving this balance. Staff recommends addressing each of these issues when reviewing the CFPUD zoning petition. Detailed compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback and buffer requirements, days and hours of operation and other operational characteristics, formerly in the Development Review Division, etc. Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Summer Araque, Principal Environmental Specialist reviewed and approved the petition in April 2018. She noted the following: The Environmental Data Report dated February 13, 2018 (last revised January 10, 2019), was reviewed for environmental impacts and historical and archaeological impacts by the Development Review Division. No EAC (Environmental Advisory Council) review is required; no changes to the Environmental Goals and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering&Project Management Division, stated his review(for potable water and sanitary sewer)is not applicable for this petition in April 2019. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer,Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition in March 2019,with all previous concerns resolved. Collier County Public Schools Impacts: Amy Lockhart, Long-Range Planner for Collier County Public Schools, submitted the following statements: The district does not need to review land use petitions for private or charter schools. All proposed uses are non-residential,therefore will not generate students. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 9 of 12 Notes: The petitioner stated the following in Exhibit Q. Comparative Level of Service Analysis: 1. There is currently no storm water management,the site's storm water management system will be designed in accordance with the LDC during the time of any development order. 2. Collier County Utilities(potable water and sanitary sewer system)are currently not available to the project site, so the proposed build-out will be served by a private well and septic system. 3. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities have no anticipated capacity issues until 2068. 4. The addition of a Charter school would assist in addressing rising population demand for School Facilities. School impact fees are not assessed on commercial developments. 5. Parks and recreational facilities will not be adversely impacted with the proposed development. 6. Fire and EMS will have no measurable impact from the proposed development. Staff concurs with all of the statements above except#4. Staff does not support the addition of a Charter school to address rising population demand for school facilities. 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 April 16,2019, 5:30 p.m. at Estates Branch Library, 1266 Golden Gate Blvd., Naples, FL 34120. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this large scale GMP amendment petition and the companion Planned Unit Development Amendment(PUDA) petition. The applicant's team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. Approximately 10 members of the public along with approximately 6 members of the applicant's team and County staff signed in at the NIM. Agent Jessica Harrelson presented the GMPA project to create the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. The public asked questions about the project details, the planning process and how they would be notified at the time of the Public Hearings. The consultant explained the purpose of the companion PUDZ application was to create a Community Facilities Planned Unit Development. Ray Bellows, Collier County Zoning Manager, and Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner in Collier County Comprehensive Planning, answered questions concerning notifications and the process. There was no opposition to the project expressed at the meeting. The meeting ended at approximately 6:30 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner,Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] Note: Fourteen emails of project support were received by Staff and are included in the Planning Commission packets. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • Staff has concern that maintaining the balance of the rural character of the Estates with the desire by residents for urban amenities, as stated in Goal 5 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan may be very challenging to attain; especially with noise and traffic impacts generated with the requested uses. • Staff concurs there is a probable need for a day care center use and can support this request. However, attention should be given to ensure that this use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood during the CFPUD application. This includes locating child pick up and drop off at Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples,FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 10 of 12 this facility that is well-removed from Oil Well Road and noise is mitigated to lessen impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. • Even at the macro level at which GMP amendments are reviewed, Staff has compatibility concerns regarding a 775-Student Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School and staff has concern that the use is out of character with the surrounding area. Staff does not support this use as part of the petition. • The Estates designation recognizes the desire of the Estates residents to own and ride horses and the Estates zoning district permits up to a maximum of 2 horses per acre. Though the petitioner has demonstrated a need for the equestrian riding academy,staff's opinion is this use should not be introduced in GGE at this location. • Staff recommends when reviewing the CFPUD petition(at a later time),special attention is needed to ensure that the activities are compatible with the surrounding area and do not create undue noise and traffic for the surrounding residents. • 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 nor concerns for impacts upon other public infrastructure. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on October 18, 2019. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(6)(a)2, and 163.3177(6)(a)8 Florida Statutes. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20170002897/CP- 2018-3, as proposed, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial — not to transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other agencies required by Statute. However, Staff does recommend approval of the Subdistrict if limited to day care use. Zoning Division •2800 North Horseshoe Drive• Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 11 of 12 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PREPARED BY: f DATE: r_c,, SUE FAULKNER. PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION/ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: 5._Thp‘11 / , 1` DATE / 0 - 2 /—/4 DAVID C. WEEKS. AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION/ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: / JA ES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE /4 —.2 /—/? GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PETITION NO.: PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 Staff Report for the November 7, 2019, CCPC Meeting. NOTE: This petition schedule pending for BCC Meeting. Zoning Division•2800 North Horseshoe Drive•Naples, FL 34104•239-252-2400 Page 12 of 12 RESOLUTION NO. 19- - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING THE OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO THE ESTATES MIXED USE DISTRICT AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT TO OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW CHILD CARE CENTERS, SCHOOLS, AND AN EQUESTRIAN RIDING ACADEMY AND FURTHERMORE PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 20.16 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY SIX-TENTHS OF A MILE EAST OF EVERGLADES BOULEVARD IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20170002897] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, 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, Petitioners, Bonnie Walsh and Candice M. Jolly, have initiated this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; and WHEREAS, on October 17, 2019, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on , the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184,F.S.; and [18-CMP-01002/1498714/1]91 Oil Well Road GMPA Page 1 of 2 PL20170002897 Words underlined are additions;Words st1uek-threugh are deletions 9/19/19 *** *** *** *** are a break in text WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of , 2019. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk William L. McDaniel, Jr., Chairman Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton-Cicko A A Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit"A"—Text and map amendments [i8-CMP-01002/1498714/1]91 Oil Well Road GMPA Page 2 of 2 PL20170002897 Words underlined are additions; Words struck-tbrougb are deletions 9/19/19 *** *** *** *** are a break in text PL20170002897/CP2018-3 EXHIBIT A COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** TABLE OF CONTENTS *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** LIST OF MAPS [Pg. iv] Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Conditional Uses Subdistrict: Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.1.2: [Pg.4] The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. ESTATES—MIXED USE DISTRICT 1.Residential Estates Subdistrict 2.Neighborhood Center Subdistrict 3.Conditional Uses Subdistrict 4. Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict 5. Mission Subdistrict 6.Everglades—Randall Subdistrict 7.Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates—Mixed Use District [Pg.30] 7.Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict The Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict comprises approximately 120.16 acres and is located on the south side of Oil Well Road,approximately 2 miles east of lmmokalee Road.This Subdistrict is intended to provide limited community facility land uses. a. The following uses are allowed: 1) Child care centers(SIC 8351).limited to 150 students 2) Educational services(SIC 8211)limited to Private School(K-12)and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students Underlined text is added;struck through text is deleted. Page 1 of 4 PL20170002897/CP2018-3 3) Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students 4) As an alternative to the uses in 1.through 3. above,this Subdistrict may be developed with single- family dwellings in accordance with the Residential Estates Subdistrict. b. The Subdistrict site is encouraged to be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development. c. The implementing rezone ordinance shall include provisions to: 1) Address compatibility with surrounding properties. 2) Establish a common theme for architecture,signage and landscaping. 3) Provide pedestrian connectivity. d. Property adjacent to this Subdistrict shall not qualify for the Transitional Conditional Use. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES [Pg.46] Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Conditional Uses Subdistrict:Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict Underlined text is added;stmek trough text is deleted. Page 2 of 4 • EXHIBIT A PETITION PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 �� OIL WELL ROAD COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 0COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 37th AVE NE W a O -a 35th AVE NE z PROPOSED SUBDISTRICT 0 ' OL Oil Well RD J J CO t N O 31st AVE NE • 29th AVE NE ADOPTED-XXXX Legend (Ord.No.XXXX) PREPARED ANBETHYANG,P R 0 150 300 600 900 Y///� GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Y SUBDISTRICT FILE:OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT L� ( I Feet LOCATION AUP.MXD 1 �� DATE'.082018 Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT"A" PETITION PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 IISILMLDEDISMIAThal ESTATE.�.NGNATION AOryCUUURAI I RURAI DESIGNATION • MD=UM OMTI4ICT MOM USE DISTRICT ®R s. A an =M .. {..pa.am,. =R..a."E 91.0..,3 " " " rl,Dowry Now..SutitabSt COncttnar•I LAW SO... nYERIgoo A1U SPACIAL.EEATi"`G ,� GOLDEN GATE AREA COM�ICML DISTRICT 0010..:Rolm... 3 1M=time �� 1: FUTURE LAND USE MAP N. 9n wA ...moo,.: 0.......c.....“.......... IMMOKALEE RD J 45 '�""'' °0�d COMMERCIALOISTUCT d I— =cam p.."..,c......U.CO 4. El iso,.".°....A`l.'r,.r`�... ' / Mown fn.OM, 11111 9..tops...Yen.1 swam 1 .. R.Mro ...c.,.a,.a:s...E.n ':• . ®Emma 9aa.pc..,s...., . . .....1.41 403.OSA U MM..O..{{a.a",aax.a.SEC,.OfINFMC. z SUBJECT SITE aME..M " CI CP-2018-3 _ \ _____. . 3 /; W 1 , / V OIL WELL RD t9 7 (1) F 0 a °� H RANDALL BLVD i - IMMOKALEE RD i ." z O p m O • O OW 0 : : VANDE RBILT m-- ..... BEACH RD L.! If w # W CO m 00 ce GOLDEN GATE BLVD GOLDEN GATE BLVD U PINE ERD 0l ........,\ 0 X / GREEN BLVD (- 10 • CD o m 3 I— — , L'11) o z 2 o mE, w qG.PKWYman,-- � I m Rgpl INTERSTATE 75 _ INTERSTATE 75 DAVIS BLVD 0 j //;" S.R.84 > / I • E W J U i/ j 8 / / RATTLESP AKE HAMMOCK RD './ • 94, al GOLDEN GATE 8;FUTURE LAND USE MAP :,-•# .7,17///://// /////// / AMENDED-DECEMBER 1 2001 U ADOPTED-FEORARY,1991 1" (ORD.NO.3001.1) • l_, AMENDED-MAY Ip 1992 AMENDED-OCTOBER 11,2008 " - AMENDED-MAY 35,1991 (ORD NO.1001.59) /// AMENDED•JULY 28,2010 j'//� / ///� AMENDED•JULY 27 1993 (ORD NO.2010.31) / / /� AMENDED-JULY 25.2010 AMENDED-APRIL 12.1994 (ORD.NO.2010-32) f,,- 9 AMENDED-MARCH 14.1995 ENDED'SEPTEMSFR 14,2011 f 03 (ORO.NO.2011.291 AMENDED•OCTOBER 21.1991 AMENDED-NOVEMBER 15,2014 { W AMENDED-APRIL 14,1998 (ORD.NO.2014-I1) Ii _ AMENDED-NOVEMBER 10 2015 I: CO p AMENDED-SEPTEMBER 8.1998 (ORD_NO.201552) 0 U AMENDED•MAY 10 2016 . AMENDED-FEBRUARY 23,1999 (ORD Na 2015-12) r. �+ . in AMENDED•JUNE 13 301) r I— AMENDED-MAY 9,2000 (ORD NO.201]23) L• AMENDED MARCH 13.2001 AMENDED XX%% ✓•'; N :'1 O TORO.No.XXXK) •,.,� AMENDED-MAV 14.3002 \r MSENOCO-SEPTEMBER 10.2003 { 0 ,��- (ORD.NO 293]-44) AMENDED-OCTOBER 25.2004 i 0 0.5 1 2 3 DED.NO 2004-71) � „:,..>••,:[[[/iir// Miles AMENDED-JANUARY 25.2006 (ORD.NO.2005-3) a.nen Rpr.r..p44.Ra AMENDER-JAN20RY 25,2001 r'•_/.,-, •"'///•/�/�I/ji'//%///%% �� {..m.w"mran MORD.JANUARY 25, SU 01.1... ......{.....0..._. u, I R28E I R27E I R28E I R29E ...op,a• APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER GMPA-PL20170002897 DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE AUGUST 22, 2017 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 BONNIE WALSH/CANDICE M. JOLLY&NEIL ELLIOT-PROPERTY OWNERS Company N/A - PROPERTY OWNERS Address 2400 OIL WELL ROAD / 2560 OIL WELL ROAD City NAPLES State FL Zip Code 34120 239.455.4257/239.289.6696/ Phone Number Fax Number N/A B. Name of Agent * JOSH FRUTH,ANNA WEAVER,JESSICA HARRELSON, PATRICK NEALE • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. & PATRICK NEALE & ASSOCIATES Address 4365 RADIO RD, SUITE 201 / 5470 BRYSON CT, SUITE 103 City NAPLES / MARCO ISLANDState FL Zip Code 34104/34145 Phone Number 239.434.6060/239.642.1485 Fax Number 239.434.6084/239.642.1487 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record SAME AS APPLICANT Address City State _Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL,Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 1 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership BONNIE WALSH 100%(Folio#39892880001) 2400 OIL WELL RD,NAPLE,FL 34120 and CANDICE M.JOLLY&NEIL P.ELLIOTT 100%(Folio#39894520000) 2650 OIL WELL ROAD,NAPLES,FL 34120 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 C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership 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 Bonnie Walsh-1.15.2003(Folio##39892880001) G. Date subject property acquired Candice Jolly&Neil Elliott- 1.23.2017(Folio#39894520000) 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 EXHIBIT"P" FOR THE SURVEY The properties comprise approximately 20.16 acres, and are located on the south side of Oil B. GENERAL LOCATION Well Road, approximately six-tenths of a mile east of Everglades Boulevard. C. PLANNING COMMUNITY RURAL ESTATES D. TAZ 393 E. SIZE IN ACRES ±20.16 F. ZONING ESTATES G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Please see Exhibit"H"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 (5) 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 X Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 4, 30&46 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. of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by adding the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. Please see Exhibit"C"for the text updates and Exhibit U for the Subdistrict Map. C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Estates Mixed Use District Residential Estates Subdistrict TO Estates Mixed Use District-Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict(Exhibit U) D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (Exhibit U) E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit D&G Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit E Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit G&H 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 H Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit F 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 F 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-1 1.006(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 EXHIBIT.,M„ 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 Q Potable Water EXHIBIT Q Sanitary Sewer EXHIBIT Q&0 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS EXHIBIT Q Drainage EXHIBIT Q Solid Waste EXHIBIT Q 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 J 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 Q 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: Zones AH&X See Exhibit T 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 X $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) N/A $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) EXHIBIT K Proof of ownership (copy of deed) EXHIBIT L Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) N/A 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of$250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 6 DE DAVIDSON !1 fklN�. EXHIBIT "B" PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SHEET Davidson Engineering, Inc. Jessica Harrelson, AICP Mrs. Harrelson is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners and has practiced land use planning at Davidson Engineering since 2004. During her career, Mrs. Harrelson has been involved with both large and small developments. Her areas of expertise with Davidson Engineering include, but are not limited to, conceptual site planning, land use analysis, comprehensive plan amendments, facilitating public information meetings and rezoning. Jessica continues to assist clients and land owners with projects to achieve their development related goals through the entitlement process. JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. James Bank, P.E. President Mr. Banks has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Kentucky (1986) and received his Professional Engineering license from the State of Florida BPE in 1991. Mr. Banks has been actively involved in the fields of traffic/transportation engineering and planning for the past 30 years. During that time, he has developed extensive knowledge within these disciplines and is regarded as an expert within his profession. Mr. Banks has represented a wide range of clientele in both the public and private sectors. Public sector clients include airport authorities & FAA, local and state municipalities, county commissions, public school boards, city councils, planning boards, and city/county attorneys. Private sector clients have been land planners, land use attorneys, right-of-way acquisition attorneys, engineers, surveyors, architects and developers. 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 1 Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897/CP 2018-3 July 26, 2019 DE DAVIDSON 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). 2 Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897/CP 2018-3 July 26, 2019 EXHIBIT "C" PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Policy 1.1.2: The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. ESTATES—MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Residential Estates Subdistrict 2. Neighborhood Center Subdistrict 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict 4. Golden Gate Parkway Institutional Subdistrict 5. Mission Subdistrict 6. Everglades—Randall Subdistrict 7. Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict Words struck through are deletions;words underlined are additions. Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 August 27, 2019 EXHIBIT "C" PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT A. Estates— Mixed Use District 7. Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict The Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict comprises approximately ±20.16 acres and is located on the south side of Oil Well Road, approximately 2 miles east of Immokalee Road. This Subdistrict is intended to provide limited community facility land uses. The following uses are allowed: a. Child care centers (SIC 8351), limited to 150 students b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students c. Equestrian Riding Academy (SIC 7999), limited to 150 students As an alternative to the uses in a) through c) above, this Subdistrict may be developed with single family dwellings in accordance with the Residential Estates Subdistrict. The Subdistrict site is encouraged to be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development. The implementing rezone ordinance shall include provisions to: 1. Address compatibility with surrounding properties. 2. Establish a common theme for architecture, signage and landscaping. 3. Provide pedestrian connectivity. Property adjacent to this Subdistrict shall not qualify for the Transitional Conditional Use. Words struck through are deletions;words underlined are additions. Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 August 27, 2019 EXHIBIT "C" PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Golden Gate Area Master Plan Study Areas Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map High Density Residential Subdistrict 1989 Boundaries of Activity Center Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict Urban Mixed Use Activity Center/Golden Gate Parkway and Coronado Parkway Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Pine Ridge Road Interchange Activity Center and Pine Ridge Road Mixed Use Subdistrict Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard Center Collier Boulevard/Pine Ridge Road Center 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 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict Words struck through are deletions; words underlined are additions. Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict G M PA-PL20170002897 August 27, 2019 Z:1Active Projects\O\OIL WELL RD\DWGIGIS12017-08-15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT D(LOCATION MAP(.mxd I 47THAVEN= 47TH AVE NE I N 45TH AVE NE w I w w w w w LB W�� E w z z z z z z z 45TH AVEE z H 1— I-- H H I- - cn w ( cn cn I _ i i _H H i a S N N °~° 43RD AVE NE J CO 41ST AVE NE W I41STAVE NE 39TH AVE NE 1 C7 W 39TH AVE NE W o 37TH AVE NE wI J al 37TH AVE NE 35TH AVE NE 2 2 35TH AVE NE 33RD AVE NE E 0 OIL WELL RD CR 858 m III � 33KU HVt INC. w ,111p. � t 5 31ST AVE NE w I w z (/) ill. U 29TH AVE NE 210111 H A , 27TH AVE NE ......... / RANDALL BLVD 24THA,/ENE 24TH AVE NE 24TH AVE NE w z LEGENDcn z 22ND AVE NE 22ND AVE NE -SUBJECT PROPERTY:20.16 ACRES I- - co —MAJOR ROADWAYS 2UI1-14/ENt 20TH AVE NE 0 20TF'0?5'ENE 1 —SOURCES'COL-LIERCOUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2018) I MILES ( J, HEND-, r' , t_ r _- PAL EACH c\ 1 I T � ' COLLIER; 'p' r A 1- • ., DADE II.M• ROE , ...:144--- DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT DEDAVIDSON RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PAYRPRRN, PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAP Z:\Active Projects101OIL WELL RD\DWG\GIS12017-08-15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT E(AERIAL EXHIBIT).mxd . fir --._� } %:","' 7 .. w • , 40t r • _ f� .� _ - ' 9 ,j n 9 F• ' '•. W _...(14- E ''. • -• ,I I .4''? r'"'-15.' .-.., 4 A , , 7- --1 f _.1 ii4:::,,,/, . ., 1.- ... , ,. - .: J.��A ♦ - .- — •. , ', .a �Y % '? t''" ‘e"''. c ✓, ., • r' `'35TH AVE NE ° �a"a " �tr.i s. .. � ` t ` . Y � � ' ' r � ti T. ►: 48 0, CF r • p 'AC' M- w i .. ss ►-�* 4------' : EXHIBIT F 1 , : ,__ _ ,0. OIL WELL ROAD PARCEL - : • •,r Ii ..` Environmental Data t Section 18/Township 48S/Range 28E . ,17:1:, .), i 1 Prepared For: ',. t ( kIi r -1/' �' Collier County Growth Management Division ``, Cott County 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 - - 41"40),f7.7 . . --- -''' `moi\ ','• Prepared By: . vcth Tee4 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC c.i .t 'O 10600 Jolea Avenue k .41t Bonita Springs, FL 34135 �� 239.304.0030 ,.; Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ii 4 , t tr ,i t f February 13, 2018 j Revised: September 5, 2018 Revised: January 10, 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA EXHIBITS Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Aerial Site Map Figure 3 FLUCCS Mapping Figure 4 NRCS Soils Map Figure 5 USGS Quad Map APPENDICES APPENDIX A: PUDZ Pre-App Notes APPENDIX B: Staff Qualifications APPENDIX C: Protected Species Survey APPENDIX D: Historic Aerial Photographs APPENDIX E: Native Tree Count Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00)for a GMPA and PUDZ.This information is in response to the checked items in the PUDZ Pre-Application Notes as provided by Davidson Engineering. See Appendix A, PUDZ Pre-App Notes, pg. 4. PROPERTY LOCATION The Oil Well parcel (Subject Property) is located east of Immokalee Road (846), and west of Everglades Boulevard North, on the south side of Oil Well Road. The property is in Section 18, Township 48 South, Range 28 East, in Collier County, Florida.The PUDZ consists of two adjacent parcels,totaling approximately 20.16 acres. See Figure 1, Location Map. --ha '"�. 411111111P021121111114KSONVILLE.'V �� PARCEL , ffle,LOCATION ' e 111411VILI . :".' . . c,. PARCEL LOCATION _ 11 SANCTUARY•. Ellik� � 1 4 v ARWAT R _ �� 88TH°Th#VE NE �4 .' T PE ERSBURO bi It _k 561 AVENE _ A 1,. . 1.1 �TTNAV E�T1� 1=STH�AVE NE � iPIiii VEtt VIIRItffl 01 27rNAVE NE wJ CAVE CORAL rw .IULEE ° 4 • - I< `'4• •RAL SPRINGS .._= IITH VE'NE— �r*i+: , z RTHAVENE—� 4., •4,17�F'OKE PINE. OLLVWOOD .•�O��..4 LEAH �'I'y In I Iii I I I I I (MA �E�� .'' •.�-. • } aoAVES COLLIER N-`r N N tg w BTAAVESE } SEC 18-TSP 48S-RGE 28E tt t w � I I I � Y 18;T AVE SE-� COUNTY f #G I I i5 ,, PARCELS: 39892880001 & F* ]8�TH,VE.5E�'; • - 39894520000 .- NTHAVE'6t- LAT:26° 17'29.66"N -VE9E -- 32ND `�� LONG:81°33'26.29"W Figure 1. Location Map ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST(criteria is bolded; responses are not) (see page 4 of Pre-App Notes) Current Aerial Photographs(available from Property Appraiser)with project boundary and,if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. • See Figures 2 and 3 below, Aerial Site Map and FLUCCS Mapping. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 11116011 • R its IMO!y • ir .4- I A , )x T. — .1. .V le' ai r . i '*: *.tib. . iiip joitZs • } w b }l .V. • i..1'Y 1, � » / ' •61/4 • .°-• ',..A. ;•' I 4 i tit .Rs, _ f v + 'iv, Q� . Nob: +� 'f0 .A 1 ,• , 2017 Aerial&Subject Property obtained '! •1r' ;{` t from Collor County Property Appraiser , _• i pl '� 1 0 " • 600.moi. _1 .4 - ' r I'. 4 -' •+r. .1 • ' 7 I-1 Subject Property Figure 2. Aerial Vicinity Map Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA �4. y <fosk P '..4., • >, lam. v �j, A t Is , ,k.:44i !.. ."4 . r , ,3.0..... , ,. . .. . . ,, . 4 +1, 110•. . .03 ,tea c 'NMI/� •- i. `� � 211 �!. r ,� .til -+9r </ 5.01 Ac :3:. T . + -N U0 ,4%1)711 l r a 250.. .. • '� ^' 2.98 Ac ! - - I — .- -,e, I 1 Subject Property Nob / R 2017Amal&Sub;ec;Property obtained FLUCCS Mapping q from Cotler county Property Appraiser ' • - -' I'I' t. .� 110,Residential 9 en " ak- 11 i 211,Improved Pastures 1" 250,Specialty Farms • Figure 3. FLUCCS Mapping FLUCCS 110, Single Family Residential, 7.03 Acres This area exists in the central and northeastern portion(s) of the property. It contains two (2) houses, one (1) large garage, a pond, a number of outdoor animal enclosures, and associated driveways. FLUCCS 211, Improved Pasture, 10.15 Acres These areas exist in the northwestern and southeastern portions of the property.They contain grazing land for ungulates (horses, a cow, a zebra) contained on the premises. FLUCCS 250, Specialty Farms, 2.98 Acres This area exists in the southwestern portion of the property. It contains a barn and smaller covered structures to provide sanctuary for mini horses. It also contains penned areas for these animals. Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 A. Environmental Data Requirements. 2. Preparation of Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental science or natural resource management. Academic credentials and Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 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. • See Appendix B, Staff Qualifications. 4. Environmental Data. The following information shall be submitted, where applicable, to evaluate projects. a. Wetlands. • No wetlands were identified on the Subject Property. b. Listed Species and Bald Eagle Nests and Nest Protection Zones. i. 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 (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Survey times may be reduced or waived where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low, as determined by the FFWCC and USFWS. Where an initial habitat assessment by the environmental consultant indicates that the likelihood of listed species occurrence is low, the survey time may be reduced or waived by the County Manager or designee, when the project is not reviewed or technical assistance not provided by the FFWCC and USFWS. Additional survey time may be required if listed species are discovered. • See Appendix C, Listed Species Survey. ii. Provide a survey for listed plants identified in LDC section 3.04.03. • See Appendix C, Listed Species Survey. iii. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with LDC section 3.04., 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 PPL. 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 PPL. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA • See Appendix C, Listed Species Survey. c. Native vegetation preservation. i. 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 LDC sectio n 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 LDC .3pter_3 and LDC section 10.07 fl . • Nearly all site alteration activities on the Oil Well property occurred between 1985 and 1993 — historic aerial photos have been provided in Appendix D. The 1993 aerial shows two(2) homes, a driveway, pond, riding area, and first shed had been constructed. The western 5.97 acres of property and the southeast 1.44 acres of the property had been cleared for improved pasture. All of these activities took place prior to the current property ownership, but have been maintained to support the ongoing agricultural use on the site. Coordination with County staff has determined that after clearing allotments for the above legally permitted uses and activities, there remains 8.01 acres of property that needs to be included in any native vegetation requirements for future development or agricultural use. Figure 4 below summarizes clearing for legally permitted uses and the 8.01 acres identified that needs to be included in native vegetation calculations. Clearing for legally permitted uses included 2 homes sites(1 acre each),a pond,garage,sheds, and areas for grazing (past agricultural uses). Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA A • . , ,,,.._.•,,.. . t 1 ' T ...a - „-.—.....:„. _ .-..—.=7,7 ',: . - �� w r __ OW 27 'II* { r • :. r i .... S. 11111 I..eel 14. . . • ir 5.97 h �,.S . r .{ ,_:4,e, _ Q Subject Property # 'h'� ;,,k Use r ' " j1 Agricultural-Permitted Clearing , ¶271 1 44 : Garage .. &10- House 1 . ., , II, • House 2 Now. - - j Perimeter Fence 2018 Aerial 8 Subject Properly boundaryR °Warned from Collier County Properly Appraiser �1 Pond Nice Shed 1 o '�' in it Shed 2 el* Unpermitted Clearing(8.01 acres( Figure 4. Past clearing activities Within the remaining 8.01 acres, most of the mid-story and groundcover had been historically removed and the eastern portion of the area functions as semi- improved pasture. Canopy trees in this area that met Collier County's tree count criteria were documented as part of a tree survey (trees greater than 8" diameter at breast height (dbh) and cabbage palms with greater than 8 foot of clear trunk). Each tree or palm that met the size criteria was measured using a caliper and the species, health, and dbh was recorded. A total of 60 slash pines, 2 dahoon holly, 5 live oak, 3 sea grape, and 29 cabbage palms were identified that meet the specified criteria (total of 99 trees). A native tree count exhibit is included in Appendix E. According to LDC 3.05.07 A.2, 15% of these trees will need to be preserved or replaced with minimum 10 foot tall trees. The project will meet LDC requirements by preserving 15% of the existing trees identified in the tree count within 1.06 acres of the site. The 1.06 acres was determined by providing a 40' buffer around the trees that would be retained. The native vegetation tree count is based on a total of 99 trees or palms which meet preservation requirements, therefore 15 trees will need to be preserved (99 trees x 15% = 14.85 (15) trees. The location of the retained trees and the buffers that Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA make up the 1.06 acre tree preservation area is shown on the master plan and on Figure 5 below: l , . ,,, GM' _ I 4. , v I' : ' ' • e • 1 i -ii:if/11,4 ...-•• , lilL „. „ .., ' i1� # f L • ,,o4... •� • i + yrs 4 , tos "-, if.. '' , •- , 1. r• «f?ditipmaimb.,,,,,.,.... 0 . 1" • ' .ilk'I. `T • • ''It. --I Subject Popery "'�. Note Trees to be Preserved(15) 3019 Aerial&Subject Property boundary - r obtained from Collier Courtly Properly Appraiser e d^� Species r"' �1'+II ' 'piM L. r. CP=Cabbage Palm(8 trees) 0 D' dU h 0 SP=Slash Pine(7 trees) , ' 4` a Q Tree Preservation Area 11 06 Acree (;t3 ' Figure 5. Tree Preservation Area with Retained Trees(15) ii. 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 (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 PPL. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to LDC section 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. • See Figure 3, FLUCCS map above and community descriptions provided above. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA iii. Where off-site preservation of native vegetation is proposed in lieu of on- site, demonstrate that the criteria in LDC tion 3.05.0. have been met and provide a note on the SDP or PPL indicating the type of donation (monetary payment or land donation) identified to satisfy the requirement. Include on the SDP or PPL, a location map(s) and property identification number(s)of the off-site parcel(s) if off-site donation of land is to occur. • Not applicable. d. General environmental requirements. ii. 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 (DEP) 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 DEP where contamination exceeding applicable DEP standards is identified on site or where an Environmental Audit or Environmental Assessment has been submitted. • Soil sampling can be provided, if required by the County although the primary use of the property appears to have been residential and hobby farm, not agricultural crop use. Soil mapping is provided below in Figure 6 and see Figure 7 for USGS Quad mapping. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA ,V 1110 • ` . , ' w ;1111' CR 41 ' Ji '.-Qc :4 1,�, t.... K.. j 11 >t , w. ` xl . NotetI, ° y ' + 1 • ED Subject Property 2017 Aortal 6 Sublepl Property�vimE ,r tom`�et`W"'r m Prole °PPr°°ef • NRCS Soils Mapping Q (111600„� -y (' 17,BASINGER 7,IMMOKALEE rte, Figure 6. NRCS Soils Mapping '1 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA I I z . I - .li I 11 I I. 46% 9 ._ FN t - 1 1 1J T I r--- Z„= .. 41) is I .. _- i 16 1 t ( 4 11141V 11 . _ 1 _�, ._----- -._y�j y 7 J•-.-1 ,.,''' c _.--''- -- ---, -- - --; *C---L- 7'-- '----19--) .. ',., ..._ , :,. , e f _ ..._.-; Fir 4 01161 - . • - ,r - I - 1 ! fki .� • 0 150 3.000 6.000 ,._r - 1�- 1 -mit __ *•- w • n Subject Property a, Feet - Uittek w Figure 7. USGS Quad Mapping Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearings. • See this document Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. • See Appendix C, Listed Species Survey. The following are explanations of how the project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP, Goal 6: GOAL 6: TO IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. OBJECTIVE 6.1: Protect native vegetative communities through the application of minimum preservation requirements. (The Policies under this Objective apply to all of Collier County except for that portion of the County which is identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay.) (XI) = Plan Amendment by Ordinance No. 2017-20 on June 13, 2017 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA Coastal High Hazard Area Non-Coastal High Hazard Area Residential and Mixed Less than 2.5 acres 10% Less than 5 acres.10% Use Development Equal to or greater than Equal to or greater than 5 acres 2.5 acres 25% and less than 20 acres. 15% Equal to or greater than 20 ac. 25% Golf Course 35% 35% Commercial and Less than 5 acres. 10% Less than 5 acres.10% Industrial Development Equal to or greater than Equal to or 5 acres. 15% greater than 5 acres. 15% Industrial 50%, not to exceed 25%of the 50%, not to exceed 25%of the Development (Rural project site. project site. Industrial District only) The following standards and criteria shall apply to the vegetation retention requirements referenced above. (1) For the purpose of this Policy, "native vegetation" is defined as a vegetative community having 25%or more canopy coverage or highest existing vegetative strata of native plant species. The vegetation retention requirements specified in this Policy are calculated based on the amount of"native vegetation"that conforms to this definition. (2) The preservation of native vegetation shall include canopy,under-story and ground cover emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible,which may include connection to offsite preserves. The purpose for identifying the largest contiguous area is to provide for a core area that has the greatest potential for wildlife habitat by reducing the interface between the preserve area and development which decreases the conflicts from other land uses. Criteria for determining the dimensional standards of the preserve are to be set out in the Land Development Code. (3) Areas that fulfill the native vegetation retention standards and criteria of this Policy shall be set aside as preserve areas. On-site and off-site preserve areas shall be protected by a permanent conservation mechanism to prohibit further development,consistent with the requirements of this Policy. The type of permanent conservation mechanism, including conservation easements, required for a specific development may vary based on preserve area size, type of development approval, and other factors, as set forth in the County's land development regulations. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA • See native vegetation narrative provided under the native vegetation section above. The site is providing a preserve and tree county combination based on past agricultural uses. (4) Selection of native vegetation to be retained as preserve areas shall reflect the following criteria in descending order of priority: (XI) = Plan Amendment by Ordinance No. 2017-20 on June 13, 2017 a. (V) Wetland or upland areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the continued use of the site by listed species or the movement through the site, consistent with the requirements of Policy 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 of this Element. e. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods, and f. All other native habitats. • The proposed development has been carefully planned to minimize any potential impacts to wildlife. See Appendix D, Protected Species Survey. (6) A management plan shall be submitted for preserve areas identified by specific criteria in the land development regulations to identify actions that must be taken to ensure that the preserved areas will maintain natural diversity and will function as proposed. The plan shall include methods to address control and treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management, stormwater management (if applicable), and maintenance of permitted facilities. If applicable, a listed species monitoring program shall be submitted pursuant to Policy 7.1.2 (2)(i). State and federal management plans consistent with the requirements of the LDC will be accepted. • See preserve management plan as part of Davidson Engineering's plan set. (8) Should the amount of wetland vegetation exceed the minimum vegetation requirements as specified herein,retention of wetland vegetation having significant habitat or hydrologic value is encouraged. Increased preservation shall be fostered through incentives including,but not limited to:clustered development,reduced development standards such as open space, setbacks, and landscape buffers,to allow for increased areas of preserved wetland vegetation. Significant habitat or hydrologic value is determined by wetland function, not the size of the wetland. • No wetlands have been identified on the site. Policy 6.1.4: [re-numbered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54] Prohibited invasive exotic vegetation shall be removed from all new developments. (1) Petitioners for site plan or plats shall submit and implement plans for invasive exotic plant removal and long-term control. (2) The petitioners for development permits shall prepare and submit native vegetation Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA maintenance plans, which describe specific techniques to prevent re-invasion of the development site by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. • See preserve management plan as part of Davidson Engineering's plan set. Policy 6.1.6: [re-numbered to reflect merger of Ordinance No. 2002-32 and 2002-54]The minimum native vegetation retention requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 shall not apply to,affect or limit the continuation of existing uses. Existing use shall be defined as:those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to June 19, 2002; or, projects for which a Conditional Use was approved by the County prior to June 19, 2002; or, projects for which a Rezone petition has been approved by the County prior to June 19, 2002 — inclusive of all lands not zoned A, Rural Agricultural; or, land use petitions for which a completed application was submitted prior to June 19, 2002. The continuation of existing uses shall include on-site expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with, or clearly ancillary to,the existing uses. Hereafter, such previously approved developments shall be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Policies and Objectives for the Rural Fringe area, and they may be built out in accordance with their previously approved plans. Changes to these previous approvals shall also be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Objectives and Policies for the Rural Fringe Area as long as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity. On the County owned land located in Section 25,Township 26 E, Range 49 S(+/-360 acres),the native vegetation retention and site preservation requirements may be reduced to 50% if the permitted uses are restricted to the portions of the property that are contiguous to the existing land fill operations; exotic removal will be required on the entire+/- 360 acres. • See preserve management plan as part of Davidson Engineering's plan set. See native vegetation narrative provided under the native vegetation section above. Policy 6.1.8: [re-numbered to reflect merger of Ordinance No.2002-32 and 2002-54] An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or submittal of appropriate environmental data as specified in the County's land development regulations, is required, to provide a method to objectively evaluate the impact of a proposed development, site alteration, or project upon the resources and environmental quality of the project area and the community and to insure that planning and zoning decisions are made with a complete understanding of the impact of such decisions upon the environment, to encourage projects and developments that will protect, conserve and enhance, but not degrade,the environmental quality and resources of the particular project or development site, the general area and the greater community. The County's land development regulations shall establish the criteria for determining the type of proposed development requiring an EIS, including the size and nature of the proposed development, the location of the proposed development in relation to existing environmental characteristics, the degree of site alterations, and other pertinent information. • See this document. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA OBJECTIVE 6.2: Protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands pursuant to the appropriate Policies under Goal 6. (The County's wetland protection policies and strategies are coordinated with the Watershed Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element.) • NA—no wetlands have been identified on the site. Policy 6.2.1: Wetlands identified by the current SFWMD land use and land cover inventory are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. For a proposed project identified on this map series, the exact location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries shall be verified by a jurisdictional field delineation, subject to Policy 6.2.2 of this Element, at the time of Environmental Resource Permitting. (VI) = Plan Amendment by Ordinance No. 2007-16 on January 25, 2007 This policy shall be implemented as follows: (1) Where permits issued by such jurisdictional agencies allow for impacts to wetlands within this designated area and require mitigation for such impacts, this shall be deemed to meet the objective of protection and conservation of wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands within this area, except for wetlands that are part of a Watershed Management Plan preserve area.The County shall direct impacts away from such wetlands. • NA—no wetlands have been identified on the site. (2) The County shall require the appropriate jurisdictional permit prior to commencement of development, except in the case of single-family residences, which are not part of an approved development or are not platted, unless the residences are within a watershed management conservation area identified in a Watershed Management Plan developed pursuant to policies supporting Objective 2.1 of this Element, in which case the appropriate jurisdictional permit is required prior to commencement of development. • NA—no wetlands have been identified on the site. (3) Collier County will work with the jurisdictional agencies and applicants to encourage mitigation to occur within targeted areas of the County including, but not limited to: Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs); lands targeted fora acquisition by a public or private conservation entity; wetlands that are part of an approved watershed management plan, as per Objective 2.1 of this Element; and other areas appropriate for mitigation, such as flow ways and areas containing habitat for animal listed species. • NA—no wetlands have been identified on the site. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA APPENDIX A PUDZ PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com Collier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 Pre-Application Meeting Notes Petition Type: PUDZ Date and Time: 8/22/17 @ 1 : 30PM Assigned Planner: Fred Reischl Engineering Manager (for PPL's and FP's): Project Information Project Name: OIL WELL RD CFPUD PL#: 20170002898 Property ID #: 39894520000 &39892a8cZoning: Estates (E) Project Address: `9`'" 2560 Oil wei�, d: Naples State: FL Zip: 34120 Applicant: Davidson Engineering Agent Name: Fred Hood Phone: Agent/Firm Address: 4365 Radio Road, Suite 2 Gity: Naples State: FL Zip: 34104 BONNIE L JOLLY (2900) JOLLY, CANDICE M NEIL P ELLIOTT (2560) Property Owner: Please provide the following, if applicable: i. Total Acreage: 20 . 16 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#: Updated 7/19/2017 Page I 1 of 5 Collier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 "1 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 IMeeting Notes - Ti — m `( C't 1U r, c <. 1P44 Vitg4 iiP fel . LN . CBs_ 4 WIP Gc fr`ii?Pvf l ,u, r-, . r b .zt '-Lei .f-1 - �. -- 4z.. .. . . ' 2 ____�.. c A . A lA Viil /1-1 ,.2 c '' A l / L.< m,,--Lifrn .4cu,_...41 .I5 , i1 1J_."- . ,t.' A--- 45 , _12•Cjilel i—e_.. PE ' d •CC�� i /, / I ' ' e ',ti a-6e .! n ' (...6:,) Alw://zet Updated 7/19/2017 Page 12 of 5 S& y COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 Meeting Notes Disclaimer: Information provided by staff to applicant during the Pre-Application Meeting is based on the best available data at the time of the meeting and may not fully inform the applicant of issues that could arise during the process. The Administrative Code and LDC dictates the regulations which all applications must satisfy. Any checklists provided of required data for an application may not fully outline what is needed. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide all required data. Updated 7/19/2017 Page 13 of 5 Col[ier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 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. 4 OF NOT REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of ❑ ❑ ❑ why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments Pre-application meeting notes ❑ II ❑ Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 n ❑ Completed Addressing Checklist 2 _ E Warranty Deed(s) 3 ❑ List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2 Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4 _ __ Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4 __ __ Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included 5 -- ❑ on aerial. Statement of Utility Provisions 4 (� _ Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4 f��[� — Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with E LvJ ❑ project planner at time of public hearings. Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include 4 / ❑ copies of previous surveys. �C Traffic Impact Study 7 Historical Survey 4 School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 2 El _ Electronic copy of all required documents 2 U ❑ Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)' ❑ -I ❑ 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 /2" x 11" copy ❑ `- Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24"x 36" –Only if - Amending the PUD n Checklist continued onto next page... 2/21/2017 Page 11 of 16 Cotner 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 ( I ❑ Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 ❑ ❑ *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement "The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: ❑ Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code ❑ Exhibit D: Legal Description ❑ Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each ❑ Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c.,the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239- 690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan." PLANNERS—INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District(Residential Components):Amy I Lockheart ❑ Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan ❑ i Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey E Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad Emergency Management: Dan Summers ❑ ' Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑ I City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director ❑ Other: ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION g Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 9 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 ❑ PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre 3 Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00 62/ Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00 0 Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 0, Transportation Review Fees: 0, Methodology Review: $500.00, to be paid directly to Transportation at the Methodology Meeting* *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. O Minor Study Review: $750.00 B, Major Study Review $1,500.00 ja Legal Advertising Fees: Rf CCPC: $1,125.00 0 BCC: $500.00 2/21/2017 Page 12 of 16 Colyer 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# 20170002898 Collier County Contact Information: Name Review Discipline Phone Email David Anthony Environmental Review 252-2497 davidanthony@colliergov.net X Summer Araque Environmental Review 252-6290 summerbrownaraque@colliergov.net GMD Operations and Claudine Auclair Regulatory Management 252-5887 claudineauclair@colliergov.net Steve Baluch Transportation Planning 252-2361 stephenbaluch@colliergov.net X Laurie Beard PUD Monitoring 252-5782 lauriebeard@colliergov.net Craig Brown Environmental Specialist 252-2548 craigbrown@colliergov.net Managing Asst.County Heidi Ashton Cicko Attorney 252-8773 heidiashton@colliergov.net John DeBlasis Zoning Services /Planning Tech 252-1050 johndeblasis@colliergov.net X Kay Deselem Zoning Services 252-2586 kaydeselem@colliergov.net Dale Fey North Collier Fire 597-9227 dfey@northcollierfire.com Eric Fey, P.E. Utility Planning 252-1037 ericfey@colliergov.net I< Tim Finn,AICP Zoning Division 252-4312 timothyfinn@colliergov.net Sue Faulkner Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 suefaulkner@colliergov.net Paula Fleishman Impact Fee Administration 252-2924 paulafleishman@colliergov.net Growth Management Deputy James French Department Head 252-5717 jamesfrench@colliergov.net Structural/Residential Plan Michael Gibbons Review 252-2426 michaelgibbons@colliergov.net Storm Gewirtz, P.E. Engineering Stormwater 252-2434 stormgewirtz@colliergov.net Nancy Gundlach,AICP, PLA Zoning Division 252-2484 nancygundlach@colliergov.net Shar Hingson Greater Naples Fire District 774-2800 shingson@gnfire.org John Houldsworth Engineering Subdivision 252-5757 johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net Jodi Hughes Transportation Pathways 252-5744 jodihughes@colliergov.net Alicia Humphries Right-Of-Way Permitting 252-2326 aliciahumphries@coliiergov.net Marcia Kendall Comprehensive Planning 252-2387 marciakendall@colliergov.net Garrett Louviere, P.E. Transportation Planning 252-2526 garrettlouviere@colliergov.net Thomas Mastroberto Greater Naples Fire 252-7348 thomasmastroberto@colliergov.net Jack McKenna, P.E. Engineering Services 252-2911 jackmckenna@colliergov.net Matt McLean, P.E. Development Review Director 252-8279 matthewmclean@colliergov.net Updated 7/19/2017 Page 14 of 5 Collier County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 AMichele Mosca,AICP Capital Project Planning 252-2466 michelemosca@colliergov.net _ Annis Moxam Addressing 252-5519 annismoxam@colliergov.net _' Stefanie Nawrocki Development Review-Zoning 252-2313 stefanienawrocki@colliergov.net > Richard Orth Stormwater Planning 252-5092 richardorth@colliergov.net Brandy Otero Transit 252-5859 brandyotero@colliergov.net Brandi Pollard Utility Impact fees 252-6237 brandipollard@colliergov.net .>C Fred Reischl,AICP Zoning Division 252-4211 fredreischl@colliergov.net Todd Riggall North Collier Fire 597-9227 triggall@northcollierfire.com Daniel Roman, P.E. Engineering Utilities 252-2538 danielroman@colliergov.net Development Review Brett Rosenblum, P.E. Principal Project Manager 252-2905 brettrosenblum@colliergov.net Michael Sawyer Transportation Planning 252-2926 michaelsawyer@colliergov.net Corby Schmidt,AICP Comprehensive Planning 252-2944 corbyschmidt@colliergov.net Chris Scott,AICP Development Review-Zoning 252-2460 chrisscott@colliergov.net Peter Shawinsky Architectural Review 252-8523 petershawinsky@colliergov.net !' Camden Smith Zoning Division Operations 252-1042 camdensmith@colliergov.net Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-5740 scottstone@colliergov.net Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 252-4446 markstrain@colliergov.net `" Mark Templeton Landscape Review 252-2475 marktempleton@colliergov.net \- Jessica Velasco Zoning Division Operations 252-2584 jessicavelasco@colliergov.net Jon Walsh, P.E. Building Review 252-2962 jonathanwalsh@colliergov.net Comprehensive Planning lK David Weeks,AICP Future Land Use Consistency 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net Kirsten Wilkie Environmental Review 252-5518 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net Christine Willoughby Development Review -Zoning 252-5748 christinewilloughby@colliergov.net Additional Attendee Contact Information: Name Representing Phone Email Tile.,,cc. 1--;x,-) 4b-11-Ja)hD G C(dcrcdso,,e,,5 n«.-. (i 44 JVII\hiPtV3e01%W K. qE 42A'Woo Ga e olJ -cpm (_ ,_ ik- \SL 4134-4043esseC c 4r19' J•On Updated 7/19/2017 Page 1 5 of 5 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA APPENDIX B STAFF QUALIFICATIONS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com JENNIFER BO B KA Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental LLC in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 6 years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. As an Ecologist, Jennifer fulfills Ecologist duties in environmental consulting, wetland & wildlife monitoring, species surveys, GIS mapping, Phase I Environmental Site Assessments,and ERP permitting. jenniferb@eteflorida.com 406.579.4616 Relevant Experience Jennifer has worked as a Naturalist for a non-profit in Collier County, a Manatee Research Intern with Florida Fish &Wildlife Conservation Commission in Palm Beach, and a Field Crew Leader for Years' Experience Montana Conservation Corps. 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 6 years invasive plant and wildlife species,with a special interest in threatened and endangered species.She is also an experienced environmental educator and Certified Interpretive Guide. Education/Training B.A. Environmental Studies Jennifer's work experience includes: Montana State University (2009) Vegetation and Habitat Mapping Wetland Jurisdictional Delineations Bald Eagle Monitoring Monitoring Well Installation Marine Biology&Coastal Ecology Shorebird Surveys GIS Mapping Study Abroad Burrowing Owl Surveys Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Costa Rica (2007) Gopher Tortoise Surveys and Relocation Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) Natural Submerged Resource Surveys Resource Management Python Responder Turbidity Monitoring Trail Maintenance The Nature Conservancy(2015) Seagrass Surveys Mechanical and Manual Forest Fuel Reduction Sawyer Training Protected Species Surveys Small Watercraft Operations US Forest Service(2010) Invasive and Exotic Species Removal Ecological Restoration Wildfire Assessments Environmental Education and Outreach Professional Affiliations Florida Association of Relevant Certifications/Credentials Environmental Professionals PADI Open Water SCUBA Diver,SCUBA Outfitters of Naples.2012 League of Environmental Certified Interpretive Guide, National Association of Interpretation.2016 Educators of Florida Wilderness First Responder,SOLO Schools. 2009 , tth Teo4 239.304.00301 ‘‘ .etetlorida.com Environmental,LLC JEREMY STERK C.E.f, Jeremy has been an environmental consultant in Southwest Florida since 1994 and has worked on + projects throughout Collier, Lee, Hendry, DeSoto, Glades, and Charlotte counties. His Partner/Senior Ecologist varied experience spans marine, upland, and estuarine habitats and includes extensive work with a wide variety of listed species. jeremys@eteflorida.com Relevant Experience 239.595.4929 In addition to authoring dozens of habitat and species management plans, in 2007, Jeremy Years' Experience co-authored the first habitat conservation plan (HCP) in the nation to address incidental take 24 years issues for both red cockaded woodpeckers (RCW) and Florida panther on the same property. In 1998, he wrote an ecological assessment computer model for the South Florida Water Management District as part of the South Lee County Watershed Study. Early in his career, Education/Training Jeremy was the principal investigator of a field research project in the Bahamas that utilized telemetry tracking to study the swimming speed of sub-adult lemon sharks. B.S.Aquatic Biology,St. Cloud State University(1994) Jeremy's work experience in environmental consulting includes: Professional Affiliations Environmental Resource Permitting(ERP) Species Surveys ( ) Academy of Board Certified Listed Species Management Plans Turbidity Monitoring Environmental Professionals Vegetation& Habitat Mapping Wetland &Water Level Monitoring #16992037 USFWS Section 7 &Section 10 Permitting Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) Florida Association of Water Use Monitoring&Compliance GIS Mapping&Exhibits Environmental Professionals Preserve Management Plans Project Management Post Permit Compliance Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Land Use Planning Phase 11 Environmental Site Assessments Native Vegetation Restoration Plans Incidental Take Permitting Lake Management Plans Site and Aerial Photography Due Diligence Reports USFWS Bald Eagle Monitor Wetland Jurisdictional Delineations Gopher Tortoise Surveys/Permitting/ Bonneted Bat Surveys Relocations Mangrove Assessments&Restorations Scrub Jay Surveys Hard Bottom/Soft Bottom Benthic Surveys Burrowing Owl Surveys Artificial Reef Deployments Shorebird Surveys Seagrass Surveys Relevant 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) 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. 4a th Teen L M 239.304.0030 I www.eteflorida.com Environmental,LLC ENVIRONMENTAL DATA APPENDIX C PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY or (�* OIL WELL ROAD PARCEL . NAPLES, FLORIDA �,v. :,,tom- Y'.` APPROXIMATELY 20.16 ACRES w li• Aiii Noy. Prepared For: x Collier County Engineering& AK, Corner C01.1{1(1 Natural Resources Department WJ; �.- 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 �7t; 440 `•c1:-. �‘ Prepared By: s li earth Tech Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue r Bonita Springs, FL 34135 �� 239.304.0030 `t'. ' - Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com Alit ' .117'i$1111% .‘ 4 1 -.• •• O R �ar� �1 -.--1 ,i I ,.. February 8, 2018 => 2 4 00 .fit,, r • - - i, -: - T Protected Species Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS �.. INTRODUCTION 3 LOCATION 3 SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS& METHODS 3 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS 4 RESULTS 6 CONCLUSIONS& RECOMMENDATIONS 8 REFERENCES 9 EXHIBITS Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping Figure 3 FLUCCS Mapping Figure 4 Transect Map & Field Results Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide a search for listed species on the Oil Well Road parcel prior to the rezoning and development of the 20.16-acre property. The parcel contains existing agricultural and residential uses. LOCATION The Oil Well parcel (Subject Property) is located east of Immokalee Road (846), and west of Everglades Boulevard North, on the south side of Oil Well Road. The property is in Section 18, Township 48 South, Range 28 East, in Collier County, Florida. The PUDZ consists of two adjacent parcels, totaling approximately 20.16 acres. See Figure 1, Location Map. T groor r ��, -iel TALLAHASSEE 1 JACKSONVILLE i; . 44PARCEL - kif LOCATION 14 , PARCEL LOCATION 11111p -i, . .. ,-1--- ,. * _' . r y [j.104 ��. . • SANCTUARY•.V/ -- ":, r ' iMMDUALEE RDE aoiffAVCNE— `� ' - ta*VENE'� Q 'VWTcR V roT"AVE'NE� 'icp 40. PETERSBURG }—SSTi AVE'NE r ,I,j ! 47TNKM,�*1�..1MVE:EI MINE 4n9� I � ��__� \ 41ST YEN = , 3THAVE NE u ' CR 056 A\— + _-_. .-.. • I vrflA NE YE�E�� RANw = CApE CORAL ---pT"AVE'N -• :itl _ __.• - LSPRINGS 1STMA ENE :• �y 1ST N'VEIN ti'--1 eV4,,:fW _ taN vENE—. OM:**4;-OKE PI - • LYW0D0 �— ST�NE�� 4/'41��4r 4r�� _ �s!pOi�i�i�i — � LEAH __I- lir I I 4TM AVEl1 , ..!•!•ti!A • ....1.-.wY.r'"iii ,�Yr'Si- a1DAVE'SE_w -I ;$[fin t m t m.STNAVE.SE ,' COLLIER SEC 18-TSP 48S-RGE 28E Z." 3ZI * r 2 10TH VE•SE COUNTY i# f I� '-I I 14T ESE-a y PARCELS:39892880001 & 2OTN VESE-S .'' 39894520000 K .YT,'J7�'VE'SE-Li . 2STN71YESE-� LAT: 26° 1 T 29.66"N 02NDMVE SC ' � LONG: 81°33'26,29"W Figure 1.Site Location Map SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS& METHODS The species survey was conducted using a methodology similar to that discussed in the Florida Fish &Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) publication "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-scale Development in Florida."This methodology is as follows: Existing vegetation communities or land- uses on the subject site are delineated on a recent aerial photograph (Collier County 2017) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this L Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey 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: "Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species & Species of Special Concern-Official Lists", May 2017. ❖ "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants", Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 2010. The result is a composite table that contains the names of the protected species which have the highest probability of occurring in each particular FLUCCS community. See Table 1 of this report for the species list that applies to this property. In the field, each FLUCCS community is searched for listed species or signs of listed species. This is accomplished using a series of transects throughout each vegetation community. If necessary, transect integrity is maintained using a handheld GPS in track mode. Signs or sightings of all listed and non-listed species are then recorded. Listed species locations are typically flagged and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on this parcel of land, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of gopher tortoise and big cypress fox squirrels. EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the mid 70's. Cloud cover was partial. Approximately three (3) man-hours were logged on the property during this species survey.Table 3 details the date and time spent in the field. The property has been cleared of vegetation,with the exception of a few scattered slash pine, oak, and cabbage palm trees. The parcel contains two residences, a large garage, a barn, a number of outdoor animal enclosures, and grazing areas for a variety of ungulates. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: West Undeveloped North Oils Well Road\ Low Density Residential South Low Density Residential East Low Density Residential Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The following community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS maps below (Figures 2 & 3). See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. FLUCCS 110, Single Family Residential, 7.03 Acres This area exists in the central and northeastern portion(s) of the property. It contains two (2) houses, one (1) large garage, a pond, a number of outdoor animal enclosures, and associated driveways. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflonda.com Protected Species Survey FLUCCS 211, Improved Pasture, 10.15 Acres These areas exist in the northwestern and southeastern portions of the property. They contain grazing land for ungulates (horses, a cow, a zebra) contained on the premises. FLUCCS 250, Specialty Farms, 2.98 Acres This area exists in the southwestern portion of the property. It contains a barn and smaller covered structures to provide sanctuary for mini horses. It also contains penned areas for these animals. The following table is summary of FLUCCS communities and corresponding acreages: CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 110 Residential 7.03 211 Improved Pastures 10.15 250 Specialty Farms 2.98 Site Total: 20.16 • or 1 swilow:1 t t i ir r 1 i.. i • 110 �- Illt, • 211 ' ' 5.01 Ac n ' ) Mt . 11 t 1V rA "alk ' t'!'et� " 211 • 7 ' 4,' .3.'v 5:14'Ac . �' 7f .t *•� wr 1 . 2 • 98yAc "' I�' IVIA f Q Subject Property Noe w. 2017Aerut a suopn Propeny°blamedFLUCCS Mapping .1 from Cofer County Property Appro., • i, 110.Residential 0 '�' " CD :$ 211,Improved Pastures "rr.. 1' 250,Specialty Farms Gtil R Figure 2.Aerial with FLUCCS Mapping Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey ('It v7N //��\ I 110 7 03 Ac 211 501 Ac 211 5.14 Ac 250 2.98 Ac O Subject Property FLUCCS Mapping 110,Residential 0 100 200 400 211,Improved Pastures 250,Specialty Farms Feet Figure 3.FLUCCS Mapping RESULTS The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown below in Table 1. Table 1. Potential Protected Species Presence Based on FLUCCS Category FLUCCS Potential Listed Species Scientific Name Designated Status FWC or FDA FWS 110 NONE - - - 211 Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Florida Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis pratensis T - 250 NONE - - - Abbreviations Agencies: Status: FWC=Florida Fish& Wildlife Conservation Commission E=Endangered FDA=Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services T=Threatened FWS=United States Fish and Wildlife Service T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance SSC=Species of Special Concern CE=Commercially Exploited Th - -- --------------- ----- -- Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey • a. ; .... �, : ` ' '`4. !`� *t. !�: Protected Species Survey Abbreviations Observations: Status: DV=Direct Visual FE=Federally Endangered HV=Heard Vocalization(s) FT=Federally Threatened OT=Observed Tracks ST=State Threatened OH=Observed Hole/Burrow T(S/A)=Threatened/Similarity of Appearance MT=Marked Tree SSC=Species of Special Concern C=Cavity CE=Commercially Exploited DB=Day Bed N=Nest CONCLUSIONS& RECOMMENDATIONS No listed species or signs of listed species were identified on the Subject Property during this species survey. Table 3. Field Time Spent on the Subject Property Date Start Time End Time No.Ecologists Man Hours Task January 16,2018 10:00 am 11:30 am 2 1.5 Species Survey Fieldwork Total 3.0 Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Spnngs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com Protected Species Survey REFERENCES Ashton, Ray E. and Patricia S. "The Natural History and Management for the Gopher Tortoise." Krieger Publishing Company. Malabar, Florida. 2008. Collier County Property Appraiser. http://www.collierappraiser.com/ Cox,James; Inkley, Douglas; and Kautz, Randy. "Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) Populations Found on Lands Slated for Large-Scale Development in Florida." Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 4. December 1987. http://www.fwspubs.org/doi/suppl/10.3996/062015-JFWM-055/suppl file/062015-jfwm- 055.s2.pdf?code=ufws-site "Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species"-Official List. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Updated May 2017. http://myfwc.com/media/1515251/threatened-endangered-species.pdf Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification (FLUCCS) Handbook. Florida Department of Transportation.January 1999. http://www.fdot.gov/geospatial/documentsandpubs/fluccmanual1999.pdf http://www.fdot.gov/geospatial/doc pubs.shtm Weaver, Richard E. and Anderson, Patti J. "Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants." Bureau of Entomology, Nematology and Plant Pathology—Botany Section. Contribution No. 38, 5th Edition. 2010. `- http://freshfromflorida.s3.amazonaws.com/fl-endangered-plants.pdf http://www.freshfromflorida.com/Divisions-Offices/Plant-Industry/Bureaus-and-Services/Bureau-of- Entomology-Nematology-Plant-Pathology/Botany/Florida-s-Endangered-Plants Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 10600 Jolea Ave.Bonita Springs,FL 34135 www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA APPENDIX D HISTORIC AERIAL PHOTOS Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com Z:\Active Projects\0101L WELL RD\DWG\GIS12017-08-15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT G(ZONING EXHIBIT).mxd N i W _ & F s 35TH AVE NE 300 FOOT RADIUS I ,' ��, 11 --------- OIL I, ( ^ OIL WELL ROAD CR 858 / • • t >� 4b44 1104. a - -- - - 31ST AVE NE r LEGEND OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 20.16 ACRES tin 300-FOOT RADIUS ZONING DISTRICTS QCFPUD-COMMUNITY FACILITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Q E-ESTATES OMPUD-MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 0 500 1,000 \1 11 FEET ,OURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2018) N.B.- 1 oDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INc. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT DAVIDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT G: SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS Z:1Active Projects\O10IL WELL RD\DWGIGIS12017.08.15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT H(FLUE EXHIBIT).mxd • W ��- E 20 FOOT RADIUS j .OIL ROAD @QM ; IMAM 1111111.11 !Mt /./2/ RS ES " • ' R I r",p • 44. gIgNalgag LEGEND OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 20.16 ACRES y mli 300-FOOT RADIUS ES-ESTATES rio RS-RURAL SETTLEMENT AREA DISTRICT OI 11 1,000 FEES (rIENIVSCINMEIG=GEOGRAPHIC(11722=1110tkilECED DEFL 34104 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NAPLES, DAVNDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT H: SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Z:\Active Projects\O1OIL WELL RD\DWG\GIS\2017-08-15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT I(PLANNING COMM.).mxd W _P�1� E ,rr� S AI L --• � l !- ;J . I.h .moi- c :4.1 ,1. r ;'};. ti Y .s %,z" 4_6A* r J>). F.ss c., IFIFOOT RADIUS ( ELAD` ( ( l \ 1 AVE.NE LEGEND OOIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES41.10401 SUBDISTRICT:20.16 ACRES COLLIER COUNTY MAINTAINED ROADS x_`300-FOOT RADIUS PLANNING COM UNITY • 8 Rural Estates - -• - ._ - _ Q ED 1,000 rTggff ,OURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2017) I grid DEFL 34104 DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NAPLES, PAYR 9N PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT I: PLANNING COMMUNITIES Z:1Active Projects\O\OIL WELL RD\DWG\GIS12017-08-15 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT J(PUBLIC SERVICES MAP(.mxd • LEGEND • Q SUBJECT PROPERTY:20.16 ACRES I RADIUS RINGS .. -. .....,- r Schools COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF FACILITY Estates-Elementary School O Hospital 5946 Everglades Boulevard,N " + Medical 3 MILES 0 COLLIER COUNTY FIRE STATION '��''��.. �.��`� FIRE DISTRICT ' 0° �``` Golden Gate Fire Big Corkscrew Fire CD /• 11 N. U ` / e 4s / w / a Big Corkscrew (ij Rescue Station _ 14756Immokalee Road 1 MILE / 2 .....� ‘ •,Corkscrew-:Elementary/Middle School Palmetto Ridge d , • School1 106 1 I 7165 Oil WII Road 1 Oil Well Road ,o 1 I CO , cow '• ; CR858/OIL WELL RD I „- ICollier County IMOD I, 5 .I I GoldenGSubstation 1 } ' --. ‘ W 1 1 ��4 / ii i RANDALL BLVD: / --___-----,- t 4> / � .Big Corkscrew ROCi•J j Station 10 / 13240Immokalee / 41/1 >, I QCypress a Elementary/Middle School / m 0118th AvenuerNE�i / 1140 `` ` ' II icse i- Illir d r aN m s i 1Al- z li,(''' ' ° 40001artmilliiiiiimmaithinissela'±., _,. . -+ AL,a cl) IIIU S DLDEN GATE BLVD GOLDEN GATE BLVD 0 1 2 MILES SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2018) i DAVIDSON ENGINEERINGINC. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT D 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE,201 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NAPLES, FL 34104 PAvNDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT J: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES Historical Aerial Photograph Report Subject Property: 2560 Oil Well Road Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples, Florida 34120 Prepared For: Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Prepared By: ;,,EDM Environmental Data Management, Inc. 2840 West Bay Drive, Suite 208 Largo, Florida 33770 January 23, 2018 1 Environmental Data Management,Inc. DM L2840argo, West Bay Drive,Suite 208 ,,,s1E LFlorida 33770 (727)586-1700 http://www.edm-net.com January 23, 2018 Jeremy Sterk Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Subject: Historical Aerial Photos-- EDM Project#: 24243 Client Project# Dear Mr. Sterk: Thank you for choosing Environmental Data Management, Inc. The following report contains a series of Historical Aerial Photographic images for the following location: 2560 Oil Well Road Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples,Florida 34120 These images were selected to provide you with an aerial photographic record of this location at approximate ten year intervals and/or one photograph per decade, where available. should you have any questions regarding this report or our service, please feel free to contact us. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you and look forward to working with you in the future. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT,INC. 2 N ,,EDM Aerial Photo Image WE 2016 I 0 r s . - .• - • „ • , . i. ..., d , • "-.41 I % -i• •' i 1 i r • A rim ,. . ..,.6 • 4. .. • 16 . — . , • 1 tsftd.- la , , kite :J1 1 ' IV SO -141 .... ''• /71 ti77.4 1444......A . . II * .• . -8 ' •t r-, 'VIII I. • .,, t ... . is * • ' i i .. q . .., 4 • 1 , • • A / .!. .1 , • - .. i:. ^ .' aii 41•11, _ u• - C -"" litr- ;;• ;Ai ' • ..... 1 • • . . . • _ r 44 0 • ',, • .t .1.-' '1"-B--1 • _I - ..._.,J , . 1..__... . - . , • J ' . ' A ___ _ , r . 4 . ,. •l, _* I. •14‘ •'•--•• .,,.4' .. 7•** I...:• 7' '1..,.„I,,,f‘•„t4„.., • : ---'-• i.- •-, t . ... —— -- .--— — __—_ _ . -.....n............, .1NOMMI.MIN NOWI•SivelliarAr.••••*,^^-,•-•"^ '11.1.111MaN1111111111W iiiii... _ _— - ........ I j 4 • Arit S - ---ii- Of • .--....., . 4 Ire 1 ir .it .., at. .. • -, :* 1 ,- it ' I .- Iri• 4: , ' ., ,Ifitg„_, ,t .,74., 91, • . ... ,11 ` ”0 • ; , ."1 — 4 4 , .,,,T ,..' :/ . 'I A 0;f .t., 4 . • , • , ... ,, hi. 'iv.% rTh., ,,i .,. • ' 4 t ‘41eIrl. 3/4. / 4 4, a ita ... 4, I • -. ik • 12 . i '. -V 16/4 I it C i II . i• ' 7, i 0446 • t, •- / t , -• /.7r 1., 4" A f . t • Et trt • P :: .'.— !: • . . • ". f, . ,. f' i t ' I 5 - . L. • ' -. - r• . ._ , ,-.41L-44.- .. . _ 1.• .... , i ' .%0001P• ..., . 4 • • , i . , 4, v IL r • 711 f ti• I -1 Ik.t..,r 7 \ • . • '-. • ). ''' -I • • " i A. . I 1 1 • •• t ti • "•• . • . - Y , . , . ti t . . . ,. 1 1 . E . ..... , , _ „it... __ -„ • ..r_ , • -iia 0 0.25i. 1• P .., it.? ; , . • Of a ............ .. . *1. . frAlr2 14, .4._ . , . _ . • "ii, -, !..1'--r . u3 jr: N i h'• • . , - ••••7 . - ..... ' ' . ..... Source Florida Department of Transportation Map Scale and Property Boundaries are Approximate Approximate Site Location Subject Property 2560 Oil Well Road ........\ Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 -1 N Aerial Photo ImageW _0-E ' .4EDM 2006 S . If ;F. ..."V , 'f . 7 /1 .:r i i 1 . ilikilift ' s•14 • 4 `... It •. . , # t . i • ' i r ' • . Q • j _ . , . II ' • i . . IlL' * v 5 i l' ;' ' , 0 0 , t"-- . gl ilo': ' kr4fg '*44 1° , . 1 * ... - ;4'.'."-.-Pi ' . 1 14011 r . `, • ' I ,1* . ...1 , ' ..- 5 ..... , ..,,,, i , ; i•-.3•7 ) ..• 1141 kk ....4 .., • I. I . R - ; if i t 4 I‘fir ' v 4 ' .r 'VW' . _ f 4 r � ! I '.> IA t tea► 1 • ` p .. • ,;, q: , I i I ( 141 ' I I ' ' ' . . 1 r----- . +I..,,At!...'' , A... "•- •••-•!•••r II ) .rs•' .:„ ' • tip •,i',r7 1 • !.► �.• Vi • • • f \ i, - ,-• ; .. • ,-- 1 ii t IIli Ii i , y� t . 4 Q II , i ..: , 4 .• ' -r TIMI' III11 , i . , . , !! 0.25,. • ‘ • r- -...—„miles R ` I . I r 4 .....4 • • / ' - —1 t4 • . r" -— - - I I t Source:Florida Department.f Transportation Map Scale and Properly Boundaries are Approximate Approximate Site Location Subject Property --50 Oil Well Road :els: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Peeples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 4 N Aerial Photo Image _4 WE EDM 1993 S ./ 1 ` 1 ' ( I i 1+ d QCT_ �+d�y40- .* I ��•? , .,10-_. Y •, i'i I 1 i 1 1 f I• 'l • j�' Z� �. ! �r ♦ �. .r .+t :�'"!:� Fi�' ., 1d j {+ty+A Mi,. • • V l• .."s • .0'. Ii,.C:411 1 1 F I ( 1 i .4 J., J ,',t, ,1Y r'fk . f A } l r !�. '� •y� rpt Ta .4 . • iE , • ` , a ,• tt1 , �. - 1. a ) k .r • •. �1i7 �., ; P j + + • • ,0013 I! .. r 'T t . F y '` 'Y 1,,. . .,. T i%:r.v_R-"$ r. AC, --Afr . , .,it, , ., . }. . i tet. . S * — . (.... 'lip.4 1 i . 1 -a �14�' lil1/441/4 fir. , ` :- miles � "', r A� ,.�_ � -- � , { 7y..Vile : ��. Source:Florida De•artmeni o Trans.ortmion M Scale and Pro Boundaries are roximate ------- Approximate Site Location Subject Property 2560 Oil Well Road Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 N EDM Aerial Photo Image W_0^E 1985 S 1. ••, •; y ,.v�r • « r,`,z� • • ?,� Via' 'Iv .. ji fk I F c , i:•,- • 66• Se•4144*4. i t, 110...:..Nt • ;. 6. ...... - _ - —.0 -':*,...•'. Al , �` t•, .. .1..:1,5•� ..z • •�w.rr�:. t—... �,/y. }1.4 • a • •" „7.:i.... .. 4.,,-.3 1 0F. •'J . r .disiii.it. `. rt�y 4: • , •;. J• Fi.,.w1 I'e a*- r. r miles �• _ -w.�Y •` 1 Source:Florida De:ailment o Trans.,'radion :$1:.Scale and Pros a Boundaries are •,'orlmate Approximate Site Location Subject Property --50 Oil Well Road :els: 39892880001 and 39894520000 pies, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 N EDM Aerial Photo Image W_0_E 1978 s 1 IF� . -T T.__ _T- t 1 . • j#. ' ,a • -.;,'. Y g ;t.','443ft ...., ,, ' lik.400, • .i.i ' • / S • 4',4 , ,Ar. i, s t,. Lfteimm, AlletiOnikftillakt AN.".-.V.. . e.P.14 Aileilliallitli r •i•. ` /(int ..�• '. , R r A• • • 0 0.25 "4` • miles 4 .• k, :.'�� a`. :1 ' • •' e,.... 1. - • et 's,„ j-;.. ''i"4"f I Source:USGS Sin;le Frame Collection JI.Scale and Pro.a Boundaries are roximme Approximate Site Location Subject Property 2560 Oil Well Road /.. Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 7 N EDM Aerial Photo Image w �-E 1973 s • f; .1. u/u 4 r ir fit.y..a. j1:1'' •! r i s'. 111 i• • I ii r. 4, , , . , . , . #ii it z r ,iNtO t r. . r .4 fi - - ,;( 4i.'' 1 • 1 o - r Win.. . - .t t i 1.1111111111.11..-.1 -.. 2-1111111111111111V f • •;%")x• a IFI: 0.25 { Ark; -ice! `::" _ '- • - .41Mpr—L- door Source:Florida De 'anent a Trans.ortation Map Scale and Property Boundaries are Approximate Approximate Site Location Subject Property -f0 Oil Well Road :els: 39892880001 and 39894520000 ‘`r.aples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 R N Aerial Photo Image W O E ,,IEDM1971 s 4. ` ,.., i 7,,,,,.litril.' ,. .;44: ' . Tom. ^,` •^. . .I. .1 ' :...20:k .yr.�:-R„N .moi T �,. �_ • 1f,i • , ip t iy �` dL • `"a. .t • 1 , ,T.. Y'.. �a _ - ' a c�'� • *it• t p ,ei k {i a ..t • + • •�z, '' ' •7� f. Tom+ y� S.-w .� A•r 1 'St * • • )� l . ••• i I s • '� i�,�- Y . �I ~ I t M ' 3 l'."4. ;,; .r., xs,, �11. t gg L' •• • .Y.- s 7'A,Tt i r ', , S i f' dx 4404.44ritAi'lt' o< y • -,,,,114-„,1.‘, ' [' 1 J , A - 0. ..25 ' '. •.1c.; isommom miles 4, ! - ... - a- " •f Source:USGS Single F Collection Map Scale and Property Boundaries are A. Animate Approximate Site Location Subject Property 2560 Oil Well Road Parcels: 39892880001 and 39894520000 Naples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 q N ADM Aerial Photo Image w 0 E J 1962 r s 1110 r'.."".."............ .....-... IR ._...., :31111 4 .11*" iti if ,, 114 TIT WI ;di 4 141610 • %. ' . , ^‘, _ _ it . AliNilli "-""311IIIIIIIe VP r- ---- - -- __ -. ..,• (111 . _ ..._...,. r- .. ir.....-..ma • -- . ,... N.. 4t- -- — •t . - I e . ,. 11) lir% '11, i 0.25 L ii.,.._ miles k . . it" • ,eilt_' • i ' JO. iitf . iiike _._ -, r A6 „ t lia .1.. .. 44...... .. ,,,• , . .. t ' lli - Sourer University of Florida M Seale and Pro Boundaries are A rovhate Approximate Site Location Subject Property ---&) Oil Well Road :els: 39892880001 and 39894520000 rrdples, Florida 34120 EDM Job No: 24243 January 23, 2018 11) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA APPENDIX E NATIVE TREE COUNT Earth Tech Environmental,LLC www.eteflorida.com • 7 ..tili 1 I t . H 1 y H x _ Tv 0 Q y} 0 Sa a < yy • "•y O N d O O0 L W d, T, d d U o 01 cn C m n a = c� a Z Q ! OA ?r " (6 z m v U o OJ <n V) "ri El 2 �a00 • • O .z1: , >, 0 7 CO CO 11-5 moi• i �. 9� ��•• Q r e ' �` zX 4 � 1 @ , ear s • 8. = lt y ee . e 6:1 a) o a N V • • ,F, 1 •ik. ....ti: ",� 8 ( 0 2 . o 8 d r 'N-Q:4' 1 s a M a • . lc \ :,R Q 043, LL O .� 4•_ �rJ7 _Z 0 E W .y ttl > 0 . O rn ano I 2>0 o —v 8LLI Gi•� UrJ• ,? t a w Jam o 1 - � �- •.% ��z03 UJ CO a Q • �r 11 1 0 tµ 0 CD O CD ct oi'Q oo4.. 12 . .__ 0 .. � . • •, 7 ,j U° 0 O c...) ., ,.._,...:i‘f„' ...4::.% r ,., O a _ ;� AOilik; °a o N O Wd 4Z 6TZI /PXw BloZd3S5 enrnS 0eJ1 an!leN\SIO\VdWO PBON II°M I!O\2!311100\S103rOHd\sluawnood nu313\0 vth Tech Environmental,LLC Black Bear Management Plan for Oil Well Rd. GMPA Earth Tech Environmental February 19, 2019 INTRODUCTION This plan provides management guidelines for Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) on the proposed Oil Well Road GMPA project (Subject Property).The guidelines are taken from objectives in the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWC) Florida Black Bear Management Plan (June 2012). This document, prepared by Earth Tech Environmental (ETE) seeks to reduce impacts to and conflicts with Florida black bear in relation to activities on the Subject Property. PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Subject Property is a residential/agricultural property proposing a rezone to potentially change uses on the property. The property consists of two adjacent parcels, totaling approximately 20.16 acres in Collier County east of Immokalee Road and west of Everglades Boulevard North. Areas of the site have been historically altered through mowing, grazing, and residential development. Two single family residences and a large garage are present on the property, along with a number of barn-type structures. The property consists of approximately 10 acres of pastureland, 3 acres of specialty farm areas, and 7 acres of residential areas. Much of the pastureland in the west is grazed. The pastureland in the east contains native vegetation consisting primarily of large, scattered slash pine, oak, and cabbage palm. To characterize surrounding land use, single-family and agricultural developments are present in close proximity on all sides, along with minimal undeveloped land. LISTED SPECIES SURVEY A listed species survey was conducted on the Subject Property by ETE in February 2018. The survey was conducted according to FWC guidelines. While no evidence of black bear utilization was observed on the property during the listed species survey, it is acknowledged that black bears are occasionally seen in the surrounding communities. Based on U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service(FWS)and FWC-provided GIS information, black bears are present within the vicinity of the property. See FWC black bear information exhibit. FLORIDA BLACK BEAR The Florida black bear was removed from FWC's list of threatened and endangered species in 2012.Florida black bears utilize a wide variety of vegetative communities. Important habitat types include pine flatwoods, hardwood swamp, cypress swamp,cabbage palm forest,sand pine scrub and mixed hardwood hammock. A combination of these communities is critical for food supply due to the seasonal changes of habitat use coupled with food response and availability. Bears are omnivores and opportunistic feeders, eating both plants and animals, as well as human refuse and pet food. The main threat to population stability is habitat loss. Expanding urbanization, agricultural development, and increasing use of the state's wild lands for recreation all have resulted in an accelerated rate of habitat loss. In order to maintain viable populations, FWC has recommended guidelines to minimize the potential for adverse interactions between humans and bears. Earth Tech Environmental,LLC 1455 Rail Head Blvd,Suite 8,Naples,FL 34110 www.eteflorida.com SITE CONSIDERATIONS AND SPECIES MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL The following recommendations are made in accordance with FWC's guidelines for black bear management on the Subject Property. FWC's Black Bear Management Guidelines Objective 1:To maintain a sustainable statewide bear population. • N/A;the property is already mostly disturbed\developed and will not adversely affect black bear populations. Objective 2: To maintain habitat in sufficient quantity, quality, and connectivity to meet the population objective. • N/A; the Subject Property is already primarily cleared and developed, and therefore does not contain suitable habitat for black bear.Additionally,the majority of the property is fenced in. See Listed Species Survey section above. Objective 3:To reduce human-bear conflicts. • Human-bear conflicts may be reduced on the Subject Property through the following example measures that will be implemented on the property: o Implement 'bear-proof' garbage cans with latching lids and properly secure refuse. o Put garbage containers outside the morning of trash pickup, and not before. o Keep pet and animal feed secured and indoors. o Obey all speed limits and lookout for bears while driving. Objective 4: To help Florida citizens have a better understanding of bears, support bear conservation measures, and contribute to reducing human-bear conflicts. • FWC has a myriad of educational information on living with black bears made available online. https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/brochures/. These resources include tips, videos, brochures, etc. Sharing information with all residents, neighbors, and homeowner's associations will contribute to the success of this objective. • 0!..1 0101.- is— r',5" 4tiot • ii 411E 00 LuZ lins ..-4\"li'-'''4. ... . .. , T„, , . I O . 7 r P, ty r ^, pp iidiSii A ': • .'i' 1,6�4 � n o%le r ,IU, l' • J J o iii. a7► � e- , 0.0,014 N V,' • 0 • ••• 8.0 o d i O O O I 8 o Q O 0 O ® O O J Q X d Z M I¢1 S 1311 W .- 2 z Z M p O W J M W O o $ z 0 E J JWyd. O LU aA1B 83av1J2i3A3 z o wa ZM ,o 2arn • 7 JU aMoJ c O = W Nd Z-,Q N1�OI- Z 3- �1 Q o 0= 3 wv-•ma3 V 41111., d � 4 Ig .�, Wa 'So a > O ! W tY a F- co III -8 c, 0 N co Nlu o o mow£ QI w m o N L' N -w CD m ° C O a2!33l`d>1OWWI ~ 6 c01i �"' oa O m o6 a - m ,0 y Q� U �� NL 2 Y Y _LL U U m c CI_ @ l0 d C C 0 S-I p m .. 5 M m Y (0 ° O m o eu 0 0 U E N rr �_ Li_ co Q 2 0 m • O • U Z ca 40 Florida Black Bear ! III et„,,_ Florida black bears are the largest land , -•' mammals in the state. Male bears typically weighs aitt 4,;,:slic,_ between 250-400 pounds. Three adult male bears ,, • .a • --.11'4,.. :- '"y- have tipped the scales at more than 600 pounds -..q ., . each. Females are smaller: 125-250 pounds each. 4 . l'"!i Bear cubs at birth are smaller than a can of soda. ' `�:; • '. ` e„t•! Big and scary? Cuddly and cute? The s' _ r r . 'r ; , A black bear is not a ferocious killer nor is it a cute ,, - '�0:-,••, 1.teddy bear. Black bears typically want nothing toeo. � do with you and will run and hide from people when 4. , given the chance. However black bears are large and .•.• *iipowerful wild animals and they have scratched and • ; „ 4 • bitten people who have provoked them. Give the bear \ ' . ' ,, respect and space. Like most wildlife, if you don't bother it, the bear likely won't bother you. � 4 �i �41/4 % • - - C ' If a black bear is nearby. If you encounter FWC a bear at close range in your backyard or in the outdoors, remain standing, don't stare into the bear's eyes, back up slowly and speak to the bear in a calm voice. Don't run away, approach the bear or play dead. Find a safe place and make sure the bear has an escape route, then yell or bang pots and pans together to scare the bear away. Becoming a bear. People have created myths • 1 •S and told stories about bears for a very long time. In ,,�* • •�`� r Scandinavia, there was a belief that people could 1 • ' 4-••••••.a..a change into bears or take on their characteristics. If I 17' a warrior put on a bearskin shirt (called a bear-sark) IOW! • coated with oils and herbs, then he would gain the :444 -ZIN/ �,� � power of the animal. The English word "berserk" • •` - `a it"IN...,"- - fs ' �0 comes from this legend. Native American lore refers • ,.! • 4.} likl.lam . to bears as brother, uncle and grandmother and .• w •• • •• = r;°:r: • j includes stories of bears becoming humans and vice versa. Milt Fox() ,,,,.„,H Aryp �� O F N R Gq TiUN�0° MyFWC.com Florida Black Bear 11111111111 "Bears are made of the same dust as we, and breathe the same winds and drink of the same waters. A bear's days are warmed by the same sun, his dwellings are overdomed by the same blue sky, and his life turns and ebbs with heart-pulsings like ours and was poured from the same fountain..." -John Muir `• r . Old-timers in North America: Black bears have � �. occupied this continent for an estimated 1.5 million years. , .c . Florida black bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) are one < -, )- of 16 types of the American black bear. ....-1047 ..,, - . ` How old is that bear over there? Check out . •. its teeth. Rings are created each year on a bear's teeth during the winter when the bear is denning and eating �.v � very little. Look at a section of the bear's tooth under a microscope and you will see a ring for each year the bear has lived through a winter. The oldest wild bear ' . _ - documented in Florida was a 24-year-old female. cyndiHome© Gotta boogie! Black bears walk flat-footed, like people do, with all five toes on the ground. That's different than most animals which walk on their toes. Bears have a pacing stride, where both legs on the same side move together so that the hind foot is placed in or slightly in front of the track of the forefoot. While they look slow because of their shuffling gait, black bears can sprint at up to 35 miles an hour. Using their stout heavily curved claws, black bears like climbing 4111111 trees. Bears' wide paws also are terrific AshleyHockenberry© paddles for swimming. When a bear sees land across water, it may swim for it! Florida Black Bear 4 4a 01111111.11 Smell test. Look at the bear's long snout. That big nose should help you remember that the bear is able to sniff something that is up to a mile away! Have you heard about the bear that raided a vacation home and ate all the canned goods except for two unopened cans of sauerkraut? That is just one of many stories about bears' amazing sense of smell. Menu for a Florida black bear: Florida black bears are omnivores, eating both plants and animals. Their diet is mostly vegetarian sprinkled with insects, with animals being only 5 percent of their food. A bear's menu includes: saw palmetto, corn, persimmon, sunflower, oak, wild coffee, blackberry, blueberry, sassafras, ferns, bees, wasps, yellow jackets, carpenter ants, beetles, crayfish, bird eggs, alligator eggs, armadillos, opossums, rabbits, raccoons and turtles. Honey, naturally, is also a favorite. You thought just teenagers were hungry? Florida black bears become eating machines in the fall when they need to bulk up for their winter naps —their appetites quadruple from eating 5,000 calories a day up to 20,000 calories a day. This brings us to what humans can do to protect both themselves and bears. Please keep garbage away from bears. Store your garbage in a garage or sturdy shed, or get a bear-proof garbage can or dumpster. Bring pet food or bird seed inside at night. Put an electric fence around beehives, gardens and livestock. Otherwise bears may be tempted to leave the forest to get food in your neighborhood. Chomping down a 25-pound sack of dog food is easier for bears than looking for . !r 11,000 acorns to get the same calories. But when bears begin .yr. to hang out in places where people are, they can get into trouble. ,r It not only is illegal in Florida to leave out food for bears, but '_ " eliminating food sources that will attract bears is also the best _ thing you can do to prevent human-bear conficts. • Jarhead: A little bear in big trouble. A bear family was doing � what it shouldn't be doing, rummaging through garbage cans in ; •- a small community near the Ocala National Forest in summer , 2010. A resident called the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) to report that one of the bear cubs was • Y F •` e ' running around with a big clear plastic jar stuck over its head. It '�� sure looked funny, but the little bear— now nicknamed Jarhead �i',� , -r "4.- - would die from starvation if FWC could not catch it and remove i - �'� the container. Traps were set and the bears were tracked for ;" '" eight days based on sightings. Then the bear family disappeared. f_+ , • . ..s Just as the FWC team almost gave up, Jarhead and his family y reappeared. Mother bear was successfullytranquilized and pp q Ashley Hockenberry Jarhead was caught and freed from his weird headgear. The family later was released in a more remote area. A happy ending for Jarhead and a reminder why people should keep their garbage away from bears. Oat Florida Black Bear -- 11111111111111 Warning! Bear crossing. The biggest immediate danger to a Florida black bear is crossing a road. You may notice bear crossing signs on the roads in Florida are near where lots of bears live. There is a good reason to be watchful and slow down when driving in those areas, especially at dawn and dusk when bears are more active. Cars and trucks colliding with bears is the major cause of known bear deaths in the state. Annually, an average of 200 bears are killed by vehicles on Florida's roads. The bicyclist and the bear. It is rare but it happens — a bear just bumps into someone. In July 2011, a man riding his bike to work at Tyndall Air Force Base in the Panhandle was knocked over by a bear of about 300 pounds crossing the road. The black bear was running across the highway and crashed by accident into the bicyclist. The man suffered minor injuries and the bike's rear wheel was damaged. The bear just kept on going into the nearby woods. Hey bear, your hair gives your identity away. OK, you know bears are hairy. That's pretty obvious. What you may not know is that the hair on each individual bear is different. Bear biologists at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission are able to analyze the DNA from roots of collected bear hair and identify specific bears. To get the sample tufts of hair, the biologists set up bait stations using doughnuts. Bears must cross over or under barbed wire to get the doughnuts and are, of course, unaware their DNA is captured as barbed wire snags their hair. The DNA analysis of bear hair is allowing biologists to more accurately count the number of bears in Florida, now estimated to be about 4,350. Bear conservation. Loss of large forested lands and swamps is the biggest ■ Occupied Bear Range challenge to long-term conservation of the Florida black bear; especially in a growing state of nearly 20 million people soon to be the third most populated state in the nation. A male Florida black bear's range is about 60,000 acres and females range 15,000 acres. The conservation of key wildlife habitats has allowed bear populations room to expand Historic 1978 Current their range, growing from just 300 bears Bear Range Bear Range c Bear Range e in the 1970s to about 4,350 today. Large tracts of public lands, coupled with private ° ' °°p° landowners whose management practices are good for wildlife, have made a huge difference for bears. Today the largest populations of bears are concentrated in the Panhandle, northeast Florida and southwest Florida with a few smaller groups in other areas. Bottom line is that the bear's biggest friend is you and others who care about bears. By learning about bears and sharing your knowledge with others, you can help conserve the Florida black bear so it continues striding across the state for generations to come. "' "_ -_ FIRST FIDELITY TITLE INC 24201 WALDEN CENTER DR $204 BONITA SPRINGS IL 34134 General Warranty Deed Made this January 15, 2003 A.D. By Cindy Alysworth,a single woman,whose address is: P.O. Box 7537, North Port,FL 34287-0537,hereinafter called the grantor.to Terry Walsh and Bonnie L.Jolly Walsh,husband and wife,whose post office address is: 3845 15th Avenue Southwest,Naples. Florida 34118. hereinafter called the grantee: (Whenever used herein the term"grantor"and"grantee include all the panics to this instrument and the heirs,legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations) Witnesseth,that the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, ($10.00)and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged. hereby grants,bargains,sells,aliens,remises. releases.conveys and confirms unto the grantee,all that certain land situate in Collier County,Florida. viz: All of Tracts 32, 32A, 33 and 33A of GOLDEN G ESTATES, UNIT NO.64,according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7,Page 64, Public Records of C tv,Florida. , 7 r ..__,...,,..,,...,,,,\\\_, Parcel II)Number: 39892880001 Together with all the tenements her t ts,.,ar�id appu e� thereto`belonging or in anywise appertaining. • To Have and to Hold, the same ip fee simple i or rI'r. N�A\ii,: f:.-;1 And the grantor hereby covenants'wiib said grantee that the�antor is au. illy seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority t, d convey said land:` tll{e.gra kor hereby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims a rsons whomsoever; ',that,said land is free of all encumbrances except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31. 2002 -).1; .. _, �1�,/j CI-Vs-C-"--"- In Witness Whereof, the said grantor has signs and-ieated these presents the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: • e L_ )) L C 4 -) . ''t }7 (Seal) m' Cindy Aly Witless Printed Name ___ Address: P.O. Box 7537,North Port,FL 34287-0537 R • (Seal) )..)re)-11.Otte:t— witness Printed Name D o C ft eN l ---- - Addreac State of Florida County of Lee Che foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_day of January, 2003, by Cindy Alysworth,a single woman.who is/are personally known to me or who has produced _Driver's License(s)as identif tion. ui- ,,o,gvol Kristin M. Irgar,� Notary we KRISTI M. GANG s �F Commission#DE`.:166C-iv Print Nome: at, Expires Oct. 22. 2,C= �'Ilftgi \d,�.' Bonc}af Irhr My Commission Expires: �//11111' i'.Nant.h- flrnlf r^. C 0. in File Number: 20160433 Consideration: $200,000.00 General Warranty Deed Made this January 18,2017 A.D. By Bonnie L.Jolly Walsh,a single woman,Individually and as Trustee of the 2560 Oil Well Road Land Trust dated June 16,2016,whose address is: 2400 Oil Well Rd,Naples,FL 34120,hereinafter called the grantor,to Candice M. Jolly and Neil P.Elliott,husband and wife,whose post office address is: 2560 Oil Well Rd,Naples,FL 34120,hereinafter called the grantee: (Whenever used herein the term"grantor"and"grantee"include all the parties to this instrument and the heirs,legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of corporations) Witnesseth,that the grantor,for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars, ($10.00)and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,hereby grants,bargains,sells,aliens,remises,releases,conveys and confirms unto the grantee, all that certain land situate in Collier County,Florida: Tract 48A, Golden Gates Estates,Unit 64, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7,page 64, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; less and except the North 21 feet thereof pursuant to Order of Take recording in OR Book 4321, page 1167,Collier County,Florida. Parcel ID Number:39894520000 Subject to (a) ad valorem and non-ad valorem real propertytaxes-forthe-tear of closing and subsequent years; (b) zoning,building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental riti L ) } il, gas and mineral interest of record, if any; and (d) restrictions,reservations and easements common to ton. --`"'- 1 Together with all the tenements,he edit/qftts-a purtenances there belonging or in anywise appertaining. ut �') To Have and to Hold, the s e in e- : .le :: -r. • --, And the grantor hereby covena ts,,,. i aid . to :t •; grant A, i, la t 1 , seized of said land in fee simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority o 1 . _ on : d .. .`'that a" . a 1-reby fully warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful clai A all persons whomsoev-.• and tha s••• and is free of all encumbrances except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31,2016. ',,,,,p, Q k. In Witness Whereof, the said grant bPa ': ed and sealed th is the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence: j: 01:9`.,,93 as to both Grantors A.A.,- ie` .4,---,,-,-1_,4, 0 � (Seal) Bonnie L. Jolly Wal , Indivi�lly and as Trustee The Witness Printed Name AA (//X (1• .4 (p) t,vr\ 2560 Oil Well Road Land Trust dated June 16,2016 I Address: 2400 Oil Well Rd,Naples FL 34120 -y-,-/- (Seal) L Witness Printed Name�C f ,( c( Address: State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 18th day of January, 2017, by Bonnie L. Jolly Walsh, a single worn' --� Trustee of the The 2560 Oil Well Road Land Trust dated June 16, 2016, who is/are personally known to me or who has produc. Dow,i\i LP:CAA- as identification. ill- eritA___ \...... ...____L_ otary Public ,.,..,,9, ,,!.• •_,,,,,,c, ;� *': IUdAX R®3ERT 1 tEl'3uRN Print Name: M ft-V. (��i{A(- Att./rho-I0 MY COMMlSSIUN#FF187sFR EXHIBIT L AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PUD2-PL20170002898 I, Bonnie Walsh (print name), as Property Owne' (title, if applicable) of Parcel No.39892880001 (company, If a licable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner v applicant contract purchaser and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. Well authorize Davidson Engineering and Patrick Neale&Associates to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes: • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres. • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member." • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner"of the named partnership. • If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts stated in it are true. Signature Date STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoin in�trtment was sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me on July 31, 2018 by r� �� (name of person providing oath or affirmation), as t��►t� who is personally known to me or who has produced (type of id tification) as identification. STAMP/SEAL ign ture of otary c e n JESSICA HARRELSON i :r° .1'`�s Notary Public-State of Florida 1 _ • Commission 0 FF 954332 %;,. My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 ) 1 •''F'F,'d', Bonded through National Notary Assn 0 CP\08-C'OA-OO l 15\155 REV 3/24/14 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PUDZ-PL20170002898 CanciceM Jolly (print name), as Property Owner (title, if applicable) of Parcel No 39894520000 (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the(choose one) owner( ,/ 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 Well authorize Davidson Engineering and Patnck Neale&Associates to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres or v. pres • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L C) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member " • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner"of the named partnership • If the applicant rs 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/.3 ) 3 Signature _224="t - a e ck - 669G G69G Date STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER he foregoing it sl trticnent was sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me on \ ` (date) by ��. c (name of person providing oat or affirmation), as Property Owner who is personally known to me or who has produced (type of ltlen'titication) aswientitication. STAMP/SEAL (Sig ture of Nota ublic HRLS 1 '�? NotaryJESSICA Public A -StateREofON Florida '' Commission N FF 954332 •.,'nto�t�Y My Comm Expires May 18,2020 t Bonded through National Notary Assn ('P108-CO,t-O 111 S115S REV 3/24/14 AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PUOZ-PL20170002898 Nen P Elliott (print name), as Property Owner (title, if applicable) of Parcel No 39894520000 (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the(choose one)owner / 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 We/I authorize Davidson Engineering and Patrick Neaie&Associates to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above 'Notes • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp Pres. or v pres • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L C) or Limited Company (L C), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member." • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner"of the named partnership • If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e g. individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts stated/'n it are tytz .' '-/ gn tours',/' Dat STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER T e fore oing instru t was sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me on( a �`A date) by •\ • U�� (name of person providing oor affirmation), as who is personally known to me or who has produced (type of iden ification) as identification. fra. ------ STAMP/SEAL :134:ture o Notar "• blip ,,oR';';B, JESSICA HARRELSON r° ` Notary Public -State of Florida •7. �' Commission#FF 954332 ,, My Comm.Expires May 18,2020 Bonded through National Notary Assn c•fnos-ct,t-00115U 55 s REV 3/24/14 MAXWELL HENDRY SUMMONS �, real estate appraisers & consultants M Le Market Study 20.16± Acre Parcel 2400/2560 Oil Well Road Naples, Collier County, Florida 34120 Published Date of Study: 8 May 2019 File Name: 18066004 - Davidson Engineering /lel I.% : ,-, . }1 t• 2 '-‘ ! • ; It. i ., 4 r rfi • • E ' lyat I . 1 iI " — R� f / I ,$ 1 Prepared For Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 Info@M HSappraisal.com (239)337-0555 MHSappraisal.com 12600 Worid Plaza Lane, Building 063 Fort Myers, FL 33907 MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS >" -� ,+ real estate appraisers & consultants 8 May 2019 Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 Attention: Ms.Jessica Harrelson, Senior Planning Technician Re: Market study of proposed uses within Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment Petition (GMPA - PL20170002897) on properties located at 2400 and 2560 Oil Well Road, Naples, Florida 34120. Dear Ms. Harrelson: As you requested, we have performed a market study on the above-referenced property, which is described within the attached report. Davidson Engineering, Inc. has submitted an application to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The application (GMPA - PL20170002897) is proposed to redesignate ±20.16 acres (subject property)from the Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates Mixed Use District - Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. As described in the GMPA, development in the proposed subdistrict shall be subject to the following: Allowable uses are limited to the following: a. Child Care centers(SIC 8351), limited to 150 students �.. b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. c. Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students Within this study, we have analyzed the trends, both real estate and demographic, in the primary market area surrounding the subject site to determine the needs of the area for the proposed allowable uses within GMPA - PL20170002897. On the following page, we have provided an Executive Summary with gives an overview of the study and brief summary of our conclusions. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, Gerald A. Hendry, MAI, CCIM Matthew S. Simmons State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser State-Certified Residential Real Estate Appraiser RZ 2245 RD 5762 Licensed Real Estate Broker BK567939 Licensed Real Estate Broker BK3214690 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Study Charge This report provides an analysis and needs assessment of a proposed amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMPA - PL20170002897), and estimates the impact on the neighboring community, if any, as a result of the approval and development of a ±20.16 acre parcel with the proposed allowable uses. The proposed GMPA will redesignate ±20.16 acres (subject property) from the Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates Mixed Use District - Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. As described in the GMPA, development in the proposed subdistrict shall be subject to the following: Allowable uses are limited to the following: a. Child Care centers(SIC 8351), limited to 150 students b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. c. Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students Objectives of the Study The objectives of the study are to analyze real estate market conditions, and economic and demographic trends surrounding the subject property to determine if there are sufficient needs for the proposed allowable uses, and if there any impacts to the surrounding community as a result of the approval. Further, the intent of the study is to sufficiently inform Collier County planning staff and elected officials of our findings. Research Methods The study includes the following methods and research elements • Analysis of the Subject Property and Surrounding Uses/Neighborhoods • Overview of the Collier County market • Overview of area of study(physical characteristics, development trends, demographic trends) • Needs analysis of child care centers in area of study • Needs analysis of educational services in area of study • Needs analysis of Equestrian Riding Academy in area of study • Review of compatibility of proposed allowable uses with surrounding properties Conclusions This is only a summary of the complete findings and conclusions of the study.The reader is encouraged to review the entirety of the report as the opinions and conclusions may only be understood in the context of the specific research parameters, methods and limitations of the individual methods. Based on our study, we have concluded the following: • The defined area of study is a growing population with a projected compound annual growth rate of 2.01% over the next five years which exceeds Collier County (1.85%), the State (1.41%) and National (0.83%) projections. • Based on the data presented, it is our observation, the area of study is poised for continued growth with increases in housing (Ave Maria, Orange Blossom, Hyde Park, Rivergrass Villages, etc.) but is lacking in high school level capacity, and private school capacity. • The area of study has a 2018 estimated population of 32,828. We have considered a typical child care demand to be 328 (1%) to 492 (1.5%) children. Given the current level of existing facilities at 230 children,there is a shortage of child care centers. • The results of the study indicate that approval of the proposed GMPA on the subject site, and future introduction of the allowable uses will not negatively impact neighboring communities or individual contiguous properties. • It is recognized that some areas on the western edge of the area of study have support facilities to the west in larger employment areas of the county. However, not all of the proposed uses are being satisfied in the urban areas to the west, and southwest. Moreover, uses such as an equestrian riding academy would fit in with the surrounding area and a drive of two miles or greater would not be uncommon for users of these type of facilities. • The following is a summary of our findings by proposed allowable uses: Total Total Projected Demand Supply Unmet Need 2018 Child Care centers(SIC 8351) 490 children 230 children 190 children Educational services(SIC 8211) 7,194 students* 1,502 students** unmet private+public high school Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999) 3,080 households <200 users >150 users *represents potential students based on age in the area of study **represents private and Charter Schools in area of study TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 SEC. I: INTRODUCTION 9 SEC. II:SCOPE OF RESEARCH 11 SEC. III: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 12 LOCATION MAP 12 BOUNDARY SURVEY 13 AERIAL MAP 14 CONCEPTUAL PLAN 15 PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS 16 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 18 SEC. IV: REGIONAL ANALYSIS 19 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA/COLLIER COUNTY DATA 19 CONCLUSION/LIFE CYCLE STAGE 26 SEC.V:AREAS OF STUDY 27 AERIAL OF PRIMARY AREA OF STUDY 27 STREET MAP OF PRIMARY AREA OF STUDY 28 SEC.VI: PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 38 SEC.VII: CONCLUSION OF MARKET STUDY 62 SEC.VIII:ADDENDA 63 QUALIFICATIONS OF GERALD A. HEN DRY, MAI,CCIM 63 QUALIFICATIONS: MATTHEW S.SIMMONS 65 SEC. I: INTRODUCTION OWNER OF RECORD: Terry Walsh and Bonnie L.Jolly Walsh (2400 Oil Well Road) Candice M.Jolly and Neil P. Elliott(2560 Oil Well Road) ADDRESS: 2400 and 2560 Oil Well Road, Naples, Florida 34120 TAX ID: 39892880001 39894520000 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL OF TRACTS 32,32A 33,33A AND 48 OF GOLDEN GATE ESTATES,UNIT NO,64, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7. PAGE 64,OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY.FLORIDA:LESS AND EXCEPT THE NORTH 21 FEET OF TRACTS 32A AND 33A FOR RIGHT OF WAY. AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION: TRACT 48A GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO,64,ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7. PAGE 64,OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, F_ORIDA:LESS AND EXCEPT THE NORTH 21 FEET THEREOF PURSUANT TO ORDER OF TAKE RECORDING IN O,R,BOOK 4321 PAGE 1167,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA, THE ABOVE DESCRIBES AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 878.110 SQUARE FEET OR 20.18 ACRES OF LAND, SUBJECT TO EASEMEN I S.RESTRICT IONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD, SITE AREA: 20.16±acres IMPROVEMENTS: 1994-built single family home and other accessory buildings 1992-built single family home ZONING Estates/ Estates Mixed Use District- Residential Estates Subdistrict FUTURE LAND USE: PUBLISHED DATE OF THE 8 May 2019 MARKET STUDY: INTENDED USER/CLIENT: Davidson Engineering, Inc. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 9 Davidison Engineering, Inc. has submitted an application to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan to redesignate ±20.16 acres (subject property)from the Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates Mixed Use District - Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. As described in the GMPA, development in the proposed subdistrict shall be subject to the following: PROJECT CONCEPT: Allowable uses are limited to the following: a. Child Care centers (SIC 8351), limited to 150 students b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K- 12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. c. Equestrian Riding Academy (SIC 7999), limited to 150 students MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 10 SEC. I I: SCOPE OF RESEARCH This assignment is multi-faceted in mission and attempts to study the needs of several different property/allowable uses described in GMPA - PL20170002897. The study was commissioned to analyze real estate market conditions, and economic and demographic trends surrounding the subject property to determine if there are sufficient needs for the proposed allowable uses, and if there any impacts to the surrounding community as a result of the approval. Further, the intent of the study is to sufficiently inform Collier County planning staff and elected officials of our findings. The study included a review of a variety of published sources as well as a collection of primary data. In the completion of this exercise, the following resources were utilized: - Local Multiple Listing Service (MLS) - CoStar - Loopnet - Esri GIS Systems - Collier County Property Appraiser Public Records - U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey - Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics - School District of Collier County - Charter Schools USA - Collier County Department of Community Development MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 11 SEC. III : PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOCATION MAP , ... .'.. Yr. ii 1.1. 1 . .,......,••..t : : , 11••116 t..,t....no I* 1 '.,...;1 .......A, 1 t I No., I 1 .•0•11 IND i ...... _ 41 : '''::''..'"' .r.-•,:. ‘ :, I iy..........,114•4.61 1 1 i Yi Pollext Day ,..t....... 1 '3..........i.Om,. ...a...0.p.m. • N.,t1.11.101.14 • ,....: 4 i 14••• t*.$ 1 .......01.4.•et r ,. 1 It...4NA i .. - i ''1. 011isa 611.• ... : 1 . I a I 6 Alsommer...406...... .or asamsem.*spa eampomumummommi-onallignImaa. a . A4,001 UN Napl ft • I \ I , •.........• sem.mo. ... la .,MOW Ilow MAXWELL HENDRY HENDRY SIMMONS 12 BOUNDARY SURVEY !j� , 0 , 7 .7. ...i7 is 7: 1.4111,10.Or '.4 tiii PUT WOK,4reT Orl ) . ... MOW OAR WA'. 1 r. 1-- 'ic►'141Jor04,1.7.01f 4. 1 .1.61 'ru r.A.. 1 - x 4- 11; r".7.1%.71.%".........'"....."... H 11. s 11 aan..o wm it - yt# ;� t8 uU.Art.wnro [t�' oaaWvi w.,. r.•+.`�wt r MOP 4. 4M`iv. t , w '•1' ,w kr MA,,PA.w IV +.�.00., w.« wMO.l aaI i ,..n ww •.e.a 5 � �$ t 4 1 i i t a : d,. 3;i ;i !; 1 � �_ E ?ri ii. __ L ....... 1 EXHIBIT P MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 13 AERIAL MAP r. ; K r " ♦ by 't i} : C~ , y. t'ric, a A r rt...d1t r 4r r, ?'Y' '� ; ; 1�ri•++�'ly' • ../4.7k ,`'awl '�+' ' ‘.4 .,..,..T'-,'"..'.. r _._-.u ",F 7.. -'•rte► > - t: .' y.,r . hha.. / i! '.r .�` •L;!`.1 ..14.-..eni: V '' ,,,t7u •;..f...' -rf' .I; 444711r. 1..:. -'"' -.r". 'j' . rr *11 .1.:1— r ' ' f � rnst . itr: `i r '•~ +� • • 35THAVE NEs a i • v ti 1� NI* • " � ' A.a t �` r.' L V ' : 71":4i b .' '; ,,; Awa. t .�� sitill II OIL-WELL ROAD•-CR858 1_: itt:,k. il:"..:, . 1 %)..tbiti ' ,,, ,„, a y. .• •. '# - ` - a 'rte Y ` aM' �. +..,.. • •i 37STrAV. .NE t 4 ' I E',•{ " G.. .11 �. Ait� ,+a w:, a•. , LEGEND ari . 1. I�OIL WELL CANIA/N•TY.ACIL TIES J -• - I :ue DI6.R IC*.211,,i ACRE3 \`] �• .. - CCSLERCOUVTYNAAITARIEOROADS '! . I. a U E.o1.•••=1 / :.r f ;%J RCO�GEOGRAPHIC NIF•Y AT• SYSTEMS MI i •, r •4 Ise •FET _, DAVIDSON ENGINEERING INC OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT DE4365RADISUITE 201 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT MAPLES,FLL34104 34104 DAVIDSONPHONE:239-434-6060 EX-IIBIT E:AERIAL EXHIBIT MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 14 CONCEPTUAL PLAN ...,—• ____ fbANNIKGN41E5 ...? 1,71 _ \. '.I a IIIrD,>K W W f� .._ MM�.•ule rwi.Wrenn T, __ . ISLfrf•�rK'iu.xFEAII{i—.—--�.J�OF f. ..MI.___.. ,....MGCNI�!— ,T,..."..."'"7: rK M.WET 1RYYELL IMrL •,%. ' E LT ..LEn.. u - S13ASE 4£E�i�A.SE!?EEXR .ENT •r _ i� — d-- _ Yrer•�MC*011•AL• ...M.n • . �1 - •/ON1Vt•IVM MI w w N••w*V ai • • fR -. ._-�_ ' Mia r.w/oTT.r F`,, tl'�^ •. wrcnlna �i. LAND USE SUMWfh 9C ®i' ro 0[tY.DK --- gig O'.uaILl Nw• to At .t 1 ' m� Pr1PC.U'DAT•N 6 f cNCT4ArnrIMN•rat• __. .1K •.r_ :vC.•VTV.Y•,awn WATER g W ...rw.rk r.ww.M. .•:: ••.,• Aucc EW. AIET/T *Ed P•21•4•041.,*w. .rrK .ea. I ' I•J i4 P15.1.131,1•11.4111 •,...0 s•rs :owl I1.1 •S .001T.ewYHlwN•Ef rrr k 4/01 r sot arms ' Q1 ___. NATIVE MET KA .INATI[7ti• __._. • Ail;1' Y *MAIM 1os ogre.111•.•1•rptew•••wrt1110 iw.M IN a IpE .wAlw Tso 1r GENERAL SITE NOTE y ill DEVEI M+AStr •f M • •>.1.01.-w IA.“01111.1.111[41111.. Y�� AREA I .... •.,m�.r I/I..ne...... MI rwrMwan,w.w•.•nAr,+,o w[TAWAT0111 l M.Y•uM w•er wM ro•.Mr.,w AMA EI Y, • •.•Tnt n Or*.••w,..w••.••n.Y•.a • 1 Fc ••T•r,e.•nnw•u.t.0.r.f.ms tli •••••••••----..-^,. I.i „MIMM.•rRY4•nw.,FNNrX•ti • WI/WM N HAAT WTt•w•WO Iw %' •ret•Wtell*1K 1w Mt•0•11.w M•4, Y PMI.•,.l••V,Ita nw�W u L • l V wN V.P1a.M w+rY•M1T.I.,..VI Tr f i le AK VPAnscnuAK +•I S Av.MO.ro1411.14404.2. .�Ka Tw•Jnnaonl.nni•l Mtt 1 • I _ wA. A...A. .~w•..• E%ISTIN6 LAVE 4• • j••, it • I ,•wwru. s•n Tn.v.<+:nrnw� � �:' / •o�d �i if hIEt.VI Mt J • ,L w vtTEA }{ • I i1 Wlij+; NAHA <: • . . I i1 ,ETLs��tAwDEwe .�—/ I kimiaii ___ w xtwcrc AMhA9Et•�i'+T J .olt•P• 't»rp I EAI All6 :ono. t MAMA 214.0 E 1111Th Tp — LA141um t1ENEtdED qt.(Lorin I LAND tfI'.0f•R0NlD I DFlWPED OND•A 1_ADEuc rc.K.w,to .wits-r•MI,.ENLbaMt URNS f...-fdsc(101N Mr**AV•Y M ANWIN I7•• I k MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 15 PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS Th „N • it7. +4. ^ .. a9, • 1..r......ata. PP .11118111 t i _ S'LY VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY --� 410 ti SW'LY VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 16 atio .04 VPI.4*4 • • J � _ '- _ „ip • E'LY STREET VIEW ALONG OIL WELL ROAD • ., 4.0110117- • • W'LY STREET VIEW ALONG OIL WELL ROAD MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 17 SITE CHARACTERISTICS -� ADDRESS: 2400 and 2560 Oil Well Road, Naples, Florida 34120 TAX ID: 39892880001 39894520000 The property is located on the south side of Oil Well Road just west of Everglades Boulevard within the Rural Estates Planning Community of Collier County. The property is bound by Oil Well Road to the north, and rural residential developments to the east, south, and west. The property has direct access and exposure to Oil Well Road (four lane, divided). Currently, LOCATION/ACCESS/ there are two driveway cuts leading to the respective properties at 2400 Oil EXPOSURE: Well Road and 2560 Oil Well Road. These access points currently allow right- in/right-out access. Oil Well Road in front of the subject has a continuous grass median which prevents legal, left-in/left out turns. Oil Well Road is an east-west traffic artery which connects Immokalee Road to the west to County Line Road to the east. Overall, exposure and access to the subject are considered good. The subject site is rectangular in shape, containing ±20.16 acres/878,110 SIZE(SITE AREA)/SHAPE: square feet according to a boundary survey completed by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. dated 22 August 2017. PHYSICAL FEATURES The subject parcel is generally cleared, graded and appears to be at or near (TOPOGRAPHY,ELEVATION, the crown of Oil Well Road. Drainage on the subject property, as well as in ETC.): other areas, appears to be adequate. The subject property is serviced with utilities including electricity provided by Florida Power and Light, and telephone service provided by Century Link. UTILITIES: Currently, water/sewer service is available with private well/septic. Police and fire protection are also provided by Collier County. The capacity of these services appears to be adequate. EASEMENTS, There are no known adverse easements, encroachments, restrictions, ENCROACHMENTS,ETC.: encumbrances, leases, reservations, covenants, contracts, declarations, special assessments,ordinances or other items of a similar nature. EXISTING ZONING/FUTURE Estates/Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict LAND USE DESIGNATION: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 18 SEC. IV: REGIONAL ANALYSIS SOUTHWEST FLORIDA/ COLLIER COUNTY DATA ,tc: IF i 4 dr rii110104illok AK ,t, 1LH iiiikil, .• Nii _ A 117.41 , f C ,1%-e'll MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 19 This section of the report is provided to give the reader an overview of the social, economic,governmental,and --� environment forces of Collier County. Collier County, named for Barron Collier, was created from Lee County in 1923, and is the second largest county in the State of Florida by land area. Collier County is bordered by Miami-Dade Counties to the east and Lee and Hendry Counties to the north. The county's western boundary is the Gulf of Mexico. The county contains a total of 2,025 square miles of land area and 91 square miles of inland water area. Collier County is the second largest county east of the Mississippi River and is larger than the States of Rhode Island and Delaware. The present-day Collier County encompasses 2,305 square miles, with a variety of natural inland, coastal, and barrier island habitats, with approximately 13% of the total area being water. The year-round population is 321,520 as of the 2010 census and 366,709 as estimated in 2018 (Source: Esri). There are three(3) incorporated municipalities in Collier County as follows: City of Naples: Incorporated in 1949. 14.41 Square Miles. 2010 Population: 19,537. The city of Naples is the county seat of Collier County, as well as being the principal city of the Naples-Marco Island Metropolitan Statistical Area. The city was originally settled in 1886, with the majority of growth occurring after the depression and World War II. The City is home to a number of major employers, as well as non-profit organizations and Fortune 1000 companies. The Fifth Avenue South and Third Street South corridors are considered to be the heart, or "downtown" of the City of Naples, and this area is a popular retail and shopping destination. The City of Naples also features a number of cultural centers and organizations including The Naples Players, the Opera Naples, the Philharmonic Center for the Arts, the Philharmonic Orchestra and Theatre Zone Equity Theatre Company, the Naples Jazz Orchestra, the Naples Youth Jazz Orchestra and the Naples Philharmonic Youth Orchestra. City of Marco Island: Incorporated in 1997. 17.1 Square Miles. 2010 Population: 16,413. Originally named San Marco Island by Spanish explorers, Marco Island is the largest barrier island within -� Southwest Florida's Ten Thousand Islands area, extending southerly to Cape Sable. The island was purchased in the 1920's by Barron Collier, and was originally incorporated as Collier City in 1927, but was later unincorporated. Marco Island is generally considered to be a resort destination, and the desirability of real estate coupled with the finite supply, has led to a rapid escalation of property values, which are significantly higher than many other parts of Collier County. City of Everglades: Incorporated 1923. 1.2 Square Miles. 2010 Population:400. The City of Everglades, known more commonly as Everglades City, is located at the mouth of the Barron River, on Chokoloskee Bay, approximately 32 miles southeast of Naples, near the extreme southeasterly corner of Collier County. With the establishment of the Everglades National Park in 1947, the economy of Everglades City began to shift from industrial and agricultural to tourism and eco-tourism. The Everglades National Park visitor's center is located in Everglades City. There are many other unincorporated, yet distinct, communities in Collier County, both rural and suburban in nature. These include Ave Maria, Golden Gate, Goodland, Naples Manor, Naples Park, Immokalee, Lely Resort and many others. Collier County is a growing county with many diverse geographical areas and populous communities. Collier County is second only to Lee County as the center of growth and activity for the five (5) county area (Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee). MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 20 Socia/Forces The population of Collier County has been increasing and is predicted to continue increasing for the foreseeable future. The chart below demonstrates the change in population from the 2010 Census projected forward to 2023. SUMMARY CENSUS 2010 2018 2023 POPULATION 321,520 366,709 401,866 HOUSEHOLDS 133,179 152,265 167,090 FAMILIES 89,276 101,247 110,734 AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE 2.38 2.38 2.38 OWNER OCCUPIED HOUSING 96,159 107,948 122,128 RENTER OCCUPIED HOUSING 37,020 44,317 44,962 MEDIAN AGE 46.9 50.2 51.9 TRENDS: 2018-2023 AREA State National ...- POPULATION 1.85% 1.41% 0.83% HOUSEHOLDS 1.88% 1.36% 0.79% FAMILIES 1.81% 1.30% 0.71% OWNER HHS 2.50% 1.91% 1.16% MEIDAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME 3.35% 2.52% 2.50% Source: Esri, US Census Bureau MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 21 Economic Forces Economic considerations involve the financial capacity of the inhabitants of a region to rent or own property and properly maintain it. These economic forces may include income levels, unemployment rates, the economic base of a region and the strength of development and construction. 2018 2017 2016 2015 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE1 3.5%(February) 3.6%(December) 4.8%(Annual) 5.2% (Annual) AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGE1 N/A $857(3Q) $915 (4Q) $969 (4Q) SINGLE-FAMILY MEDIAN PRICE2 $449,000 $434,900 $420,356 $308,000 (June) (Annual) (Annual) (Annual) RETAIL VACANCY RATE3 4.1%(1Q) 3.3%(4Q) 5.7% (4Q) 6.2%(4Q) OFFICE VACANCY RATES 7.0%(1Q) 6.1%(4Q) 7.2%(4Q) 9.3%(4Q) INDUSTRIAL VACANCY RATE3 1.4%(1Q) 0.8%(4Q) 1.2%(4Q) 2.4% (4Q) 1. http://www.bls.gov/ 2. htto://www.floridarealtors.org/ResearchAndStatistics/Florida-Market-Reports/Index.cfm 3. Costar MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 22 Residential real estate is a strong economic generator in Collier Collier County. As can be shown, median sale prices have been on an upward trend over the past few years as shown below: Collier County Single Family Month Available Inventory Number of Average Marketing Market Area Median Absorption Sales Time(DOM) Sales Price Percentage Apr-15 2,253 489 80 $375,000 21.70% May-15 2,126 425 84 $429,000 19.99% Jun-15 2,092 427 77 $397,000 20.41% Jul-15 2,003 354 88 $379,000 17.67% Aug-15 1,985 343 78 $392,000 17.28% Sep-15 2,008 379 87 $375,000 18.87% Oct-15 2,163 308 70 $385,000 14.24% Nov-15 2,267 258 84 $423,000 11.38% Dec-15 2,377 340 83 $412,000 14.30% Jan-16 2,664 288 78 $425,000 10.81% Feb-16 2,929 261 84 $425,000 8.91% Mar-16 2,942 385 94 $385,000 13.09% Apr-16 2,824 421 78 $434,000 14.91% May-16 2,727 392 84 $432,000 14.37% Jun-16 2,627 410 85 $400,000 15.61% Jul-16 2,517 318 73 $375,000 12.63% Aug-16 2,509 346 86 $385,000 13.79% Sep-16 2,617 299 90 $378,000 11.43% Oct-16 2,794 293 84 $375,000 10.49% Nov-16 2,916 265 80 $395,000 9.09% Dec-16 2,958 338 102 $408,000 11.43% Jan-17 3,163 279 94 $397,000 8.82% Feb-17 3,205 291 101 $402,000 9.08% Mar-17 3,180 428 98 $428,000 13.46% Apr-17 2,937 399 108 $399,000 13.59% May-17 2,689 480 105 $436,000 17.85% Jun-17 2,603 430 92 $405,000 16.52% Jul-17 2,501 353 110 $410,000 14.11% Aug-17 2,400 374 93 $423,000 15.58% Sep-17 2,272 171 100 $449,000 7.53% Oct-17 2,390 299 104 $425,000 12.51% Nov-17 2,565 268 107 $435,000 10.45% Dec-17 2,640 323 109 $416,000 12.23% Jan-18 2,910 277 95 $430,000 9.52% Feb-18 3,050 298 96 $472,000 9.77% Mar-18 2,911 455 94 $455,000 15.63% Apr-18 2,744 445 94 $455,000 16.22% May-18 2,637 484 90 $440,000 18.35% Jun-18 2,564 425 93 $449,000 16.58% Averages: 2,607 354 91 $413,077 13.85% Source: Naples Area Board of Realtors This historical data indicates that approximately 8%to 18%of the available single family units listed for sale in Collier County were absorbed each month for the most recent 12 month period. The average for the most recent 12 month period is 13.21%, while the last 24 months was 12.78%. As of the date of this report, the residential markets are in a period of strong growth and the bulk of the evidence suggests that conditions going forward should be a continuation of our current conditions with slightly moderated growth as the pace of recovery normalizes as shown above. For the most recent 12 month period, there were an average of approximately 2,632 single family residential units on the market per month, and an average of 348 units were absorbed each month. A review of the past 24 month indicates averages of 2,736 single family inventory and an average absorption of 347 units per month would indicate a slightly lower supply and a similar `'" demand. It took an average of 102 days to achieve a sale in 2017 compared to 85 days in 2016, 81 days in MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 23 2015, 82 days in 2014 and 136 days in 2013, with the longest marketing time occurring at 108 days in April —� 2017, and the shortest average marketing time occurring in October 2015 at a 70 day average. For the single family product type in Collier County, inventory levels have increased since April 2015. The first quarter of 2017 represented the highest level of inventory over the 24 month period with a decline occurring in 2018 over 2017. The following chart illustrates the average available inventory since April 2015: Available Inventory 3,500 --- 3,000 3,000 .•2,500 2,000 A 1,500 • — 4 moo a 500 0 - - Jf v1 N N N 'D n n N N r, N CO CO C U -6 C 00 u U p C 00 U d < O < ° < 0 o W a 4 < o a Source: Naples Area Board of Realtors Average marketing times have increased over the past 2+years with the trend line indicating a slight increase since late 2016. However, since late 2017 to current, this trend has reversed with lower average marketing times. The following chart illustrates the historical marketing times since April 2015: Average Marketing Time (DOM) 120 110 i -- — A 100 40 80 r 70 --- 60 V1 Uf v1 1.13 '0 '0 tD 'D 'O N N N N N N CO 00 CO Q• , < O u- < Q O O u_ < < 0 0 � < -. Source: Naples Area Board of Realtors MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 24 The following chart illustrates the number of sales since April 2015: Number of Sales 500 _ 450 400 350 3°0 IIIIIAru1111 11111-111II ISR 1 250 111111111111111 11111111 111111 II I 200 111111111111111 11111111 1 !'111111 I 150 111111111111111 11111111 11111111 I 100 111111111111111 11111111 11111111 I 111111111111111 11111111 11111111 I n v% v+ r+ m '.o m '.0 '.0 n n n n n r. CO 5 5 C I C 00 g u a C 00 g d 4 G < Source: Naples Area Board of Realtors Also,the following chart illustrates the change in pricing levels over the same period: Market Area Median Sales Price $480,000 $460.000 $440.000 •' • $420`000 1 1 fi $40QA001 /, e . : 5380,000 $360,000 $340,000 uD tO 4O ID r n n n n n co m co Source: Naples Area Board of Realtors Governmental Forces The county government consists of a five-member board of county commissioners, elected to four-year terms within single-member districts. A non-elected county manager heads the government staff. Other elected officials in the county are sheriff, tax collector, supervisor of elections, clerk of the circuit court, and property appraiser. In addition, there are numerous special districts with independently elected boards, with the services provided ranging from fire protection tot water&sewer service. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 25 Services There are three incorporated cities with the usual municipal services, such as police protection and fire protection. The balance of the county is patrolled by the Florida State Highway Patrol and the Collier County Sheriff's Department. Independent fire control districts serve the balance of the unincorporated area for fire and rescue services. Utilities CenturyLink is the primary telephone service provider for Southwest Florida. CenturyLink has a fiber optic backbone that has the ability to connect all of its central offices and maintain high network availability. KMC Telecom, Inc., along with CenturyLink, has a SONET ring surrounding Fort Myers. This SONET ring safeguards customers from service interruptions by using diverse routing of its fiber optic cables. Electricity is supplied by Florida Power and Light, LCEC, and TECO. Gas is available from any one of a number of manufactured bottled gas dealers in the county or directly from TECO. Water-and sewer service is supplied by the either city or county government. Medical Services The Naples Community Hospital System is a private non-profit which oversees several facilities throughout the county. Educational System The School District of Collier County oversees the uniform K-12 public educations system within Collier County. There are also several private and parochial schools in the county. Florida Southwestern State College has a campus in Naples, while Florida Gulf Coast University is located in south Lee County. Ave Maria University is a newer Catholic University located in Naples. Transportation By far, the major artery through Collier County is U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail). Another major artery is Interstate 75 (1-75),which connects Naples to the east coast population centers of Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Air service is limited but currently expanding out of Naples Airport. Primary airport transportation is Southwest Florida International Airport,just north of Naples, in Fort Myers. Environmental Forces The county has a sub-tropical climate. The average temperature is 74 degrees. Temperature extremes are infrequent with only a rare freeze and few readings above the mid-90s. Rainfall averages just over 53 inches annually, with the heaviest rains during the summer months. CONCLUSION / LIFE CYCLE STAGE The Collier County market area is in the Growth stage of its life cycle. This market area experienced tremendous development from 2003-2005 and then an equally significant decline in property values from 2006-2011. This trend has reversed over the last five+years with year over year increases in property values and a returned cycle of new property development. This growth trend is most pronounced within the Naples area, but increasing property values and new development is also occurring in the eastern rural areas of the County as well. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 26 SEC. V: AREAS OF STUDY AERIAL OF PRIMARY AREA OF STUDY ...tot.--4 '. la; * E. '-..^is. ifel ..to, 0. , 4 -.— • , l•••417.•-• *.;itsillt f‘t \Orr ' . , eta ' ' s".1' ii,,,, 1 ""' sr •4133 * ;.-7•-•1 r iimil. .., • .;.*: t 4.. 1 • • ' f , . • ' ii, _ , = 1* V. •44' ,1•114 _.k.A1 1 . • •. _.,-.i- i , i; —1- , . ... 61 , * •• ' ;.• 1 31,111 • ' , v. is t fall I I III A' _-.,4 7111 lb i . 7 ) 4 I 1 4 II r .1,_ 4 ' 411111jlibili d.. • ilr' OM ,- .. I '... • 1 ' i • . s"i ' I . a - 01 gait.;A., Alligator Al., Alligator AN r t I , ^- .•la ``:, r. .•_ ' MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 27 STREET MAP OF PRIMARY AREA OF STUDY Imme&r«R. } Z S{ r %..!Mara csp S .J•wvol r 0 imm..”Rn m s t.c.1.1en Gab Pial A V V16rn Gate H'.1•. L Greer 11,.•d Golden Gate The subject property is located in the eastern portion of Collier County in an area which was historically rural residential and agricultural in nature. As the western portions of Collier County began to build out over the past decade, development trends have been trending eastward with notable developments such as Orange Blossom, Ave Maria. The area of study is designated on the aerial map above and consists of lands located in portions of three planning communities of Collier County: Rural Estates, Corkscrew, and Royal Fakapalm. The following is an illustration of the area of study as an overlay to the Collier County Planning Communities map: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 28 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMUNITIES - ...-':- -1•� Alt ,.4 los .9 , g use . rr ,i • I1 6ce�."„�;:,, - .O = PLANNING COMMUNITIES 1 co�susw m Z 1.North Naples 7 Royal Fakapalm y �` "�- 0 2 Central Naples 0.Rural Estates ::..C3 - �' 3-Golden Wit 9-Cotksctew 4.East Naples 10-Immokalee L. v., , LEE COUNTY 9. ep O( 5 South e-►tar oNa12 U11 lutC pens Z citaill , ..c r MIMEE T o PO — -- T V 0114."'-fn Q (1 0 115,111 CITY OF NAPLES .iii-e, ..... 0 7 6 `rwe,� m CITY OF MARCO ISLAND \* _ + EVERGLADES CITY d Mlles 6. i, 0153 6 9 12 - The area of study has been determined by Davidson Engineering based on existing infrastructure that leads to and from 1-75. The land west, north, and south of the subject development has been identified to include residential areas east of 1-75 in which residents typically commute to work, specifically including Golden Gate Estates, Ave Maria. The area is estimated to consist of 73,600 acres. Access to this area is primarily via Immokalee Road to the west, State Road 29 (SR 29) to the east, and Immokalee Road/SR 29 to the north. This area of study was considered for all proposed uses. Existing Developments This portion of Collier County is generally less developed than the western or coastal portions of the County, and is primarily rural or agricultural in nature, with the exception of the Ave Maria development. To the north of this market area is Immokalee, which is an unincorporated community consisting of an estimated 2018 population of 27,454(source: Esri). The urban core area of Naples is located approximately 15-20 miles to the west. The primary rural residential areas are identified as Golden Gate Estates within this area. A significant portion of Collier County west of Interstate 75 is nearing build out with new development pushing south and east. Over the past decade, the area along Immokalee Road from Interstate 75 east to just east of Collier Boulevard has experienced significant growth in the form of residential and commercial development. As this area continues to build out and as Collier County residents search for more affordable housing options, development has been pushing eastward to the area of study with newer residential projects such as Waterways of Naples, Orange Blossom, and, most notable, Ave Maria. In addition, there are two pending projects which are "under review" by Collier County: Hyde Park Village SRA and Rivergrass Village SRA. Hyde Park Village (SRA) (PL20180000622) is currently under Review and is proposed to be a Stewardship Receiving Area for 1,500 single-family units, 300 multi-family units, as well as 45,000 square feet of neighborhood MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 29 commercial uses, and 18,000 square feet of civic uses. The development will consist of 654.80 acres and is —� located at 4125 Oil Well Road in Naples. Rivergrass Village SRA is in a resubmittal phase for 1,000 acres and will consist of a maximum of 2,500 dwelling units, and 80,000 square feet of neighborhood-scaled retail and office uses, and 25,000 square feet of civic, government, and institutional uses, and one 18-hole golf course. The project will be north and south of Oil Well Road east of Desoto Boulevard North. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 30 Ave Maria Ave Maria is the primary development within this study area. The Ave Maria community itself is located near the easterly edge of the study area. The project,which is a Development of Regional Impact(DRI), was created in the early 2000's as a town and university (Ave Maria University) in a partnership agreement between Tom Monaghan and the Barron Collier Companies. The original Ave Maria campus was located in Michigan, but was relocated to Collier County when zoning rights for planned expansions in Ann Arbor Michigan could not be obtained. In 2003, the Barron Collier Companies donated approximately 5,000 acres of land for the project, and the campus was opened in 2007 with an initial enrollment of about 700 students. Approximately 20%of the overall lands are designated for the University Campus, with the rest of the lands being used for residential and other development. The town and university are conceptualized to be a Roman Catholic-centric enclave, in a mold similar to that of Notre Dame in Indiana. A number of master planned communities are being developed within the town of Ave Maria by third party builders, and there are 11,000 planned residential units at build-out. Enrollment and home sales initially fell short of expectations, and as a result, some of the new master planned communities (such as Maple Ridge, Coquina and Avalon Park) are being marketed to a wider demographic which includes families looking for affordable single family housing (relative to Naples as a whole) in a small town environment. Within Ave Maria, there are several developments: Del Webb, Emerson Park, Hampton Village, Bellera Walk, Residences at La Piazza, Maple Ridge, Silverwood, Avalon Park, and the Town Center and Arthrex development. i imettarm ,. .. PI:WE S(I4(K t%IIt .m a ARAN ]I ... .._.... .. T ..m w. , 4.:�• (OMMERCIAI rt �_ RSR)EN1IM I EEE111 YVI ' UNMRSRY RREMI11fION Ilr� ♦ 2 ,4 • 44.43: 111,4 a�ii • 'E�ji TJ ' • _.^` EFR E ..... .... ... V.�.. +-` ��:. MAPLE RIDGE 1111111 L ,• •! ..".. 1 .elnrJr 1 „ r n n¢I IILUJwtul P > =914` II.TURE . RESIDENTIAL • pygn FUTURE fa uan.sou ar Nam ....... l • MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 31 Del Webb: The Del Webb Naples neighborhood in Ave Maria is a 55+ adult community located along Anthem —� Parkway, south of the Ave Maria town center. There are 11 models of homes available within the community ranging from 1,289 square feet to 2,634 square feet with two and three bedrooms floor plans. Prices start from $202,490 up to $323,990. Amenities include the Oasis Club, an amenity center featuring over 12,000 square feet of entertainment and fitness space, resort and lap pools, tennis and bocce ball courts, café, art studio and an 18-hole championship golf course. Over 450 homes have sold in this project since 2007. Emerson Park: Emerson Park is a family friendly, all-ages neighborhood located at the northeast corner of the site, developed by Lennar now being marketed by Pulte, consisting of one and two story single-family homes. There are a number of floor plans and styles available from Pulte ranging from 1,570 square feet to 3,514 square feet, with three to six bedrooms. Prices range from $236,990 to $333,990. This project is at the end of the sellout with over 175 homes sold since 2007. Hampton Village: Hampton Village is being marketed as a traditional-style neighborhood, with homes that feature front porches, alley-loaded garages, and large, single-family floor plans designed specifically for growing families. Hampton Park is located just south of the Town Center. Pulte Homes is at the end of the sell out of this project with over 110 homes sold. Bellera Walk: Bellera Walk is now sold out with over 140 homes sold. The project was most recently marketed by Divosta Homes. Residences at La Piazza: The Residences at La Piazza are condominium units located on the second and third floors of the Town Center. They are designed to be Mediterranean or European in style with views of the University and the downtown area. The floor plans range in size from 1,189 square feet to over 1,700 square feet of living space. Resales range in price from $180,000 to$287,000. Maple Ridge: Maple Ridge is one of the newer communities within Ave Maria and is intended for single family development by CC Devco. The development will have 1,699 units at buildout with Phases 5A, 5B, and 6A (42), Phase 2 (88), Phase 3 (220), Phase 4 (164), remaining Hampton Village (23), Phase 5A(130), Phase 53 (121), 6A (12) and future phases of 899 units. There are 17 floor plans being offered, with 30 exterior elevation packages. Floor plans range from three to five bedroom homes on one or two stories. Sizes range from 1,493 square feet to 4,032 square feet, and pricing from $210,990 to$406,990. Since 2014, over 425 homes have sold in Maple Ridge making it one of the fast selling projects in Collier County. Coquina at Maple Ridge: Coquina at Maple Ridge is located adjacent to the larger Maple Ridge project. This community is designed with smaller, single family lots (45'). This community has homes ranging in size from 1,348 square feet to 2,251 square feet and pricing ranging from $210,990 to $262,990. Since 2015, over 210 homes have sold in this project. Maple Ridge Reserve/Silverwood: Maple Ridge Reserve is one the newer communities within Ave Maria and is intended for larger, single family lots and residences. The development has homes ranging in size from 3,097 square feet to 4,358 square feet. Pricing within this community ranges from $366,990 to $484,990. Marketing began in approximately July 2015. There are 51 lots in Phase I. Due to slow sales,the developer is converting future phases to smaller 45' lots with a project known as Silverwood. Under 30 homes have sold in the development since 2016. Avalon Park: Avalon Park is the newest community within Ave Maria and is being developed by Pulte Homes. The development will consists of 1,200 units with homes ranging in size from 1,565 square feet to 4,242 square feet. Pricing within this community ranges from $242,990 to $433,990. Over 50 homes have sold in this project since 2015. Town Center and the Arthrex Commerce Park: The La Piazza Town Center is located adjacent to the university campus near the northerly edge of the town of Ave Maria, and is centered around the Ave Maria Oratory Church. The Town Center features retail shops and restaurants as well as office space and public services. Located near the southerly end of the Town of Ave Maria, the Arthrex Commerce Park is a 57 acre flex/light industrial park anchored by a 197,000 square foot manufacturing facility for Arthrex, Inc., a major medical instrument manufacturing company. This industrial park will eventually encompass 200 acres accommodating a wide range of businesses, R&D and manufacturing. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 32 Ave Maria experienced strong initial growth in 2007 with 177 sales followed by 2008-2012 which had an average of 48 sales per year. A resurgence in sales occurred in 2012 with 107 sales and continued with 183 sales in 2014, 287 sales in 2015, 321 sales in 2016, and 337 sales in 2017. In total, there have been just over 1,700 closed sales. According to Metro Study, Inc., Ave Maria has lead the Lee/Collier County markets in annual starts and annual closings for 13 consecutive quarters. $400,000 - 400 321337 $350,000287 350 $300,000 300 $250,000 I 250 C $200,000 ' 1111 , 111 , - , 200 $150,000 111 111 11 i� Sale Price $100,000 . - 41 37 3 #Sales $50,000 • 50 $00 N 00 00 O 0 rl N m 'Q 'I tD T r` 8 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N 1?-45 0 N Source:Collier County Property Appraiser;compiled by Maxwell,Hendry&Simmons,LLC. Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD The Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD is located just west of the subject property on both the north and south sides of Oil Well Road. The MPUD is a mixed-use development with a maximum of 1,600 units, and 200,000 square feet of commercial and office leasable area. Currently,the residential components are being marketed with Pulte Homes and Lennar Homes both offering residential product. Lennar is offering attached villas ranging from 1,417 square feet to 1,564 square feet with a base price of $214,999 to $224,999 and single family homes ranging from 1,677 square feet to 3,867 square feet with a base price of$288,999 $427,999. Pulte Homes is offering single family homes ranging from 1,674 square feet to 3,811 square feet with a base home price from $282,990 to $409,990. The majority of the area in the eastern portion of the area of study and, more specifically,the area surrounding Ave Maria is within the Rural Land Stewardship Overlay, which encourages conservation, clustering of development and smart growth concepts. Overall, the study area generally serves as an agricultural and rural community with the exception of Ave Maria, and the western portions of the area which are more suburban. Of significance is a proposed project to the west of Ave Maria. This project is proposed to be developed by the developer of Ave Maria, Collier Enterprises. The project will eventually include up to 10,000 residences and nearly 2.1 million square feet of commercial space. It is projected that permitting will take 18 to 24 months with site work not projected to occur until late 2018 or 2019. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 33 Demographics The study area consists of an estimated 73,600 acres of land area in eastern Collier County. Although this area is a less populated area of Collier County,the area is one of the fastest growing areas of the county. The Ave Maria community, with over 300 home sales in 2017 (highest in Southwest Florida) has been a boost to the population and household growth. The following is a comparison of the population trends in the area of study as compared to Collier County, and the state of Florida: Population 2010 Census 2018 2010-2018 CAGR* 2023 2018-2028 CAGR Area of study 28,255 32,828 1.89% 36,256 2.01% Collier County 321,520 366,709 11111111111111111, IF 401,866 1111.11111111111 Florida 18,801,310 20,875,686 1.32% 22,394,909 1.41% *compounded annual growth rate Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 As shown above the growth rate in population in Collier County and in the area of study have exceeded the state of Florida rates since 2010. The area of study indicated a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 1.89%, compared to Collier County at 1.66%, and Florida at 1.32%. Also illustrated are the projected population growth rates over the next five years. Similar trends are projected with the area of study estimated to have a CAGR of 2.01%, compared to Collier at 1.85%, and Florida at 1.41%. All trends lead to a positive conclusion of population growth in the area of study and Collier County relative to the State of Florida. Within the area of study,the following is a breakdown of the race and ethnicity of the population: Area of study Census 2010 2018 2023 R- =nd Ethnicit Num.: R rc-nt Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 24,387 86.3% 27,658 84.2% 29,996 82.7% Black Alone 1,539 5.4% '1051._._ 6. '0 4 7.6 American Indian Alone 122 0.4% 148 0.5% 169 0.5% Asian Alone 391 1.4% 584 1.8% 764 2.1°: Pacific Islander Alone 6 0.0% 8 0.0% 8 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 1,168 4.1% 1,523 4.6% 1,784 4.9% Two or More Races 641 2.3% 857 2.6% 991 2.7% His•anic Ori•in An Race 9 763 34.6% 12 454 37.9% 14 925 41.2% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2017 The population within the area of study is a younger demographic compared to Florida and Collier County. The area of study has an estimated 2018 median age of 37.6 years compared to Collier County at 50.2 years and Florida at 42.3 years. In relation to national trends, the area of study area is similar to the national median age of 38.3 years. The following is a breakdown of the population within the area of study by age: Area of study Census 2010 2018 2023 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0-4 1,771 6.3% 1,951 5.9% 2,114 5.8% 5-9 111111111W 2,070 7.3% 2,198 6.7% 2,360 6.5% 10-14 2,515 8.9% 2,586 7.9% 2,784 7.7% 15-19 2,443 8.6% 2,410 7.3% 2,535 7.0% 20-24 1,669 5.9% 2,025 6.2% 1,893 5.2% 25-34 3,030 10.7% 4,025 12.3% 4,524 12.5% 35-44 4,572 16.2% 4,577 13.9% 5,311 14.6% 45-54 4,567 16.2% 4,724 14.4% 4,614 12.7% 55-64 2,972 10.5% 4,158 12.7% 4,605 12.7% 65-74 1,814 6.4% 2,839 8.6% 3,649 10.1% 75-84 694 2.5% 1,089 3.3% 1,534 4.2% 85+ 139 0.5% 249 0.8% 333 0.9% MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 34 Population by Age 14- 12- 10- amiI I 111 2018 8- u a 6- 4- I 2 Id � is2023 0 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+ Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 With a growing population,the area of study is obviously seeing a similar growth in the number of households. Within the area of study, household growth indicated the highest CAGR since 2010 and is projected to have the highest CAGR over the next five years. These household trends are illustrated below: Households 2010 Census 2018 2010-2018 CAGR* 2+ = 2018-2028 CAGR Area of study 8,732 10,100 1.84% 11,168 2.03% Collier County 133,179 152,265 1.69%aa 167,090 1.88% Florida 7,420,802 8,152,541 1.18% 8,720,568 1.36% Housett 2000 Households 4,285 2010 Households 8,732 2018 Total Households 10,100 2023 Total Households 11,168 2000-2010 Annual Rate 7.38% 2010-2018 Annual Rate 1.78% 2018-2023 Annual Rate 2.03% 2018 Average Household Size 3.20 Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 Positive trends in population and household growth are also having a positive impact on home sales and home pricing. Ave Maria continues to lead the area in sales pace with Maple Ridge of Ave Maria recording the most sales of any development in Southwest Florida in 2017. Demand in this once considered remote area is leading to increases in median home prices in the area of study. The median home price increases in the area of study and Collier are projected to continue on an upward trend with some stabilization or slowing of the pace of growth potential as affordability levels are stretched. Median Home Value 2018 20 r 2018-2028 CAGR Area of study $251,227 $288,648 2.82% *•flier County WIMP $340,866 $376,804 Florida $212,954 $246,740 2.99% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 As an additional source, we extracted data from the Florida Gulf Coast Realtor Association MLS which resulted in slightly higher median home price figures but illustrated similar upward trends: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 35 Area of Study-Median Sales Price 5350.000 5300.000 5250,000 • 5200.000 ------- - it -_ A 5150,000 - -------- $100,000 —-- — $50,000 ---_ So 8 $ o 0 - .-. N n M v v WI 0to pp n CO CO The median home prices in Collier County have maintained a gap of approximately 30%-40% higher than the area of study. Maple Ridge in Ave Maria has been so successful by maintaining pricing of at least 30% lower than competitive properties west of the area of study on Immokalee Road between Interstate 75 and Collier Boulevard. Examples of this price differential can be illustrated with Maple Ridge pricing (in area of study) versus projects on Immokalee Road west of area of study: HISTORIC SALES Development Sale Price/Sq.Ft. Maple Ridge $109.20-$127.69 Saturnia Lakes $182.10 -� Bent Creek $178.94 Lamorada $208.60 Source:data compiled from Collier County Property Appraiser and local MLS As the area of study, and developments such as Ave Maria continue to grow and more surrounding support facilities are developed,this price delta between the area of study and Collier County is expected to shrink. Home ownership remains high at nearly 70% in this area as shown below: Housin: Unit Summar 2000 Housing Units 4,391 Owner Occupied Housing Units 90.5% Renter Occupied Housing Units 7.1% Vacant Housing Units 2.4% 2010 Housing Units 10,226 Owner Occupied Housing Units 71.7% Renter Occupied Housing Units 13.7% Vacant Housing Units 14.6% 2018 Housing Units 12,566 Owner Occupied Housing Units 67.9% Renter Occupied Housing Units 12.5% Vacant Housing Units 19.6% 2023 Housing Units 13,806 Owner Occupied Housing Units 69.5% Renter Occupied Housing Units 11.4% Vacant Housing Units 19.1% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 36 Income levels and projected growth rates in income area also expected in this area. As illustrated below, the area of study, and Collier County exceed the state of Florida in most all income categories (average household `- income, median household income, per capita income): Household and Per Capita Income 018 ., -- 2018-2028 CAGR ea of study-avg. - . - $88,565 $106,259 3.71% Collier County-avg.' $97,081 $116,367 3.69% Florida-avg. $75,281 $88,906 3.38% Area of study-median $67,192 $78,488 3.16% Collier County-median $61,684 $72,747 3.35% Florida-median $52,098 $59,013 2.52% Area of study-per capita $28,691 $34,384 3.69% Collier County-per capita $40,758 $48,792 3.66% Florida-per capita $29,913 $35,101 3.25% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 Both the area of study and Collier County have projected annual growth rates in average household income, median household income, and per capita income which exceed the projections for the state of Florida. The median household income of the area of study is estimated to be higher in 2018 than the county and state and is also projected to be higher in five years. The area of study and Collier County not only exceed the trends in Florida but also far exceed the projected growth trends in the United States: Trends: 2018-2023 Annual Rate Area of Study Collier Florida United States Population 2.01% 1.85% 1.41% 0.83% Households 2.03% 1.88% 1.36% ,....- Median Household Income 3.16% 3.35% 2.52% 2.50% Trends 2018-2023 3- 66. 2.5- v W O 2 C ca, 1.5 10 or • Area i USA • 0.5" • state ii Iii 0 � Population Households Families Owner HHs Median HH Income Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 As illustrated,the Collier County and study area trends remain ahead of state and national trends. As this area continues to grow, and at a rate faster than Collier County, this area will transition from a remote area to an area with urban centers such as Ave Maria,and Rural Land West, and will continue to gain market acceptance. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 37 SEC. VI: PURPOSE OF THE STUDY As noted earlier in this report,the purpose of this study is to examine the necessity of the proposed GMPA and estimate the impact on the neighboring communities. The proposed GMPA will redesignate ±20.16 acres (subject property) from the Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates Mixed Use District - Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. As described in the GMPA, development in the proposed subdistrict shall be subject to the following: Allowable uses are limited to the following: a. Child Care centers(SIC 8351), limited to 150 students b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. c. Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students In this study, we are examining the necessity of these uses and compatibility within the area of study. We will analyze the allowable uses in the following categories: Child Care centers, Schools/Education, and Equestrian Riding Academy. Child Care Centers Child care centers are a proposed allowable use as part of the GMPA. The following map illustrates the location of the existing child care centers in the area of study: Imre sem Re R \ Dag -e “wMMw Ra at. Mak �ifa - ! _ril sm v..Ohl o Golden Gate - As shown, there are only three traditional child care facilities in the area of study which are broken down as follows: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 38 Child care center Location Capacity Louis Hasse Community Center 3390 Golden Gate Blvd.W. 120 children Casa De Bambini Ave Maria 60 children Ave Maria International School Ave Maria 50 children This area of study has limited available traditional (non-home) child care centers with a total capacity of 230 children. Beyond these facilities, there are registered home day cares (70 potential children) which provide capacity for parents who do not utilize traditional child care services. These are illustrated below: Child care center (home centers) Location Child Capacity Rowles Family Day Care Home 18th Street SE 10 Villagomez Family Day Care Home 6th Street SE 10 Hall Family Day Care Home 12th Street NE 10 Rodriquez Family Day Care Home 29th Avenue NE 10 Delgado Family Day Care Home 22nd Avenue NE 10 Montessori Golden Gate Estates Home Preschool 120 18th Avenue 10 Randall Family Day Care Home 6th Street NW 10 MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 39 A summary of the population in the area of study indicates an estimated 1,951 children between the ages of 0- --� 4 who would be candidates for child care services. Moreover, it is possible that a portion of the population age 5-9 would demand child care services. The population between the age of 5 and 9 has an estimated 2018 total of 2,198. Combining these population segments indicates a population of 4,149 children. Census 2010 2018 2023 Po.ulation b A:e Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0-4 1,771 6.3% 1,951 5.9% 2,114 5.8% 5-9 2 070 7.3% 2 198 6.7% 2 360 6.5% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 In order to estimate potential demand for child care services, we have reviewed a survey completed by the American Community Survey(U.S. Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey). According to the survey, a total of 1.0% of the Collier County population and 1.5% of the Florida population were enrolled in child care programs. Based on the previously estimated area of study population of 32,828, we have considered a typical demand to be 328 (1%) to 492 (1.5%) children. Given the current level of existing facilities at 230 children, there is a shortage of child care centers. Recognizing there is other capacity with home care centers (70 potential children), we are estimating the area of study to have a need for additional capacity of up to 190 children. The existing supply still falls short of the estimated demand. Schools/Education The proposed amendment will consist of allowable uses related to schools/education and are proposed to include: • Educational Services(SIC 8211) o 8211 - Elementary and Secondary Schools Further, the allowable use will be limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School limited 775 students. In this study, we have considered the existing supply of educational facilities as described above. This supply analysis includes both public and private institutions which are located within the area of study. A major component to the educational system is the School District of Collier County (CCPS) which offers a wide range of educational opportunities, including, but not limited to, elementary, middle, and high schools, as well as, vocational and technical training. CCPS school attendance is maintained by an Attendance Zone system. However,the system allows for school choice for families meeting specific criteria. For purposes of this supply analysis, we are illustrating the supply of available public education opportunities based on schools within CCPS attendance zones which have areas that overlap the area of study. The CCPS facilities may not necessarily be located in the area of study, however, families living in certain parts of the area of study may have the option to send their children to these facilities without utilizing a school choice criteria. In addition to public education/school facilities, we have also considered the supply of private schools (fitting the criteria of the allowable uses of the GMAP). MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 40 Public and Private Schools t. MIXIr rs11; '41 $0 . ' ISltr: �� • • 1 904001 MWI fii , _ 44 1 ii x --sc-jillk ' . a $. Ell tr, . 14 .- - SCHOOL ._ It. a rpp1Y The map above, illustrates the location of public schools fM00L, private and parochial schools , and charter schools . As shown, the public schools include all facilities operated by CCPS;within the area of study, or schools which are located within a CCPS Attendance Zone accessible by those living in the area of study. These CCPS public schools are shown on the following page along with their respective capacity based on FISH (Florida Inventory of School Houses). In addition, this chart shows the 2017-2018 enrollment, along with five year projections from CCPS. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 41 Enrollment 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 ^` School/Zones within area of study Capacity* Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Enrollment Elementar Schools Big Cypress Elementary 940 947 951 960 945 960 978 Corkscrew Elementary 836 631 606 593 599 598 599 Estates Elementary 730 589 578 565 569 580 596 Laurel Oak Elementary 864 960 1010 1077 1129 1166 1184 Palmetto Elementary 919 474 456 430 431 442 440 Sabal Palm Elementary 761 574 577 565 572 565 574 TOTAL 5050 4175 4178 4190 4245 4311 4371 Capacity under/(over) 872 860 805 739 679 Middle Schools Corkscrew Middle 1006 778 786 804 775 761 734 Cypress Palm Middle 1177 718 725 779 783 773 742 Oakridge Middle 1311 1179 1243 1248 1257 1277 1305 TOTAL 3494 2675 2754 2831 281.5 2811 2781 Capaci1 under/(over) 819 740 663 679 683 713 Hi:h Schools Gulf Coast High 1770 2273 2364 2441 2506 2567 2660 Palmetto Ridge High 1931 1950 1979 2033 2104 2147 2200 TOTAL 3701 4223 4343 4474 4610 4714 4860 Capacity under/(over) 1522 ;642i 773) )909) 11.013i ,1,159) Source:School District of Collier County As shown above, there are six elementary schools, three middle schools, and two high schools under the control of CCPS which are within the area of study or have attendance zones which overlap a portion of the area of study. Strictly within the area of study, there are four elementary schools (Corkscrew Elementary, Estates Elementary, Palmetto Elementary, and Sabal Palm Elementary) which have a total capacity of 3,246 students. Moreover, within the area of study, there are two middle schools (Corkscrew Middle, Cypress Palm Middle) which have total capacity of 2,183 students, and one high school (Palmetto Ridge High) which has a capacity of 1,931 students. Based on the CCPS Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2038, the ratio of enrollment to capacity varies from "'� school to school and between elementary, middle, and high schools. There continues to be opportunities outside the traditional public school setting which are growing in popularity such as home schooling, virtual school, and a variety of private and parochial school, to name a few. This is obviously putting pressure on the public school system to adapt and reexamine their tradtional facility operations. This is strongly evidenced in the elementary level schools and in the middle school level schools where students are opting for variety of schooling options outside the public system. Beyond the middle school age, students are still finding favor in the public system. This is evidenced by a total 2017-2018 undercapacity(enrollment to capacity) in both elementary and middle schools of 875 and 819, respectively. However, some of this decline is attributable to lower birth rates for those students now in elementary, and middle school in this area. Conversely, the two high schools were both over capacity in 2017-2018 by 522 students with Gulf Coast High School overcapacity by 503 students and Palmetto Ridge overcapacity by 19 students. This overcapacity dilema is projected to worsen to a total overcapacity of 1,159 students in five years based on CCSD projections. Clearly,the demand for public high school capacity is needed in and around the area of study. Although the elementary and middle school capacities are undercapacity, there are a few schools which are overcapacity such as Big Cypress Elementary and Laurel Oak Elementary despite the trends for alternative education at the lower grade levels. In addition to the existing schools, CCPS also has undeveloped land inventory in the area of study, as follows: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 42 #1 Undeveloped CCPS inventory: • Folio#40750720001 and 40750680002 • 11.47 acres • Within area of study ialszta = CYE CCM CEIMI3 . awn CCM m= =CC CUM 0 0-183ft #2 Undeveloped CCPS inventory: • Folio#00301240006 • 115 acres • Just outside area of study Qin g g C�C33 CUM 704. • MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 43 #3 Undeveloped CCPS inventory: —� • Folio#38609040006 • 28.73 acres • Within area of study I CZ= 0 CM= C=3:13 g 8 8 la up • 11 et= CC= C1,.,.•.v8•r CT :�w.lor Cr . 0_214n #4 Undeveloped CCPS inventory: • Folio#00301080004 • 35 acres • Just outside area of study -rt... , 4V�' ' l v 4r Ai /1 . _•wrr amr�ea.><.wn«. 0 20ft MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 44 Furthermore, Collier County owns a 90 acre parcel north of Palmetto Ridge High School which is designated Community Facility within the Orange Blossom Ranch PUD. This property would likely not compete with the subject given the water retention feature and difficulty in any future development of the site. Sites such as this are typically the last infill development pieces in areas of growth. There is currently no physical access to the site and the site currently accomodates watershed from surrounding developments. It's unclear how much of the site would be buildable and what expense would be necessary to provide both access and fill. Future uses of this CF site certainly may share uses with the subject property, but the development horizon for this property is likely several growth cycles away and not directly competitive with the subject property.0 H _ 37-11pli 4., . , .__ . , , b-.-E,. ,, .. • . . . ..6 � Vii ~ ....,IT CT - NwtM..RD cie 1= .:1 -/C, ` , t==ila C12:10 44 1 1 1 o•rho no `' % '14\ • E_ r. 1 L � q ✓�+La i.�t. t _ f In addition, the following map from the CCPS Capital Improvement Plan 2019-2038, illustrates all existing school locations and proposed school sites: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 45 _ - Collier County =Soulh Naples i Planning Communities=Marco North Naples _ Ro,al Fakapalm 1.11Immokale* am Rural Estates =Big Cypress Corkscrew -Urban Estates City of Marco Island amContrai Naples 11111 City of Naples n IIIII Golden Gate Everglades Cky =East Naples d CCPS SCHOOLS A , FUTURE SCHOOL SITES d "• arti 4 MajorRoads A A d b , • • A Collier County Planning Communities and Public School Locations Source:School District of Collier County Development of new public schools is not projected until 2023. Beyond the public school system, there are limited availability of private, parochial, or charter schools. In the area of study,there are four available, non-public schooling options: Enrollment Private/Charter schools Capacity Private Schools Rhodora J. Donahue Academy 236 Corkscrew Christian School 18 Ave Maria Montessori 48 Charter Schools Collier Charter Academy* 1,200 *represents five year plan capacity,2017-18 was 481 Two of these private options are religious based (Rhodora J Donahue Academy, Corkscrew Christian School), and two are non-faith based schools (Ave Maria Montessori and Collier Charter Academy). Rhodora J Donahue Academy and Ave Maria Montessori are both located in the Ave Maria community and primarily serve this community while Corkscrew Christian School and Collier Charter Academy are located west of Ave Maria. The private schools only provide limited options beyond public school in the area of study. The Collier Charter Academy is a newer(2017), non-public option located on Immokalee Road in the western portion of the area of MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 46 study. The Collier Charter Academy, although a non-public option, is one of the lowest rated schools in the area of study receiving a grade of C by the Florida Department of Education in 2017-2018. Beyond the aforementioned public and private schools within or overlapping the area of study, the primary educational opportunities can be found west of the area of study in north, central, and south locations most of which are west of Collier Boulevard (CR 951). Based on supply only, the take away from the information presented is an adequate availability of public school capacity with the exception of the high school level which is far undersupplied. CCPS is currently monitoring capacity constraints at several elementary schools and high schools, and in some case providing temporary fixes such as expansion with portables. Capacity in grades 9- 12 is critically low in the area of study and supply is not meeting demand in the public or private system in the area of study. CCPS has funded a proposed high school,temporarily referred to as "GGGI". The location is the south side of Veteran's Memorial Boulevard west of Livingston Road in the North Naples Planning Community. The project has a proposed opening of August 2023. The addition of a new, public high school should alleviate the overcapacity issues but will not occur for another 5 years. Demographics of Potential Students in Area of Study A typical grade school age would be within the population age of 5 years old to 19 years old. We have broken down the population by age to give an overview of the potential demand (students) available from the population set within the area of study. This population analysis is solely within the area of study and does not take into consideration the migration out of the area or in-migration into the area for school options. This break down can be shown as follows: Census 2010 2018 2023 Population by Age'' . P -nt Number Percent Number 0-4 1,771 6.3% 1,951 5.9% 2,114 5.8% 5 -9 2,070 7.3% 2,198 6.7% 2,360 6.5% 10 - 14 2,515 8.9% 2,586 7.9% 2,784 7.7% 15 - 19 2,443 -8.6X-- 2,410 7.3% 2,535 7.0% 20-24 1,669 5.9% 2,025 6.2% 1,893 5.2% 25-34 3,030 10.7% 4,025 12.3% 4,524 12.5% 35-44 4,572 16.2% 4,577 13.9% 5,311 14.6% 45-54 4,567 16.2% 4,724 14.4% 4,614 12.7% 55-64 2,972 10.5% 4,158 12.7% 4,605 12.7% 65-74 1,814 6.4% 2,839 8.6% 3,649 10.1% 75-84 694 2.5% 1,089 3.3% 1,534 4.2% 85+ 139 0.5% 249 0.8% 333 0.9% Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 As a comparison to the total population with the area of study, the age 5-19 segment of the population, although expanding, is occurring at a slower pace than the area of study, and slightly slower than Collier County. There is an estimated 2018 population age 5-19 of 7,194 which is projected to grow to 7,679 or a 1.31%compounded annual growth rate. The compounded annual growth rate for the the total area of study is 2.01%which is summarize below: Population 2010 Census 2018 2010-2018 CAGR 2023 2018-2028 CAGR Area of study-Total 28,255 32,828 1.89% 36,256 2.01% Area of study-Ages 5- 1,028 ,194 sej^ Source:U.S.Census Bureau,Census 2010 Summary File 1.Esri forecasts for 2018 Previously, we provided the capacity of the public schools within the area of study at 7,360 students. A current snapshot of a population age 5 to 9 of 7,194 would reveal an apparent sufficient suppy of schools solely from the CCPS. However, projecting forward, this segment of the population is expected to increase to 7,679 which will surpass the capacity of CCPS within the area of study. Furthermore, with the limited capacity of private and parochial schools, there is potential for school needs outside of the public system which is not being meet in the area of study. The only exception is within the Ave Maria community which has a faith based (Catholic) MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 47 private school. Students/parents seeking a private, non-faith based or non-Catholic faith based school have limited options in the area of study. In summary, the public schools within or overlapping the area of study, are operating well over capacity at the high school level (9-12 grade), and are in need of relief for this overcrowding. Conversely, elementary and middle school public schools are undercapacity and meeting the needs of the area of study. Ave Maria offers private school options but is faith based (Catholic) which may not be appealing to the entire area population. Beyond Ave Maria,the private school options are only providing limited capacity. Based on the data presented, it is our observation, the area of study is poised for continued growth with increases in housing (Ave Maria, Orange Blossom, Rural Estates West, etc.) but is lacking in private school, and alternative school opportunities. Equestrian Riding Academy An equestrian riding academy is a proposed use. This area has historically maintained a rural landscape with equestrian uses being common. Surrounding residential uses consist of a significant portion of the area as larger(1+ acre) parcels some of which have a farming, and equestrian type uses as part of their properties. Although there are no known larger equestrian academies(100+students) in this area of study,there are several residential properties within the study area that have small equestrian-oriented hobby uses on site. in our opinion,given the surrounding residential uses and the evident interest in equestrian activities within the study area, demand for an equestrian academy can be expected. There are several smaller equestrian academies such as: • Piney Acres Training Stables • Dove Tree Stables • Dream River Ranch • Southern Pines Stable • Stable Hand • Colts and Company • Bayhead Farm Given the location of the subject property with surrounding rural residential, a proposed use with an equestrian riding academy would be compatible with the area. In estimating demand in the study area for an equestrian riding academy, we have considered equine data from the American Horse Council (AHC) and American Horse Publications (AHP) both of which are nationally recognized in the equine industry. These sources provided data on the demographics of users of equine services. We have considered this demographic data and correlated with our study area demographics to derive a potential for demand in the area of study. According to the 2017 AHC Economic Impact of US Horse Industry report, there is a $6.8 billion annual equine economic impact in Florida which is up 33%from the previous study a decade earlier. Also of note, the State of Florida is the third largest state in terms of equine population in the United States. According to AHC, in 2017, there were an estimated 387,078 horses in Florida and 30.5% of households or approximately 2.5 million in Florida contain horse enthusiasts. According to the AHC study, the typical user of equine services is mostly female which is similar to the results of the 2018 AHP Equine Industry Survey Report which indicated 92.6%female. Furthermore, the AHC study indicated the typical user is employed, married, and lives in a rural environment. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 48 Assuming 30.5% of households are horse enthusiast, as per the AHC study, in 2018, there would be a pool of potential households with horse enthusiasts from the study area of 3,080 (10,100 households in study area x .305). It is assumed that within a household that there may be more than one equestrian enthusiast, and further, within an area with a historically rural breakdown, there may be more users than the average population set. As such, we have assumed the potential pool of horse enthusiasts at 1.5x the household horse enthusiast estimate of 3,080, and we conclude an estimated demand of 4,600 potential equine service users. There is obviously the possibility of some demand from outside the study area not factored into this analysis. Currently, within the area of study, we have estimated an existing supply of equestrian facilities which service the needs of approximately 200 equine users. Considering the previously estimated potential demand, based on this extrapolation, there appears to be more than sufficient demand for an additional 150 equine service users. The AHC study indicated a percentage breakdown of horse enthusiasts in the United States by age group. The following is a breakdown of the demographics along with our estimate of the number of potential equine service users in the area of study using the AHC percentages: Potential Horse Svc. AGE % of Users(AHC) Users in Area of Study <18 years 12.0% 552 18-24 years 5.0% 230 25-34 years 22.0% 1,012 35-44 years 20.0% 920 45-59 years 23.0% 1,058 60-74 years 16.0% 736 75+ years 2.0% 92 According to the AHP report, 43%of the users have a household income of less than $75,000. The following is a summary of the household income data for users from the 2017 AHC study: Household Income % of Users < $25000 14% <$50000 38% <$75000 64% >$75000 36% As shown above, approximately 1/2 of the residents have income levels ranging from $25,000 to $75,000 with only 36% having income levels greater than $75,000. Within the subject study area, 44.4%of the households have income of between $25,000-$75,000 and 44.7% have households have incomes greater than $75,000. As illustrated, the majority of the pool of potential equine users have household income levels which meet or exceed typical standards based on the AHC and AHP reports. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 49 Area of study 2018 Households by Income Number Percent <$15,000 454 4.5% $15,000 $24,9991 6441, $25,000-$34,999834 8.3% $35,000-$49,999 .,.._ ...._�_, ... ��......., ,._......_,. .n._ _.,x._._... 1,371 13.8 $50,000-$74,999 2,276 22.5% $75,000-$99,999 1,517 . $100,000-$149,999 1,680 16.6% $150,000-$199,999 748 7.4% $200,000+ 577 5.7% Median Household Income $67,192 Average Household Income $88,565 Per Ca•ita Income $28 691 Alternative Sites to Subject Site To determine the supply of similar properties in the area of study, we researched this area for other properties that could potentially provide similar allowable uses. Our research consisted of a review of traditional listing portals including (CoStar, Loopnet, and Florida Gulf Coast MLS) for properties greater than 10 acres which were listed with non-residential potential and would have allowable uses similar to the proposed uses on the subject property. We chose a threshold of greater than 10 acres as several of the proposed allowable uses such as Education Services would typically need at least 10 acres as evidenced by the most recent Charter School (Collier Charter Academy) which is 13.39 acres. Moreover, private schools would also typically require greater than 10 acres as evidenced by the Rhodora J. Donahue Academy in Ave Maria which has 10.56 acres. In addition to active listings, we researched properties not actively listed in the area of study which have development potential allowing for at least one of the proposed allowable uses of the subject. Limitations of Surrounding Properties A review of the surrounding properties, namely those with frontage on Oil Well Road, indicates limited demand for residential development given the lot configurations.This statement applies to the properties fronting on Oil Well Road from the Orange Blossom MPUD, and Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD east to the Winchester Land LLC property located at 4697 Oil Well Road. This area of Oil Well Road represents 2.45 miles with frontage. The subject is a 20.16 acre parcel which is nearly square in shape with 990' of frontage on Oil Well Road by a 888' to 907' of depth. In this area, there a total of 65 parcels which front on Oil Well Road including two represented by the subject property. A significant number of these parcels represent small properties ranging from 1.55 acres up to 2.52 acres in size. Moreover, of the parcels in this size range the dimensions of the properties typically range from 220' deep by 330' wide. Only six parcels (including the subject) have depths beyond 330'. Of these six, only the property owned by Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran (see Alternative Site #2) has greater width and similar depth as the subject. Typically lots in the Estates area have depths of 600' or more which allow residential uses to be set back from the road to mitigate noise and visual impacts to a homeowner. This may be further intensified in the future with potential widening of this road as per Collier County's Long-Range Transportation Plan. With these "depth" problems relative to residential development, demand for frontage parcels will be limited. The most feasible uses of these narrow parcels is potential assemblage and, if allowable, future limited commercial uses would be more appropriate from a financial perspective given the location along an arterial roadway. This lot depth issue is illustrated in the following aerial maps with lot overlays: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 50 I .I . I e Was.'r, Wali . 9 1. -,t - ? `• . . t. r.1 u.w...0 iter+ . . J., r— 1 .• v • •SUBJECT r 1• I * , • ; , I , i 4 I i Winchester 1n,1 4 •• . . . :I 1,4 • 4 a p,w.•,o 111 1 . ,' • Actively Listed Properties As noted, we considered actively listed properties in the area of study which are greater than 10 acres and have non-residential potential including at least one of the allowable uses proposed for the subject property. A total of two listings resulted from this search which can be shown below: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 51 • •..•,&'. v ' 'E W 11191 sr.r- 1, ~ ' • � • r��I{+ 1. 'Alk �, v. rat4 Z,a .: Fa 1R.,kr, , - 1jr.r • oaf • v • rII .‘ . ___„____J..f .� t. lit • f —� a I: 'i. •r .rr 1 ''I ikicr Ia. .N t r_. vi, —. . .,-ersikitait i .7'• ' •• • Fln',da --..., GGIdr:i G tr, l• ,'1. iir P,:niher . •. _ - am‘ NJbc: »I 1J y i, 7Pr —._ 0 1 SP The easternmost listing consists of up to 28 acres in Ave Maria with commercial potential. Although this site does not specifically list uses potentially allowed on the subject property, it is assumed development rights in Ave Maria could be shifted in the community to this site. The following is a summary of the listing information: MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 52 Summary rmsmM' 5.4 Coes nubs. rem., A,aen..-.o, C_04a, ..1405 vac For Sale Sale Notes • •...--- Nee p o6.,d 26 acres avalabrel 5Wtividable Idose to 1 acre)as neceaa0yl Seim puce a Invent OR. •e 123 MDs 29 D.. o9sable Az Ins • -• Jul 192018 4,, • Mn ,ur MnRIA , Lagisp. Ave Mane Park 0l Camscs MI be 0010.6y beats*a hat Mie south or Ave Mane _wales. o ensy aro tie Town Career The perk o1 Commerce Mt tribally include • t )) Land __ aopro comal ely 40 000 square real refrl apace and 30 000 square feet of neon.el V 191st Canarl.5.61.04tl spate as 041 as IM land lora wariness center torWs residents to 0e but by Pune tdld AC.Gross 28.00 AC :219680SF 008Oonal'y as pert or the uralpFase dicare0Uceo0.a•0,0040lthe dtpertebnsyr ' :se AC-Net 2800 AC '219 68C SF the Pads amm Coerce w dsve be bued.F04 vSMn0ank Ddn re9p en o0 parcel r 5 'Ain Ar 500 1 00 AC manes.land lease or but-laser oppabnily please contact Cee Cee Mannesi M .• Toreeraain Level Crrl04keSCavemena cam s0 `�1 In Sees F. ed Sale Contacts as cC Fueled Y `0,4 54es C rbeGulladSidewek.Elam tnnty Sas Sewer.Streets Neter 61011112101118 054,114 life Soled ._ c.Dpaaea use CanmatY Filets.Analyst e Apem e 12391262.2600(pi Ave Mdle RFA .239)403-6703 8n) s - ,239)263a33910 j r+ .f. ..' . _ dvue64606 yoteCmwnaxoleer:an t 50.025F12017) k 0J' .. Cat 01)41 Pnsavlla OW. •.._ A91931191'nano 101 Executive Asaislert `— .. 2391262.2600..p. Assossm.nt,a 1339i263-3339,r, f'•4AMsaww5a4lier cow tar Asseaamert (no. SI 508.252 Sr 231458 BARRON N The westernmost listing consists of a 40.62 acre commercial property on the south side of Golden Gate Parkway. This site is approved for retail uses. Similar to the Ave Maria listing, this active listing may not have the same potential allowable uses as the subject property but presumably could be modified to allow at least one of the uses. The following is a summary of this listing: Summary Prer rtf FAComps MOB Tow. aiaeasm.'i C:T,n 51425 99C • For Sale Sale Notes 'f.. , b1 • $ Nice 510,917.213 Approvra plans are r piste for tee aeoelopnlert o4 to Estates S6opap Center. criceAG 5268,764.48 • 3 Mos 21 Daft 'nc*JSF 56.17 J1930 20'3 Constriction n lehtdtiled for etio phases °TA in., ale Type CrenerAlso .MK,! Mews Attire The first prose a approved fix'00 066 square kat AP plans fora nabX*retail grove as an anchor tenant ' Land +te ... Cammecml LSM The grocery store is required to occupy warm 27.000430.000 ware het al Phase '- Zoning E(Estates)C2 G3 111111 111111 1.in aedeor to ramming to Sit:ornate of ccooency _ .and AC•Dross 40.61 AC .. . .- 1 769 401 sr The mond phase a proposed fano m 41000 s9uere fee dei can be Onted into en addboner pose tree 4 neto d Proposed Use Commercial.Wed Use.Retst Staetcol RehiliOfice.Strip Center StoaFettr Documents Parcel 37119440001 b - .. :,!, rime Sore* C0Aepagent142) �._... Ireosd Soren UMW Trareitroi Sale Contacts,, . Assessments, Soso D.xsml rMr 6 �'_ ::1--s>essr'ea 1235)189-3600 tor(p) 5472600 501715E 239)675321789) 239)45449470) MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 53 Non-listed Parcels with Similar Development Potential '..., In addition to the active listings, we researched the area of study for properties that have at least one of the potential uses of the subject property. These sites, which are limited, can be summarized as follows: Alternative Site#1 Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD (Ordinance 04-74) - This property is described as Folio # 00209961102 and consists of 39.98 acres just west of the subject property. As per the PUD, this property is classified as Commercial/Office Area (C/O) and is permitted to have no more than 200,000 square feet of commercial/office uses. This property allows for similar Child care centers (SIC 8351) which would potential compete with the subject property as though developed with the proposed uses. The PUD allows for a variety of uses one of which is child day care services and establishments providing educational services (SIC 82). Ordinance No. 16-31 specifically mentions "Collier County Public Schools - Educational Facilities" which will not be a permitted use based on the proposed allowable uses on the subject property. Although the allowable use on this site is for a public school which is not a proposed allowable use on the subject, the potential for adding a school could impact the demand for the proposed subject property. =7...:4" -ter— 111 i ......21......, ...2 -*••+ r -, f -1 t r • !• Sthjec . . 1 SI • qtigmb I.1 0175ft - MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 54 Alternative Site#2 Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church CFPUD (Ordinance 11-23) - This property is described under nine Folio #'s: 398899120007, 39899160009, 39897640000, 39897560009, 39896040009, 39897520007, 39897520104, 39897600008, and 39897600105. The property consists of 21.72 acres and is east of the subject property. As per the CFPUD,the permitted uses that may potentially compete with the subject are child care services, and private schools. The allowable uses are Child care services for not-for-profit and operated with a church or place of worship, and Private Schools (8211, 8243, 8244, 8299) for not-for-profit and operated with a church or place of worship. The child care allows 300 children or adults, while the school allows up to 450 students. These uses are potential competing uses and would add to the supply of day care, and private schools. However, this PUD allows child care services and private schools only for a not-for-profit and operated with a church or place of worship which may not be desirable to all users that will demand private schooling. • • . t 1 ( . i .-'•T - } , � ` -- , I 9- -- �►. • a i . ;I. • `, _ I r4 1 -.- - WWII RD --- ? ♦" SITE#2 . r 0)` r: 4 .SUB.AJ CT '4 . . 1 �t ♦-.. IIA AVCNC-- T� `.. I 4i.,,, ; # CI• "J ! a' J • I1'91I'Y :.;va p µ aygi `r C'C .1' �._ .A .' •'(' r•el . 4 _1 0-B5fi MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 55 Alternative Site#3 . -. Orange Tree MPUD (Ordinance 11-23) - This property is described as being the northeast and southeast corners of Immokalee Road and Oil Well Road in the area of study. This area is significantly built out and has similar existing uses as proposed for the subject property. This MPUD is mentioned, however, is not believed to have enough remaining land or uses as an alternative to the subject property. The uses permitted are those in the C-1 thru C-3 zoning districts of Collier County. Include in this is child day care service (SIC 8351), educational plants and public schools. No delineated size or student capacity is available at this point in the project. Educational services(8211) is a conditional use. /(j� i i— I I I IMw�weau. — I I uw'r` t AG . MOW/ rl i . 1 R8 `• _.__ =..w'�... �.e.+`sliCTRVAifiatm mon ----^em OP 1 1 mum u009 /U R-2 kI( „ _ n x� s . �. IRM _ W1 1 Mg DER 1 .o.or.om�` Compatibility with Surrounding Properties and Neighboring Communities In order to determine any impact the allowable uses may have on surrounding properties and neighboring communities, we have considered sales of properties adjacent or in close proximity to similar uses and compared to sales away from similar allowable uses. This study will examine whether there are any negative or positive impacts from being adjacent or in close proximity to the uses proposed. The study accomplishes this by making sure that the only variable in the comparison is proximity to a given use. This allows the comparison of two nearly identical properties where the only difference is,for example, proximity to a school. If proximity to schools is impacting the value of properties,that impact could be seen in the form of a lower price for that property that is in close proximity to the school. This type of analysis allows the researcher to capture more nuanced concerns of impact, such as noise, traffic, views, or light pollutions, as those impacts, if any, would be present in the sales price of the adjacent sale pair. We considered five paired sales in this study. The paired sales analyzed represent extremely comparable scenarios as three of the five studies are within the area of study. After analyzing the paired sale data spread across the search area, the conclusion is that proximity to educational facilities has little to no discernable negative influence to the sale prices of adjacent properties. Although examples of each specific allowable use with relation to directly paired sales was attempted, an insufficient data sample was available. However, it can be inferred from similar studies of these similar uses (elementary, middle, high school)that a similar result would be projected. Moreover,the uses are considered to be compatible to the neighboring communities which are primarily residential and rural residential. The addition of the proposed allowable uses is not expected to have any negative influence on the value of existing properties within the area of study. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 56 Paired Sale 1 - Residential surrounding Corkscrew Middle School .„,--• _we, I CI.L\, 1r - ''11---: T i J Ci,:! 104. ':‘' Gl'itir~MojC,: 11 11 i a 154 .4 Y r _ IVOidalsafti • . Ij}?) r ��`: ��V lil � �•r I (c.7.4-14. ..til:..W), .Isirviit:„..t tl' '.44-\........"--Ar 410 • Ii ,j 4. t j • r11 1V `4,i i0 •fid 1* , '.r+ (% 1 . /. il. • •ter / ; S. i I ., . ' 1 ,. tlip r • ' •r_'- eye I• Address Subdivision Sale Price Living Area(sf) Sold Date Sale Price/SF 702 GRAND RAPIDS BLVD WATERWAYS $216,310 1,848 5/14/2018 $117.05 3361 MYSTIC RIVER DR WATERWAYS $365,000 2,582 5/18/2018 $141.36 996 CHESAPEAKE BAY CT WATERWAYS $387,500 2,603 5/15/2018 $148.87 907 GRAND RAPIDS BLVD WATERWAYS $395,000 2,578 5/25/2018 $153.22 1099 PORT ORANGE WAY WATERWAYS $460,000 2,986 5/31/2018 $154.05 1091 PORT ORANGE WAY WATERWAYS $465,000 3,014 6/1/2018 $154.28 3514 OCEAN BLUFF CT WATERWAYS $359,700 2,280 5/30/2018 $157.76 938 TROPICAL BAY CT WATERWAYS $420,000 2,623 2/1/2018 $160.12 3482 OCEAN BLUFF CT WATERWAYS $370,000 2,292 3/5/2018 $161.43 1015 CHESAPEAKE BAY CT WATERWAYS $470,000 2,869 3/1/2018 $163.82 601 GRAND RAPIDS BLVD WATERWAYS $431,000 2,582 4/27/2018 $166.92 945 CHESAPEAKE BAY CT WATERWAYS $329,000 1,953 5/15/2018 $168.46 3217 BROOKEVIEW CT WATERWAYS $444,000 2,582 5/31/2018 $171.96 772 GRAND RAPIDS BLVD WATERWAYS $338,000 1,672 6/12/2018 $202.15 Average-all sales $158.68 indicates adjacent to school Average-not adjacent to school $155.33 Comments: Pair 1 is a comparison of a single family home in Waterways which abuts Corkscrew Middle School within the area of study. This sale occurred in June 2018 and was compared to similar sales that occurred in 2018. After considering the smaller size of the improvement adjacent to the school, the location of this sale next to a ~"' school indicates no impact on value. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 57 Paired Sale 2 - Residential surrounding Sabal Palm Elementary . . 1 L . ar _ i , :L.t--t y#-fir;� J / i'- ty oe...5 w.swi 1•1-2.*--. 4."•';'• r.•lir 1 ��CJ10- ; 1,,.':— . . 7 , 'r.' ! .' ' . l• - . -- :a 1 _ ! . E i :•i•. titilp J T. ' •or 0.•,* 0„r; . J , J 1 ^'Y 1.r —n) t 1 jor / or/ I �� i .V Address Sale Price Size (sf) Sale Date Year Bit. Land (acres) Sale Price/SF 3692 22ND AVE NE $365,000 2,190 5/25/2018 2017 1.59 $166.67 3519 6TH AVE NE $389,000 2,080 3/14/2018 2017 2.73 $187.02 4285 29TH AVE NE $280,000 1,489 6/29/2018 2018 1.59 $188.05 3529 6TH AVE NE $389,900 2,073 4/27/2018 2017 2.73 $188.08 3525 6TH AVE NE $389,999 2,073 6/30/2018 2017 2.73 $188.13 3511 20TH AVE NE $365,000 1,936 5/22/2018 2017 1.59 $188.53 3625 8TH AVE NE $345,000 1,814 2/16/2018 2017 2.65 $190.19 4096 31ST AVE NE $286,000 1,500 7/6/2018 2018 1.59 $190.67 3603 8TH AVE NE $350,000 1,814 1/5/2018 2017 2.65 $192.94 4030 18TH AVE NE $330,000 1,730 4/4/2018 2015 2.5 $190.75 Average-all sales $187.10 indicates adjacent to school Average-not adjacent to school $186.70 Comments: Pair 2 is a comparison of a single family home adjacent to Sabal Palm Elementary within the area of study. This sale occurred in April 2018 and was compared to similar sales that occurred in 2018. The sales were considered based primarily on the land area, year built and living area (square feet). This comparison indicates no impact to value for being next to a school. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 58 Paired Sale 3 - Residential surrounding Estates Elementary 1 aneLYn w i ilk r I I _ _i I Ir 1 �7L r r � , 9 ' ^ I 0 L J Pr r J L r r J I ' _ - - - v r ii t ♦• i' .; ' Iiie 7T-IIT r F i: , : ird :. • t ;-,A. , - . 1 . -I. . °''; -' ''; . 1 • i w i�.:�' .. ...--- - 1` R.•' fir/ lo 1 1 f s i _ FIX4 c_ct,r r. i - J i w Address Sale Price Size (sf) Sale Date Year Bit. Land (acres) Sale Price/SF 2535 56TH AVE NE $270,000 2,356 2/12/2018 2005 1.14 $114.60 4171 72ND AVE NE $290,000 2,152 4/27/2018 2005 1.14 $134.76 3750 70TH AVE NE $253,000 1,788 2/28/2018 2005 1.14 $141.50 4335 45TH AVE NE $265,900 1,843 3/19/2018 2006 1.14 $144.28 2870 56TH AVE NE $260,000 1,708 5/22/2018 2004 1.14 $152.22 3774 62ND AVE NE $288,000 1,733 5/3/2018 2007 1.14 $166.19 3380 72ND AVE NE $257,000 1,512 4/10/2018 2003 1.14 $169.97 3780 66TH AVE NE $260,000 1,509 6/7/2018 2006 1.14 $172.30 3687 66TH AVE NE $213,000 1,234 4/3/2018 2005 1.14 $172.61 2530 70TH AVE NE $241,000 1,396 5/29/2018 2004 1.14 $172.64 4131 56TH AVE NE $253,500 1,355 3/23/2018 2007 1.14 $187.08 4841 EVERGLADES BI $255,000 1,357 1/5/2018 2005 1.14 $187.91 4640 54TH AVE NE $230,000 1,217 7/24/2018 2007 1.14 $188.99 2945 66TH AVE NE $240,000 1,248 7/13/2018 2004 1.14 $192.31 2965 60TH AVE NE $249,900 1,157 5/18/2018 2006 1.14 $215.99 Average - all sales $167.56 indicates adjacent to school Average-not adjacent to school $164.10 MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 59 Address Sale Price Size (sf) Sale Date Year Blt. Land (acres) Sale Price/SF ----, 2415 45TH AVE NE $277,340 1,756 7/27/2018 2018 1.59 $157.94 4161 54TH AVE NE $255,000 1,495 2/12/2018 2017 1.14 $170.57 3212 60TH AVE NE $260,000 1,495 3/27/2018 2017 1.59 $173.91 4371 43RD AVE NE $295,300 1,692 5/15/2018 2017 1.14 $174.53 4240 56TH AVE NE $267,000 1,495 3/21/2018 2017 1.14 $178.60 4080 60TH AVE NE $268,000 1,495 5/31/2018 2018 1.14 $179.26 2362 52ND AVE NE $270,000 1,491 6/22/2018 2018 1.14 $181.09 4449 60TH AVE NE $274,000 1,495 6/29/2018 2018 1.14 $183.28 3461 60TH AVE NE $275,000 1,500 6/27/2018 2017 1.14 $183.33 3275 56TH AVE NE $277,000 1,500 1/17/2018 2017 1.14 $184.67 3292 47TH AVE NE $372,000 1,995 6/28/2018 2017 1.59 $186.47 4226 58TH AVE NE $239,900 1,283 5/21/2018 2017 1.14 $186.98 2980 58TH AVE NE $265,000 1,400 1/26/2018 2017 1.14 $189.29 3737 48TH AVE NE $249,999 1,320 1/26/2018 2017 1.14 $189.39 2518 54TH AVE NE $285,000 1,500 1/22/2018 2017 1.17 $190.00 3752 54TH AVE NE $270,000 1,314 1/23/2018 2017 1.14 $205.48 3470 66TH AVE NE $255,000 1,213 7/19/2018 2017 1.14 $210.22 3252 66TH AVE NE $258,000 1,213 6/21/2018 2017 1.14 $212.70 3477 60TH AVE NE $263,500 1,213 7/13/2018 2017 1.14 $217.23 2554 68TH AVE NE $259,900 1,142 4/25/2018 2018 1.14 $227.58 2582 68TH AVE NE $260,000 1,142 3/23/2018 2018 1.14 $227.67 Average-all sales $190.96 indicates adjacent to school Average-not adjacent to school $191.95 ---, Comments: Pair 3 is a comparison of three single family home sales adjacent to Estates Elementary within the area of study. The sales occurred in 2018 and were compared to similar sales which occurred in 2018. The sales were divided into two data sets based on year built and land area of the properties. This comparison indicates no impact to value for being next to a school. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 60 Paired Sale 4 - Residential surrounding Gulf Coast High School — ♦ - +rte - s, *TT Mi ii 4 • • ` 11 VIG.JIy , v } .er .► 1: .11 r .r- _, 2.,. - a t rI i '1 - • 41' C'� mumeTs.,‘.. -+ .-1,1* -- •r.. ryrr. .' - : yowl: :"- _ Address Subdivision Sale Price Living Area(sf) Sold Date Sale Price/SF 2292 HERITAGE GREENS DR Heritage Greens $340,000 2,134 3/15/2018 $159.33 '....-„ 8623 IBIS COVE CIR Ibis Cove $263,500 1,557 6/14/2018 $169.24 8699 IBIS COVE CIR Ibis Cove $280,000 1,557 1/30/2018 $179.83 8764 IBIS COVE CIR Ibis Cove $330,000 1,821 6/7/2018 $181.22 8700 IBIS COVE CIR * Ibis Cove $370,000 1,987 5/1/2018 $186.21 2240 HERITAGE GREENS DR Heritage Greens $305,000 1,621 7/11/2018 $188.16 8615 IBIS COVE CIR * Ibis Cove $298,000 1,558 3/3/2018 $191.27 8483 IBIS COVE CIR Ibis Cove $280,000 1,455 1/19/2018 $192.44 2340 HERITAGE GREENS DR * Heritage Greens $385,000 1,999 3/12/2018 $192.60 2249 HERITAGE GREENS DR* Heritage Greens $415,000 2,084 4/27/2018 $199.14 *indicated private pool Average - all sales $183.94 indicates adjacent to school Average-not adjacent to school $182.97 Comments: Pair 4 is a comparison of three single family home sales adjacent to Gulf Coast High School just outside the area of study. The sales occurred in 2018 and were compared to similar sales which occurred in 2018. The sales were located in Ibis Cove and Heritage Green. This comparison indicates no impact to value for being next to a school. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 61 SEC. VII: CONCLUSION OF MARKET STUDY -� In this report, we have analyzed the designated area and provided and overall assessment of the needs related to the allowable uses proposed with GMPA - PL20170002897. In addition, we have examined the impact on the neighboring community, if any, as a result of the approval and development of the subject property with said uses. The proposed GMPA will redesignate ±20.16 acres(subject property)from the Estates Mixed Use District - Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates Mixed Use District - Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. As described in the GMPA, development in the proposed subdistrict shall be subject to the following: Allowable uses are limited to the following: o Child Care centers(SIC 8351), limited to 150 students o Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. o Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students Based on our study, we have concluded the following: • The defined area of study is a growing population with a projected compound annual growth rate of 2.01% over the next five years which exceeds Collier County (1.85%), the State (1.41%) and National (0.83%) projections. • Based on the data presented, it is our observation, the area of study is poised for continued growth with increases in housing (Ave Maria, Orange Blossom, Hyde Park, Rivergrass Villages, etc.) but is lacking in high school level capacity, and private school capacity. • The area of studyhas a 2018 estimated population of 32,828. We have considered a typical p p child care demand to be 328 (1%) to 492 (1.5%) children. Given the current level of existing facilities at 230 children,there is a shortage of child care centers. • The results of the study indicate that approval of the proposed GMPA on the subject site, and future introduction of the allowable uses will not negatively impact neighboring communities or individual contiguous properties. • It is recognized that some areas on the western edge of the area of study have support facilities to the west in larger employment areas of the county. However, not all of the proposed uses are being satisfied in the urban areas to the west, and southwest. Moreover, uses such as an equestrian riding academy would fit in with the surrounding area and a drive of two miles or greater would not be uncommon for users of these type of facilities. • The following is a summary of our findings by proposed allowable uses: TOtet Projected Demand Supply Unmet Need 2018 Child Care centers(SIC 83511 490 children 230 children 190 children Educational services iSIC 8211i 7.194 students* 1.502 students-• unmet private+public high school Equestrian RiaingAcademq;SIC 79991 3.080 households <200 users >150 users 'represents potential students based on age in the area of study •'represents pnvate and Charter Schools in area of stud) MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 62 SEC. VIII: ADDENDA QUALIFICATIONS OF GERALD A. HENDRY, MAI, CCIM EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND TRAINING: Master of Arts in Business Administration, with a major in Real Estate and Urban Analysis, University of Florida, 1995, Gainesville, Florida. Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, with a major in Finance, 1991, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Principles and Practices of Real Estate, Brokers Course, Florida Real Estate Academy, 1995, Fort Myers, Florida. Case Studies in Valuation and Report Writing, University of Florida, 1994. Real Estate Market Analysis, University of Florida, 1993. Preview of Urban Planning and Regional Planning, University of Florida, 1993. Seminar in Real Estate Valuation, University of Florida, 1994. Seminar in Real Estate Financial Analysis, University of Florida, 1995. Land Use Economics, University of Florida, 1995. Principles and Practices of Real Estate, Salesman Course, Florida Real Estate Academy, 1990, Fort Myers, Florida. Demonstration Report Writing,seminar sponsored by the Appraisal Institute, Dallas,Texas, May 1999. Comprehensive Appraisal Workshop, Dallas,Texas,August 2000. "Appraising and Analysis of Proposed Subdivisions and Condominiums", seminar sponsored by The Appraisal Institute, Boca Raton, Florida,August 2002. CCIM CI 101 - Financial Analysis for Commercial Investment Real Estate, CCIM Institute, Naples, Florida, October 2002. The Valuation of Wetlands, seminar sponsored by The Appraisal Institute, Fort Myers, Florida, September 2004. Case Studies in Commercial Highest and Best Use,Appraisal Institute,September 2005. CCIM CI 102- Market Analysis for Commercial Investment Real Estate, May 2006. CCIM CI 103-User Decision Analysis for Commercial Real Estate, September 2006. CCIM CI 104-Investment Analysis for Commercial Real Estate,August 2006. MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 63 Appraisal of Local Retail Properties,Appraisal Institute, May 2009. Subdivision Valuation,Appraisal Institute,September 2009. Fundamentals of Separating Real Property, Personal Property, and Intangible Business Assets, Appraisal Institute, Bradenton, Florida March 2012 EXPERIENCE: Currently an owner/partner with Maxwell, Hendry&Simmons, LLC, Fort Myers, Florida. Owner/partner with Maxwell & Hendry Valuation Services, Inc., Fort Myers, Florida, 2004-2013. Associate Appraiser with W. Michael Maxwell &Associates, Inc., Fort Myers, Florida, 1995-2003. Commercial Credit Analyst with Barnett Bank of Lee County/First Florida Bank, Fort Myers, Florida, 1991-1993. PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: Appraisal Institute- MAI CCIM Institute-CCIM State-Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, RZ 2245 State-Licensed Real Estate Broker, BK#0567939 Southwest Florida CCIM District - Board of Directors 2014 - 2018, 2017 President Real Estate Investment Society- Board of Governors 2002-2008, President 2007 Appraisal Institute-West Coast Florida Chapter Board of Directors 2003-2008 Appraisal Institute-West Coast Florida Chapter President 2008 Commercial Investment Professionals(CIP) Member OTHER: Qualified as an expert witness in the 20th Judicial Circuit Court of Florida and United States Bankruptcy Court Middle District of Florida. Special Magistrate-Lee County Value Adjustment Board 2012-2014 Guest Lecturer at Florida Gulf Coast University, College of Business Administration 2007-2016 MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 64 QUALIFICATIONS: MATTHEW S. SIMMONS �.. Educational Background and Training Bachelor of Science in Business Management,2008, Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, Florida. Appraisal Board Course 1(ABI),Steve Williamson's Real Estate Education Specialists, 2003,Orlando, Florida. Real Estate Transactions, Florida Gulf Coast University,2003, Fort Myers, Florida. Various Appraisal Institute Courses Appraisal Board Course II(ABII),Academy of Real Estate,2005, Fort Myers, Florida. 63-hour Sales Associate Pre-License Course,Career Web School,2008 Experience Gulf Coast Appraisal and Consulting Services, Inc.,Cape Coral, Florida-Associate(October 2003) Gulf Coast Appraisal and Associates, Inc.,Cape Coral, Florida-Associate(2003-2005) Maxwell &Hendry Valuation Services, Inc., Fort Myers, Florida-Residential Division: Manager(2005-2013) Maxwell, Hendry&Simmons, LLC, Fort Myers, Florida-Partner(2013-Present) Professional Affiliations State-Certified Residential Real Estate Appraiser, RD5762 State-Licensed Real Estate Broker, BK3214690 Qualified as an expert witness in the Florida District Court: 7th Judicial Circuit,20th Judicial Circuit Qualified as an expert witness in U.S. District Court: Middle District of Florida Qualified as an expert witness in St.Croix County,Wisconsin Realtor Association of Greater Fort Myers and the Beach, Inc.-Member 2009-Present National Association of Realtors-Member 2009-Present Real Estate Investment Society(REIS)-President-2015 Sanibel-Captiva Chamber of Commerce-Member 2006-Present Southwest Florida Museum of History Foundation-Board Member 2014-2016 HUD FHA Approved Appraiser Associate Member of the Appraisal Institute-2011-Present Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board (FREAB)-Gubernatorial Appointed Board Member-2012-2016 Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board(FREAB)-Past Chairman 2014 Since 2016, Board of Directors for IMAG-History&Science Center Since 2017, President of L.E.A.D. Foundation of SWFL MAXWELL HENDRY SIMMONS 65 )L NOV813S GeIVA GIS ,OE 8 8dJ11SI- I I 4 8 8 , 81 --, ( 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 __)y 4 / / ---._ w0w � i=Q Q CC LU (/) w 0_ N__---- Ill w Q JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC . TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING SERVICES ADDENDUM TO TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT For Oil Well Community Facilities (Oil Well Road, Collier County, Florida) Traffic Impact Statement, dated February 21, 2019 ..." Addendum, September 20, 2019 Prepared by: JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. 471 1 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34119 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 27920 (PROJECT No. 180214-ADDENDUM) ``,,,,�ti3�Ittllff/,,,,,, AN• ,S M• S141 , �' ]P .�\GENS. . liSI No 43860 ', * ti" / Y'' STATE 09 2 0) 9 . ,<, JAM ' . BANIe$� ,�iiE�� 4,O R\?P- ES FLO- REG. No:.1,3j10 {1 b �N i .` I.1/1111110 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose of Addendum 2 Scope of Project & Site-Generated Trips 2 Table A - Proposed Land Uses 2 Project Generated Traffic 3 Table B - New Site-Generated Trips 3 Table 1 - Trip Generation Computations 3.1 1 Purpose of Addendum Oil Well Community Facilities is a proposed land use change that is currently under consideration by Collier County Government. As originally proposed,the Applicant was seeking approval to develop a variety of proposed uses, which include: a charter school, (SIC Code 8211) an equestrian riding school (SIC Code 7999), daycare (SIC Code 8351), and senior housing/care. The request has been revised which no loner includes senior housing/care land uses. Therefore, the net new trips that will be generated by the site are less than that which was previously estimated by the Traffic Impact Statement, dated February 21, 2019. This addendum is provided to establish the project's net new trips that will be generated based upon the revised land use request. Scope of Project Oil Well Community Facilities is a proposed project that may consist of a K thru 12 charter school (775 students), an equestrian riding school (150 students), a daycare center (150 students), . . . !! . -• . . -: . . : .: •- - : : ..-• : -: _: : . _ .. . . The 20.16 +/- acre site is located on the south side of Oil Well Road and approximately one-half mile west of Everglades Boulevard, within Collier County, Florida. Table A Proposed Land Uses Proposed Land Uses Number of Units or Size ALF OE 200 Units CCRC Charter School (K thru 12) 775 Students & & Equestrian Riding School 150 Students Day Care Center 150 Students 2 Project Generated Traffic Traffic that can be expected to be generated by Oil Well Community Facilities was estimated based upon the guidelines established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. That is, historical traffic data collected at similar land uses was relied upon in estimating the project's traffic. It was determined that land use codes "CC Retirement Community" (LUC 255)/Assisted Living Facility (LUC 25'1), "Private School K-8" (LUC 534) (SIC Code 8211) and "Day Care Center" (LUC 565) (SIC Code 8351) were most representative of the most intense land uses that could be developed. As determined, the project could generate 963 916 vph& 131 345 vph new trips during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Table 1 depicts the computations performed in determining the project's new trips, as well as for the less intense alternate land uses. Table B provides a summary of the trip generation computation results that are shown in Table 1. Table B New Site-Generated Trips (Summation of Table 1) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Generated Trips Generated (vph) (vph) 963 X131 916 345 3 TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Oil Well Community Facilities Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 534 Private School (K- 8) 925 Students 565 Day Care Center 150 Students Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit ********************************************************************************* LUC 534 Daily Traffic (ADT) = N/A N/A ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.85(X) + 22.17 = 808 vph 444 / 364 vph 55% Enter/45% Exit= PM Peak Hour (vph) = T= 0.26(X) = 241 vph 111 / 130 vph 46% Enter/54% Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 565 Daily Traffic (ADT) = T= 3.56(X) +47.23 = 581 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T= 0.66(X)+8.42= 107 vph 57 / 50 vph 53% Enter/47% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph) = Ln(T) =0.87Ln(X)+0.29 = 105 vph 49 / 56 vph 47% Enter/53% Exit= ********************************************************************************* Totals Daily Traffic(ADT) = N/A ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = 916 vph 501 / 415 vph PM Peak Hour(vph) = 345 vph 160 / 186 vph 3. j Exhibit 0 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT F or Oil Well Community Facilities (Oil Well Road, Collier County, Florida) February 19, 2018 Revised February 21, 2019 County TIS Review Fees TIS Methodology Review Fee = $500.00 TIS(Major Study) Review Fee = $1.500.00 Prepared by: JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. 471 1 7TH AVENUE SW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34119 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION No. 27830 `,,,,IV111tt11//,,,,'' .' -A BANtt (PROJECT No. 1 8021 4) ,,••‘‘ ` S - , % 3g6� , ,' 0 W OF IU 4 FLOR`-' ,1 ZDI JAM S . BAN FLORI. • REG. NO!44 11 l irp if tt11t 1111,\\\\\\ TABLE OF CONTENTS Conclusions 2 Scope of Project 3 Table B - Proposed Land Uses 3 Figure 1 3.1 Master Concept Plan 3.2 Project Generated Traffic 4 Table C - Net New Site-Generated Trips 4 Table 1 - Trip Generation Computations 4.1 Existing+ Committed Road Network 5 Project Traffic Distribution 7 Area of Significant Impact 7 Figure 2 - Project Traffic Distribution 7.1 Table 2A(AM)- Area of Impact/Road Classification 7.2 Table 2A (PM)- Area of Impact/Road Classification 7.3 2017 thru 2023 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions 8 Table 2B (AM) -2017 & 2023 Link Volumes 8.1 Table 2C (AM)-2023 Link Volumes/Capacity Analysis 8.2 Table 2B (PM) - 2017 & 2023 Link Volumes 8.3 Table 2C (PM) - 2023 Link Volumes/Capacity Analysis 8.4 Appendix 9 1 Conclusions Based upon the findings of this report, it has been determined that the proposed rezoning and future development of Oil Well Community Facilities will not adversely impact the surrounding road network or cause any roadways to operate below their adopted levels of services. This conclusion is based upon the findings that Collier County's existing plus committed (E+C) road network has adequate capacity to accommodate the site- generated traffic associated with the development that may consist of a K thru 12 charter school, a daycare center, and equestrian school, and an assisted living facility (ALF) or a congregate care retirement community (CCRC). Therefore,the project will not be required to fund any off-site roadway improvements/mitigation, other than the payment of its road impact fees, which will be used to fund a portion of the costs of area-wide improvements as set forth by Collier County's CIE and Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Planned and/or Committed Area-Wide Transportation Improvements Based upon the area's existing and forecasted traffic demands, it was determined that the E+ C road network will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service for project build-out conditions. However, the "anticipated" traffic demands for that area are subject to change pending the status of other large-scale projects that may become entitled for development(e.g., rural lands west). It is for this reason, Collier County Government has accelerated the planning and funding of several major roadway improvement projects. Transportation improvements that are planned or have been funded are described below in Table A. Table A Planned and/or Committed Area-Wide Transportation Improvements Transportation Improvement Status Notes Oil Well Road (Everglades-to-Desoto) (widen to 4-lanes or 6 lanes) Planned 8th Street Bridge Reduces traffic demand on (N/S/Collector Randall-to-Golden Gate Blvd) Funded Randall Blvd& Immokalee Rd 16th Street Bridge Reduces traffic demand on (N/S collector between Randall and Golden Gate) Funded Randall Blvd& Immokalee Rd Reduces traffic demand on Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext (C.R. 951 to 8th street) Funded Randall Blvd, Immokalee Rd& (New 3-lane road within 6 lane footprint) Golden Gate Blvd Randall Boulevard (Everglades-to-Desoto) (widen to 4-lanes or 6 lanes) Planned Randall Boulevard& Immokalee Road Conceptual (at-grade & flyover improvements) (PD&E Study) Oil Well Road to Randall Connector Conceptual (S-Curve Connector or Other Options) (PD&E Study) 2 Site Access Improvements The project proposes to have one (1)right-in/out and left-in median opening along Oil Well Road. The proposed directional left-in access will be centrally located along the site's frontage. The proposed access was analyzed for project build-out traffic conditions based upon the guidelines set forth by the Highway Capacity Manual (refer to pages Al and A2 in the appendix). It was determined that the site access will operate at acceptable levels of service. The final design of the site access improvements will be established at the time of acquiring development approval. Scope of Project Oil Well Community Facilities is a proposed project that may consist of a K thru 12 charter school (775 students), an equestrian riding school (150 students), a daycare center (150 students), and a 200-unit assisted living facility (ALF) or a 200-unit congregate care retirement community (CCRC). The 20.16 +/- acre site is located on the south side of Oil Well Road and approximately one-half mile west of Everglades Boulevard, within Collier County, Florida. Access to the site will provided via be one (1) right-in/out and left-in access. For additional site details,refer to the MCP prepared by Davidson Engineering. Table B Proposed Land Uses ``.. Proposed Land Uses Number of Units or Size ALF or 200 Units CCRC Charter School (K thru 12) 775 Students & & Equestrian Riding School 150 Students Day Care Center 150 Students 3 Immokalee Rd I -0 0 D � oo. 0 v m � a d O D C 2 0a E .>" m 0a Shady Hollow BI d E 01.10.1.61 .... •••••1 *1 Oil Well Road r111 1 1 1 t M / 1 1 1 1 --f Randall Boulevard mmao --e Rd . �� D 0 2 7 Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext. m° 0 z 3 L v NORTH N N.T.S. _ Golden Gate Blvd 0 0 0 0 m 0 a) m 0 a 0 3 0 m N Y) D LEGEND COMMITTED IMPROVEMENT PLANNED IMPROVEMENT —--——-- INTERSTATE HIGHWAY e 6–LANE ARTERIAL 4–LANE ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR 2–LANE ARTERIAL 2–LANE COLLECTOR/LOCAL Funded Bridge Construction – JMB TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Oil Well CommunityFacilities Project Location & Roadway Classification FIGURE 1 November 5, 2018 3. i >a ' a. w NY-Id 31IS 1Vf11d30N00 10"'.,,,'"'x'„ n019111444E 4 OM/OEa �or. 'In. 3UK1i'$T nwom ONI>r33N10N 5 3eiwOo utwoo m n Wm 4.11000 a,oYTowlloaale NOSUTA $ tualmoo.unco ten=au cana3•iaru1 uw.rrw AIWA 3INNae'3W Of1dA0 W Z V .w.m rvu•.enopuQ_w♦ww.e� . .eo X„, 3311FIIOVd AlINfWWOO 3M-no 30 il ' ...>wx rwiasvun ui•ioc¢m 9NOKN3Y cl , / .uwn uscw 0 2r F- @ w b� l4 g-c7 4I wa Z u�S:4li:tIJ!H uaiLL Wzaz o � O) m 0 gJ Q IYwx l~ Ow¢N O U N Q in ��3Joy W ; & ��I� `6N tgU 0 �aLL w wa Uail Q' XN > 0 ZZ _aw ,p.2,-Eujoj'� (� qo r W W 5, w s0 W 4' ..S4 W wp0 o4,=H y��W't2m 1W W ? - < i< w V, 5 yJ w 2 K�U 2, 8 ac2Z �WV02Z¢w3�Wa N ,' �`d� `' Q R N � a o w woo O wig �� g� �� fq wVuwou d g a ¢ a: a um Za W Ag 2 w = 0 m n Q' $ ,L Z `l �� x¢�w w wp Uw— w 0 ¢ m d � �—a � uz� Nc7w—"'< �w 1-§- ui <UUk � > W F LL Z mw l'_. mp w�a:~g f�LLoxo wN O NLT, g i K 1 Q LL W 4 w W W p r 3:W x W U m W ca i h ' L6 2 J p o i $ yap "c12 ¢E5r w qi o u. =<8%,'t2Mo2 ag � o� H EPJ z ,9 55 4Z4a EL.JL¢ 3 jI 2 U S r a ¢ 2 W W I I 1vaN301S321 1 1V iN301S321 A11WVd91ONIS 3S1l ONV1 A11WVd-310NIS 3Sfl ONVI t 2131dl8 3dY0SONV1 S31V193-3 :ONINOZ y S1V1S3-3 ONINOZ )401,81,3S 0dVA 301S AE 8 3dAl.SL J 1 s i "> + u > I- �F ---,— —,- --- I0 FFg z . i ♦ , • > ♦ ♦ • ♦ • O W0a $� w • • • , • • • • • • • • • r �p wO_ 0 I I Wct • * • • . . . . . • • • ♦ • 1 z (73 Wo ^ QWC4 4 f > 4 • • i • • • • • 4 • W `e I f 2 . 8>- 'OA' > WW g. ♦ • o50- I'4{�2 Q Q< Q J LL a g z F di Z(- Q N W-' no Z I I g 1 I _ �L W 7 M O /j i 41 Q�Q� 1 fl �. / W 4 o`Z Y I > N S • 0 CL < I CO W Zo 1 y W WO OF �4ti[ I ce SSN a {p�QFJ ;,,c4 a W Z k , Z Q j O Z Zo i "I I Jaf Wp Zfa p• w j O X w5 ♦71 0.0W ; W r r O. zp a W 1 w0 Z Y FJLL J I CO O �-- eN'Zi I r� 1 -I Z W wpm 1 s S L. O W Il '^ O� .7..) X z 7sLZ' W Q W ZZi i Z t♦ i W d N Pz W 0 2• 'et y a i a Itm t U wp tW • co a wWg -- tia : 1- wa: W Q w J rJ zm . `a Lug L. o p z oz tiw— bw v� . 5 wo W>� N� s,..< �� J 6 2LL w0th 0ce Xw �a > .1 f 0 col >y Z.:❑ Z0 (.1) CO_ .to �j W � t`�IV �I� w a Wy!� Z n w co U N a O K"' ix 0 (J ¢w?LL 1 I41 LIl co m N t w 1--W-' > v : dZII N ill am 9 waw i t a ,1 _ Q' O (0 PC O I.7I p o 2 03dO13A30Nfl 3Sn ONV1 03d013A30Nfl'3Sfl ONV1 I S31ViS3-3 :DNINOZ S31V1S3-3 :ONINOZ 3.2 /J Project Generated Traffic Traffic that can be expected to be generated by Oil Well Community Facilities was estimated based upon the guidelines established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 10`h Edition. That is, historical traffic data collected at similar land uses was relied upon in estimating the project's traffic. It was determined that land use codes "CC Retirement Community" (LUC 255), "Private School K-8" (LUC 534) and "Day Care Center" (LUC 565)were most representative of the most intense land uses that could be developed. The report also estimates the trips associated with the project's less intense land uses (i.e., LUC 254 and LUC 537), but the potential off-site impacts were measured based upon the more intense land uses. As determined, the project could generate 963 vph& 431 vph new trips during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Table l depicts the computations performed in determining the project's new trips, as well as for the less intense alternate land uses. Table B provides a summary of the trip generation computation results that are shown in Table 1. Table C New Site-Generated Trips (Summation of Table 1) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Generated Trips Generated (vph) (vph) 963 431 4 TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION COMPUTATIONS Oil Well Community Facilities Land Use Code Land Use Description Build Schedule 254 Assisted Living 200 Units 255 CC Retirement Community 200 Units 534 Private School (K - 8) 925 Students 565 Day Care Center 150 Students Land Use Code Trip Period Trip Generation Equation Total Trips Trips Enter/Exit LUC 254 Daily Traffic(ADT) = T=2.60(X) = 520 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.19(X) = 38 vph 24 / 14 vph 63%Enter/37%Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph)= T=0.26(X) = 52 vph 20 / 32 vph 38%Enter/62% Exit= LUC 255 Daily Traffic (ADT) = T= 2.32(X) + 176.28= 640 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.13(X)+21.28= 47 vph 31 / 16 vph 65% Enter/35% Exit = PM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.13(X)+59.19= 85 vph 34 / 51 vph 40% Enter/60% Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 534 Daily Traffic (ADT) = N/A N/A ADT AM Peak Hour (vph) = T=0.85(X) + 22.17 = 808 vph 444 / 364 vph 55% Enter/45% Exit= PM Peak Hour (vph) = T= 0.26(X) = 241 vph 111 / 130 vph 46% Enter/54% Exit= ********************************************************************************* LUC 565 Daily Traffic (ADT) = T= 3.56(X)+47.23 = 581 ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = T=0.66(X) + 8.42= 107 vph 57 / 50 vph 53% Enter/47% Exit= PM Peak Hour(vph) = Ln(T) = 0.87Ln(X)+0.29= 105 vph 49 / 56 vph 47% Enter/53% Exit= ********************************************************************************* Totals Daily Traffic (ADT) = N/A ADT AM Peak Hour(vph) = 963 vph 532 / 431 vph PM Peak Hour(vph) = 431 vph 194 / 237 vph 4-. Existing+ Committed Road Network Figure 1 and Table 2A provide a detail of the surrounding E + C road network. Table 2A also shows the roads' respective minimum level of service performance standards and capacity. Oil Well Road varies from a two-lane to a four-lane major east/west arterial that extends between its western terminus at its intersection with Immokalee Road to S.R. 29 and continues east through rural/agricultural lands to its eastern terminus at the Collier County Line. Between Immokalee Road and Everglades Boulevard, Oil Well Road is classified as a four-lane divided arterial having a maximum LOS D capacity of 2,000 vphpd. Between Everglades Boulevard and Oil Grade Road, Oil Well Road is a two-lane arterial having a maximum LOS D service capacity of 1,100 vphpd Within proximity of the site,the posted speed limit of Oil Well Road is 45 MPH. Collier County's LRTP has identified Oil Well Road to be widened to four or six lanes. 8th Street and 16th Street Bridges Collier County has funded the construction of two (2) bridges (i.e., 8th NE and 16th NE streets)that will be completed by 2020/2021, which will provide an alternate means of north/south access for the Randall Boulevard area. More specifically,the bridges will create a north/south interconnect between Randall Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard and between Randall Boulevard and the extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road that will substantially reduce traffic demands on Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. Vanderbilt Beach Road Collier County has committed to the funding of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, which consists of a three-lane arterial that will be expandable to six- lanes. The road will be extended from its existing eastern terminus (east of C.R. 951)to intersect 8th Street NE and will eventually be extended to Desoto Boulevard. Vanderbilt Beach Road will substantially reduce traffic demands on Immokalee Road, Randall Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard. Construction is expected to begin in the year 2021. Everglades Boulevard is a major two-lane north/south arterial that extends between its southern terminus (south of I-75)to its northern terminus at its intersection with Immokalee Road. Collier County has planned for the future four-laning or six-laning of the Everglades Boulevard. Desoto Boulevard is a major two-lane north/south arterial that extends between its southern terminus (immediately north of I-75)to its northern terminus at its intersection with Oil Well Road. Collier County has planned for the future four-laning or six-laning of the Desoto Boulevard. Immokalee Road varies from a two-lane to a four-lane and six-lane major east/west and north/south arterial. The road extends between its western terminus at the Gulf of Mexico to the northern Golden Gate Estates Area and then north/south to the Immokalee Community and interconnects with S.R. 29. South of Oil Well Road, Immokalee Road is classified as a six-lane divided arterial; and north of Oil Well Road it is classified as a 5 four-lane divided and two-lane arterial. Immokalee Road has a posted speed limit of Immokalee Road is 45 MPH. Randall Boulevard The report acknowledges that Randall Boulevard is expected to fail by the year 2020. However, Collier County has funded the construction of two (2)bridges (i.e., 8th Street NE and 16th Street NE)that will be completed by 2020/2021. These two (2) bridges will provide an alternate means of north/south access to the Randall Boulevard area. More specifically,the bridges will create a north/south interconnect between Randall Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard and between Randall Boulevard and the extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road that will substantially reduce traffic demands on Randall Boulevard. Collier County's LRTP has identified future four-laning or six-laning of Randall Boulevard. Randall Boulevard&Immokalee Road Collier County is evaluating possible at-grade and flyover improvements to the intersection of Randall Boulevard& Immokalee Road. At this time, no final improvements have been established. Randall Boulevard& Oil Well Road Interconnect Collier County is evaluating possible at-grade improvements that would more directly interconnect Oil Well Road to Randall Boulevard. The direct interconnect is expected to provide substantial better traffic flow in the area. At this time, no final improvements have been established. 6 Project Traffic Distribution The project's traffic was distributed to the surrounding road network based upon logical `•••. means of ingress/egress, current and future traffic patterns in the area, and the location of surrounding residential areas as well as other schools was considered. Figure 2A and Table 2A(AM) and Table 2A (PM)provide a detail of the traffic distributions based on a percentage basis. Also, Table 2A (AM) and 2A (PM) depict traffic distributions by volume and by peak direction. Figure 2A details the turning movement volumes at the site access. Area of Significant Impact The area of significant impact was determined based upon Collier County's 2%, 2% and 3% criteria(i.e., if the project's traffic is 2% or more of a roadway's adopted level of service capacity, then the project has a significant impact upon that link). Table 2A(AM) and Table 2A (PM) depict the project traffic distributions and the level of impact on the surrounding roadways. Roads that were identified as being within the projects area impact are identified in Table 2A(AM) and Table 2A (PM). 7 Immokolee Rd a P 0 o 0 ce ' 0 O m o o m *c 0 N O a Q. E 2 oP 0 L', 11 °0- 01 ab\ u7 Shady Hollow BI d E w--., 57-' I �� _ 41 111P. 45% 15% 5% Oil Well Road ► OA r . I I ij 15% 110% i i i i a _1 _---� Randall Boulevard Irnmokalee Rd ! . .01 0 b\ If) O 0 0 _u 1 0 r- I Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext. a° — -- a o z z , ; a NORTH -b- tn. in U, Al N.T.S. C L °Dilli :,olden Gate-Elvd b\ 6\ u In LEGEND 00% PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT JIM TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING, INC. Oil Well Community Facilities PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION FIGURE 2A November 5, 2018 7. 1 .E 0 10 m w cy p a w NORTH N.TS. AM 293 : PM 107 i____ §' AM 239 : PM 87 n Ni 1 0. M d' m Q N N U 0 Q N Cr i Project-Generated Trips (Includes Pass-by) AM Peak Hour = 532 enter/ 431 exit PM Peak Hour = 194 enter/ 237 exit LEGEND AM 00 : PM -►AM : PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Oil Well Community Facilities PROJECT-GENERATED FIGURE 2B TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT February 19, 2019 1.l.b \ � g22 2 $ 2222 On m ( m@ 2 $ - W L W WWW ''' u u W W W WW E 2 » y » » 7 » 2 7 y z > > » > >- >- •c5 227 $ 7 / » J « yy y $ 777G 8Q 8Q § m Co e w ® Co A CO w o CO c © r r\ \go e CO N CO I n Co 0) e e CO oEw w & a o CO a / a a s _ ra ell a2a $ $ y 777 $ 7 $ J y / y $ J $ / / Com N CO a a t m m Co n Co m a m Co m ƒ O § R / z @ R w ± w w $ w WOW = OW 0- 2 « 0) c11 22/ ,- q 2 7 \ CONN $ # \ $ / / \ \ z { § E / @ Z E 4 4 R R W R z z z m z z 0- 0_ 0- -, 5 _ a E -- 2kM3km ® w o J ® oww o wo (2r rw 0 « ƒ ƒ mfr / ® m \ / mea cLn (-NJ CO 1.0 CV ", W LLI no Q w /% ¥ $ a y 77 $ 00 $ 8Q .0 7777 yR CLF—ci, © $ f % Gr r / r / / % = G i- 0 0 0 § III \ \ / \ / / o o 00000 00 0000 00 7 / 0 / $ / a) \ / % 2 \ / / ? / / / / ? 11 Ce q a c 2 > m ) C § W W 0 0 00000 0 0 0000 O 0 w w . 2 /222 D OODD ° 22 2222 DD 10q JJco ( A # # NN NN NNNN NN ) \ \ / 7 a \ 7 , = j -o ) ± J > * = I 0 kCO § DI t ) ° > 2 9g II = Q g 0 2 , , _ \ ) \ = 3 E _ \ 7 f , 3 2 7 f ± { , 2 a § / o $ ) \ a ¥ a o - » g 2 - e 2 = e - ƒ / j 2 $ m \ \ / $ 0 3 j Ca- J ) \ ; + c = , w 3 # \ = a \ 3 _ : o o a - e ) y £ % a s t a / } E E ° \ § / E o - ) / — ; 6 4 5 f f \ 2 A a t 3 \ / J » A ¥ Ei • -0 -0a) c0 a § f % 7 \ ] k › % t - ce cc 2 m I- & \ 0 / % $ o 9 E © - \ I w \ a w A 0) 8 0 as = o 7 (N 0 0 0 c- CV 0 CC yf ° © \ / / § ® ® COCOCOCOCOCO coa - 1,le Y c Y V � OCn2 c (n0C�) OO ITO 0 ("" 0O E , Z } r >_ >_ r } Z Z Z Z } } } Z Z a) - Y +' 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 C V o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) N O N U) M N M CO CD U) CO CO d' d) CO CO CO s- ti CO M O) M U) N O U) C) N 't d' CO C) O) .1- w ' OO •T- T-• M U) M M — O M O r- d' CO (Ni N r- a U 17 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - CO N N M N N N M M M M M M N N M M _, 0 wu) Z w � � � 'S wzZZcn Z a I °i2 a =rnoo rn NNrnoo rnN ornoorn mo a t CL O > ,— m- N CO v_ N c- N N In m- m- a z I— (..) -- aaa � z w � wwww � w cncncnz WW 2 — L V 0 LL. 2 .d M a C d- Cn N CO 0 OM cO N N CO N N CO d' d- N Q O Y Y p, N U) M cp m M ,- ,- M m- M N- N N m- a a a > N Q Lu W — J Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CON w = o o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 p ; 0 0 U) o U) cc) 10 sO o o o o U) O O o 0 Q /A t, o a- N -' d IC) "" T- c- l(� M in T- 1.— V♦ a r o F- w c�'i o y L V Q O O o 0 0 0 0 0 CJ CD CD C) O CD C7 C] C) d d = _ cD O Q C7 0 C7 0 (] 0CO co C 0 C) C0 0 Q o O N p O j M M N N m- T- NCD COCD ao M OD a Ow a a) 0 m e > U) c .c • 01ww0 0 00000 00 0000 00 °) w C (n M C4 03 R❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DD D ❑ N U c0 c0 N N d" d- N N d' NN N N N N NCV P U D a c a `m m > o a) a aCu CO -0 2 r» m m - m = m m o Cu a) o d ovaV ( o va N0 a o maoa � a 0 >) c > E c aO uO o = g m CC o a, o - a Q o a m o m -a s a c o -p u) ci) 0) c " O m a) ° o > , o o 7-) °:' o a) o C7 a) m 0 0 ti To ca w m c - c 0 0 o m °' o o O o rn o > 0 rn s a) o a) _c E E m a`) N _ E a) 5 c 5 m Y 0 O E _ in w> a O _ w' cn C7 ca O 0 ) b a) a .II a4 a CD R m a U U a) > O O 0 > o N [0 CD m -w ct fab m )- h- o o a Q7 0 E Nc > N ) Ca 4 Q E 7 O ix w o Y Y U U a) 0 O t9 _0 O r N O CD O r N 0 0 f ".27 O O O ,- 0 O O 04 N N N M CO M V to O CO O. arr 7 co77 ^ 1.3 2017 thru 2023 Project Build-out Traffic Conditions In order to establish 2017 thru 2023 project build-out traffic conditions,two forecasting methods were used. The first traffic forecasting method was the County's traffic count data was adjusted for peak season conditions, peak hour conditions, peak direction, and an annual growth rate was then applied. The AM and PM peak season/peak hour/peak direction factor as shown on Table 2B (AM) and Table 2B (PM) was derived from the 2017 Collier County AUIR Reports. The annual growth rate was also obtained from the 2017 AUIR Report. Using the annual growth rate,the 2023 AM and PM background traffic conditions were determined, which are also depicted in Table 2B (AM) and Table 2B (PM). The second traffic forecasting method was to add the vested trips (trip bank) identified in the 2017 AUIR report to the adjusted peak season, peak hour and peak direction traffic counts. The 2023 vested trips "+" background traffic volumes are depicted in Table 2B (AM)and Table 2B (PM). The greater of the two values produced by the two forecasting procedures was then considered to reflect the 2023 background traffic. The AM and PM peak hour project generated traffic was then added to the AM and PM background traffic. Table 2C (AM) and Table 2C (PM) provide a summary of the 2017 thru 2023 AM and PM traffic conditions and the roadways' level of service and remaining available capacity. As determined, all project impacted roadways (E+ C Network) will continue to operate at the County's adopted minimum level of service thresholds at project build-out. Site Access Improvements The project proposes to have one (1)right-in/out and left-in median opening along Oil Well Road. The proposed directional left-in access will be centrally located along the site's frontage. The proposed access was analyzed for project build-out traffic conditions based upon the guidelines set forth by the Highway Capacity Manual (refer to pages Al and A2 in the appendix). It was determined that the site access will operate at acceptable levels of service. The final design of the site access improvements will be established at the time of acquiring development approval. 8 u C0 0 G - C )) 0 0 C it O Z 0 O 'R N 2 ` 0 a) Q T V M M (') 0) 0) a) cD O co co O O -0 0 R 8 Y N Q N v) M (n et a 0) (0 V M M O^ a a a CO ) CrCL Q. a V 0) M M M o) C) CO 0 CO 0 L N M N M M N O O N O CO M O 0 m V M M N N N ,,^^ V! W a) C y j O C c eh = C.1 2 Q M M (0 a0 co a V V O It) v a) 10 N M N _0 L N O) (0 V N O 00 (0 •C N a) Y Q (N V M ap M M M H M 0-)O ❑ o ° a m > 0 CC5 I.. Q Q. r Q ? L a) Q e c o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 .E �-' 0 p_ ❑I 0 0 N N N C) 0 0 (00 O 0 0 0 0 0 N CO V. a N V M M M Ni V V N N N N N N N N Q c W o y C J (5 Ce (� m 'Q a a of U) (/) www z U) V) cn z H e a s :_-_-1 a) m N N. a TE E a m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 0 0o Q O N @ a co o) N O O a0 a0 a0 (O N M —CO O CO M M 1,-- H N N N CO CO V N N N a i-- > o 0 z 06 V Ir.".. m a) r a) — co N a ip o Q — N N C a, `m m > a rt cD -o a) -o a 2 o) CO a — a) — m a) o Cn ° C� > > o o 0 0 m o o m m O N 0 m a) a) a) O 0 m C- 0 O E a C7 O Q• CCn f a) O a) o mo _ a 0 -O O a _ (0 O 'O > 0a) > a) 0 > a O ' ( 0 m a) a) O 0 0 a) - m � N — N Y Y iN O N 0 — O E E a, > a) — E > o o COC — 0 0 O 0) w o O E w co 0 0: O 0 N 0 v a a m r a) '> o O m > a) m cc v m Y C a) -=--to O O 0 a Ql O E C d N O n' w ❑ 0 as .0 0 .- N 0 0 0 — N 0 0 O O O T O .- N M V 6 6 6 0 cn coN N MM M MMV .V V rNN C.) c0 .- •- u a) N iC -O .a 0 0 _0 c _ Q 0 +.) 3 •a Cl S ` 4. V (2M) M co) Co Cn a) (O co (0 (O 0 O ti O Y r M N V O O O CO CO V C co O ,a N a) o d > N In co ,- (1) v v 0) (O V co M V a Y ru > _" Co LL m a) i a) a fl10 . C .0 M M M 0) N N ^ N co M N 0 O N O N el O O m V M CO N N N lO V/ Z LU C • 0, 0 O C _ 0 o d _ _ ,--a) M S U Q -. 00 M CO CO CO LO V V O C) C to CO N M Cr IN CUa. Y L 6) Co V V (() C) ' O Coco .- J L N (a a Y Q N V Co co CO co M M 1� M M O 3 Y m a m - 2 Z Cl. d J = 1; ge e e o e e e e .85_.D. eeee e'' .0 _� `y 10 0 u') (1) (f) O O O Co O O O O O O .0 O p0 . 0 0 N N N O O O co O O O O O O N a N V M M M N �' V' N N N N N N N N s W 01 J o C d fr < 0 n a a of w z z w w 3 3 3 w w (n z z z U) c I— Ce a J ai Cy, U Ca N LNOcoO O O O O O O Q Q G M o) N O O W Co co 1`- (N M CO CO O (a N NQ F' M M N 1` N N N Coao (O V N N <t a) o 0 z 06 17 > N. CO a) r' c0 N — -o — (o a) m a) N c a) ca m > CL a) a a) v -a 2 m' 7 > > 00 m COao o o as (D a) uO N0 a ) 0 O (1)) c -0 Q E 'O C (n a cu a) in O m W O ct p O �_ ct O -0 0 N 0 -O o -0 O N O m > a CO rn To W mTi3 (a -F,), o c — a) CO O o o 9O rn > 0 01 t L N E E m > w — E > D o m — 0 32 0 O E � co w o O - W w 0 CC O 0 u) V0 0 O > o -0 m a) > o 0 cn > d m CL a alm o Tv To co c E 0 v c 4,- w E 3 C4 w' 0 o O co O N O O O (N O O O O [O O) O O N M V 6 (fl (O Co 8 (f') M N N N .M- .M- co ^ (-) J C V i.. N ,- CD N 0 O Z Z C S. O O M O = U N V O O to N co co r- Q) V CO (D C '- 0 0 -6 Y 1- Ce N (O L() (O (D (O d N N ti (D V 10 0 N a) N - ld 0 U O O O 0 0 0 O O — O O O O O O O CO d Y > CO El_ • CO o - _ ° 0 0 O o 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 as c ( ) > x Y n (`) rn rn o o o 0 0 COoaoo 000 CO0Lt i a a > M N N •- N C N = c J 5 i ` o CO Q M Y Q n M M r 0 co ,- 0 (O (() co E 0 a t N . u(0) LO (n C) ti (n M aco a Q N '� E a > N �) V 0 ma 0 (B Y H a c of z co � wwww w cncncnz co a) U Z Q U Q =_ Qm 2 Y L c0 N �j cr) to N N Cn N Cn o M M U 0 a O N CO N CO N N CO -4' N CO v W IL z W CO ^ � a s oIwcn z w � � � � w � zzzcn z 0 co QO N = G co ti CD M O f� I� O i� O CO M a7 Y Y Q N co N N co N N CO N CO (1S (t) cC 7 0 > Q a a a > Q m N Y m LV Z (73 c J J m c Q } Q m a of (n V) w w w z cn V) cn z CO cc -0 -o co U 00 F- Q ) Q C -C7 C 00 j O C a O 3 O QM = a) O` D. 0 O COM M CO O) O) (O •V 0 U7 N C C O N a) Y Q N If) ro M Or r0 V 7 ,_0 CO CO � V' co co V J O a) U V Ce CI_ a a) a) 7 CO 'CI M = C 0 0 > o p )` _ ° a 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y `1 L W CA N O 0 M CO CO n N M CO CO O ° a) N N m p a M M (- N- N N (NJ CO CO f N N 'V' O _c a Y o ti O. z a) is - 2 (U N CO ,U N a F- C a) m m C a' a) > U) a) -o -o m m m — a) — m v V ? o f6 a) a) o a) m x O U)) a) N 0 a) N a) 0 0 a) CO '> O E > C CL Oin a 0 a) -m o Eo- a) O o o m o - mo � o a o o a acC a a) > 0 N N O m CD N o > a o To m m Y N O C c O -= O > O O 2O O) -O g O O) L a) r a Oin w> o O E w> in c� cr Oc7 in LL 0 J a V CO 1 m a> > o o m mcc maiii ) m N Y C y is O o o oE c rn o 0 E 0 co >o ac O co 1] O N O O O - N O O CD co 0 0 c0 O) o O - - N c7 V (0 6 (d c0 Z CC g 3 Lc) co N V c co co co co co co co 03 > al a) — 0 o 0 Z z CO m C = 0 0 C o c', N () S N @ N O) CO CO CO CO (() (O N CO N CO N- N Ct 0 -O .X IX N V7 V (() (O V ''Cr N ,- N. CO V V' CO N •_ U O O O O O O O O - O 0 0 0 0 O0 m a Y > D CL C (o o L ,- a E a) CO > 16 yY L0 0 00 00 0 0 00 00 O OO O O 0 0 dd a > 'Co) CA co N N ,- e- N 63 Cr) co a0 a0 CO a0 U Cin N J = _ " a a) Q GO N Y M T coN CO N O) 0) 0) N- LU V CO j Z N .� L N to V (n V v O� N v CO COCrco '� Q m' Q a > a) Y ~ a o 511tH Z UJ w � ZZZO) z w U zCK Q L. m a. o > art a . o j T N 00 N r CO N N ,- N RIZ W Q) ^ � 0) a a adz cnwwww � w cncnOnz cnrc 70 03 aO O I m = 0) N CO � ( ) C0 N N CO N N (0 - c Ve 1 a a x a e- co , co ,- 1- co r CO 1- N N CC (n V �/ a n > D N Y Q a) (� UJ Zw 06 J J 3 y CO QmaolWz Z WWF W tnZZZ10 0 C 3. L. c a o ° = O a U D O Q S a 0 `- e..10 CO M CO 0) 0) N LO V co CO N co Y L 0 Y • 0) = co N C�h CD Lo V •V .O n C COCOCO C CO 0 `0 a " C re a a m °' 08 C ca CD M = 0 > I- pi a 0) C) O 0 0 0 CD 0 O CO 0 0 0 _0 C) Q O Y t co O N 0 O CO CO CO N- N CO CO CO o O U N N a) Q a M CO N- N N N CO (O • N N V ca d O o (LO F- a_ z F- a) (n 0 ca a)cn aCC a) 0 C a) co (aa 2 'C C a) › aj a) a) a O rn m (a - a) - m O O O O N O w N a) a) 0 0 N a> O c � �., O [L cr O a m o m u • ai aa) > v O (7 (1) d 0 m a m 0 : CO o • C7 CO CD C .) Y Y 0 N 0 N Y (a O C N N C O O O O m 0 O N -a a) L (n 'S E a) N E m a c 'S a LL O in w' oo Ow' (O 0 CY O C7 (n 0 J a.. a ra co CC a a m a)a) '> 0 o a) 'O (D 13 a CL a) co ea 0 0 0 _0 o co = N co (6 : O ca W W O 10 O co .0 O N 0 O O .-- N 0 0 a) M O O W O) (n O .- — N M V U) w (O a) CC V Co. - — — N N N M M C') M M T Z .— Q•4. HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report ..„'-' r... .-... .,,...',..:-... . , General Information Site Information Analyst JMB Transportation Eng Intersection Site Access @ Oil Well Rd icy/Co. Jurisdiction e,._a Performed 2/19/2019 East/West Street Oil Well Road Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Site Access Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.92 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period(hrs) 0.25 Project Description Project Build-out Lanes J4l ..4- i L. ix- -4 I- t- -4-S F� -The- it- -%1 r I 1 I I'Y t I' r Major Street hast-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 r ber of Lanes 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1\_ Configuration T R L T R Volume(veh/h) 633 239 0 293 1033 431 Percent Heavy Vehicles(%) 0 0 0 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade(%) 0 Right Turn Channelized No No Median Type I Storage Left Only Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway(sec) 4.1 6.9 Critical Headway(sec) 4.10 6.90 Base Follow-Up Headway(sec) 2.2 3.3 Follow-Up Headway(sec) J 2.20 3.30 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate,v(veh/h) [ 1 1 _ 318 468 + I Capacity,c(veh/h) 732 658 v/c Ratio 0.43 0.71 95%Queue Length,Q95(veh) 2.2 5.9 Control Delay(s/veh) 13.6 1 22.8 '-•'el of Service(LOS) B C r oach Delay(s/veh) I 3.0 22.8 j Approach LOS 1 C i{ Copyright®2019 University of Florida.All Rights Reserved. HCS'"TWSC Version 7.5 Generated:2/19/2019 8:54:16 AM Site AM.xtw Al HCS7 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst JMB Transportation Eng Intersection Site Access @ Oil Well Rd Agency/Co. Jurisdiction Date Performed 2/19/2019 East/West Street Oil Well Road Analysis Year 2023 North/South Street Site Access Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.92 • Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period(hrs) 0.25 Project Description Project Build-out Lanes J d 1 J.4- - I. L - 4- -4 r $-4 `_}— r li -I-Yt f f Major Street East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound • Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 111 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -� Number of Lanes 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration T R L T R Volume(veh/h) 1033 87 0 107 633 237 Percent Heavy Vehicles(%) 0 0 0 Proportion Time Blocked Percent Grade(%) 0 Right Turn Channelized No No Median Type I Storage Left Only 1 Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway(sec) 4.1 6.9 Critical Headway(sec) 4.10 6.90 Base Follow-Up Headway(sec) 2.2 3.3 Follow-Up Headway(sec) 2.20 3.30 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate,v(veh/h) 116 258 Capacity,c(veh/h) 580 476 v/c Ratio 0.20 0.54 95%Queue Length,Q95(veh) 0.7 3.2 Control Delay(s/veh) , 12.8 21.1 Level of Service(LOS) B C --. Approach Delay(s/veh) 1.8 21.1 Approach LOS C Copyright(0 2019 University of Florida.All Rights Reserved. HCS""TWSC Version 7.5 Generated:2/19/2019 8:53:04 AM Site PM.xtw A2- v) .4..d- W 0_ I- ill Z ~ UH Y 0i, O Z O s6`. F— Z ° D m <1 o a O J O a 6 `d! 62. [ • ONI>Id1 82:10d38 IVld H2d 1V101 .£9106 MH0I,6I,o00N w CI CC Z a p 7 7 X 0 0 S N07 0e occ -3 � ‘9; 62< ` c Q g[. 002 66F1 S4. 9y` `s�/ 6 [ O 9o.[ S` F'r! gF aft 9,a Osf 9 9[ 910, C' 6 ![. 6 �'[ F[ P it iz ea di N......., 99s` as avow 11VHdSV 6e..61 6. 6l. O 2d <! 9! 4, 96[ ` V iL t�, t�,` �6> �2 c-.,,L OS! c'..s, ` • 9.! c'[ .5..s., e- ,0£'9L p o 1 9. M mon (I) N P1W ..--. Y O co ' m ezzz `z! W <o vLri J .99.9l W 0 N W> M 'H 0 `2` IL o 'rt? m J M W 9. ci _ 0 Z W `z[ U Z o Z • L7 CO U . Y 9 N v¢ '0 N Q C� I— O 2[ w Q rn c�0 Q 6, Z 0 S 6 n In w X 0 `!� a czl r Z Z m r` 2` 961 ai in 0 0 -°� 0 L w SB —I : 0J 0 /� ![ 09 !a di,' a. < 0 0 i+> wy. 9. V m y J w 0 cn w 9 X0 X0Z <<, `'i 'n p W 9' �' N E r Y 2[ �2 ��, X21 2i E 1 ! '1... M V en i ONIN` 18210d88 l` id 2I2d 1`d101 .917'906 M.,01..6Lo00N 0 DE DAVIDSON EXHIBIT "Q" COMPARATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) ANALYSIS The subject property consists of±20.16 acres located in section 18,township 48 south and range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. The property is bounded by Oil Well Road to the north, and single-family residential lots to the east, south, and west. The subject property is currently zoned estates. For this comparative analysis, the site will be conceptually developed to the maximum standards using the current project zoning and the proposed zoning. The existing property consists of the following uses: Single Family Residence* 3,822 sf Single Family Residence* 1,693 sf Total: 5,515 sf *Areas taken from Collier County Property Appraiser The new development proposes the following uses: Charter School (K-12) & Equestrian Riding School: 775 Students & 150 Students Child Care Center: 150 Students 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. Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 Exhibit"Q"Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com September 2019 DE DAVIDSON F NG I NF FN I III., Arterial and Collector Roads The proposed build-out will not have a negative impact upon the surrounding road network. Per the traffic impact statement provided, it has been determined that the surrounding road networks can accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed mixed-use development that may consist of a K-12 charter school/equestrian riding school and a day care center. The road network will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service for the 2023 project build- out conditions and will not create any off-site transportation deficiencies that need to be mitigated. The project trip generation can be seen in Table 1. For additional information regarding transportation, please refer to the traffic impact statement prepared by JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. Table 1- Project Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips Generated Trips Generated Development (VPH) (VPH)) Total Total Proposed Build-Out 916 345 Surface Water Management Systems There is currently no storm water management provided within the existing single-family properties. During the time of any development order permitting, the site's storm water management system will be designed in accordance with LDC section 6.05.01. Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Systems Collier County Utilities are currently not available to the project site. Due to the distant proximity of existing Collier County utilities; the proposed build-out will be served by a private well and septic system. Therefore, the level of service of Collier County Utilities will not be impacted by the proposed build-out. Solid Waste Disposal Facilities The adopted level of service is 10 years of permitted landfill capacity and 2 years of lined cell capacity at previous 3 years average tons per capita disposal rate. There are currently no capacity issues, and no capacity issues are anticipated until the year 2068. Capacity Per 2017 AUIR: Total permitted landfill capacity remaining, 2017 17,244,316 Tons Required permitted landfill capacity, 2017 2,625,495 Tons Total lined cell capacity remaining, 2017 2,372,915 Tons Required lined capacity, 2017 490,736 Tons Estimated Life of Landfill 50 Years Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 Exhibit"CZ"Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com September 2019 DE PAYRPROIV Existing: 0.55 Tons per capita disposal rate 2.4 People/household 2 Existing single-family residences 2 x 2.4 people/household x 0.55 = 2.64 tons solid waste/year Proposed Build-Out: 0.55 Tons per capita disposal rate Charter School (K-12) = 775 students Equestrian Riding School = 150 students Child Care Center= 150 Students Staff associated with each use (assume) = 235 people 1,310 people x 0.55 = 720.5 tons solid waste/year The proposed landfill capacity at project build-out (year 2023), is anticipated to be 15,721,103 Tons Per the 2017 Collier County AUIR. Based on the aforementioned data, the landfill will have sufficient capacity to accept the additional solid waste during the project build-out year, 2023. The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Parks and Recreation Facilities The proposed build-out will not create a negative impact on Parks and Recreation Facilities. The school/daycare will have private recreational facilities/amenities to serve the students.The level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Public School Facilities The proposed build-out includes a charter school (K-12). With the steady increase in permanent population throughout the county and in the Golden Gate Estates Area,the addition of a charter school will assist with the rising student population. Additionally, school impact fees are not assessed for commercial developments, therefore the level of service is not significantly or adversely impacted by the proposed build-out. Fire and EMS Facilities The proposed build-out has no measurable impact on Fire and EMS Facilities. There are currently two existing North Collier Fire Stations (Station 10 and 12) and a Collier County EMS Station (Medic 10) located within a 5-mile radius of the site. 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. Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 Exhibit"Cr Comparative Level of Service(LOS)Analysis www.davidsonengineering.com September 2019 DE DAVIDSON F�J<�I�� k NiN[. EXHIBIT "R" Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict Narrative & Justification I. Introduction The intent of this request proposes to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by removing ± 20.16 acres from the Residential Estates Subdistrict and designating as the Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict. The proposed Subdistrict will provide the surrounding Residential Estates Subdistrict needed services that will be beneficial to the Estates residents. Per the recent draft of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Re-Study White Paper, public outreach has indicated that the area of Immokalee Road near Randall Boulevard is an area that may be suitable for non-residential uses such as an activity center or other designation because of the significant transportation planning that is underway. The subject property is ± 0.87 miles from Randall Boulevard to the south and ± 2.70 miles from the intersection of Randall Boulevard and Immokalee Road. Community facility uses, per the Land Development Code (LDC), are described as public facilities, institutional uses, open space uses, recreational uses, water-related or dependent uses, and other such uses generally serving the community at large.The dimensional and development standards, as depicted on the Master Concept Plan, are compatible with the existing surrounding residential neighborhood. The purpose and intent of the (CF) district, per the LDC, is to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) by permitting nonresidential land uses as generally identified in the urban designation of the future land use element. While the subject property is not within the urban designation of the GMP, its location and surrounding neighborhood characteristics meet the intent of the urban designation's need to provide community facilities. Uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those listed below as Permitted Uses allowed within this proposed Subdistrict: PRINCIPAL USES: a. Child care centers(SIC 8351), limited to 150 students. b. Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students. c. Equestrian Riding Academy(SIC 7999), limited to 150 students. 1 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE II. Growth Management Plan Policy Adherence The proposed GMPA also furthers the vision of the Collier County's Future Land Use Element. The following Objectives and Policies have been considered in this application: FLUE Policy 5.5: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by: 1) confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map; 2) requiring that any changes to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary; and, 3) 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: While the subject property is not within the urban designation of the GMP, its location and surrounding neighborhood characteristics meet the intent of the urban designation's need to provide community facilities. The property has been historically cleared of vegetation and used for single-family residential and accessory uses permitted by the Estates zoning district. The property is in a well- established residential community and not on the fringe of the County's developed footprint. Therefore, the proposed development does not contribute to urban sprawl. Furthermore, the proposed change in future land use and zoning of this property will result in the provision of services and facilities needed in the Estates community;refer to Exhibit"M"-Market Study that documents the need for these services in this area. The proposed development is within the community's footprint of an existing developed area. The Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict will provide the surrounding community a location for needed services without traveling significant distances into the Urban area, which is to the west. In addition, travelers to Arthrex for employment and any similar development will also benefit from services offered at the subject location. Confining urban development, including community facilities, to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map is not possible when the population and construction of homes has increased in the subject Rural/Estates area. The trending increase in density and population warrants the inclusion of nonresidential services and community facilities that fit within the fabric of the Estates designation. Based on the proximity of the existing school facilities, the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, the commercial components of surrounding PUDs, the NE County Recycling Drop-Off Center and the fairgrounds, the case is being made by the Market Study(Exhibit "M") that this area of the Estates is similar to the Urban designated areas and their provision of services and nonresidential land uses to serve the Estates community. The purpose of this GMPA is to encourage the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural designated area. The GMPA will also consider the protection of 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 by creating and promoting additional community facility land uses. —. 2 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE DAYRP.QN FLUE Policy 5.6: 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: To ensure the site will be compatible with and complementary to its surrounding land uses, the Estates Zoning District's development standards will be followed and there are no deviations from the LDC being requested under the companion PUD. Development standards include 75'front and rear yard setbacks,30 foot side-yards and a maximum zoned building height of 30'. In addition to a 15'Type 8 Landscape Buffer, a 6-8' wall will be constructed along the site's eastern, western and southern property boundaries to reduce impacts, such as noise and glare from headlights to adjacent properties. The proposed development will contain a tree preservation and water management areas along the eastern property line that will serve as an added buffer to the adjacent property. In addition, site lighting will be Dark Skies compliant to prevent spill-over onto adjacent properties. Limitations on each use has also been added to reduce impacts on neighboring properties. These limitations are outlined and underlined below for reference: • Child care centers (SIC 8351), limited to 150 students • Educational services (SIC 8211) limited to Private School (K-12) and/or Charter Elementary School, limited to 775 students • Equestrian Riding Academy (SIC 7999), limited to 150 students Existing PUDs located along the same major corridor,known as Orangetree,Orange Blossom Ranch and the Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church, have been approved setting the precedent of allowing commercial and community facility uses in the subject area. The Orangetree and Orange Blossom Ranch PUDs offer a wider variety of permitted commercial land uses, many of which are more intense than what is being requested within the Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict. The Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran PUD, located 11,000 ft west of the subject property, allows for similar uses being requested within the proposed Oil Well Subdistrict,but not-for-profit only.Although this PUD permits similar uses, the only development that has occurred since its adoption in 2011 is the construction of an on-site lake and an athletic field. Currently, the LDC permits Child Care and Educational Plants-as Essential Service as Conditional Uses within the Estates Zoning District but are limited to the locational criteria per the GGMPA. The only permitted use being requested within the Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict not listed as an allowable Conditional Use is the Equestrian Riding Academy. The Estates is an appropriate location for such academy, due to the allowance of livestock and the acreage requirements. Amendments to the GGMPA to allow Conditional Uses within other areas can be requested for approval if consistent with the applicable Goals, Objectives and Policies. Lastly, taking into consideration the configuration of the platted lots along Oil Well Road, specifically depth of existing lots, single-family residential development no longer seems appropriate along this major corridor. Per Collier County's Long-Range Transportation Plan,future widening of this roadway is also possible, which would create more incentive for property owners to sell and/or apply for rezoning. These lots along Oil Well Road are+220 feet deep while the majority of other Estates lots are 3 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE DAVIDSON ENC;I NEt NI NC over 600 feet deep, allowing for homes to be set back farther from the road. Without this depth, it appears to be more appropriate for aggregation of lots along Oil Well Road and land use petitions to allow for community facility and limited commercial uses, such as child care centers. FLUE Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. Response: This property will be connected to Oil Well Road, an arterial roadway as classified by Collier County. FLUE Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. Response:Internal access will be provided to distribute traffic through the project and provide sufficient circulation. FLUE 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 GMPA, and the companion PUD rezone petition, provides a Master Concept Plan (Exhibit "N") that addresses appropriate pedestrian and vehicular connections within the development. More specific interconnections for land uses within the development will be addressed at time of Site Development Plan Permitting. The project will include internal interconnections throughout the development to allow for proper circulation within. External interconnections to adjacent single-family residential developments is not appropriate and is not being considered. FLUE Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. Response: Although this development is not in an area where walkability is feasible, this proposed Subdistrict will supply facilities to a community that shows an apparent need. Although detailed site design has not been determined, the intent of the subdistrict is to provide common open space. CCME Policy 12.1.2: Land use plan amendments in the Category 1 hurricane vulnerability zone shall only be considered if such increases in densities provide appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts of hurricane evacuation times. Response: There is no increase in density being requested. 4 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE DAVIDSON III. State Statutory Criteria: Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) 2 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Response(s): a. The amount of land being considered for this request (20.16 acres) is sufficient to provide the community facility services being requested. The Conceptual Site Plan, as Exhibit "N", reflects the proposed development areas while the Market Study,as Exhibit"M", documents the need for these land uses. b. Please refer to the Market Study-Exhibit M. c. Property/parcels in the area of the subject property are largely developed with single-family homes and their accessory uses. The subject property, itself, is currently developed as such. As noted previously, the subject property has been developed as such historically with the land being previously cleared as identified in the historical aerials found in Exhibit"F"—Environmental Data. d. County water and sewer utilities facilities are currently unavailable in this location. Until utilities are continued across the canal to the west, the subject property and the homes surrounding it, will continue to be serviced by on-site well and septic systems. Please refer to the Level of Service Analysis, as Exhibit"Q". Furthermore,please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement as Exhibit"0", which documents that the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the surrounding road network. e. The property is proposed to be redeveloped from single-family residential to community facilities. The subject area is not blighted and does not contain non-conforming uses. 5 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE DAVIDSON INGI l As noted previously, based on the proximity of the existing school facilities, the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, the commercial components of the Orange Tree PUD, the current construction of the NE County Recycling Drop-Off Center,fairgrounds, and the Mission Subdistrict, the case is being made by the Market Study(Exhibit "M") that this area of the Estates is in need of community facilities services to serve the Estates community. The purpose of this GMPA is to encourage the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural designated area. The GMPA will also consider the protection of 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 by creating and promoting additional community facility land uses. f. As this site is not near any military installation, this criterion is not applicable. g. As this site is not near any airport, this criterion is not applicable. h. The proposed GMPA does not contribute to urban sprawl. While the subject property is outside of the existing Urban Future Land Use designation, it has been historically cleared of vegetation and used as a site for single-family residential and accessory uses permitted by the Estates zoning;refer to Exhibit "F"—Environmental Data. The property is in a well-established community, with nearby public schools and commercial uses, and is not on the fringe of the County's developed footprint. Therefore, the proposed development does not promote an urban sprawl. The development will provide the community a location for needed services without traveling significant distances into the Urban area to the west. Refer to the Market Study, as Exhibit"M",for further detailed explanation of the need for these services in the Estates area in response to the trending population growth in the study area. i. By virtue of the proposed land uses and zoning entitlement, the subject property will continue to advance the job creation, capital investment, and economic development goals within Collier County. However, it should be noted that the applicant's desire to provide their community with needed services is equally important while advancing economic development. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions is apparent with the proposed amendment and subsequent zoning. As it was noted earlier, the provision of these uses and services will limit the impacts of urban sprawl by developing within an existing developed area. The proposed amendment for modification of the Future Land Use Map amounts to updating the County's Growth Management Plan to address a shortfall of services and uses for the community in which it would be located. 6 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 DE DAVIDSON Chapter 163.3177(6)(a)8 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. Response(s): a. County water and sewer utilities facilities are currently unavailable in this location. Until utilities are continued across the canal to the west, the subject property and the homes surrounding it, will continue to be serviced by on-site well and septic systems. Further, please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement as Exhibit "0", which documents that the proposed development will not have a negative impact on the surrounding road network. b. The subject property is currently developed with single-family homes and their accessory uses. The proposed land uses shall be reviewed, with specificity, for soils, topography and general development needs at the time of site development plan review. c. The amount of land being considered for this request (20.16 acres) is sufficient to provide services and facilities to the Estates community. While the subject property is outside of the existing Urban Future Land Use designation, it has been historically cleared of vegetation and used as a site for single-family residential and accessory uses permitted by the Estates zoning;refer to Exhibit "F"—Environmental Data. The property is in a well-established residential community and not on the fringe of the County's developed footprint. Therefore, the proposed development does not promote an urban sprawl in the physical sense. Further, the proposed change in future land use and zoning of this property will result in the provision of services and facilities that will opposite effect of urban sprawl because the property is currently within a developed semi-urban footprint.In so far as the provision of needed services near an established residential area, the proposal seeks to limit expansion of the community's footprint to an existing developed area. The development will provide the community a location for needed services without traveling significant distances into the Urban area to the west;refer to the Market Study, as Exhibit"M"which documents the need for these services in the Estates area. 7 Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict GMPA-PL20170002897 September 17, 2019 EXHIBIT S 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 .%J 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. February 16, 2018 Florida Master Jessica Harrelson Sitetja Davidson Engineering „ File 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of February 16, 2018 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcels of Collier County, Florida: Parcel ID: 39892880001 with a 50 foot buffer as shown on the corresponding map. 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, Cody VanderPloeg Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Cody.VanderPloeg @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 1 of 4 ' \ 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. February 16, 2018 Florida Master Jessica Harrelson 1. File Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com In response to your inquiry of February 16, 2018 the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded cultural resources in the following parcels of Collier County, Florida: Parcel ID: 39894520000 with a 50 foot buffer as shown on the corresponding map. 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, Cody VanderPloeg Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Cody.VanderPloeg @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 2 of 4 Cultural Resource Search 50 Foot Buffer Collier County f _ r • I y . r r.. is .• .J r I - It 2i I I/.• • .rf- ; 'far ., 4. 4401. ' • • ir vil+ .+a•fro,, •. . 1"4 9 1PV-. 4w. ! 1 ' + a. • •• ' .. 46 I�, ► / ► /, 4- 4,4 a 40 , ,:• • • , r ` . • ,r mr A 11., _ • • i if il,'• • S ~ hr ,t,7► JO R 0 410: l, i .... • I. ; ViCor ' i , -Nt No . ' 46 k -il d it:. ' , it till i, ♦4 _ _ '«..... r 'f v 3.1stIWAvell NF r Legend _ • • N Parcel , Florida _ HistoricalBridges ®National Register anal Geographic Society,i'•-wbed, o M , 39892880001 Structures HistoricalResource ,0© DpenStreetMap contributors, ?Mpg: Florida Sites Cemeteries ® l Geographies,( �/ �n A :GroupsI'D,OV,a Jfnd`x�-RE U@Gir ern unity 0 0.025 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 Miles February 2018 3 of 4 Cultural Resource Search 50 Foot Buffer Collier County tillilt' 16 1 I .444..4.440/:'4, .. Cfri iti91.m r1A. _— V � r' ir 0. 1 . • , i . .. .,.. . t 03 . • e ;,• . - : . 4 , . .. . • , , . . ...,,.. ; 0 0 . t), • Sy 4/ )10 ' . "` i t a • f ... 1 f .44 . ... . iirli• l. _.., . . iipT• Ittl is! 47, . , . , 1 . , .„,, , , 01..... . , . fr. i' ,.,_.. .. .....• . V • , • $ Al • • Legend N 39894520000 Florida Structures HistoricalBridges ®National Register snal t-ogrophie Societyo 0 op Esri, �E=E, A • HistoricalIM Resource ,Q®p- StreettMM''ap contributor , source: Esri, Florida Sites Cemeteries Groups IL Earth tar`Geographics,©map irbus DS,• . ;dDgl1C I, .nd be IS U -r o is unity 0 0.0129.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 — — Miles February 2018 4 of 4 N R • p 4 ayaV c aE' N- Q y• N c a I'aa0 � v f c E1111k veO °n > E Rv3 o 0 H o m mi H..= E -o > m R vw z nc E ° R ` �Vi _ s O RN xy C ° RNca� o c _ nu c -2 L N t6 a) ; aE. R OM1 i anpR E ° N 'O O 1- ovno o c 0 E v Op ov a) x p E - Q a) o Ry Opa E ONc N.0 d LL ° oc c c o No E o Q vR oTaN 'O u w .LLR Lt 2.1 _ O . Q p _ D V ._ T ._ al a c UyT w c U y O . o T o 0 c o 9 LT_ s p . 9 > C N ' R no ~ WRy a OLR CcC ° ei RN N O c C O LO R m, 2 G Ra E O V acp g a ° Rom c m s ,t, ¢ _ Cc «r _ ° m c m - m °' A m 2 E a o E Ro i Wo y 0 V V R•E O I OO« n R N N - uW N d O N ° i j R = . ` v U -8 v Q 5 c E d aE-p c PaE> _R J 5 N til c2Z , E O 3O c aR) NWV °• NL Q. OD . 2 ?* aNw >9 a- N O I--; E Rq p 3 O �,W O c c NaO ET- Y 0 L -10 Us U FR O to' O• F R a R « a 2 a n c can, ` Q()a E O O a V� N m Q R r_° o a 0 > o c ° RN Ta LI OV .. mN O Ty 8 wypN O .dN Q L c L p o2 - cRDR RU R cN NNu1aN Q m 6- R ON0 N@4c2 Et6 i3" 0NodpRLQJy Qwd LJ> URUNJUaOx oL Z 7 OU ' Q >aR OU4CIli! O!a w r c N Y w e N)O-0 U — 2W ` ' ;:l1 1 I33 'OR O 53 GL6 CZ9 N❑U) w 0 V) Jfn CCN Cl) E E a ,.., VNx 0 c N C c 0 O OO O x v)Q Q Q W UJ x x W W x x wZ O.ORR RjYcWn E O 0- 0 U p E Lco O Ra v IX a 0 am U 'O Y aO LU LaaN Ra c /URc an) oiCc LLQ Q N wQ dW 7 Q zI— O 1— Q 0o w0 x wU x Q a E oa 2 ` w •~ E E ° g am,1 a) ¢ asa Lu Q .c - .co ° ct ctmi = w E a .E oo, C 0) LL i- 1-'C 1- co H R 3 2 -L F 4)9 LL p JT) d W O �LL vx O 81°33'7.02'W n O N f N . w L. W �641111N- • ��t ' ti � le)) N w � :al t 0 : :. .- , •• illa, 4041116----larell#F*-- 10141,10",--- ' Ti CO _04 co .....e:N1 O. ir .,.‘,. _ 1 ,:. 4 lii • • , 1 /1). — z. •— M' « m. NN I w to -s JL�..�p } - i.., 0O O CN i N J) � �_ 1J I J'S.. i N9 • }' • ��11 * r o r LU 3 v- i�- `16 FEET o ritgam co o z r 2 )400114014 4 -LL r , Q a O o % 4tqp in4 M,.84 VVI££°l8 Z:\Active Projects\O\OIL WELL RD\DWG\GIS\2018-07-11 OW GMPA-EXHIBIT U.mxd I III 35TH AVE NE I W� � E S CR 858 OIL'WELL ROAD AZ 31ST AVE NE r LEGEND ®OWCOMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT.ILELL 20.16 ACRES 7'1 Parcels SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2018), 0 500 1, COLLIER COUNTY PAO _T DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. OIL WELL COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT DE4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN FUTURE DAVIDSON NAPLES, FL 34104 LAND USE MAP ENGINEERIN< PHONE: 239-434-6060 EXHIBIT U: SUBDISTRICT MAP DE Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting DAVIDSON www.davidsonen ineerin com ENGINEERING g• g• MEMORANDUM April 24, 2019 TO: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Tim Finn,AICP, Principal Planner FROM: Davidson Engineering Planning Dept. RE: Oil Well Community Facilities PUD (PUDZ- PL201-0002898) Oil Well Community Facilities Subdistrict PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Tuesday, April 16, 2019, 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: • Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Anna Ritenour, Davidson Engineering • Sue Faulkner, Collier County • Ray Bellows, Collier County Jessica Harrelson started the meeting at 5:30 p.m. and used a PowerPoint presentation, reviewing the proposed Planned Unit Development and Growth Management Plan Amendment being requested. The PowerPoint presentation is attached hereto for reference. ***Please note, meeting begins 10 minutes and 45 seconds into audio recording. *** Following the PowerPoint presentation, the following concerns were stated, and questions were asked: 1. When are you planning to go to an open meeting with the County for this requested change? Jessica responded that hearings will be scheduled once Staff approves the petitions and that mailed notifications would be sent with those dates. 2. Are we getting notified by regular mail or certified mail? Attendee also stated he was not notified by Collier County of a separate zoning project (FYI— attendee was referring to the Emmanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church PUD/Mission Subdistrict). He also stated he is 5 buildings down from the proposed Oil Well project and was not notified of the NIM. Jessica responded that the County sends out the notifications containing the hearing dates and an ad is also published in the paper. She also offered to email the hearing date to the attendee if he left his email address. (Note: attendee left the meeting prior to Jessica obtaining his information.) 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 P:(941)309-5180 DE DAVIDSON ENGINEERING 3. Do you realize there is a 50-acre development going in across Oil Well Road as well as a property that is about 5 properties "down" from the subject project? Jessica responded that a market study was prepared and took into consideration all surrounding commercial development approvals. 4. Can you briefly explain the wall that will be going in? Will it be a concrete wall? Jessica responded that the code requires a 6-8'wall along the south, east and west property boundaries, and that deviations from this requirement are not being requested, that the wall can be pre-cast and no chain-link fences allowed. Jessica also mentioned hand-outs were available with the buffer and wall information. 5. What exactly are the plans you want to put in? And can you get this information on the website? Is there anything set in stone right now? (Attendee came in late to meeting) Jessica responded that all the information is available on the County's website and offered to send attendees any information they would like review. Jessica went back to through the PowerPoint presentation to review the list of uses being requested. Jessica also stated the development would be limited by the number of am and pm peak hour trips& she also reviewed the limitations on each use being requested. 6. Is there an intent at this time? I find it hard to believe that an engineering firm would go through all this trouble without having an idea of what they are actually going to do. Jessica responded that the developer is very interested in first opening a day care center and equestrian riding academy and that these were the two main focuses for the development right now. 7. #6 in the permitted uses is a catch-all? Jessica responded that any other use not listed in the PUD document would require a hearing process and NIM to get approved, and the County would have to deem the use comparable and compatible. 8. Once the rezone is approved is it just that one property? Jessica responded that it is just the subject property that would be rezoned and is 20.16-acres (two separate parcels). 9. What water reclamation is being included in the uses? Jessica responded that the water and wastewater facilities are listed as accessory uses to allow well/septic to accommodate development. 10. So, you are not planning on tying into the new water service? Jessica responded not at this time and the site had not been engineered to determine if it is even possible. 11. What is the purpose of having a Golden Gate Master Plan to begin with if you can just amend it whenever you want to? People buy and build knowing what the plan is and you amend it. DE DAVIDSON ENGINEERING Jessica responded that has the County evolves and changes that the plan can be amended directly by the County or at the request of a private developer and that it must be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Conversation amongst attendees occurred at this time about development,traffic, etc. 12. Attendee began asking about permitted uses. Made comments about traffic and failing roads. Jessica responded that there is a list of uses being requested and it does not necessarily mean that all the uses would be developed. Jessica also mentioned the Oil Well Road/ Randall Blvd Corridor Study was being conducted by the County to help alleviate any traffic congestion, etc. Conversation and general comments amongst attendees occurred. 13. Attendee requested information on the hearing process. Jessica explained a total of 4 hearings would be required(2 transmittal hearings and 2 adoption hearings). 14. Where are the owners right now? Jessica stated one of the owners was present and the other two were not in attendance. (Individual property owners). 15. Where are they going to move? Jessica responded, "not sure". 16. When do you expect the first Planning Commission meeting? Jessica responded that Staff approval was expected in about 60-days and hearings would then be scheduled, and it could be early Fall. 17. What is the sign-in sheet for? Will this be served as a mailing list? Jessica responded that it goes to the County for their records. Ray Bellows &Sue Faulkner addressed the attendees. End of memo. AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a Planned Unit Development Rezone and 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 \1/411AkIN- f } v (Signature of Applicant) State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this 22 day of April 2019 by Jessica Harrelson , who is personally known to me. ,tiM"*., TOCIA HAWN ;.: :4 MY COMMISSION#FF 217538 �'•.�� a EXPIRES:J7, R„54 Bonded Thnj Notary Publiculy UndNwriters2019 (Signature of Notary Public) _ (Notary Seal) Tocia Hamlin Printed Name of Notary Planned Unit Development Rezone (PL20170002898) Growth Management Plan Amendment (PL20170002897) � 4 � ? apfrLi Battu !:..-NeWS NaplesNews.com Published Daily Naples,FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida;that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed.Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na- ples, in said Collier County, Florida,and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida,for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.# DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC 2258551 INFORMATION MEETING . rub Dates April 1, 2019 / 1tLL0Ya4 (Sign ture of affiant) A;;;• KAROLEKANGAS 4 r: Notary Pubs-State of Florida Sworn to and subscribed before me Commission•GG126041 T .� °j'• My Comm.Expires Jul 29,2021 his April 04, 2019 g ,, : eonaetMo.g6tuuorsalrarsyA,� AIMPRIPirmrawmpup qopAera (Signature of affiant) IMP' 1111 wland did to Josephson Rowland is charged with kidnapping WEEK! W W W w w • • W W W Naples (239) 263- she got into his black and murder,Holbrook said.He was be- Also in Bonita Springs )ala in Columbia's Five ing held in the Richland County jail. It 26701 S Tamiami Golden 3580 N,TClmial iinment district around wasn't known if he had a lawyer. 239-949-4969 Gate I N0 10164567 1 Parkway ay until her body was Rowland decided not to appear at a •• •• ods off a dirt road in Clar- hearing in jail Sunday. The judge al- ab� 55 miles away. lowed Josephson's mother to speak, Worry About Growing lac`,aerous wounds to The State newspaper reported. k, face, upper body, leg Marci Josephson said her daughter ,rding to arrest warrants was planning to go to law school after s ay by the State Law En- graduating in May and described her as 1 t,. Chronic Health Condition vision. The documents "bubbly,loving,kind and full of life." it was used to attack her. "Unlike him, Samantha had love unique legal, financial blood was found in the within her heart and purpose in her ide Rowland's car along life,"Marci Josephson said. 4 personal care advocacy p phone, bleach, window Safety advocates urged college stu- .eaning wipes, Holbrook dents to match the vehicle color and Please join us for a CompllmE model,the license tag number,and theti`' • a bad scene," the police photo of their ride-share drivers before `y Workshop on Seek' sews conference late Sat- getting in a vehicle and make the driver say their names to them before they in- Good Care Without Going fund Josephson's body troduce themselves. Wednesday, April 3rd, 2019 10:( on just hours after it was "She simply,mistakenly,got into the p lite being left in an area car thinking it was an Uber ride," Hol- difficult to get to unless brook said. Reserve at 239.434.8557. Limiter i to get there," Holbrook South Carolina Gov. Henry McMas- Light refreshments will be server ter and his wife,Peggy,asked on a mes- '" as recently lived in the sage on Twitter for prayers for Joseph- son's family. .fter Josephson was kid- "Peggy and I are devastated and , 1_ umbia police officer no- crushed over the Josephson family los- ' I 1 r BURZYNSKI ELDER Chevrolet Impala about ing their beautiful daughter Samantha. / Helping Seniors Find,Access and Pay for their Life Care )m the Five Points bars She was one of the brightest young - Jill Burzynski www.burzynskilaw.com ion was kidnapped. The stars,"McMaster wrote. Daniel Burzynski 1124 Goodlette Road, Naples, FL 34102 •239-4 ND-GC10147419-01 •A• BORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING nvited to attend a Neighborhood Information Meeting, held by Davidson lc., representing property owners Bonnie Walsh, Candice Jolly and Neil 16, 2019 at 5:30 p.m.at the Collier County Library-Estates Branch, located We Fee 1 Gate Blvd.W., Naples, FL 34120. Fci m i operty is located on the south side of Oil Well Road,approximately 3/4 miles ' ades Boulevard in Section 18, Township 48 South, Range 28 East, Collier ' ' ; , 3,consisting of 20.16±acres. •-'` 'rr . , H i l ' ' Li '350)4k NE I' 1 1 111 , .f, PROJECT - - LOCATION "Or( ' ... . . — oN was an -� �s 4NA lt — 1 ilia,-7 ill ill ,,„ 11.1. 31stAVENE " cr _ 0 . L7 Iy 0 i l.1 III ` ! ' 1 >wners are petitioning Collier County for the following: Development Rezone(PL20170002898): requesting to amend Ordinance .- - P iprehensive zoning regulations by amending the zoning maps by rezoning (a 'operty from Estates (E) zoning district to Community Facility Planned DE DAVIDSON Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting ENGINEERING CELEBRATING 20 YEARS www.davidsonengineering.com March 27, 2019 Dear Property Owner, The public is invited to attend a Neighborhood Information Meeting, held by Davidson Engineering, Inc., representing property owners Bonnie Walsh, Candice Jolly and Neil Elliott on: Tuesday,April 16, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County Library-Estates Branch, located at 1266 Golden Gate Blvd. W., Naples, FL 34120. The subject property is located on the south side of Oil Well Road, approximately% miles west of Everglades Boulevard in Section 18,Township 48 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 20.16±acres. The property owners are petitioning Collier County for the following: 1. Planned Unit Development Rezone (PL20170002898): Request to amend Ordinance No. 04-41, comprehensive zoning regulations by amending the zoning maps by rezoning the subject property from Estates (E) zoning district to Community Facility Planned Unit Development (CFPUD) zoning district to allow for certain permitted uses including, but not limited to,a K-12 charter school for up to 775 students, day care for up to 150 students, 200-unit assisted living facility or continuing care residential. Other community facility uses are included in the proposed development along with a limiting maximum of allowable traffic generation and other development standards. 2. Growth Management Plan Amendment (PL20170002897): Request to amend Policy 1.1.2 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to include the creation of the"Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict" and all corresponding text to provide consistency with the proposed CFPUD document; and to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map Series by adding the "Oil Well Road Community Facilities Subdistrict". Business and property owners, residents and visitors are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owner/developer and Collier County staff. If you are unable to attend this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone or e-mail: Jessica Harrelson Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email:jessica@davidsonengineering.com 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 •Naples,FL 34104 • P:(239)434.6060 • F:(239)434-6084 1990 Main Street • Suite 750 • Sarasota,FL 34236 • P:(941)309-5180 1 of 3 11yDC�A9 R o FA' J �� 11 35thAvE NE L PROJECT LOCATION SA LWJROL so,— t ______, , P z- .– "oil 31st AVE NE -1 hl -1 +6 V L 2 of 3 MATLIN, LUZ VEGA, PABLO C MOJENA, NORA M 17768 NW 62ND AVE 2325 OIL WELL RD 2330 35TH AVE NE ALACHUA, FL 32615---7246 NAPLES, FL 34120---7537 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 CASTILLO,WILFREDO PARMAR, GURDIP S& GURDEV K POPA,JOHN 2390 35TH AVE NE 1464 SUTTER BUTTES ST 1151 JUNIPER AVE NAPLES, FL 34120---7503 CHULA VISTA, CA 91913---0000 AKRON, OH 44310---1246 KIBRIA FAMILY TRUST ILAGAN, EMILIANO & LOLITA POWERS, WALTER&GERALDINE 5741 GOLDEN OAKS LN 6906 LA MIRADA DR 330 EAKER PL NAPLES, FL 34119---1219 HOUSTON,TX 77083---2439 DES PLAINES, IL 60016---6037 BELLAMIA PROPERTIES INC ARIAS DEOLIVARES, EVANGELINA GONZALEZ,ZUZEL 3575 BONITA BEACH RD STE 101 2430 35TH AVE NE ANTONIA R GARCIA LOZANO BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---1403 2440 35TH AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NUNEZ,JORDAN J MENEJIAS, MARCELO CACHO, DANILO C&CATHERINE L NUNEZ,JUAN J=&VIVIAN MARICELA MENEJIAS LORENZO 2485 OIL WELL RD 2480 35TH AVE NE 2460 35TH AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---1472 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---1403 WALSH, BONNIE LJOLLY ALVAREZ,CARLOS GODOY,ALAN &CINDY 2400 OIL WELL RD 211 SW 41ST AVE 2540 35TH AVE N E NAPLES, FL 34120---1471 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---1748 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 GOODY,ALAN GODOY,ALEXIS&TAYME MOONSAMMY,STACEY N 2540 35TH AVE NE 2540 35TH AVE NE 6124 FUNSTON ST NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---1473 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33023---0000 GARCIA, MARIO LINK,CHRISTOPHER& KATHERINE JOLLY, CANDICE M 5730 W 14TH AVE 1777 BIRDIE DR NEIL P ELLIOTT HIALEAH, FL 33012---2217 NAPLES, FL 34120---0541 2560 OIL WELL RD NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 TALBOTT II,TIMOTHY MILLER BROCK, DEVIN & PAULA MUSLIMANI, RAY 2626 OIL WELL RD 644 94TH AVE N PO BOX 110127 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34108---2447 NAPLES, FL 34108---0103 RENA LOU WILSON GUZMELI, BARBARA RODRIGUEZ,ABRAHAM E 6035 NORTH WATERBURY ROAD 2618 35TH AVE NE VALERIE MAGILEWSKI DES MOINES, IA 50312---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---1405 2670 35TH AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 CUBAS, LUIS GUILLERMO PEREZ, HENRY SANTOS, CHRISTOPHER A YOLANDA CORTIJO CUBAS 2042 MANDARIN LN 2670 OIL WELL RD 17011 N BAY RD APT 801 NAPLES, FL 34120---4554 NAPLES, FL 34120---4529 ANY ISLES BEAC, FL 33160---3633 BAKER, MICHAEL&JULIE ROBERTS, MARK EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL 2680 OIL WELL RD 2660 OIL WELL RD LUTHERAN CHURCH NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 777 MOORING LINE DR NAPLES, FL 34102---4715 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN BT INVESTMENTS 01 LLC ORTEGA, HECTOR F CHURCH OF NAPLES INC 2400 OIL WELL RD 2720 35TH AVE NE 777 MOORING LINE DR NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0441 NAPLES, FL 34102---4715 OBERLIES, DEBORAH L HECTOR G LINARES TRUST SMITH,JOHN R 2730 35TH AVE NE 3261 2ND AVE SE KRISTEL RABORN NAPLES, FL 34120---0441 NAPLES, FL 34117---3764 2775 OIL WELL RD NAPLES, FL 34120---4454 JUANITA RODRIGUEZ FMLY TRUST UPADHYAYA DR, NARENDA MILLER,AMY 17400 SW 63RD MNR MAYURI UPADHYAYA COLLEEN BIBER SOUTHWEST RANCHE, FL 33331--- 11067 GARDEN RIDGE CT 2345 31ST AVE NE 1731 DAVIE, FL 33328---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0443 GORDON SR, STEVEN J & ROBIN L SIEGMUND JR, C W RODRIGUEZ, CAMILO 2365 31ST AVE NE PO BOX AH 2385 31ST AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0443 SPARKS, NV 89432---8633 NAPLES, FL 34120---0443 JACOBS, RONNIE L& DEBRA J GG6 NAPLES LLC RODRIGUEZ, FRANCISCO 1013 VANSCOY DR 3178 W PEMBROKE RD 2390 31ST AVE NE GILLETTE, WY 82718---0000 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---2017 NAPLES, FL 34120---2920 RUZ, DANIEL R& DULCE M SULLIVAN, CORNELIUS CRUZ,JUAN 2380 31ST AVE NE 2440 31ST AVE NE 560 E 58TH ST NAPLES, FL 34120---2920 NAPLES, FL 34120---0442 HIALEAH, FL 33013---1315 MOODY, ERIC EQUITY TRUST DIAZ, LUCY 2404 31ST AVE NE %SERGE DE CESARE JESUS ESTRADA NAPLES, FL 34120---0442 PO BOX 1409 3929 SW 60TH AVE ELYRIA, OH 44036---1409 MIAMI, FL 33155---5016 D R HORTON INC ESQUILIN, FELIPE A STANDEN, DAVID &VICKI 10541 BEN C PRATT NIVEA DE JESUS TORRES 2405 31ST AVE NE SIX MILE CYPRESS PKWY#100 2435 31ST AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---2929 FORT MYERS, FL 33966---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 MAGUR,GEORGE P, MARILYN A MAGUR MACIER,JERRY D & MARIE H CARRUBBA, GENEVIEVE MILDRED ** EDWARD G MAGURANN MARI 2495 31ST AVE NE C/O JOSEPH L. CARRUBBA POA MAGUR833 ODELL AVE NAPLES, FL 34120---2929 34 MASON ST ENDICOTT, NY 13760---1733 PEPPERELL, MA 01463---1216 MOREDA, EDUARDO GLORIA ESTHER CRUZ TRUST SIMMONS, LEE S LEIDA MOREDA 600 BILTMORE WAY APT 709 CHERI L WEEKS 5949 W 21ST CT CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---7531 11740 GARFIELD ST HIALEAH, FL 33016---2634 THORNTON, CO 80233---0000 GARCIA, DIANA C BURTON, RAE ANN BICKNELL, BENJAMIN MASON 2480 31ST AVE NE 2530 31ST AVE NE 2540 31ST AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0435 NAPLES, FL 34120---0435 WOOD, MICHAEL M & LAURA N POLYS,JASON K HINES, MICHAEL&TAMARA 2520 31ST AVE NE 2550 31ST AVE NE 2525 31ST AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---0435 NAPLES, FL 34120---0456 OGDEN, MARGARET M JOSEPH, BOBBY MONTANO, ROSS M E CANEDO 11 N HONEYMAN RD 2595 31ST AVE NE DANIELA PERROGON CANEDO WHITE HSE STA, NJ 08889---3635 NAPLES, FL 34120---0456 1210 20TH AVE NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 DOGER, PEDRO& MAYRA JOHNSON, GARY E HAM, EMILIO A& EDA E 1441 SW 139TH AVE 2640 31ST AVE NE 12221 SW 24TH TER MIAMI, FL 33184---2768 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 MIAMI, FL 33175---7308 KIRNON,ANNA LOUISE SELVA, CELESTE V LAURORE, KENOL&SANDY ANTOINE ALDRIC KIRNON HENRY B SELVA JR 2680 31ST AVE NE 2685 31ST AVE NE PO BOX 830669 NAPLES, FL 34120---2921 NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 MIAMI, FL 33283---0000 HUTCHINSON ET ALS, LARRY W ERDOS TR,THELMA M FERRERA, HUMBERTO 1331 AUGUSTINE DR 1480 FORD BLVD 2731 31ST AVE NE THE VILLAGES, FL 32159---8536 LINCOLN, MI 48146---0000 NAPLES, FL 34120---4477 AZUA, ROGELIO& MAGDA ELENA PADILLA,JAIME L WILLIAMS, MICHAEL C 2725 31ST AVE NE 3413 TISDALE DR 3291 NW 42ND ST NAPLES, FL 34120---0000 LEXINGTON, KY 40503---4234 FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33309---4224 Michael Ramsey, President Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Golden Gate Estates Area Civic GGEACA Association Association 2631 4th Street NW PO Box 990596 100 13th Street SW Naples, FL 34120 Naples, FL 34116 Naples, FL 34117 ) .....3 ..„5, LA -1„ N- 3� 9 31 Z° J `� a N ' pw <. `1 1 s �`` .OjJ c ; v w l /3›:,0-- NI, " i & c? • (< ' 0 N1','; I 14.4 t 4'5 '.4@ 3 _ - t ,Q ,,, 1-- _) r t ._ $. .. ki `-k) No 4 .,K, v , „ ., N,.. .- \,..`- -•• • f,.. .., 14,.._) , t,„ , _...... 1 - %) - ,,‘ t , c_ c. ., . k 14, , ) -. - -?_ 1. \,r.) 1: (.5 i . , N -, t 0 ,3 t(: C) '4. = 3 <1 c. kri -8 '�: jo 0 C cl c� r' v Q �� At �� ` N 03 K CC ,s 51,, ,4 : ,_v_1) c jI a z `) a-1 N M Ln lD 1•-• 00 Ql O r•1 N M G}' U1 lD h CTI O r•1 i-I e-I r•1 e-1 r•i `-I r1 I-I N EXHIBIT B Otter County Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper IELLIMIZRUIZ GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP ;_=— u m▪-- ilI - I 1 g / �rA ti „••. _ • A f a>e ene I ane 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 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 Co ier County Figure 12: Golden Gate City Planned Transportation Improvements .21 Figure 13: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Distribution of Residential Development...26 Figure 14: Golden Gate Western Estates Distribution of Residential Development..27 Figure 15: Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Study Area 28 Figure 16: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Neighborhood Centers 30 Figure 17: Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard 31 Figure 18: Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface 32 Figure 19: Area 1 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 33 Figure 20: Area 2 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 34 Figure 21: Area 3 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional Uses 35 Figure 22: Long Range Transportation Plan Highway Cost Feasible Plan 42 Figure 23: Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment 43 Figure 24: Long Range Transportation Plan New Bridges 44 Figure 25: North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project 52 Figure 26: Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area 53 Figure 27: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Non-Conforming Lots 55 Figure 28: Golden Gate Western Estates Non-Conforming Lots 56 List of Tables Table 1: Watershed Management Plan Initiatives 60 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 3 of 220 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 ...... 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 I 1 Y D D 1 LEE COUNTY UNE _----i Q m N,A..•••• c)3, A WIGGINS ASS RD . OIL'NE.L RD Yl OIL WELLRO IIEDI AVE N 1 y` IUROXA.EE RD BLV RANDAL D , m , = ,I O NI 2 O VANOBRBAT BEACH RDr 4 I $i <- 3 tMN i - r Gg MTMM WENOAttsow GOLDEN GATE SLwE °> ISEAGATE DR vINEP"RD 3 m _ < 446106 I o U 1El $ 4 m F 0 0 m MIENO 3 Al �n C 2 }Q( Jam'�y' W � EN ATE RKY F'/� �, N 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 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 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 and June 2003 and proposed amendments to the Board for consideration in two phases. The stated goal of this restudy was to guide future decision making in a manner that balances the residents' need for basic services with natural resource and preservation concerns. Importantly, many of the topics heading todays restudy were closely reviewed by the Committee: commercial uses, conditional uses, rural character and transportation. Subsequently, amendments to the GGAMP were adopted in 2003 and 2004, reflecting community vision for the future of the area. Since the 1990's, the State of Florida had been purchasing parcels in the South Golden Gate Estates/NRPA area. Under the Florida Forever and Figure 2 Save our Everglades Golden Gate Estates / d 1,0101.11.0 RDA, programs, Picayune Strand South Blocks State Park was envisioned and pursued, along with significant restoration — - OILWF..I,l. RSI-Ail activity. The acquisition .. i 44 101.\Lit'.11050 process was completed - l KA.DML BM LCVARD around 2006. Since then, - _ -� IANOFHNIIJr miles of roadway and canals BEACHROAD Z 29 ,,o1 D. IN'rE t:BDODLRT.\RD ❑ have been recontoured and ,� YINR[VW Ill j ' 1 NIIITi Rl.Ili . three large pump stations13 and levies installed, with .. e `. the aim of rehydration to f ""T r:, ; i restore natural sheetflow F. = 1,.1JJ997•47,.-,399 II for the benefit of wetlands, ..- DAVIS ROL LEVAND' .. S.R.84 aquifers and estuaries, - under the direction of South Florida Water � Golden Gate Estates ► 7. 'South Blocks' — Management District and Ayr the Army Corps of / ____y Engineers. Accordingly, as shown in green on Figure 2, , approximately 39,000 acres i that comprised the "south = blocks" are no longer part O 1 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 8 of 220 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 IMMDIWLEE RD The rural Estates PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES f % h017-7 u�1tiyltl retains the most "rural" PARCELS WITH STRUCTURES ' I'i grjll(t ; character of the three fir ' ' �' ,_ areas, given its size and residential distribution. _ i ` Because of the __ _ development pattern and changes in xMu� � ____� condition over the past RAMpua BIM) 5 decades, flooding, *4,40..LEEPD — �, ri wildfire and wildlife conditions play a more 8 E i important role in r sr VANDERBILT BEACH RD ----- — - - eastern Estates 1 4€RGAT4.L.-,,, residents' lives as — compared to the urban F area. �r��Q I I _ _ ^ r — — P _ _I 1 Gn EEV e4.,D 1 r� As of 2016, the rural Estates was nearly 50% Fri-4L I built out, as shown in j Figure 3, with a higher concentration of y`D N dwelling units located d i / 0 0.5 1 2 3 nearest the urban area. g I Miles The population / j/ projection for 2016 was Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 9 of 220 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 GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES including areas within (WEST OF CR 951) the Horsepen Strand --` flowway. 11 IMMOKALE-ESR—D—�I 1- ll' IM Meanwhile, the pace Asil 1111 II Legend of development - _ DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.2.691) remains high in the ■ I11-I Ii lii VACANT RESIDENTIAL(APPROX 430) eastern Estates. In I fact, building permits :BEACH RD '� II issued in this area -11 Mir 11 • increased from 273 to Y _ 408 year to year, as11ij , I measured second � r 1 GOLDEN GATE BLVD NI quarter, 2016 to 2017. i _ IIi I< In contrast to the l 1 I I I I . . n i F rural, eastern Estates, I I I I v; ` I II 7j the western Estates is �I I ' !1 1� o more associated with �u i I I I , $- I I _ the urban area, °� PA_ 1,i. 1j i. '1 in although large lots o II _tom predominate. This 0 II relatively smaller area - 1 I is in closer proximity i 11 _ r_ . to goods, services and _ ! —= I job opportunities. GOLD` "..j 1 'yL1l.� ...A6 1 _ ■ NI E. 1t ! ■ 1 Because of its s I `No, slr location, it is closer to �` A build-out with 86% of the lots developed, leaving only 14%vacant as of 2016. Figure 4 illustrates the number of residential parcels developed and the number of parcels vacant. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 10 of 220 Golden Gate City is at the heart of the GGAMP. As illustrated on Figure 5, the City comprises a denser population in close proximity to a mix of uses which include commercial, office, schools and parks. Although some canals create impediments, and some infrastructure needs improvement, the City is well connected to support a more walkable and bikeable community. Creating a vibrant, walkable community has been identified as a top priority by its residents. Figure 5 c.a .ur ma cGOLDEN GATE CITY AREA A 1 •. . . p ,�. I • � yy q .fd--� ya . �.. :;J.-v.4.. Tn.;• . .- a✓, . �•/Y a_.,.,, It �.� L .. ,••.�... Y *Y a1' 1 ., ± .1'. ij Y m �• {jam 1 v r t' ..,..•. ,• .. , ` '. y, ^I .`. meg. ft.' r a. ' ' V • I , s4. .a , ;1' :t o'M m t" j 4 .1,4e- F I l •k �Ya ,.,-k.---,..., 1' It, ". .{q, •' (Li,, i ~• i Q i. 9 t4St;r� r APS f =S- ..0 ,V _ i' .1' .i. 4'4 r`ati*J -'... -tio. ''';')/ 40‘7. ''4400$A ., - '7' '' ‘' .,;..i ' C .. .- . '.- ;if%V, ','°..v A A ' ..;.,..,.` .. 1Floi ' .1 1\W:111 ! 7:;;414--.414.) '''• ri i • /".%,.4re ,,, • A 4' :. 3 ,..,,,,:„,,, .. ... V.' ...'" .11 1 • • t2r7Frrist- }• I. 04 'Mir '.: ' ..�. �' „,: cid. tp. a' ' rA-r-.. *, ..• 1 JE' a h' aft' "':A` - . �j��,� {w'{" ;ry �T YI" •` ?`` rte'yt y rge,A s-'Vt-',4.Fr:*:- C 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 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 aall Vacant Parcels !i`:....' •- l'•7:27:-1---",'''.,_ _ Y ' Golden Gate Master Plan z_.f.1''..•-•;*" y,iw.. ' i 3 •.; ' ''''• !. '• gr GG Urban Infill Commercial a -_•41 - _' . L&..'_-..ti.'.:LI'.' ' r y- a -y " ` iRYF. •,GREENBLVD',• ! ._e b • - nActivity Center �' t_ ,'i'ti IUi! Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrictt} -• ;.� *` _ Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict • t !vgit .... .,11:4'::. 11i GG Parkway Professional Office . • (,"�; 'r . Commercial Subdistrict l' 'Y. ., ' A: •.'I.•%,:.:*� •tom Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict - .• ii, F...., ....•.... , , ,.... g. 6 . . . , , , .. . ... .w. . 1 • •c. •0 . ''I.• Y PR I `� ‘411''V -� ,i' _' GOLDENiGA-TE PKY., ...ea. . '•.e E ilk , - ''''''{{{''' � ' _ (i0. ! ‘:',.,._,.:..,. •1 i . •1 } r7+ � --",;' ,41,;....-: 1 ,; , .1` ' 1t`� 11 � isli. -41 1s �'�N.�iw {4.4._} .6,V. �,� �, •'C' X93 !:,. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 12 of 220 Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City, an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, the restudy effort included public outreach and planning analysis along these three geographic lines. This Section provides information reflective of the unique conditions of Golden Gate City and the Estates. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in common and are discussed in this Section under the same Golden Gate Estates heading. Where differences exist, they are described. The focus areas of complementary land use and economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship are addressed under both Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy public outreach process included extensive public engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. Appendix A includes the public workshop summaries, polling and survey results, and other communications from stakeholders. The public workshops for both _ Golden Gate City and the western • and eastern Estates kicked-off with a visioning process. The intent was to determine if any of the community 0.0t ' • ti 001- values had changed. The visioning , liP process lead to each community -11 -Av - ; developing their own vision statements. These community- �'_ w ./ ` -�... defined vision statements should _ provide guidance for implementing planning goals, objectives and I, 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 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 —TSchools j Golden Gate Master Plan GREEN BLVD GG Urban Infill Commercial -Activity Center Illit; Collier BLVD Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict GG Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict j Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict 0 Z > ca it, m -1 > 4 w I— 4 W 4 m J W 4 J 0 I— 4 z Q 1 GOLDEN GATE PKY Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 14 of 220 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 �R x. GREEN BLVD _ -- .. � ` �� 4 Legend f..,.,. ,w•... 3 -�.- _ �.. --Single Family — 11.1,11' d ' n 'z J t (4,213 Units) 0i ► m" 1 "'''i 4 : r Multi-family 1 1 r--- -(3,874 Units) F' ',.: , iY ' _ / ' " i (=Golden Gate City Tom ` y : W e ,r�a z,,_ C0 I Tit- 411 ,, e r _I . . —11 .1 in Zis, i < r3 a 1L1_ . 1 ,,,_ ....„„ 4 ' :* r4 !"SN�wgF. -_r we wv � I r ...,0. I TS:0 '''' . te 11:: '' lel I \ ,' i y %,..._1 GOLDEN GATE PKY .„, . 4 tor Ifili AL., �' I _ yw�A-- 1 1, ...: Irmo!! i.T i • MI13111- ,.[FL K _ 1. �� _ _. -. V. ...aTie UM" laillAir–.6. "IMill . •"l I Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 15 of 220 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 greater certainty that the park is well connected into the Activity Center and a focal point for community celebrations. Figure 9 PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE CITY AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP Legend GREEN BLVD Category Addition MO Golden Gate Urban Infill Commercial ElCollier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Goden Gate Dowtown Center Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict Urban Residential noActivity Center Addition Addition O r- re F- m N Addition GOLDEN GATE PKY There are two policies in the current GGAMP that call for community-planning and neighborhood- based planning programs, however, these policies have not been implemented. During the public workshops, residents expressed a clear willingness to participate in the planning process for their community. When asked, "would you be willing to participate in community-based planning program?", the majority of workshop participants were willing to engage in such a program. Continued community participation will be needed for future planning efforts such as redevelopment, urban design themes, development standards, and the creation of branding and marketing materials. To best facilitate community and neighborhood-based planning programs Collier County staff should engaged with and support the established Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Municipal Services Taxing District (MSTU), utilizing these established groups to involve residents in future planning efforts. Working with these associations builds cohesion, recognition and support for Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 17 of 220 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 _�r.te� a •' • d.e v c I0 pan:ein t;F. R e ra a w,i.l ;Ar e,i,; B'o u n d a +1` , {i ;l��' s '44'4>i {`j`�_ ' 1611. 40..44 _ ...- - -- : , - . _ . _ . ., . , . V.1 . ... 11 t .. . - $ , .. ,... ),,,,,, .- -07.e1.2.,.. , ,-, , .,..t . -n,-- , :,I„, ..„,... .. ., . .. ,.. -„, ,,,,,,,„, ...,., ? Z''' ' .. '' ' : ': ' tw.-. --"tt4C „„, ' Is , 19... ..... ',.., ,. b • E -.2 i . „': '`‘ ._i' ), : .7,7...,. ... s ze-.',..% . 4 1� y . J. f SF`J ; .,....• v....". ... . t~:•s e^ R Mi XI '' 4 ..- .-., ..... ._ ., -.,,,,„ . - q. , , ti ip, . : , ''' ''''Ps i ..,_. _ ... .. ,,, >i 'T' • 1 ,,., . .,...,.. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 18 of 220 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 ;. r ,� , - I! • ,,111 areas within the Activity -?.*4 •,; ,,:°., Center do not interconnect or I i . .-,v,rr' L � N,� �� .� relate to one another. They lij, , • were clearly developed y ir _' • _- —hi `' . separately without a vision or °"'4 " • " c consideration for the whole. ., This is a shortcomingof the full ,t �?� '' t. • . �' potential of this Activity ;Y Center. Moreover, the Activity .'N y . • 3 i Center plazas were developed , '4�. ti *'f ,�' : SAI. .,4 in an auto-oriented pattern i•.• , .p- + •$ ''•, with access and circulation 1' '� ,•, favoring the automobile. This ,►�" �' ,�k i 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 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 CRAB, 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 CRAB. 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 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 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 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 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 . _ DPECIAL FEATURE* TRANSPORTATION FEATURE* r. r Svu.nf• [Among S4wM. . . #>I T. . : ' !i1 ,K Station. FJwOng PMa SOWMdM 1 • j ; ,.,,. t. #• t...•g e•.l.» T- V r e . v.nr...�. F.mn9 Bus Routes r ... M• rr ` _ . • g- 1. 1310 ■ L°`""' III t q.el•A 61...Rauh, �• • • r ~4 '+' ` . ,' PINE RIDGE RD . :, 4 Panned Perks . ` iS.-'w) 's' ',`-1 i: ^11 .yam 4 Future Tr.n•,P...K,i.f. (C- 1 '0 • • 'I'• YY 1111 Shnne Slxrona 0 _ . • "I• Fu ST inert 7r•m4r 5:.. Y 1 P "�' -. 'l • .,t .y ► t_iliOST • :. 1.. f!li�i -t I• s '' i el S • - -. t' i „ 'tr3"q'•"x --•. ,v 316" I „.6'. lit. I- +. ,t.jr . ` ' __ '^ ' 0,0 ) et I, IiREFN kil.%'0' ". •- •.e a ;,rr v+�—-, •"'•. •, . .'" .' v _ . � ...,-,1,34.;:--7 t •.,11 � i . ..1: .2..1-•1' 1 ''y- t-7 •-•.-- `} Q'A•'' w'rri3.c1 5'a 1• •V fii "t4. / Tl :,.41' . tC . Pir 4- 1 ; .` 7' #S r . ,g ' 1.-3.q TTTT 1) • '1'' pry., 't �� ; - 4 . . ,• � t"� 'O• -tr , , -44"-Z-4., r- Akt.l ti.T P _ . KP-44 '!% • !lie' 'i - to �` t • f ..'' . •;-1 .1. }e..-' l'u:•..04 •1, R 4 ''• 1 i r_ 11 r; �r' •�'' , 7,`' 4 1 • • a iVio•-.:- f..-”•, ra,...rr. ' 1 -"�•�. •0 ., ,� „F,..PS 1 • 1 • / • ' T3•..Corona^o PKWY r".,_.�.".;-"K yTr .... .• +�. "{. ♦ -' • V - r "''�- '�,►{ i. �j 4 ' '45.4 ; . - ' s•. 'Ott•Pr- 'C,S'..',., • • r ,,-4 ' . • „0-rso;t7c4. A , , rr -1 h • • L • 'fes`•. 1 03 :4 Z ').. .A ., 1 r..1r,.�t . F:G U A :7:. a .�d • ...11 . ,• 'ti' tt • - .., .....s -T �'- . .: -. c J;p: t c_,cr•,. >< •r 4 . •!"C _ •-011 •"".. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 24 of 220 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 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 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 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 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 Parcels with Structures:Approx.11,296 build out. In this area, 86%of Parcels without Structures:Approx. 12,512 the parcels have been Legend developed, leaving only 430 STRUCTURE vacant parcels in this much PARCELS WITHOUT STRUCTURES !:f ` ` 'rei smaller portion of Golden PARCELS WITH STRUCTURES Gate Estates. I -- 1' I -.4. , 1 An analysis of building ri ' r" activity in Golden Gate �_R�, , Estates suggests that !I aro „ .. ori, I' MOON, development is currently 1-- T- accelerating. When r' comparing annual totals as — of second quarter, 2017 to i second quarter, 2016, permit r--- ' -' -_-----„0 "`"``"--` • applications rose from 273 to i 408, an increase of almost ~ .J 50%. Taken together, 681 7 7. 1 I 1 t. housing starts over this 2- 0 "" year period suggests I economic vigor in a post —� ! high foreclosure market. H %// ' 'z,-;- ,/' i '-�--....Mlles Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 29 of 220 Figure 14 During public outreach, residents GOLDEN GATE URBAN ESTATES (WEST OF CR 951) and stakeholders did not advocate any major changes in --� IMMO+wLEERD l residential land use. Most i ), �i�}iLegend individuals polled preferred to = �� mi DEVELOPED RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.2.691) maintain a low density residential 1 a1111_11 VACANT RESIDENTIAL(APPROX.430) • environment with few changes. , + )r In fact, the Golden Gate Estates VANDERBI BEACH RD .:1I 1[+ Area Civic Association (GGEACA) l,aPr )i+ NI 6) I I voiced the preference for a "low ti ti ■ 1( + + - ■ GOLDEN GATE BLVD density overlay" to protect its j'. i • III' character well into the future. 'I ) ,, (+ The minimum lot size would ' I '!" I 1 E '�4i I+ m remain unchanged, with the �� 4 r= + ' ' ■� ' L �; xi 0, possibility of recombining some 11#1? + ' + u + a Ill legal non-conforming (smaller) o y .�` ('+ ` I' lots. No new designations of i ii 1 residential areas to ( ' Neighborhood Centers were -_ i + suggested.The sole conversion of rt ' GOLD: t;a L'.UL 5._� I _ residential areas endorsed by the ■�lrie \ra public was for office type A 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 Some requested changes, as described in the environmental portion below, relate the desire to recombine legal non-conforming lots and to require or incentivize on-site stormwater retention and other water-related initiatives to maximize water quality, percolation and floodplain protection. Also, noted in the environmental section, are recommendations for strengthening wildfire prevention and lighting standards. These provisions cross several land uses, including residential land use. Public Notice Although the concept of strengthening various notice provisions was not queried or mentioned in public outreach workshops, staff has observed one notice issue in the context of public petitions. Currently, mailed notices are required in advance of Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) as well as certain public hearings. Where required, it would be beneficial for all involved to provide notices along the entire length of dead-end Estates avenues or streets where a project makes direct impact, if the length is greater than the required linear distance of 1,000 feet. (See Non-Residential Uses/Notice provisions, below.) Specific Property Re-designations From time to time staff was queried about specific properties and whether there would be any specific land use changes recommended. Staff understood its Restudy scope as one essentially limited to universal principles- either in land use or other GOPs. However, it is always possible that, during the Public Hearing process, public officials will endorse land use changes in a parcel specific manner. For example, parcels owned by the County may be Figure 15 Future Land Use Study Area the subject of Board direction at 33rd AVE NE Transmittal to effect affordable i OIL WELL RD or senior housing needs, or to g accommodate other public uses 4 i such as park and ride locations, W Z w or other land uses. One specific ! N o g N • N � N location that gained attention < N 3 Po following public outreach is the O/ 25th AVE N area in the vicinity of the RANDALL BLVD Immoka lee Rd. curve near IMMOKAL Randall Blvd. This is a location Randall Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Z 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 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 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 lCONDITIONAL USE SUBDISTRICT EN INFIL_COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER SUBDISTRICT IN MISSION SUBDISTRICT FUTURE LAND USE MAP -PINE RIDGE RD MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT -RANDALL BLVD COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER ._?1 RURAL SETTLEMENT AREA 151)1(15 SI I I:Ill) ___/ 'Nee., 11.1 SOUTHBROOKE OFFICE SUBDISTRICT 4,--_ EVERGLADES RANDALL SUBDISTRICT URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT GOLDEN GATE PKWY INSTITUTIONAL SUBDISTRICT -WESTERN ESTATES INFILL SUBDISTRICT INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT 'RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT s 9 s . \ 011.%ELL RD (III%4;1.10 __ 4.R(N7)SlI RI\11 1\151(15\I I'I'RD < ATANDK III ow R RI) il - c COI DEN GAIL HIST K / (;III DIN(..\15111\'1)T S PINE tuwt. Itn p? _ _ ' �ar ) ,°t — Y i a 2 :�-- / • y N (.,,cSIC\\'\' ''....4‘.-----__ A 11.41410KVN11'11,1 11 E--4 DAVIS RT VD ----7— 1 _ Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 33 of 220 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 o road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water retention." Additional rationale would /1°-°‘ include parking, future right- of-way expansion and effective buffering from residential uses. AI P '"' 'V ' ' 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 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 Legend N -\f 1,O ,. VPA ill „, POTENTIAL CU ~� , , . 11 • 1iø EXISTING CU&PU \` -COMMERCIAL • _..__ te Nob: I I I �_ �� •• (y^Commercial^Includes parcels zoned commercial ander daalynaled eotalnercbl on the Golden Gate Ana Future Land Use Mat and/or daveloped aonniadal. u`— ' la)Most ap is.rclel^pa.els would Nan m e1plbb fora Condltlbe c Uu. I „”" 410 — irg. Ic)TMs map la a pulde.lan Gddon Gab Ana Muter foan Candid Mitt to debrmine —�J . andorconfinn.Xylbipty of lnd us...- ---•Nowl El limilli — 1111111 _ iii ify 1111111 ''' OW ...,, ) 1 1 Nil OM - NMI%b, /111 4111111111111 - Immokalse RD 1. ---\ 2021 50 71 90 150 Autumn Oaks LN !!!!! 23 as 611 I R al 12 iCQ 12 1 132 149 conditional use application. Another is a County-owned parcel for water retention.Thus,five parcels could retain existing residential zoning or apply for a CU or rezone to C-1, under the recommendation below. When asked about additional conditional uses in the western Estates, a slight majority felt that additional locations were not needed. However, when asked whether the Immokalee Road/Oaks interface should have future land uses to include office and conditional uses, over 75%were in favor. The public understood that a more unified planning approach to this corridor could result in better outcomes, including access points and continuity. For this reason, the recommendation below suggests a FLUE designation that allows rezone applications for C-1 uses as well as conditional uses in this corridor. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 35 of 220 Conditional Uses - Conditional use opportunities in Golden Gate Estates include churches, social and fraternal organizations, child care and adult day care centers, Figure 19 private schools, group care APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES facilities (such as nursing ` homes and assisted living '` Legend 11 =- 1111111111:' n ro1ENeiiuCU facilities) and model ? �!!E"-�elll�, go EXISTING CUaru --1111111111■ homes. As conditional =="'"r!!*-III■ 1111 COMMERCIAL -muumuu -=1!!11!!!•'!f1111. li c...i«arnwe..para.arca..erculmr.d..�medcom.,.cu.n+w uses, they are generally uuuuw Mie ,,,,,,.„r;;;;oldOmbe@ C ,U. :117:1111MMI pThis... ewe Tv.OW. r..wrer«wn.Mwn,...von.*ihrbooffine appropriate if compatible -—III 111°III M''.4.-.461"."."'".. :r rail 11 szmmuwith neighboring uses, and 7irtimi,mi111111111111 should be limited as to 1"1""11"1111 111111111111 W,o—..SRAM» location and number. A I lillig!IMiliaIIIIII �'��Ill-'�Illlll1111111111 �1 rv!r�IIommiIIImr:=IIII111111111m GGAMP allowance for IIIIIIIIIIIIH11111111111C=ulllllulllll: :=19"Llrn111IU111I"!'r"I11=:IIIIIIIIIIIIIP conditional use provides a -=11111111111n1111I1111111-=1111111::11111: M=u!!!le1uu■m1MV111=_uuuI1MM= right to seek approval, not = 11111u11111 = 1IIIII • N11nilrs_mum 1un!!!11w111I, ! !!! 111111111ii =1111111111111 a right for the use at any 111111111111111; :=111IIIiuullnuI!! r"uI=-11111111111111: :III"!'11r9111h :=752mmii911ILfI11111IIIIII '11111111111111: location. Typically, if uuiiuml .i1. =111111111111111111!/11911 01111111111111E111E!!!!!!111JI1 wCI!!!!59.111■II1111111111.;A1IIIII111IIIII: 1u11111111111r; Z=111111111111111111=111=-11111111111111: granted, conditional uses 111!!!!"!!1911'' F:117!!!!!1111■IIHIIIIIII1:=11111111111111: -.=nunuullr!l'!ulInl---1111111111111111 are subject to numerous .9ui7"E11=�11'!U U!IIIIII Illnnu. -uuuullun1i "11111111111111::I II 11111111111111 r!a Rr,.111 -11111111111111. m1r1111!"1111==Ir".!!r7!211111111H11111111= 11111111111111: conditions of developmentII111111111111==1111111111I111111rlelr"1u==11111111111111: Mull'"!!!!m=:".!!!e!!rl111111u111111111=:11111111111111: and operation. ■11111111111111:'=1111111111111111R"e!rlIII :11111111111111: •111111I11Iwir--llllllll lul 111 mum! 11111111111111- ilmuu/1m:--�m�•• r''''"=4=1".1111•0111111111111111. 9 -..LL::_.LVAIMM - — I =nlumml 1 IIIM IIIIIIII� 1� _1111 !1111! :11IIIIIIIIII The GGAMP allows 1 K11111""911=-11 I wail. .. 1 I rmi111111m 1111 mil mr, w `� '7// I" —111I11mum •tl111milumm -. �I'_�/t�a I'-IIIIlI1um conditional use 't•J111111111ma11I ,1i"'� X11 1�� —111111111111 ismr i1u1111 mi=III == —+1ppss�--� 111111111111 applications for properties .. 1 r 1= 1 -�� 11 X111[_.9_7.1 _111111111111 :::__::: :IIIIIIIIIIII=II.0 v A. �� :111111111111 designated as residential. ;`111111M11111;111-1I1�� `��I 1 =mumu -'—"—"--• i111111111111 However, the locational e�111n111n1°1I'''""' 111 I°"'—frail e./ Who .— 111111111111 hill r m u CJI 111 ul u r , mu I=1 :III -numnul criteria are extremely --�= - --^ E -" —' 111111111111 limited,except for essential services. The Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow such applications if immediately adjacent to a designated Neighborhood Center (there are 4 in total). The Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow applications for conditional uses if adjacent to some, but not all non-residential uses. In addition,there are further restrictions along Golden Gate Parkway from Livingston to Santa Barbara Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 36 of 220 Figure 20 \.......' APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES r • _ 11111111111111=1111111111111111111111111C Illi n 1111 Ili.r oun1111Uu1111uItuuUII.u,ii,.,iiriii iiiiiiiiIIIIIIII::i:iiiuii ' ______ - . ' IIIIIIIIII•11111 .M1111u1U1Ui-ummest=V!1t1U11nunu111tuU--1u11U111U1uUIP!!All= r ll, 111111111111111"m11111111111133111u11111110:IIIIIIIIII1111111111u111"11111111111111111111111113 Ili, - I Mull!P11111=rPN1111!PA111Z=1111111111113D11l1111111111111111111111!T11111111111111111.Ig1P113 �,� 111111111111111=:111111111111::111111111111""1111111111111111111111111:11111111111111111111/1111 as11111•Pg11113PN111111111tr,r111111111111Z.!![111111111111111111111111.rIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/IBP!IIC �� ■111111111111113:111111111111:3111111111111::111111111111.111111111111:"11111111111111111111111110 19"1-4 11111!1''''111111- ,7•11111111174IIIIIIII M52111111u1111111111111111P11111111111111111111111111111 ■IIIII11A1111113�!lIIIIIIIIIh�.11111111111111A11111111111111111111113"1111111111111111111111111= _ ■11111 111111= P!!11111111147111/11111111=31P1111111111111111111111MT1111111111111111111PP111: in 111111111111111:3111111111111::IIIt11111111":1/111111111111111111111111301111111111111111111111/11= T!- , IIIIIPl41IIIIZ3PPIIIIt11ttr111111111111::C!•PUIIIIIIIt1111111111115r_IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPIIPtIh ■1111111111 m�3u1111111111""IIIIIIIn1113 31111111111111111111111/11".IIIIIIt111111111111111111:, 1� IIIIIN4mil...miu11111_ 111111111111=.018111111111111111111111111-1111111111111111111M1,11: '' 111111111111111331111111111110:11111111111113:1111111111111111111111111::1111111111111111111111111 _�. 11111/11111,11111=V111111111111".x111111111111==M11111111111111!!1111113111111111111111111NP1111= 11111111111111130111111111111==1111111111113311111111111111111111111113:31111111111111111111111111: r 11111111!1!11111::11111111111111111111111111= :1111PIIIIIIIII Errs■ Ot111111111t11::1111111111111111111111111: :11111111111111 11111111111111L".!-/11IIIIIII1111111111Pl111= :1111111!•111111 _ 111111111111111::1111111111111111111111111: :11111111111111" "" "'""""-' �'""":3:_::::... ' 1111IIIt111ImTrn111111IIUIII 1t11!1l111: 11111!1.111111.,-. '"""" "'" --111111111111111::11111111111111111/1111111: 011111111111111 1111111111111111-T1111111111111111t11111111: :11111!!!111111 1111111111111110=11111111111111111111111110 CUM111111IIlIII11111111111111111/lllll M11111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111:1111111111111111l111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111 :1IUPIP1 1 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111. 1111111111111.11111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111:1111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111 .11111111111111 - 111111111111111'":.1111111111111111111!91113 311111!1!111111 111111111111111"311111111111111111111111113 =11111111111111" '"'"" _" 11111111111t111V IIIIIIIIIIIII11111IIP11PII1t 31111AR9IIIII ' '. "' 111111:11111111311111111111111111111t11u3 :11111111111111 '" """'"' """" P 111111111111II41111111111111111111!!!111: 011t1Pl1!111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII":11111111111111111111111110 =11111111111111 EEEss 111111111111111--U1111111U11111111P901: :1111111111111!Il!11111111111111113m.........._ ....E ■Ess 1111111111111110:1111111111111111111111111: :11111111111111111111111111111111 -E1111� Ess■ EEE IIIIthIIIIUIII�mIIllllllllllllIIIII 1III13 :1111!1!111111 111111113rIIII/IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1: "11111111111111 IIIIIItrzrmli1t1111111I111I!!1111: �IIIIU'111111"11111111111111 = 11111111::11111111111111/1111111111 "3: IIIIIIwarmu111111111111U1 1111 i=1111.1.111111111111:"IIu111U111/111111111111: 11111111111111 ...31119119u911IIU1! IIII1111 • 1 I1IP1411P�11t1111t11111IIIIIP O111: ..11u1!PIII/111 .II1r111,1111.11 1 111111111:111111111I111111111111111C :111111111111E 1111U1P11.3t1111111111111111u19I11: :IIIII.1U1IIU -a=3:3:3- 111111113:1111111111111111111111111: :111111111111■ 411m====3= Lind 111111111:31111111111111111111111111: ''. 11111111=411111111111M111.....ma 3111P11H11111 =_-:3_3_3:_� IIIIIIIII/Illi! POTENTIAL CU 111111111:�II111111111111111D111111: 31111P4Ulur _ O 111111111:1111111111111011111111111: 311111111111111 -""""" -EXISTING Cu a AU 111111111=rIPIIIIIIuuIIIIIIN*PIII: r.111!1PPU11111 t11111111::1111111111111111111111111' 111111111111E -CO*. RCS IIIIIIIt13r'PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPPPUI: ~'�'� :IIIP!'VIIII i 111111111:311111111/111111111111101: :111111111111■ 1 I... 111111111:,-4111111111111uIVHP111: _1111,91111111 Ni'o. rrrr.. .. •. w.... 11....rrr .r. w... wr .w .. 11111111133111111111111101111111111' M111111111111OMPA Oi1Ami PAWN�ei•No maim drai••1"'""'"M I IIIIill Ira MVP Mil It111iii III','!111: =in 1P!lVIM M1iNMI Vom...rprods AmIA elm bbMA•O rUm w..r. 1111111 3 111111 IIIII111111111111'� MUMMER �Il!Ib 11u11n_ nn11n11111111num11: and on the west side of Collier Blvd. The limited availability for conditional use applications can be gleaned from the analytic Figures 19, 20 and 21.The areas marked in yellow indicate conditional use potential under the current GGAMP. Because Golden Gate Estates is 50% built out, it is likely that additional locations would be useful for conditional uses as development progresses. With this in mind, staff sought public feedback on the possibility of expanding location potentials. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 37 of 220 Figure 21 _ N '1 APPROVED CONDITIONAL USES,COMMERCIAL, ' i J. I ...i�w .i_ii1i11 AND POTENTIAL AREAS FOR CONDITIONAL USES f i 11. 2=�,1= IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES 7 1 `� L' ��M"•i'—e:eti.11ll 1 1 1 =_�. - '-' I -_.SII.21111111111 Legend i Ii I --Eilmlimu- Iaenlnw q -rt_I1t�I112 J IPOTENTIAL CU 1 1 221111111•11111111:112 111 1 `^711•1111111111111. =I _EXISTING CU a PU N1 2=1/w1r1. 111 --■�1111'1,1.111:1 _COMMERCIAL 1 �111111111111�1 ill 1.1fUlIMINIIIIM„ 21 2 211111111111111 ,Iola. ""-- II =11rsnopi7,1111111111 l la)'CommercW-mawd.e Parcae monad COM.rclal antra.designated commercial on ate II :11.1lail....-111111IIIIIIIII • Golden Gab 4 me pWum land Use Mae antror developed commercial 11 1111--�■I- 1„111111 Rl Noel Tonmemer sweets would Neo be visible for a Conde!tonal Use Irl II : - / \ la)Thie map n P Outdo.The Golder Gab Am Master Pim should be consulted to determine 1 1 - ..�1�-1_ _ andrw.mem a NglblNy of land mos 1 1 I --_� 1.11111•111111111111111 = 1111111111111 2111111111111.•11111111:11112 2 2M11•11'11= 11.11111 ;^.I 111111/1 =111'111--:111:111-...I num): -ll --1111�m,1- _..:1r! - �I .1.1��1=111111. •- - _= 1 1 _._.-.,_._.-.,_.-111,' • "1111•. N I 11■ 1=IIIIIIIIIIII �IllllrlIINIIlu11nel' _ /`'I 2� 1111111!!!111111:1111}1!1111 I I,'' ^ .^ 111111111.111111=11111111111 1 1 E �� -• =11111111111 •_ 1 21:11.11,11 ' I s 1 1■ .:---•- 1�p[_ ate{ H __ === _F _= R'a •.I ,0 ='f! 1 ■'TTS 1111,,1.1== , / :>_�tt11uu.1'1.1== jI111u111111.111111111Iiir� =�■1■�1 we 1111101Pt1IIINlllipul:n:Slltlllllllll ulul'nlunlli u. �17� '1H'1== ■l 2=111111111111 11.1■111:11=_ 4� � 1!111117=111 =_ ==111r111IIII■1-1rt111�--�1111•P111C= �� —�11 , ■1111111.1•::_= 1-1 1-�2:� 111.11 1111 !-:■ ■.■1111.11!111== r.Lf wolel9uue-a-•• = 1.1 M1 IMO/ �'1�1111 `fII :..:1:111111111:.= MS �= �1� Cy SSP• S- i-,11• 1111 112 X1.11111111:3= ==11111111u17,I 1�= w1■1111 r of =_ =:111.11 ■- 1 .■Il.....al:e}'^I= r- , 11111111111111 :: :2111111""/-1141�1=2=1111111111 = - -_111111111111=_7111111 -.UI-1F:�IIt1 al gli111/111111 11111 = _-11111111111 1�1:=X11.11/1111111_ IIII11III," - _ :'1:111111111 -111' n I Ir.:w.ull l...7= ::1111111111112=111111111111 1 ==�11■1111111111== MU 11111■1 T-1111 �111111^11_=1 menind 1111..11 ■■ 1 11.■.==.1.■1M11r1111ill Ill_ I -1 11111111 111i. , .1111_=11 1111••11-=:_-_7.. - - - - - - _.-.._.-.. -•-__-.. _..-•_•_•-_ 1-■1 \1:2�� 72111 11111111' -.-.--- ----- - - - -.-..-.-..---.-_-•-�_ 171 1.Ir1rf�� =111 -1wi1 11n==1m1111r 111• --II 11111111--'-'- 1■.f11.11-=111■1� 1I11:=_Illi 11/11/11 :: - - -. .. 1.- IIS=- m --111\ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111111''1r.I1e11111II1111I11111I111I111 II111111111111111111,III111It11111111111 III a..MEM 1■1111 .1.1■1 II t 1111111111111111111III111111111111111117.11111111111111111111111 1111111111111111IIIIIII1111111111111111111111 (�I I1•■�1. 11111111..-.-.-. .- -.-•------ _ --- 1 1 1 11111■-- ltll. 111111 11!1.111..- ---.-. -..- ----_.--_ --.-.. - - .---'----_ -..1 111•111112 2. X4111111 u: 1.1.1111--..-.-. ..-.. .. -.- -. _-- --- _-:m I.m==ffilimemm = 1 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 • Everglades Blvd. and Randall Rd. (future) • Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. (future, south quadrants) Urban Estates • Logan Blvd. and Pine Ridge Rd. • Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. (west quadrants) • Logan Blvd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd. (future, SW quadrant only) (Note: "future" designation derived from 2040 LRTP) Based on this recommendation, a total of 6 quadrants in the rural Estates could qualify for CU application, not considering current land uses at those locations. An additional 10 quadrants could support conditional use applications in the rural Estates, based on improvements indicated in the MPO's LRTP. In the urban Estates, a total of 6 quadrants could qualify for CU application not considering current uses. An additional quadrant could qualify based on the MPO's LRTP. Public opinion differed when individuals spoke about church uses. Opinions ranged from allowing churches along major road corridors to eliminating any additional locations for churches. Staff's recommendation, below, is the addition of the major arterial intersections (as defined) as a locational criterion for CU applications; plan language would allow parcel assemblage where minimum ingress/egress requirements dictate. The CU applicant should demonstrate the need for the requested acreage in the context of the intended use and facilities and ingress/egress recommendations. Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions As noted in the Related Existing Provisions section, below, there are special provisions related to Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd.frontages.As described above,the only change to the Golden Gate Parkway provisions would be a change allowing CU applications for properties located at the corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. The two quadrants at that location are currently zoned PUD or CU. With respect to the Collier Blvd. Special provisions, the GGAMP currently requires adjoining conditional uses on two sides, rather than the transitional conditional use provision requiring certain non-residential uses on one side only.Staff observes that, during a public hearing for a zoning change request at 13th Ave SW and Collier Blvd, a conditional use was not available under the GMP due to this provision. However, the property in question was located next to an industrial type (PUD) use, Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 39 of 220 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 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 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 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 • 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 The Collier MPO is Figure 22 a federally mandated and COWER 2040 federally funded • Long Range Transportation Plan �_ I II_ © ©ffr�r- transportation N _ policy-making r 1'u organization and is -- it _ ,I I Highway Cost Feasible Plan made up of Highway Improvements by Funding Period 7- made V _� representatives of WI tomp :-:- � W' local governing w.,.o Rd bodies. The MPO VI , , 1,1 has the authority to v 111;1111111 — - F plan, prioritize, and i +�_— I drx7wee ou raw it. r—„ select °' "'°'" ' rj transportation ,.i; �' !"��_ projects for federal , ;"""""°'1r funding ' ,-, "4 Gate appropriated by i Nape.. ,, ,s j�--4 1 the US Congress }� A_..._ I.e T _ ----�-- _el • through the US ' I �� p' a" Department of L•« Transportation, suissu ; kr Federal Highway weir �i, Fakar Naas:. Slab Preserve Administration and Federal Transit rat gait Park Administration. , _. Marco l In addition to q.ALF OF island MEXICO Estates residents, c,ut I ivnni _ - Collier County _ Eve • - . citizens, taxpayers and visitors are also EvarpYdsaNalvnfArk 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 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 COWER 2040 Lonrecommendations in `T rans ' a A © .Q ;° ki< r `moi I the County's Master a Mobility Plan (MMP), I Needs Assessment accepted by the • \ 'gee` t..wrr ii Board in 2012. �, «Fr t ` fr Nollips“ ,.-- Recommendation #3 oil "'""iD0"`'"r°°"" in the MMP calls forIlk - incentivized goods, k lb «S, ..amicw.Peni ' ' , + services and jobs in s'.b r- p Neighborhood I `""'°r" Centers, the RFMUD , 4t : -I 4l � Villages and the 1�' .' Orangetree J, nor*Plinth, Settlement area to , - ' ,„.k, r;.�• • reduce the vehicle ' Naples . ' ___________v - miles travelled by ' :1,; r u.w. • . 4 estates residents. I hlu" � i; irry Mobility related to the Estates is alsoutifir ' ” ' - "° i» addressed by M Mt Rom ald !._ Recommendation #9, • r`Wind fw,nrrn..n 04 r Eucww&poi cairrw Study Area ' enhanced localized m • ' connectivity through Interchange Improvement bridges and other CALF of Island nd''n0 Intersection Improvement connectors and by rnExlcc- (,.v.r',:•A., — Roadway Improvement Recommendation F"`'r #13, development of Everades park and ride lots. These concepts are further discussed below. As noted on the 2040 LRTP cost feasible plan, the MPO has designated additional study areas in and around the Estates.The Randall Rd./Oil Well Rd. study is currently underway.The North Belle Meade Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 46 of 220 study area is not yet funded. Staff recommends funding for route alternatives study of the North Belle Meade east/west corridors in order to accommodate area planning efforts in the North Belle Meade Receiving area and to provide linkage for Estates residents travelling to south Collier County and the urban area. Funding will need to be identified for alignment, design and ROW acquisition. Bridge Connectivity within Golden Gate Estates Existing GGAMP objectives stress the importance of increasing linkages within the local road system to reduce traffic on arterial roadways, Figure 24 shorten trips and increase overall road capacity. In addition, coordination COWER2040 Long Range Transportation Plan 113 db ri 1:1 with emergency services �1. officials is mandated for County staff and MPO. • 1�� \ in; I CMS/ITS and New Bridge Projects In August 2008, the Immokalee -1, Collier County I ayeF ..—. ir Transportation Services AudttonCodnaew r` F`"i Swop Division produced the East of 951 Horizon Study - for Bridges. The study CREW E i 8 f RIM Pen included stakeholder input from Emergency 11' Oran9etne North � tai service providers, 1473 N.,,,, environmental groups 9/ ©I ;©f ,K and other County ',Ora +01 Divisions. The study V'"e'irdi 41 considered emergency - ()I ' Et MI iit i r service response times, Oi Golden0Gearevacuation needs, public Nas- -.1.1- — 1841 "".1 e�f_„-- -® ------- service efficiencies, a Strand general mobility �'�i QMH Fowl 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 Environmental Stewardship Watershed and Related Water Resource Topics In 2011, the Board accepted the Collier County Watershed Management Plan (WMP), which was developed over several years by staff and consultants. The WMP covered the major basins within Collier County, including the Golden Gate/Naples Bay Watershed. The underlying study included an evaluation of the surface Figure 25 water and groundwater, North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project wetlands and related Legend :f environmental resources, • �' :'s iir NGGEFW Project Boundary ....-4.; ' t ' ' `t' and the performance of the Horsepen Wetlands ' - i` ••. .11 .1 current water management NGGEFW Wetlands , i. facilities in providing the Description 1 • •� desired levels of services for MI Cypress ' Everglades Blv Hydric Flatwood flood control, water supply, Hydnc Hammock • Winchester Head water quality and Marsh environmental protection. MN swamp Forest 11.; It recommended initiatives Nil Water - tr �w! that would serve as a guide .5 • for staff in developing •!, �, 4 f.11:-.-. `'•6$i policies, programs, �, .� __` "` •' • �•� :• r tr-.., r ordinances and regulations t�' w*,,• J i Golden Gate Blvd. • •F g • for further consideration by - '' \�4�% • " [ the Board. The major water `• i. . . ;_r' ' .1..• .r•r...;:;, '. .r, .>, tNh resource concerns • '''` ' GG Main Canal ', ' ' :'!e,�-:.. identified for the GGAMP c •z T,�`,,t�,��+f r `� ,,� . t . • ?"r�bt'.rll�1G eb r.. :.�i. i � . region include: ••• 4 ' +' .'N`k: � 5.41';'..3141; Y 4� r t • Excessive fresh . M �" t 1'' 5. *=< 'I` North Belle Meade water discharges ` ' i _ ' �,,. from canals into s . - 1''-+m`„_ - _ , s tn�•' . Naples Bay • • E ,;T. • Lack of appropriate `�'.0r_i,;+. w.-. Mr levels of flood I-75 } ^- protection 't + g�� , •R.- ,-_ 4 • Pollutant loading "'.iT •'� � �- r� associated with ---=- ,• • ri Ella-_ • F*ar _.r ..._ .. — 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 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 � o" Legend ' � Plan was developed and U l • Belle Meade Area accepted by the Board. k\ cs Lee • County Picayune Strand State Forest Collier County This plan, co-sponsored - -- Golden Gate Canal -- - L.....,Collier County Watersheds by Rookery Bay National Am - Canals Estuarine Research y� � N y bd • Watershed County Boundary Reserve, outlines a ,I:-'• , • rehydration effort Belle Meade reh y Naples Bay Golden Gate canal designed to provide ` greater balance between .1 i j the Rookery Bay and ` S •. Picayune Strand VV. ' :I��i StateForest Naples Bay estuaries, through diversion of a Rooke Ba `' o.eryt r yl portion of Golden Gate Watershed!, Canal flows to the Belle Rookery Bay /Alb... Meade area. The RESTORE funds are 3 -.5 5 10 •a intended to aid in design Mile' ''' 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 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 Citizens and representatives of the GGEACA suggested that these lots might be re-combined, if ""' possible, through an incentive- based system. The rationale behind Figure 27 recombining these smaller lots GOLDEN GATE RURAL ESTATES(E OF 951)PARCELS relates to water benefits- TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.23,808 Parcels<=1.5 Acres:Approx.6,433 watershed, floodplain, aquifer and (Parcels with Structure:3,036;Parcels without Structure: 3,397) estuary related. It has been said by Legend a former District 5 Commissioner, .. M -Parcels<=1.5 Acres without structure(Vacant) ) A that protection of this low-density - Parcels<=1.5 Acres with structure 1111 '(jl�Qarea translates to a "CountyDRGR l 1GoldenGateRuralEstatesBoundary ' ';,+,� {}',il, la,+i 100 (densityreduction, groundwater ,� ,+�('- "' ill recharge) area without cost to theriiii.-----iir , � Ii County." It follows that further n�r^'"1.1'.'," ,►iAT. i I i,, density reduction in the Estates can 'r�' 11)11! . .. .M1 I I u11 enhance these benefits. Larger lot ,u, -t- - ,,, . 11./!!!11 Illylli;�� sizes with relatively less impervious ' r; ,�,v:, „1f,'l Ti::OM ��I�;i'CL area generate less run-off per lot, „ 'I. 1, � it +1 + M; " g � � u and contribute to surface water __ 'fir' '_ --- t'i. ,I, i' `'"'1' i' I ,;' � ,h attenuation, water quality benefits, _ �- -2,.,,,,, - _ - -..- I',II '+''.l. ' E, '� floodplain storage capacity, aquifer -�_ ! ,-t 1+�'' Ill'. ��' b. recharge and less flow or "pulse" to ,,,.�,.. ?is Ii ' =mss. -2'"I;1 ', ��; l){;. t I.)3 STI canals and estuaries. I," �t z----.-5 ;';'qI'r!t. '# r ii 1 t.ii 4�I. a+ ,4 Ideas to incentivize small lot ��►t' bl'i' � 1,+�� Iti r1,}+I',I ,l recombination have included tax .„___H---- ----_____,„ ' ' I+ �� .n l,l 1,��11 r 1 incentives, impact fee reductionN ■q and credits for stormwater 8 e 0.5 1 2 3Miles ) il 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 quantifiable benefits. For these reasons, the recommendation related to this initiative supports further study within a defined time period to implement any incentives for recombination. Following the study, if the Board directs Figure 28 implementation, its provisions would be contained in the Land Development \ GOLDEN GATE ESTATES WEST OF 951 PARCELS TOTAL NUMBER OF PARCELS:APPROX.3,442 Code or Code of Ordinances. Parcels<1.5 Acres: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 Estates14- Developed or Other Parcels(Parcels<1.5Acres)— ' 111 I II I II o Community Planning staff attended _'I 11II o numerous Comprehensive Watershed r Improvement Plan Ad Hoc Technical `I1,'�� I VANDERBILT BEACH RD Advisory Board (CWIP) meetings, �_� �• • I — exchanging concepts related to the7 o_I existing TDR program (RFMUD) and Z�II '+I GOLDEN GATEBLVDW Z a 0 potential Golden Gate Estates , =1 I initiatives. One idea that gained I III', r attention was the potential issuance of I IIPIERID/fjR (``a Ill Il lI I' -. .. TDR credits as part of a sale or I '�IIk �� i 8A donation proposal for parcels within current or future acquisition areas.The Il 1 II+ i examples of two specific wetland sites, _ Ii II Red Maple Swamp and Winchester -—G I "IfIl // Head within the Conservation Collier 1 . '' W acquisition areas were discussed and o N studied. The "Gore" properties and �`� surrounding area could also be RADIO RD considered. / The CWIP committee understood its role as a technical advisory committee,and not a policy advisory committee. Accordingly, by motion at its March 7, 2017 meeting, CWIP recommended the concept of using TDRs for acquisition of select wetland parcels as "consistent with CWIP goals in improving the floodplain, surface hydrology, aquifer recharge and connectivity of the watershed". In the Committee's view, a recommendation beyond consistency would have exceeded their scope. In the meantime, the Board considered the idea of external (outside of RFMUD Sending lands) sources of TDR credits at its RFMUD Workshops in January, May and June of 2017. Staff had Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 59 of 220 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 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 County should continue to study costs, feasibility and possible implementation as a long-term beneficial initiative. Finally, flood control can be more easily measured, predicted and accommodated by coordinating :r!r:: ,. with the South Florida Water •• Management District to review R "' - their Level of Service Standards for primary water management P 11 canals within the County. 4 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 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 (5)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 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 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 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 10 years. Policy provisions within the GGAMP are numerous, and have been part of the Master Plan for many years (see existing provisions, below). Concurrent with the GGAMP Restudy, the Board directed the Bureau of Emergency Services (BES) to provide an overview and recommendations related to wildfire risks, responsibilities and funding. In early 2017, current mitigation practices were outlined with recommendations for improvement. It was noted that brush fire calls per year have reached an average of 130. Springtime, 2017 came with hundreds of wildfires across the state, following a severe "dry season" that resulted in area-wide and state-wide drought. Collier County was particularly hard • hit. A March • wildfire burned ^: over 7,000 acres in Picayune Strand State Forest. In • April, the "3d ' • Avenue Fire", stoked by high winds, tore across the North Belle 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 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 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 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 • 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. GOOMO Mena Internal anal ,wI'.. OaA SkY•trx V I • • a. • itill. • l � l 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 • 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 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 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 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 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, Shoppi g parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, neighborhoo walkable community." culture"'keity-center. 14# ° ePa rkssafety Feegem communitWJamibes ' elarolNleuslestitution= i Wss edu Cl ;,1, din rresidentia '" "�"""'hi e gisip sidewalks a abiK Ilid ly ° working-class green space workforce housing Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 82 of 220 Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement communi worMing-class "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an commercial nodes interconnected, low-density residential community r' ge loss nl gle-family with limited goods and services in neighborhood .a o dable.- farmin! Darks.aw centers, defined by a rural character with an outdoor iowtraific appreciation for nature and quiet alternative.. II r families surroundings." limited servitear- pro-con,.,,_..,.=al lientr V y services watershed s.:safetyNINO low-densitygUI co nary-iiuing e onmentpeaccful recreation Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement � _ dam e "Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, „�,,,.ch large-lot residential neighborhood in a iimitedcommercial�n't natural setting with convenient access to trien""�y eattown•IBM!mindro-g no change thecoastalarea." flOfl-CJ1 m re ' ter...... itiai Vow arii Iersenvirgionl no condn ona hw tromc mc neighneebeihffileiatili gat p ways state a.ices ev.0 -*density Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 83 of 220 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 Restudy, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high-level visioning exercise for the future of the Eastern Estates. Consistent among all Restudies is the planning wheel- a process matrix that describes present plans, public outreach, staff data and analysis, development of alternatives, republication, ultimately with recommendations that reflect stakeholder consensus, and finally re-initiation of public outreach. The process may include several turns if the "wheel" prior to formal public hearings. A reflection of the current progress of the Rural Fringe $ • Restudy included the fact ti. - 740 that there was broad support - • tri, - /1111 among stakeholders to • „, , W !�'r incentivize uses that are not . .• • presently adopted- most "I' particularly free-standing �� employment centers and • sports venues. GGEACA and ' ' g; attendees were encouraged d ' -. 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 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 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 With respect to Land uses, permitted uses and conditional uses were described. Also noted was the special language in the GMP describing the limitation on - additional conditional uses along the Golden Gate Parkway. . _ if„ ' , rillr-7 The vast majority of the citizens whoI b . • , , attended appeared to live within - close proximity to Golden Gate dk ,. 4 v Parkway. Accordingly, there was , significant comment from the attendees related to the fact that ' they do not wish to change any of the current land use restrictions ..4, related to Golden Gate Parkway. Mr. Greg Ault asked for a show of hands in favor of no change to the land t1 ., , uses on the Parkway. There was '> nearly unanimous agreement, as Th, `-- - shown in the photos below and by ' • ' virtue of the responses received in4 i the visioning session. ` . !!#! Principal Planner Anita Jenkins A+ A 41111 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 I. The Western Estates will be Distinctive for: ¢ Large lots near town with quiet, open and peaceful character o Rural beauty with traditional neighborhoods consisting of dead-end streets where neighbors know one another ¢ No commercial uses or special uses, maintaining uncluttered thoroughfares o Natural habitat with areas for wildlife and environmental protection o Single-family living for local working families a Agriculturally and livestock friendly per allowances 11. The Western Estates will be a premier location for: ¢ Peaceful living with private single-family homes Beautiful gateway to the City of Naples o Quiet estates residential living o Family and neighborly atmosphere safe for children o Low traffic o Small town feel o Wildlife and agriculture o A remote animal services substation to support domestic animals found in the area o Accessible to services while maintaining a rural character �-- a Well maintained infrastructure a A predominantly residential community with supporting uses including senior housing along arterials. o Maintain distinction from Golden Gate City Ill. How does the Western Estates area complement Collier County? o Untouched and quiet nature maintains the charm of Naples area o A respite from commercial blight Peaceful living close to town o Provides a non-gated, peaceful, estates-living neighborhood between the City of Naplesand Golden Gate City 4 Serves as the gateway to Naples _. Gives long-term residents a place to raise generations o Maintains the value of environmentally friendly neighborhood with little commercial uses = Unit 29 should be its own neighborhood, rather than part of Western Estates t Clean, crime-free area o Maintains true to the existing master plan r Provides affordable living for year-round residents Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 89 of 220 e High value residential housing with limited commercial and special uses a Desire to be the "Pine Ridge Estates" of the area IV. What is the full potential for your community? e Safe, cohesive neighborhood for families e Desire to maintain privacy e Maintain the existing character, no need for further enhancements or intrusions e For the area of Unit 29 to be sub divided into its own area similar to Pine Ridge Estates e Commercial and additional uses will only destroy the potential e Country living close to town E Enhance the "Gateway to Naples" a Most desired residential acreage in Collier County 2 Ability for growth of environmental protection services e 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? e "One of the best places to retire with friendly people" "Unique and faithful community that supports the integrity and charm of Naples" e "A great and convenient place to live" e "We are not a part of Golden Gate City" e "Local homeowners rejoice over being left alone" e "A pearl of beauty that truly complements Collier County" e "A wonderful residential community to live in" e "Commissioners gave in to their supporters and turned it into another Pine Ridge Road" e "This community stayed the same" e "Premier Estates living 3 miles from the beach" e "Beautiful corridor to the City of Naples" e "Excellent quiet location close to town provides solitude from busy work life" e Depends on how much "commercial" money changes hands with commissioners e "This master plan has not changed in 50 years. What a wonderful place" e Hardly anything-this area is quiet. a "Estate living still exists" e "Close to everything in town while maintaining privacy" Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 90 of 220 VI. What three things would really improve the future of the Western Estates? Not amending the master plan No commercial uses Maintain privacy Maintain traffic flow without addition of lights or stops Enhance Golden Gate Parkway west of 1-75 into a lush landscaped corridor serving asgateway to Naples Uncouple the 4-block area from the GGAMP Increase wall height for 1-75 to reduce noise permeation Enforce existing laws and ordinances f Small localized sub-neighborhoods with neighborhood commercial development thatsupports rural areas Establish additional wildlife and environmental preservation areas Provision of public services and access to schools, museums, parks, etc. To never build a RaceTrac in our area Create a name/identity for our neighborhood Re-study traffic impacts of L75 interchange E Consider traffic light at 66t Street SW Water feature at SW corner of Golden Gate Pkwy and Livingston is a very welcome,positive feature Sidewalks Nature conservancy Community gardens The workshop concluded at 8:35 p.m. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 91 of 220 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 i between studies and the .(1 timing of each. Discussion also included the process, _► • identifying current plan F ,/ ., las : provisions of importance to 41 0-t i� � • . • -4 +"' the community, identifying r- . t �� opportunities fors improvement and "PA' 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 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: 2 Cleanliness Affordability New Growth and Development E Celebrated Diversity Safety Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 93 of 220 II. Golden Gate City will be a great location for: & Raising Families o Affordability o Community Services o Mobility o Recreation III. How does Golden Gate City complement Collier County? o Diversity o Center of Activity o Accessibility to workforce IV. What is the full potential for your community? o Unifying to accomplish goals o A place of flourishing families, business, and community services ¢ Safe and effective for all modes of transit ¢ A downtown destination V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the Western Estates? o Clean safe and friendly with a lush landscape o Third fastest growing city in the state of Florida "1 o Golden Gate notes first million-dollar home sale E A great place to raise a family a Number one most inviting community o Golden Gate wins state championships in sports, music, arts and more o More full-ride scholarships provided to residents per capita than anywhere in Florida o Community rallies to improve image o The remarkable turnaround and revitalization of Golden gate o The city that met the needs of its people VI. What three things would really improve the future of Golden Gate City? o Code enforcement Safety of mobility (pedestrian, bicyclists) Infrastructure o Creation of a CRA e Reduced public transit headways o Creation of a community trolley o Lighting o Preservation of green space o Increased homeownership Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 94 of 220 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 • 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 1 ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ........_. How satisfied are you with the potential locations of commercial uses in Golden Gate City? •Very Unsatisfied •Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How Satisfied are you with the ■Somewhat Satisfied locations of existing commercial uses •Very Satisfied in Golden Gate City? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 96 of 220 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? •No Would you volunteer one evening per month • to serve on a planning committee? ■ Not Sure a 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% •Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in Golden Gate City? Dining •Offices •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 .21;:111)!Il. ■Expanded Should home-based businesses change in ■Reduced Stay the Same any way in Golden Gate City? ill ■Not Sure 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Never How often do you walk to get somewhere in illirli ■Monthly Golden Gate City? Weekly ■Daily 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 Do you have school-aged children that i •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% 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 98 of 220 Have you ever used Collier Area Transit(CAT) ■No service? Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How satisfied are you with gateway design for Golden Gate City along Golden Gate Parkway? •Very Unsatisfied How satisfied are you with the current ■Somewhat Unsatisfied CAT service times and schedule? ' ' Not Sure •Somewhat Satisfied •Very Satisfied How satisfied are you with the current l CAT routes? V 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 99 of 220 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 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 •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 I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden GateMO i Western Estates? Developer/Representative •Elected Official ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in the Western Estates? Dining •Offices ■Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Reduced Should home-based businesses change in ■Stay the Same any way in the Western Estates? Not Sure ■Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 102 of 220 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 II institutions in or near the Western ■Very Satisfied Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of social organizations in or near the Western Estates? How satisfied are you with the locations of existing commercial uses in or near the Western Estates? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 103 of 220 Do you have adequate access to ped/bike trail system in or near the Western Estates? 1111101.11111111111111111111 Do you have adequate access to public spaces in or near the Western Estates? Do you have adequate access to neighborhood parks in or near the Western Estates? Do you agree that raising livestock and crops should be allowed in the Urban Estates? Would you volunteer one evening per month ,,.. to serve on a planning committee for the Golden Gate Area? Would you be in favor of a voluntary"small lot combination" incentive program? Should there be a change to allow rental of ■■ ■No your guest house?(Do-over) Not Sure • a 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 intersections? Do you support office uses at major intersections? • 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 104 of 220 ■No Would you consider a voluntary Not Sure association for the Western Estates? •Yes, sub-areas ■Yes,as a whole 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Never How often do you walk to another ■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 i 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% How do you feel about existing public ■Not Enough Light 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 ■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 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 --.1•00-- conditional uses, and _ coordination with the ._ RFMUD restudy in • ' X .'- providing nearby iir , • opportunities for retail, �`" t, .,, " Apo ;� _� WA , service and jobs for Estates , - 4 '"''' ' ` residents. Transportation .4 �� / study areas were discussed r _____-; —!tb'1,.. _.. , , . as were watershed and 1 fru! other environmental OW' — - topics. The following draft vision statement was presented to workshop attendees: "The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings." Upon presenting the draft vision statement, attendees were asked to provide feedback and potential revisions. Responses included the following terms and subject areas: • No interference • Nature/natural/environment/park/recreation Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 107 of 220 • 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 • 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 111 MO 5>10 Years Gate Eastern Estates? ■10>20 Years ■Over 20 Years I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 109 of 220 ■Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate Eastern Estates? Developer/Representative ■Elected Official a 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 How satisfied are you with the availability and locations of assisted living facilities and nursing homes in or near the Eastern Estates? How satisfied areY ou 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 .11 institutions in or near the Eastern •Very Unsatisfied Estates? ■Somewhat Unsatisfied Not Sure How satisfied are you with the ■Somewhat Satisfied availability and locations of child care and adult day care in or near the ■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 ■Retail What type of commercial use is most ■Personal Services needed in the Eastern Estates? 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 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 Not Sure Would you use a Transit Park& Ride or Ride ■Yes Sharing Facility? Should there be a change to allow rental of 11111111111 your guest house? Do you want specific architectural standards 1 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 Th Is there a need for an industrial area or Mil •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% 1 ■Reduced Should home-based businesses change in •Stay the same any way in the Eastern Estates? Not Sure •Expanded 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% --„,„ 1 •Allow everywhere I •Allow along arterials Should potential Conditional Use a Only at select locations applications change in any way in the Eastern Estates? •Only certain kinds at additional locations a 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 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 • it these districts applied to their •s r, 1 property. To invite discussion { r . ,..s ��. •related to improvements that 'l �` '! 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 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 • 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 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 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 •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 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? •Over 20 Years •I don't live in GG City I 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 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 1111111111111111 to the Estates. Add new provision to allow E.communications towers. ■Strongly Disagree •Somewhat Disagree Not Sure Add new provision to allow Group ■Somewhat Agree 111111111...111111111•Homes(7 14 people). a 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% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 121 of 220 The County will consider a TDR program for natural resource protection. The County will promote the combination of 1.14-acre or similar "small lots" into adjoining lots through incentives Retain existing policy that the County will encourage "dark sky" lighting standards. Retain existing policy that the County will consider incentives for wetland preservation. Retain existing policy to conduct wildfire mitigation education and prevention •Strongly Disagree programs. , •Somewhat Disagree The County will update setback and Not Sure buffer standards for non-residential uses •Somewhat Agree in the Estates and for adjoining uses in ■Strongly Agree the RFMUD and RLSA. g y g 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 I ,,,■ greenway plan. Retain existing policy to schedule(or update)and fund bridge improvements. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 122 of 220 Do you support the ability of owners to rent/lease their guest homes. The County will create new lighting standards within the LDC. •Strongly Disagree The County shall continue to work toward the goal of providing a septic ■Somewhat Disagree disposal facility located in Collier Not Sure County. •Somewhat Agree The County will continue efforts to •Strongly Agree support independent fire districts and Florida Forestry Service in public education, planning,and resourcing related to wildfire prevention and response. The County will consider dispersed water storage and watershed connectivity to,through,and from the Estates. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 123 of 220 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 Golden Gate City Workshop — Initial Recommendations: 04/26/2017 Do you live in Golden Gate City? •No ■Yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% •Less than 1 Year ■1>5 Years How long have you lived in Golden ■5>10 Years Gate City? ■10>20 Years •Over 20 Years s I don't live in GG City 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% •Resident Which option best represents your ■Business Owner relationship to Golden Gate City? Developer/Representative •Elected Official i Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 125 of 220 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: ■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 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 Innovation11!Ill Zone within Golden Gate City. Adopt appropriate tools for business enhancement, such as incubators or accelorators. Enhance community cultural assets, international focus,and community identity. Enhance community participation in area and sub-area planning through a county- fostered initiative with the ultimate goal of self-sustained community planning. ■Disagree No Opinion Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District: ■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 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 contamination as it relates to septic. No Opinion ■Agree Study potential for utility service conversion from Florida Government Utility Authority to Collier County Water Sewer District. Express need to conduct a pedestrian bridge connectivity study over canals. Identify and prioritize traffic-calming locations. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 128 of 220 Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict: ■No Should the Uses include"light industrial" if compatible with neighborhood? No Opinion a Yes 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 129 of 220 Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220 Office of Business and Economic Development Research Memo: (April 18, 2017) Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP)1 Overview: Collier County's Economic Development is inclusive of Golden Gate City particularly with respect to retail and commercial business. However, various sources reveal that there is limited Industrial land which has been retarding the County's capabilities for investment attraction and expansion2. This update provides a great opportunity to create an environment to bring more development to the area covered by the Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP). Big Boxes are increasingly becoming vacant big—box stores i.e. 'dark boxes'3 at a time when the GGAMP remains heavily focused on Commercial use. Commercial Zoning is defined by Florida statutes4, to include activities predominantly connected with the sale, rental and distribution of products or performance of services while industrial-use means activities connected with manufacturing, assembly, processing, or storage of products. Industrial-use facilitates greater value-added activities associated with improved jobs and wages, while lower value-added investments usually promoted by commercial use activity, are generally subject to greater job termination, and this seems the opposite of the vision for the GGAMP. Industrial areas would indeed serve as a major economic boost for the county and in the Golden Gate area. However, industrial zoning would require buffers and other ways to separate business use from the residential areas. Heavy industrial-use has been associated with negative community impacts including environmental pollution. Proposing Mixed-use, or allowing certain light-industrials uses as a conditional-use would be a great way to update the GGAMP. Conditional-use would allow for county staff to review and ensure that each proposed use will not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhoods. The main objectives for Golden Gate City could be further promoted and facilitated where the GGAMP includes mixed use and conditional use zoning that promotes light-industrial-uses and business parks in Goals 4 and 5 of the plan. This could also enable greater investments in some of Golden Gate City's currently unused and underutilized `big-box' spaces e.g. Sweet Bay, Sears and K-Mart. Points: • The 44 respondents included in the GGAMP survey6 indicated they wanted Golden Gate City to: o facilitate new business as a top priority for improving Golden Gate City's future; 1 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=66933 z http://www.co Iliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=764 3 http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bbtk-factsheet-blight.pdf 4 https://floridaldr.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/relevant-florida-statutes-definitions.pdf 5 Light or limited industrial zoning is intended for lands appropriate for low-intensity, light and medium industrial activities.Typical uses include assembly and fabrication industries,warehousing, distribution centers, administrative offices,and business support services that typically do not cause noise,air,or water disturbances or pollution. (see http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fairfield/html/Fairfield25/Fairfield2506.html retrieved April 18, 2017. 6 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/l7Yols-i6vU-QMYD6RLNvPoW6NbkZFNtjwGJzBWWRgBo/viewanalytics Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 131 of 220 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 From: Michael Currier <mcurrier©govmserv.com> ,ent: 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 ,ppreciate 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 Lnder 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 • 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 -� r Re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion When you have a moment, would you please provide Kris with the requested map(s) or graphics and any other pertinent project details. Thank you, Michele Michele c 914osca,:\I('I' Principal Planner Growl Management Department Capital Project Planning. Impact Fees& Program Management Division 2800 N. I Iorsesltoe Drive, Naples, FI,3110 I Irl. 2 0.2.'2.2 166 From: VanLengenKris Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:40 AM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita Subject: GG City improvements Hi Michelle: You mentioned the outfall replacement project for GG City stormwater, ($.5m, FY 17). Do you have a map of the improvement locations, or graphics from studies to show improvement areas in flood control for certain blocks?Also, are there any other future stormwater improvements in the next 5-10 years? Thanks, Kris Van Lengen,JD,AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 135 of 220 crom: DelateJoseph lent: Friday, October 07, 2016 1:00 PM To: MoscaMichele Cc: JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris Subject: RE: GG City improvements Attachments: GoldenGateCityStormwaterDrainageSystemImprovementPlan_CurrentConditions_2016.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NW1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_SW 1.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged This is a multi-year project that may take 20 years from start to finish. It is a maintenance project to replace the stormwater pipes and catch basins (stormwater inlets) in the 4 square mile GG City only. There are no ponds or new improvements planned. The total estimated construction cost is$15M in 2012 dollars. This amount obviously will be higher by the time is fully constructed due to inflation, construction cost increases, etc... The design costs are approximately 15-20%so that would add an approximate$3M to the 2012 total. Funding will be in small amounts as it is available and budgeted on a yearly basis. he 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 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 23'd Ave. SW. I have owned the house 'nd 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 ' ax: 239-566-9561 ,.....::,-mail: SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us APlease consider the environment before printing this email 1r/)(\ PARRISH, WHITE & YARNELL, P.A. attorneys at law Both Sandra Mediavilla and Parrish, White & Yarnell, P.A. intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorizec 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 fgu GOLDEN GATE PRESS STATEMENT RE: POTENTIAL COUNTY ACQUISITION FOR STAFF USE This transition [of the Golden Gate Utility System] follows the original FGUA vision and historical practice - of partnering with local governments to acquire private utility systems, move them to public ownership and improve their condition to a high quality municipal standard. The FGUA has an agreement with the local or"host" government wherever we are [now in 14 Florida counties] to convey these systems to those governments when they desire. The Golden Gate system was among the first acquired by the FGUA when it was formed in 1999. The Golden Gate system was one of several systems purchased from Avatar Holdings, Inc (Florida Cities Water Company). Other systems acquired with Golden Gate included Barefoot Bay (Brevard County), Carrollwood (Hillsborough County), Poinciana (Osceola & Polk Counties), and a system in Sarasota County. Since the inception of the FGUA, there have been a number of utility systems acquired and then conveyed to local governments. 11;:,rWhen 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 "M" 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 Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220 From: MottToni Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 5:28 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: DowlingMichael Subject: 1983 Agreement- GAC Land Trust Attachments: 1983 Agreement.pdf; Reserved and Available List with Folio 2016.xlsx Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Kris, Sorry I missed your call. Please find attached the 1983 Agreement between Avatar Properties Inc, f/k/a GAC Properties Inc. and Collier County. Michael Dowling is the liaison with the Golden Gate Land Trust Committee. Also attached is the list of remaining properties. I'll be out of the office next week Monday through Wednesday and perhaps we can meet and discuss and questions you may have after that. Just let us know. Thanks .7,,/ 'f eo7Y 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 00842617EVNOY 18 AR o 22 COLLIER COUNTY • RECORDED AGRIzteNr 64' THIS AGREEMENT 0fP node and entered into this 15th day of November, zi e-, 1983, between At TAR PROPERTIES INC., f/8/a/ GlIC PROPERTIES INC., a 0 0 Florida corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Oanpany", and COLLIER ca cn 9t N coaarY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as 'County, acting by and through its Hoard of County omissioners. WITNESSET H: WHEREAS, the Company entered into a Oonsent Order with the Federal Trade Omission 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 be used0 o to provide facilities for such things as recreation, utility and D c7 CO community service for the existing an firtnre residents and visitors of rn _ Collier County, and to provi• y of fund improvements within the area known as ..t eco - • - lir_ ... Ai4Lherein; and WHEREAS, the of <$ .. ,_-nt Order was - • 917 ar-•-ny and the Federal Trade • in a Modifying Order ins April 17, 1979 - . the . " no longer required • - ••,,.- to deed to Coin; the ,101. .S r: .tes; an• WHEREAS, the • ty has iria-• _ ._• - previousl •_- land from the •..•. - ••ii .-.. ,- .4_ conveyed by Ctanylir 061. ` 41' recognize that !*.'sof -. .r .61:• : ._ by .- . , County remains r,R). tial need to enable the .i, ty to =-t present and fut :'.�•'is needs of the Golden r. tat__ :. WHEREAS, the lill -y- has determined that the . nt of a,a- that certain >,. October 4, 1977 have been • V. ly satisfied by various - Cmpatry, incl :•' . i .. limited to exchanges of purchaser o _ 'I. • ,• .„,! - ,sews, and expenditure and tendering to tuft 0(3`•- . canal maintenance and water retention facilities; THEREFDRE, in consideration of the aforesaid premises, it is mutually cvnvenanted 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 shouwn 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 lards listed in Exhibit 'B' encompassing approxi- metely two hundred ten (210) acres. These lands are within the area marked I as sheen in red as set forth in Exhibit 'C" hereto whirl, is incorporated herein by reference.ns�� *,, Coja CV..,�r�'ry6_.VFY7.op —1 7'i>In.'�•�e..I pregarey by�1:/401 FA'K T'u'ISAUAoA) p.`cii:J(3-"uAry sou�tF +ac:,x;xr avol®(3D.'.xmate Area Master Plan RtitetlittrMinte Paper Page 141 of 220 Lora Gables.Ronda 33,34 11 001052 000L92 . OR BOOK PAGE bl On or before December 31, 1983, the Ctxrpany 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". cl On or before December 31, 1984, the Company will convey to the Canty appro b:lately two hundred ten (210) acres within the area marled III as shown in frown as set forth in Exhibit "C. d) On or before December 31, 1985, the Company will convey to the Canty approximately two hundred fifteen (215) acres within the area marked IV as shown in green as set forth in Exhibit "C". e) On or before December 31, 1986, the Company will convey to the County approximately two hundred fourteen and five tenths (214.5) acres within the area marked V as shorn in yellow as set forth in Exhibit C . 3. The Company and County will meet in October of each calendar year referenced in Paragraph 2 so as to mutually establish and agree upon the property to he deeded frau_.Cowany!.s.' ventory to the County for that particular year. •.1x th tte . n-- .-... and County are unable to do agree then/� • thus-2euxht• 1,... -- upon a mutually acceptable ' arbitrator to settle . : dr • ' - as to property to he do . -. . County by the Company for ..:t pa icular year. In the event tha tLhe-Etapany.and the Ccunty are una, e to'agree as to a mutuall('a . ..let�dedent arbitra.' , then the •+ and the County gree abide by ar hi.tati. . -- to the •- ican Arbitration As.Boria r a ='- :.:1111k- - e)•- "�,, tf�'� t what properties she dont=• ( tt e •.. ,tyk, le b7I 4. the Cpopapy i igaik, to'eli er to �y , County thirty C�rj30).'(t re an' y= stile ii /II Commitment shooing e to be good and insurable! jectito 1.1 and zoning laws,',* tions, reservations, l' /eag.m. of record, taxes fork a„baai�nan of the year foil '{ ,3a ;' .' of conveyance ands l ears. If the county has tlt3e� objections, they must las,‘ in writing tc,...CompanN4hIn forty- five (45) days from Counti"..iy,:eititticf,ttsii,6*.lhei3vard. In the V event that the title shall notes.' wt -acid insurable, Company, at Company's option, may cure such defects and shall have sixty (60) days in which to do so, which additional time will extend the conveyance date herein provided. If after reasonable diligence on 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 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 r, shall be used only to provide goverrnxental facilities for existing and ii future residents of Collier County, with all capital improvements to be physically located within the geographical boundary of the area known as "Golden Gate Estates" and any prooseds fran the sale of dedicated lands as provided herein shall be utilized for capital projects, as ; ; Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rt tt 2.19'1 ite Paper Page 142 of 220 001052 000I'93 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 prcperty include fire protection facilities, police facilities, public schools, libra- ries and recreational facilities and equipment necessary for the oper- ation thereof. Neither the property dented nor the proceeds from the sale of any dedicated property shall he used for the purposes of ac- quisition, construction or saintenance of roads and fridges, or similar projects. If it is determined by a court of enmpetent jurisdiction that the Canty has allowed the lands or any part thereof to be used for any purpose other than the aforesaid, the ownership and title thereto shall revert to the Company. The conveyances provided for herein shall be made by the Company to the County regardless of whether a present or immediate need racists for such acreage in the year of conveyance. The parties hereto recognize that the progress of development in Golden Gate Estates, .,. ----.the need for facilities, is not dependant upon the .. iii .00.,...6,. -in. The Company shall have the ri. .to and mineral rights for - •- donated hereunder, the right of reasonable • g‘ed and egress. In the event the or- ation for or expl. tati.. • .. oil or minerals on sub - 1 results in dame.= thee- . . in a diauni • in vel •f - subject property, the •...: agr-- - "Ey ful y the • y f., such damage or : .- . ue , '. 6. The r. ty to i a - `t`l or = and all reven = -• by of -f any described herei .' t . .- 1 .- • of • :9,!Oi collected so tha be determined that said ._,,- firs -ve utilized only for •. + ..--s provided herein. /J liAllt- 7. It is and agreed that the Ccun "~ dim4 i' right to sell or -squired hereunder. ty [. shall not sell or trade - .206 of said lands { year. The County does hereby agr-- tha . .� . A bJ`ii'• shall he subject to the sane limitations . - ,..,• ... is purposes 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 he used 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 cu pleted by an M.A.I. and the conteoplated conveyance may be oonsunaated only if: (a) the sales price is ninety (908) 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 (908) percent or more of the appraisal fair 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 Company shall quit-claim deed the reverter interest of Company • referenced in Paragraph 5 to County. ,, Golden Gate Area Master Plan RtarttlitiMilite Paper Page 143 of 220 0' 1052 000'. 94 . OR BOOK PAGE 8. It is understood and agreed that the Company 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 Ornpany of all terns and conditions of any such sale or trade and the Company shall have the right and option for thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice to elect to acquire the property for the same consideration and upon the same terms and conditicm. If the property is subject of a trade, the Canty shall, through the appraisal referenced in Paragraph 7, establish the fair market value of the property and the Company shall have the right to acquire the property to be traded for said fair market value amount. The Company shall have thirty (30) days from the receipt of such notice to respond to the County by notifying the County of its desire to exercise the right of first refusal. If the right of first refusal is not exercised by Company within the stated period, the County shall have the right to sell or trade the property to suo jhimd , . but only at the price of sale and upon the terms t € • • .. . , irated to the Company. Ma sale . .- - �t>.1 the foregoing regui i lied with by the1 . , f'' ight of first refusal th the land, and failure of - •. . to exercise such r t case.sahall not effect the •••,.- - right to exer 'se rri - t ; case then . - arising. The status of title to •y y e • .--yywith = right of irst refusal opti r _ •''� i.. _ - lirTilt_' _ , et • - •"� rice of �.•f pr.. • �fy t County confi . ealti . m. ., =• for!, - cr •- shall be elig ' r - oe 0 'l.h .�..t. — 9. In vi, K. premises and in coni.- r ion .; the . obligations - . =V,-ibilities hereunder, thee24• y .-re, e:,-- the Company, its . ��h''t` ••rporation and their su _i . .':.i, and I all obligations . . le,.. 'unities, as set forth in - - t dated October 4, 197 •ri. bE which is atta. _• -•ked Exhibit "Ur, and incorpo1P‘ ,1::12./1.,0 10. The Company and the•C... • 3 ,wally sharing in revenues from the sale of excavated spoil materials in the Golden Gate Estates area, and it is mutually understood and agreed that during the duration of this Agreement, the County will continue to have such rights as the Company can convey, at no cast therefor, to utilize such • spoil materials that remain available from time to time, for fill purposes on the various land parcels conveyed hereby, if such is deeded by the County to be needed. This Agreement will terminate on Iiecenbet 31, 1986, except for the provisions of this Paragraph 10. I. 11. All amendments, 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 Mail to: 01 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rtarttlitritlfffite Paper Page 144 of 220 '1 4 OCI052 000195 • OR BOOK PAGE COMPANY: AVATAR PROPERTIES INC. c/o Avatar Holdings Inc. Attention: Legal Department 201 Alhambra Circle Coral Gables, Florida 33134 COUNTY: COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Collier Canty Courthase Naples, Florida 33942 FEDERAL TRADE CC/MISSION: FAL TRADE COMI.SSIIN Bureau of Consumer Protection Enforcement Division i4mshirgton, D.C. 20580 12. Company 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 pawns, having been duly authorized, and is not in contr."-• of the law or the terms of its charter, by-laws or of - .. .•+att.-I of agreement to which it is a party or . ;. r is or other writings sutmi t maty with this Agr=:._. •- setter in connection with - -- t are or shall be true, cor , ..,.lete, valid and ge . Ceunty-warrants that it has every ight .. enter into thi- Agr-: -nt 13. The :cos the State of V• da - = 1 .. - n the .. - tion and in - . - '• 1 ,.•, .. =•t. 7 14. This is >,., re►�/' to :1. • . parties here � - above, and � ,.- understandings 15. Other . - set forth herein, 'es merei¢ .-- that there are . � - • , representations' wgrr1 , oral or written relati • aV Agreement. 16. It is her-. law, custom or 4 - contrary notwithstanding, that ,N.4411.1, a. ,,,,y,;(“fliebita.t,all times to enforce the conditions and ag -8e3 -i in strict accordance with the teams hereof, notwithstanding any conduct or custan on the part of the Company in refraining frau so doing; and further, that the failure of the Company at any time or times to strictly • enforce its rights hereunder, shall not be construed as having created a custom in any way or manner contrary to the specific conditions and agreements hereof, or as having in any way modified or waived the same. 17. If it should tense necessary for either of the parties hereto to resort to legal action or arbitration under this Agreement, -5- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rt4ta'tttP¢m'V'Giite Paper Page 145 of 220 1 Cr1052 000)- 96 • CR BOOK PAGE the non-prevailing party shall pay all reasonable legal fees, oasts and other expenses incurred by the prevailing party, including attorneys' fees at trial or appeal level. 18. Invalidation of any provision or clause in whole or in part by Judgment or Court order shall, in no way, effect any of the other provisions or clauses which shall remain in full force and effect. IN NIINNSS sREtIDT, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed according to their proper authority and seal, this day of Prr- i S , 19?-•i-. AVATAR PROPERTIES INC. Witnesses: (CCRPCNATE SEAL) / �4��,� •f s _\ (....?...u.,,:et.. Attest: ! ‘__,../.._.-/ 'f`-^w-1.".......:`. ool 1tiY - test: . , C �" I G , .. ism J. •:7Th, w S V ` 4...\ \.., \N.,., o dor 1� m-1' �,IC- i -6- Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rpt fdp7'6fite Paper Page 146 of 220 EXHIBIT "B" UNIT TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 44G- S7-95' of N. 150' I-H- 6 390 N. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 7 81 Entire Tract 9.11 11 107B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.17 0 0 11 139D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 �• ' m o 13 20D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.17 o LO : IV 13 144C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.17 14 114D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 14 127 Entire Tract 5.77 15 35B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 16 84C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 0 17 18C .�-7fi oC - TSO 1.13 CD o 17 36B - �j�•y (moi . 1.13 rn [�v co 17 89 CS Entire Tract „It4.62 ~ 17 10 D a� 75' of E. 150' 1.13 18 D ' - 75' of S. 50' 1.17 18 9B '. - ;$; 1.13 18 (55 t' a ,acll 4.43 �" 18 67S ' of a�150' f f„,.,.i,j1.13 18 killN. 75' of S. 80' 1.17 19 1j E. 75' of W. 1.13 20 2 f Entire Tract li (' ' 8.78 f 20 17A ® W. 105' of W. 180 `ec 1.59 20 810 n AJ 1.13 20 134C TY G ' 1.17 23 318 W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 23 58W W. 180' of 330' 1.75 23 75A W. 105' of W. 130' 1.63 23 800 E. 75' of E. 150' 1.17 23 1190 W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 23 142A N. 105' of N. 180' 1.63 23 143A S. 105' of 5. 180' 1.53 24 19C E. 75' of 150' 1.13 24 523 W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 24 68B W. 75' of E. 180' 1.13 2,, 7a'; I. 75' W. :80' 1.:3 l .glcign Gate Area Master Plan Rtalt1.2f9071itite Paper Page 147 of 220 • UNIT TRACTDESCRIPTION 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 CD c rn 25 28A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 co o 0 ca crt 25 28C E. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 7K ro 25 77A W. 105' of W. 180' 1.59 26 13A E. 105' of E. 180' 1.59 27 30B 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 C. v o 28 35D E. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 v o co 28 98D of '' 1.13 m co 33 103D -'?`' ^� 1.13 33 104B CP W. 75' of E. 180' '?' 1.13 48 43C N. 75' of S. 150' �`^ 1.13 48 12 _ . 75 o . 4' 1.17 49 6 AS '-. ' • 81' 1.59 49 1 6 E i � `� 60 49 1\13,9 N. 7 ' •f ,180' V C�+ .17 50 S. 75' of N. :0' t,! .17 50 23 N. 105' of N. 1.59 50 24D 71'. N. 75' of N. 15tt'1 r'0 1.13 50 66A 0 S. 105' of S. 180'`/s,„ 1.59 50 103D y C�.J y 1.13 51 3D f. . o.E-4 1.17 51 10D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.17 51 35D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 F 51 43C S. 75' of N. 150' 1.13 I i 51 69D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 51 50B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 51 107C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 • 95 A Entire Tract 4.09 r 95 38B E. 75' of W. 180' 1.13 +' 95 47D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 95 53W W. 180' of 330' 3.92 95 95D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 95 1050 E. -5' o_ E. 15.0 1.12 ._.l. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rl�'ttBf¢enTite Paper Page 148 of22Z14 1014:83 1 ' L UNIT • TRACT DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 95 106C W. 75' of E. 150' 1.13 96 - Road R/O/W - S32, T48S, 29.28 R26E 96 121 Entire Tract 4.52 97 10 Entire Tract 5.67 C) o 7, o 193 15A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 to — 0 0 193 16C N. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 CD N 193 218 S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 48B S. 75' of N. 180' 1.13 193 54B N. 75' of S. 180' 1.13 193 72D W. 75' of W. 150' 1.13 193 93A S. 105' of S. 180' 1.59 0 0 193 94D S. 75' of S. 150' 1.13 -v ca T.- .I.,- 193 r193 135 71 V r v� 3.00 rn coo c 194 27A o , 1.59 194 27C �� N. 75' of S. 150' J-* 1.13 194 30A • ' of S. 180' 1.59 194 34+ > ..' 5' . W. 1 0 1.13 194 5 Cir)' .13 194 6 D (IC -•S. 75 0 . ` L.13 194 8'07 . '50' .13 194 ' 92,r.:,4, W. 75' of E. 0 .13 195 85 Entire Tract �0 4.77 A 195 115B ''f— S.-75' of N. 180' V 1.13 195 131N O 150' of 330; „(` 2.50 3.00 195 133S F 1.1 195 135S S. 1 •' 3.00 4 i I s. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Rtiltttarli Nite Paper Page 149 of 220 I r:r1fl57 000500 RECORDER'S MEMO: Legibility of writing. Typing or Printing '.;l COOK PAGE umatisfsdory in this dorlmlent when received. _ —_UNITS BY NUMBER P z 77 - �^ f _ Y�n a u c - - STATE ROAD 646--Z-e - . . ALTAI e I •- Z. U .-�X�j a.j-rl CA. ;"il a , .dr,. 1�^/4 ' MO-sTnri mai.in • `. ;�lLaz,a,,:,MMUS ITP MI ®n Ir.4Ynl"s'!n0....[SI m / U \ o U CIES . . 0 < 3, 1:.: .. • mg I% 1 DI 1- V i ' r .9TEwmer BLV4 X .\ l `\vim% �'r,( M ©©. CI ©� I U y m 1 ›.. Cliel1 -a- 1:3 ?t'(12f)-1)g .g 4 t Cla • . ---..„ SCALA • Golden Gate Area Master Plan R1S tt8f¢0Y'61ite Paper Page 150 of 220 L • EXHIBIT D of Collier County, Florida (",..,_ .;.. lnty") to accept, in principal, a program for the completion of the roads and canals in Golden Gate Estates and the eventual acceptance of . c.:, such roads and canals by the County. This Agreement is subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court. cm ca cm CA N The Company estimates the total. dollar value of its planned expenditures to be $3,100,000. This total is broken down into four categories as per the..attached Schedule A. The Company would propose to fund $300,000 to the County to be utilized for capital improvements, maintenance o 0 . and restoration work in tl t1- ate Estates canal. system. -o o- s ••oC e gi tely $300,000 or m The Company pr •fps, (;l __such sum as is , y'to accomplish:- Ve e ring and • restoration o tho e canals lying South of . -ewa Boulevard and North o Ta am - (w11C s are - oss hatched on Exhibita ti e "* The mp - --ti�� to t ea •-� r s -.r- o • and\ reme- dial effor ' e• .....1.• -- road ikcl riann3 the raising of\bad elevations on certa `' road preili yantly t South of Stet coulevard and fort Tania r,Ai1 (as 1 identified by -rpke lines on Exhibit 2 a♦ e' •could cost approximately $14(403,1. y The Company prop. -s jc 4 ee4 of %500,000 or such sum as is necessary to accomplish the raising of _ road elevations..elevations.v14The estimated cost of the road restora- tion and remedial efforts for unaccepted completed roads, (which t-rork could be deferred until the County determined to have it accomplished) is approximately $700,000. The Company prcposes to fund this $700,000 to the County for une for capita] improvements, restoration and mainten.:rce r as required by the Golden Gare road system. F' Nt:CiiBt.):R5 11E)ill: lPhnK • nf writing. tOt ordurrmirnr m .,tiro ,i-::.,i - Golden Gate Area-Master Plan Rffitttbliy llitite Paper Page 151 of 220 L ilr!.e, ;1Cv ?y she ..nu:,t .:CaaLL uC .3 ... _t_.t_i-,. 1. -.;. The Company would be agreeable so the $300.000 canal fund referred to above and the $700.000 road fund referred. to above comprisiniv a single $1,000,000 fund for use by the c, a CD County for capital improvements.and maintenance of roads co — 0 0 and/or canals in the Golden Gate Estates area. CD cr, Pq N The Company proposes to spend approximately $1,200,000 for water management (retention) and related structures to enhance the overall water management of the Golden Gate Estates Area. The details of the proposal which at present o contemplates•a 500 acre plus or minus retention pond with cm na o controlled discharge will be refined and worked out with the g cn _ m o County Engineer and i pf»d ,j`ly rip •_' .al engineers '^ engaged by the C t e C`ompai'#, •rior to com- mencement of c n tion thereof. The C any •r•,.oses t.; ..r. d ap.• oximat ly• ' 00,000 on drainage an di e work in WE .n to t at set ort} above, including he . r c r b:ythyr:: As stE rev ously, a •mpn• ise >La' initial approval of'ked. bove concept, which : cent iiis the ' • acceptance by tion of the entire' .-f,t Estates d ' canal system (wi h(f l xception of the as outh of � �. l Stewart Boulevard a 'r,Nc�rgthjf taeif �, upon the �s t4 ,, ll�w y.- tender of the sum of $300,'': by.-the-trustees of CAC to the County. Implicit in the request is the understanding that an application for acceptance of those canals South of Stewart Boulevard and North of Tamiami Trail will he accepted by the County upon the completion of the clearing; REO IRI Ki MEMO: legibility of writing. Typin¢ r Printing umati•fa.tory in that document ..two r.rived. Golden Gat- • ea y aster Plan RUM1.911Miite Paper Page 152 of 220 ,..... reoration w concempiaren act _., ,.. . . coiLio..n consis,_cnc ,...iHI oy.iilin.J1 .. , H. : • F.r.. IT RESOLVED chat the forctgoing p-w,... , is her.- i)y approved in principal, subject to Eyrt .r rt:finc:rer.t. . . DATED:. October -4, 1077 BOARD OF COUNTY CONMSSIONERS ATTEST. COLLIER COyTY, FLORIDA WILIA/0-„/REAC91,/flak .. - -;,..,..i. - oas Arc r ;,;;,.. .//(e` - .. -- r ra :. o - . Chairman - -1 : •' • CAC CORPORATION . , . . C3 .-.'. • • . % Wi:4fles;id: ' ' - o '=, .CJ1 .4 // .c)., 7C S. .;. «./ - -. - __ ___...-- .er<--" ..__ 0' , IF , _ ,..4./. Abir•'(.• I / 4•11. . W • ,.,•n, Co-Trustees 00" 0 4 ViNt, cm —0 .., • C3 Gal L CO linsie . 7._•-)., 4...) -7 E CII -c . . ! • t- • is. t . : 1 RECORDER'S MEMO: Legibility nf uriting -1'. iiing or Prtit, int un,rittiat tory in awl atm tauten* wit.. rerrit ca. Gold n iate Area Master Plan RlitittafitYnite Paper Page 153 of 220 \ 1 ......- " 1052 000504 77 JR BOOK PAGE • GOLDEN LATE ESTATES • 1. Canal Maintenance $600,000 This provides for cleaning of North Area 32+ Miles 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 Toads, plus raising certain South Roads to Construction Standards. A. Raising est. cost $500 B. RestorA.•I 1C-i 'Remedial fob.•-{docee*c !) (1 00 3. Weter 1a .gement (Retention $1,200,000 and talylted structures. 4. Dra ag °. -4 *ark $ 100,000 11)11111( �3 $3,100C 00 , • 000 (I (71 i • • 0, al 5GPic-Dua • Golden Gate Area Master Plan R121112WiTiite Paper Page 154 of 220 00 00 Q\ 00 r tf ON 0 7 N M N O ON M NO M 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 'D 7 00 7 N N N O 7 N © 7 N 7 00 Z N O 7 M In 7 O 00 In 00 00 00 ON M M 7 O a N O O' x N 'O In O r 7 r O 7 M C' In r — M 4 4 tV © 'O © 7 7 'O 00 In 0� �D N 00 N 00 7 O r a, 7 7 In 7 N x x r r r 7 o C' In in 00 x r r N 7 00 N 7 r r r 00 M M M 7 7 7 -- eo r In o r r r a r O o 0 00 a a a 0 0 0 0n M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 M M M M M 7 7 7 M M M M 7 7 7 M 0 WeW Q O O O O OO O O O O O O O ' O O O O O O O O 7 O O O O D N A If: oo N N N 7 0' 7 in O O r O in in o M ~ iro in in 00 M r „M.. N — 00 Iek 0f1 N a in O— O— sr:, O- 6A SR 519 SR EA N9 F/9 519 614 69 SR EA 6�3 F/9 519 SA a a d w a" O 0 0 0 0 _ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U o 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = Q C:?.. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 © o 00 S. © 0` 0 0 0 0 7 0 ON 0 ON In 7 M NO NOIn In In M In 6T-1 H4 619 00 619 6/4 00 00 00 00 00 619 614 En6A 00 Q-1 L. 7 7 u 3.30 ti EA N a a a a :: y y i . .. .. .- R 0 M O O N N 0y CC dLdLOO ...6 O LVO O C L L " R R R 7 7 7 R R 7 7 7 52. 7 7 .M.. M 7• I. Y 63 61 6> 6i Y Y C) CJ CL) 6U C) 67 CL 0.4 C 0 W L L L .0 Y a Y' a Y 1 Y 1 -0 d L O O L L '0 "d (y a L L L L L L L L L 7 C3 R CC 7 C3 7 U 7 > co L L L GL ti . 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 CO 7 W r1 63 m CC 0- O. co, 6.3 v u ,14 CU v u v Q d d Q d d d 7 7 L L L L L L L L L '.....,,. V CA 0 EA `n o 0 7 Z Z 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 = r�., CCC . L Z L L 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 V h u u t �C„ �7„ Lt f. Lr. k. LT. L. Gr. LU E.L. Cr C4 I. CO CO L 0 L L CO z c v p�, 7 7 7 7 7 ON a s r r r r 7 a a a a 01 ON 01 0 T N —, IA IA V1 In .� N r r r 0 0 0 r r r r o 0 0 0 LL N N N .-. .--, .--, N N N N NO v0 .0 in In In M .0 .0 .0 .0 N N N — -.N M M en N el EN eV EN en^ ^ ^ M O VD W 00 r N N T r -t r N — M r r 'O 00 C' r M 7 7 r D\ Lu N r ON IA R — — r NO In 'D 7 ND M If! 1r (, O' 00 7 M 7 — — V1 7 If) 7 — — .6 r ici ooQ — M .-. O r CIN r •O M 00 O 00 N 00 O N x On _, M .M. — = O O O O O x . M-� - - — 00 O — O O u x In x In .�. .-. y `J 7 u O u u — u V v U V 00 M V eel — V L'et 01 L L L L ' r� L co L L L W co L. !/p Z V] cn Q� C 7 w w w 3 O In w w w vi In o - ° o o o ° ° o ° w r o D O r r r 0 w Q d < Q Q Q Q Q a Q 6n z w w 3 In M '" _ x x r a r D In ao In a M M N L.) 00 N x In N Y Y N x O‘ ^ M M M M M 00 In F E. ,Z M 7 r 7 0 00 00 00 00 N O — M M M r m ..I N N .�. ON 0 NO C. T — N 7 — N r r 7 In In if) N N N 7 00 N W N x — — .5 p„ 7 .� N m Cl In r 00 rn o ., N m v In la 1;_-21. o0 0) © RI r,..- m ;,51.,1" io r 100 I 7,1 )I o I.-+I N I(Cl v n 16° .-1 .-1 .-1 .-I .-i .--I .--I .-i .-I N N N N N N N N (Cl (Cl (Cl (Cl (Cl (Cl (Cl 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 Crom: Susie Mahon <susiemahon@comcast.net> :ent: 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 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 From: castillaglass120©gmail.com ;ent: 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 From: Octavio Sarmiento Jr <sammyosjr@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:06 PM To: JenkinsAnita Cc: Kitty Paz Subject: PARADISE FACILITIES Attachments: BROSURE_0301.pdf; collier_2016_sde031519696081546.jpg; EMAIL_0305.pdf; LETTER_ 0304.pdf; patio and legalization-Model.pdf 1 (6 files merged) (2).pdf; PROPERTY APPRAISER_0302.pdf; SURVEY.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Anita, How are you? Hope you are doing well, we spoke on the phone few times in reference of a Church and now we also have this other Project that we had start prior, We are now also informing you of the intend and plans of Extension to the Existing Home Care Facility. I am attaching letter, documentation of the Home Care Facility, Parcel ID, Site Plan, Additions and Expanding Plans and more, so you can be aware of our intentions. Plans of expanding and adding from Six Residents to a total of 14 Residents and we love for you to add us and help us, so we can count with you and the County to be part of this new changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan, that will allow us to Expand. We like obtain that window of opportunities and continue our project, which then will continue with SDP building permits and others. Let me know if there is anything else you may need from us. My best Regards Thank you Octavio OCTAVIO SARMIENTO JR ASSA-AGENCIAS SARMIENTO S . A Permit Consultant 239 - 601- 0485 sammyosjr@yahoo . corn www.permitandplans.com 1100 Commercial Blvd # 118 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 160 of 220 From: JenkinsAnita ,ent: 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 'len 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 From: ScavoneMichelle Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 4:07 PM To: militorl@rogers.com Cc: VanLengenKris; WilkisonDavid; JenkinsAnita; ScottTrinity; KhawajaAnthony; AhmadJay; WilkisonDavid; PutaansuuGary; LulichPamela Subject: RE: TO 6153/ RE: Future of Rural Golden Gate Mr.and Mrs. Milito, Thank you for providing your comments.We appreciate your input. Staff will be reviewing all input received and forwarding to appropriate staff for future planning and programming as funding availability permits. On behalf of Staff, Michelle Scavone, GMD Operations Coordinator From: Ron and Lilianne [mailto:militorl©rogers.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Future of Rural Golden Gate Good afternoon Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could - not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with 47th Ave N.E. 47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road. The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area Thank you Sincerely Ron and Lilianne Milito Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 162 of 220 From: Jayne Sventek <jsventekl @hotmail.com> :ent: 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 relcomed 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 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 Prom: 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 ignage to warn drivers to be on the lookout for bears, panthers, and other wildlife on the roadways.This will also inform newcomers of the existence of bears and panthers in the county, which still comes as a surprise to many GGE residents. Signage of this nature should be a part of the Master Plan. A greenway has been brought up many times in the discussion of the Master Plan. A bicycle and pedestrian trail could be made alongside VBX. An independent trail is what I am suggesting- not a narrow path which is actually part of the road. I hope you will put, or keep, wildlife conservation as a part of the GGE Master Plan. If you need more information on anything I have written, please let me know and I will provide it. It has been my experience that the majority of people living in GGE want wildlife as part of their community. Thank you for considering my thoughts and suggestions. Sincerely, Carol M. Pratt Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 165 of 220 mea c, 0 0, e -ft a` f,•11111§, it:• ......„, 0 • i The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.ore 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 /1//cA7 - 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 02 November 2016 g Page 2ar.41® The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civie.orx A. Complementary Land Uses 1.) Formal Low Density Overlay for the Rural Estates—eliminate densification of E zoning Benefits: * DRGR/Watershed over 90,000 acres at no cost to the taxpayer Complimentary to Corkscrew Community and Sending lands in RFMUD and RLSA • Well Field Protection—county and municipal (Naples) • Community Character • Secondary habitat transition between Conservation land and development 2.) Incentivize the recombination of 1.14 acre lots (legal non-conforming) Development credit(voluntary TDR program) for use in urban density and infill? See also GGWIP 3.) Update LDC regarding compatibility requirements, setbacks, and buffers for all non-residential uses in the Estates including but not limited to Convenience Commercial, Churches, Schools, utilities. 4.) Update LDC regarding land clearing regulation and setbacks, for all uses to be consistent with Wildfire safety and management recommendations established by the Collier County Fire Districts and the Florida Forest Service. 30 feet of defensible space and acceptable setbacks for all Estates lots to allow access of emergency vehicles and equipment Consideration: Completion of the Estates Community Wildfire Protection Plan 5.) Establish appropriate Setbacks and Buffers and compatibility standards for all adjacent RFMUD and RLSA land uses. Previously recommended changes permitting non residential land uses in the RFMUD must be applied so as to preserve the rural residential character of Golden Gate Estates. To that end, it will be essential to establish appropriate buffers and transitional uses, together with appropriate controls over the location of utility service lines and transportation corridors. To achieve these goals the following recommendations are submitted: a.) Projects directly abutting residential property shall provide, at a minimum, a one-hundred (100) foot wide buffer in which no parking or water management uses are permitted. Twenty- five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer type C as outlined in the LDC. A minimum of fifty (75) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained or created native vegetation and must be consistent with appropriate subsections of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The 100 foot buffer shall not be part of a setback, but will be a separately platted tract. Setbacks shall be a minimum of 50% of the height of any structure other than single family. b.) A solid masonry or concrete wall 8' high and on a 3' berm at the development (RFMUD) side of the 100' buffer shall be required. The buffer area shall be supplemented where needed to assure an 80% opacity is reached within one year. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 167 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 3 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-(.'ivie.orx c.) All lighting shall be consistent with the Dark Skies initiative. Parking lot lighting shall be restricted to bollards except as may be required to comply with lighting standards in the Land Development Code (Ordinance#04-41, as amended) and other governing regulations. d.) Rural roadways as typically used within the Golden Gate Estates neighborhoods shall not be used for access or utility conveyance to any new development. Appropriate truck route management tools need to be employed to limit Community impact from adjacent development. All adjacent RFMUD and RLSA residential and commercial uses should be considered. 6.) Develop Rural Architectural Standards 7.) Develop Rural Median Landscape Standards B. Transportation and Mobility -Roads 1.) Complete the study for a New I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. Consideration: Restricting expansion of Everglades Blvd. to 4 lanes to service Estates needs. RLSA growth Management planning should address appropriate right of way and developer contribution to meet RLSA transportation needs for the predicted population growth (est. 300,000+) in this planning area. No unreasonable impact on the established low density Estates. 2.) Prioritization of the improvement of Wilson Boulevard North to commercial services, and the Wilson Extension south to White Lake Boulevard to link Golden Gate Estates to North Belle Meade Receiving lands and future economic development. Provide a needed road corridor to the north, south, and west. Wilson-Benfield Corridor Study. 3.) Extend White Lake Boulevard east to the proposed new I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd. 4.) Complete the Green Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor linking North Belle Meade Receiving lands to CR 951 and points west. Consideration: Extension of Golden Gate Parkway rather than Green Blvd., to improve connectivity and reduce the need for excessive Eminent Domain through the Estates. 5.) Complete the Randall Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor to the RLSA. S Curve Concept review. Consideration: Improvements to intersection of Randall Blvd and Immokalee Road are a critical infrastructure need and the choke-point of Randall/Oilwell/Immokalee Rd. Consider an emergency declaration to accelerate needed improvements at this intersection due of impending transportation failures. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 168 of 220 02 November 2016 Page 4 ' The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Elates-Civic.orj C. Economic Vitality— Commercial Development 1.) Commercial Goods, Services,Jobs for the Estates provided primarily from zoning in adjacent areas including: Orange Tree PUD, RFMUD Receiving Lands (846 Partners, N. Belle Meade), and RLSA (Rural Lands West) 2.) Possible focused Commercial Overlay within the Estates adjacent to existing Commercial in the Randall Blvd. /Oil Well Rd. area east to the intersection of Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. * Along Randall Blvd. adjacent to Publix (already zoned/) * Randall Curve/Golden Gate Land Trust 40 acre parcel across from Orangetree * Wilson Blvd. / Immokalee Rd. intersection 3.) Update Standards/Size of Convenience Commercial parcels in the Estates to provide sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water retention D. Environmental Stewardship/Watershed Management Water Resources Management: 1.) Incentivize single family Water retention/detention and Dispersed Water Storage in the Estates to retain/detain storm water and promote groundwater recharge. Ponds, swales, other 2.) Support completion of the North Golden Gate Watershed Improvement Plan. GGWIP to improve drainage, support aquifer recharge, integrate with Picayune restoration. 3.) Consideration of ASR Wells in Receiving lands, especially Sec 15 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 02 November 2016 4 Page 5 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.ori 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. "1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 170 of 220 yea Cii� - • ::i7ti(17fk'or,/ The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Estates-Civic.or' 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;e •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 28 November 2016 Page 2 ®�.I The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc. PO.Box 990596,Naples,FL 34116-6002 Eslates-Civic.orjz 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 Collier Soil & Water Conservation District Dennis P. Vasey, Chairman 14700 Immokalee Road, Suite B >A '' Naples, Florida 34120-1468 o-a ,o 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 FIHF MH N ; 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, /7 -yr James Cunningham Fire Chief Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 174 of 220 Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220 From: Chris Henning <chenning@continentalfin.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:06 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: rrosin@peat.com; ELLEN ROSENBERG (ellenrosenbergdesign@gmail.com) Subject: RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Mr. Van Lengen: To carry forward from our previous discussion, we own 2 parcels in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan- Urban Estates. These parcels are 6715 Golden Gate Parkway (currently a residence) and the approximately 7 acre parcel (as referenced here-the "Undeveloped Parcel") at the north-west corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. Our objective with these parcels is to develop a commercially-viable project. Our group purchased the Undeveloped Parcel in 2007 with the intention of building a medical office building for Anchor Health. At the time, one of the partners formerly associated with our group, Paul Zampell, was in the process of building a medical office for Anchor Health on 951. Paul believed that Anchor wanted to proceed with our parcel as well. Unfortunately, after acquiring the Undevleoped Parcel, Anchor Health, the prospective tenant, decided that it no longer wanted to expand its office locations and withdrew from the project. Having lost our intended tenant and unable to locate an alternate medical office user, we ordered a market study which identified healthcare as a use which would generate sufficient demand to support development. We incurred significant architectural and planning costs in the course of coming up with a mix of assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing, and independent living units on the property. The PUD did not support alternate healthcare uses so we sought zoning relief which ultimately was tabled shortly before Mr.Joseph Rosin, Mr. Zampell's original partner, passed away. The Undeveloped Parcel is one of 2 parcels designated as Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict on the "Future Land Use Map." Note that though referred to as "Future" on the map, it is the land use zoning currently in place for the undeveloped parcel. We are limited to a single story structure of not more than 35,000 square feet, and the only permitted use is for medical office. Unfortunately, the limitations imposed make this parcel nearly impossible to develop and none of the prospective purchasers who have contacted us, are interested in the current zoning. We would like to develop this property for commercial purposes consistent with other properties in the area, such as the CVS across the street from us.The corner parcel across from us to the south on Golden Gate has, to our knowledge, been acquired with the intention of commercial development. As more residents move to the area, it is only natural that signalized corner parcels such as ours be developed with retail uses to support them. We appreciate your consideration and would request either that the Commercial Infill Subdistrict restrictions be changed, or that the Development Parcel be moved to a new designation that would allow for more commercial options than currently exist. Should you have any suggestions in terms of participating in the general master plan review process that is going on, please let us know. Sincerely, Chris Henning Ill 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 176 of 220 847-291-3700 rom:VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen(Wcolliergov.net] Sent: Friday,June 10, 2016 3:43 PM To: chenning@continentalfin.com; rrosin@peat.com Cc: ienglish@barroncollier.com; dgenson@barroncollier.com;JenkinsAnita Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy. Chris and Robert: We discussed a property of interest to you approximately 2 months ago. It is located in a future land use designation: Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict. It is zoned PUD, and located in the northwest quadrant of the Santa Barbara and Golden Gate Parkway intersection. As an update, we began a series of public outreach meetings, all introductory in nature, pertaining to Rural Estates, Urban Estates and GG City. We will resume in the fall with topics more granular in nature, such as comp plan and zoning subdistrict overlays. A meeting summary of the Urban Estates introductory meeting can be found at: http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/community-planning-section/golden-gate- area-master-plan-restudy/public-workshops . 1. My notes indicate that you were considering sending an e-mail at some point to express your points of view. 2. I thought you might be interested to know that we met with Barron Collier engineers/planners, who expressed an interest in development in the SW quadrant of the same intersection. In case you think there might be commonality of interest or perspective, I have copied them on this e-mail and you may wish to contact them directly. Sincerely, Kris Van Lengen,JD, AICP Community Planning Manager Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-7268 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 177 of 220 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. Da.vld -w 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: davidweeksCdcolliergov.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 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. don't believe you would be disappointed in what we can show you. Thank you Bill Confoy-- 262-0802/643-0001 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 179 of 220 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 ,44 GradyMinor Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors • Planners • Landscape Architects May 1, 2017 Mr. Kris VanLengen, AICP Via Email: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net RE: Tracts 103 (east 180'), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 Dear Mr. VanLengen: We represent the property owner of the above referenced parcels located at the SW quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and 13th Avenue S.W. The parcels total approximately 12.5 acres. This property had a pending Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) amendment in 2014, which the property owner requested it to be placed in abeyance, in order to participate in the re-study process. An aerial location exhibit is attached for your convenience. We wanted to provide you with some additional information regarding the parcel as a follow-up to our meeting on April 4, 2017, which we believe will demonstrate that this property should be re-evaluated for the potential of non-residential land uses as part of the re-study effort. Under the current GGAMP, the site is designated Estates, and based on the existing criteria, the site is only eligible for one dwelling unit per 2.25 acres. The site is ineligible for even Transitional Conditional Uses. The property owner recognizes that the property's proximity to the quasi- industrial FP&L PUD, and the newly 6-lane segment of Collier Boulevard, renders it illogical and incompatible for very low density residential uses. The property owner had previously proposed to amend the GGAMP to re-designate this property as an additional Neighborhood Center, with additional restrictions on buffer and setback standards for the 12.5+/- acre property. It has been our consistent contention that the property is not appropriately designate for only low-density residential dwellings due to the changing neighborhood conditions with the expanded Collier Boulevard and the increasing number of vehicle trips that utilize this major roadway corridor serving the eastern areas of Collier County. An economic analysis had also been prepared in support of the amendment, which demonstrated that the demand for additional office and retail services could be supported by the growing population of both Golden Gate City and the Estates area east of Collier Boulevard. Additionally, with the then impending expansion of Collier Boulevard to a 6-lane arterial roadway, additional pass-by trips were anticipated, also contributing to the market viability for office, retail and service uses. In our prior discussions with Growth Management staff, they were not supportive of an amendment to the GGAMP that would result in retail and office development on this site. They did; however, support an amendment that would re-designate this site as a Conditional Use Sub- District which would then permit the owner to submit a Conditional Use for a variety of non- Q. Grady Minor& Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1 144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com • I . • Mr. Kris VanLengen RE: Tracts 103 (east 180), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26 May 1, 2017 Page 2 of 2 residential uses. Some of these land uses would include churches, schools, day care, group housing/group care, private schools and social/fraternal organizations. In our most recent discussions with you, you too acknowledged that the site may no longer be appropriately designated to only permit low density residential development. In that meeting, we discussed the possibility of possibly modifying the Transitional Conditional Use section of the GGAMP in order to permit this property to qualify to apply for a conditional use. The GGAMP already acknowledges that these conditional uses can be good transitions between non-residential and residential land uses. We believe that a minor amendment to paragraph 3e), Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria would be appropriate to specifically indicate that this property would be eligible to seek a conditional use of the E, Estates zoning designation. The amended language could read: 5. The east 180 feet of Tract 103, Tract 119 and Tract 120, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates are eligible for conditional uses as identified in Estates zoning district. We would appreciate your consideration of this minor change to the GGAMP as you continue your re-study efforts. We believe the unique location of this parcel adjacent to the existing FP&L PUD, which permits not only electric generating substations, but also open equipment storage, maintenance and fueling facilities and any other use deemed appropriate for FP&L(since the FPL plant is no longer subject to local zoning restrictions) is incompatible with very low density residential use. The property too, is located on a 6-lane arterial, which contributes to the incompatibility of the site for residential use. Attached are photos of the FPL plant, the subject property and its intersection on Collier Boulevard Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Attachments c: Via Email Larry Brooks Bruce Anderson GradyMinor File Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 182 of 220 prom: Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net> :ent: 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 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: ajturner37@hotmail.com Date: Wed,4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400 To:fredcoyleCa@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<alturner37@hotmail.com> Date:June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com> Subject: GG parkway Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before, and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the safety of our children. 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 185 of 220 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 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 220 239-289-4420 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 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 0:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. Sec the re meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of obtaining the cors' concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Mast+ changes could potentially include 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 neirhbo response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate Parkway to so their efforts to commercialize the Parkway. WHAT TO DO: ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOPS 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 AL ONG 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, WF ENCOURAGE YOU LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN TO: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY QPPC CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARI LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET RESIDEN1AL CHARM NEIGHBORHOOD." TALK TO YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. IT IS OPPOSITION TO BF HEARD. 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220 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 collier2ov.net twitter.com/CollierPIO faeehnok.com/CollierGc you tuhex um/Col ierGon April 27, 2016 FOR PMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Area Mastt Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on t Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning doeumct Gate arca 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 hop..The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Bouleva will he held at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center, 4; Parkway, Naples, Florida 34116 It is critical to the success of the Master Plan that the residents of this area participate in def vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed. Agendas will he posted prior at httus://www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies. During the coming year, there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and sl on the (IGA MP, including advertised public meetings, digital forums, website inibrmatiot web content. All interested parties arc invited to visit https://www.colliereov.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 stakeholh email updates or to provide comments, please email us at: GGAMPRestudvecolliereov: Two or more members of the Board of County Commissioners, City of Naples City Cow 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 t Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, Florida 341 12, or 239-25 as possible, but no later than 48 hours before each of the scheduled events. S accommodations will be provided at no cost to the individual. s Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220 Questions and Answers Concerning the Upon announcement that the 1-75 Proposed Commercialization of Golden tate planned. the residents expressed development of the interchange might Parkway commercial and conditional uses consistently made their concerns knc leaders, and the response from such What is bein, proposed'.' 1 here is an effort underway to been that the impacts of adding the change the Collier County Growth Management Plan. and surrounding residential ncighhorhoo thereafter the County's zoning ordinance, to alloy.'commercial and the neighborhood would he pro uses along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road development; recognizing that interci and Santa Barbara Blvd (the "Corridor'). The proponents of development. In fact, in consideratic this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at larg front on Golden Gate Parkway. the proponents of leaders put in place significant barrio commercialization are proposing to ultimately rezone the rezoning and the expansion of conduit entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors, developers and What barriers are in plat commercial interests. The proponents are pooling their money commercialization of the Corridor' to hire attorneys, engineers and other professionals. The has been for a long time, zoned proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential zoning classification land. Their first step will he to propose an amendment to the commercial uses; and the Growth Ma part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known as ]nog time, designated the Curt the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (the "GGAMP"). which neighborhood to he used for primarily guides future land use decisions and presently prohibits commercial uses along the Comdor. In December 2007. contemporaneous the 1-75 interchange, the Board of Why should this change to the Growth Management Plan consistent with a 'treat deal of corn' be resisted? It the proponents are successful in changing the consideration, adopted an amendme GGAMP, it will pave the way for the Corridor to he filled with contained the following policy ~tatem commercial uses: very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. In order to "Recognising t facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant residential nature of t1 changes to the roadway system in the neighhorhocd are 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 Subseetioi establishments. They want to eliminate direct access to Golden (fate Area Master Plan, tln Gate Parkway for many of the existing streets. They want to further commercial_ zoning install additional traffic lights along the Parkway and funnel ahuttinp Golden Gate Put all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The I.ivingston Road and commercial establishments. including gas stations, Boulevard. list• new Gamma convenience stores, retail establishments and offices will be permitted on properties attract additional traffic and congestion to the area. including accessing Golden Gate Park transient traffic from i-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. 17I improvements and utility facilities. such as sever and water. exception Pr that asistirrg will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Co additional traffic. These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrict. which is Io would likely span multiple decades. as has happened on Pine northwest corner of the Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community. Golden Gate Parkway and and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding BotelevardJ. 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 these adverse impacts. The same Board of County Commissioners types of businesses and ren ices as are being proposed are requirement regarding conditional use already nearby. "Recognizing t h this a new issue for the surrounding neighborhood? No. residential nature of ti ii is not. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have r.,rrn.inrrirm rhas nlinnril 1-?' 9 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara of local area neighborhoods we Boulevard. except" [there is a limited anticipated. The only changes that h "'1 exception for David Lawrence Center. are those which were anticipated. Center Point Community Church and provisions of the GGAMP restricting essential services J. Further no properties adopted in anticipation of such chan abutting streets accesstng Golden Gate area; actually, in anticipation of the pre Parkway within the above-defined segment to hear as a result of those changes_ shall be approved for conditional uses except" [there is a limited exception for The proponents will also assert that ib David Lawrence Center, Center Point desirable places to live. Some prop Community Church and essential services]. Parkway. recognizini! the value of the have made sizable investments in hu As mentioned above. the Growth Management PlanIGGAMP their homes to make them nice plat is intended to guide future land use decision making. widening of the Parkway and increase Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their property will ul amending the above provisions of the GGAMP. Amending "Commercial" and are therefore hold the GGAMP is an expensive and time consuming process, and their property. Some proponents migh amendments must be approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of slight 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 area for all Na Why is this happening now? Property values have been commute through. rising. The pmponents of commercialization see an opportunity to sell or develop their lots and reap large What can will t financial rewards. There have been changes in local government leadership; and the proponents are hopeful that The good news is that there are sigr �1 the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the propo. resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled. in order to achieve their objectives. They believe, perhaps, the time is ripe. Those are the real why there should be any change to the reasons. GGAMP. On the other hand. the government leaders to maintain t However. the proponents will assert that they are unfairly appearance and utility of the Corridi restricted by the current provisions of the C'GAMP. Yet. surrounding neighborhood and protect while the community undertook the process of cons:dering the residents has not been tested. It i. future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to spe, through public hearings. the proponents were almost entirely influence in order to resist the pressure: assent. On the other hand, those interested in avoiding the bear by the proponents of commercials; 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 leaden.. write letters. atte Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to • to'`properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this proses: within the above-defined segment" (i.e., the side streets). bearing upon the outcome. You are en Unfair' matter w ith people residing insi neighborhood; to encourage the Furthermore. many of the proponents have purchased their lots conunercialiration of'the Corridor. along the Corridor subsequent to adoption of the current provisions •of the GGAMP, knowing well that they were Traditionally, the Naples community ai purchasing a lot in a residential area - designated to remain a in favor of maintaining the predominan residential area. of the Corridor. They have put in G--, conmieicializatioin. The proponer, 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 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 Crom: Elizabeth Foster<elizabeth©judithliegeoisdesigns.com> ;ent: Friday, October 28, 2016 12:22 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Fwd: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study Sent from my iPhone Date: October 28, 2016 at 10:58:55 AM EDT To:<GGAMPrestudy( tcolliergov.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 x 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 193 of 220 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 crom: Tony Ojanovac <amoappraisals@gmail.com> Ant: 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 From: Daniel Jenkins <dwj2790@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 2:35 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Golden Gate Master Plan Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Mr. VanLengen, I am writing you to express my strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or Apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the QUIET, RESIDENTIAL character of our neighborhood. Thank You, Daniel W. Jenkins 2718 68th ST SW Naples, FL 34105 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 196 of 220 Crom: 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 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: boystravell7@comcast.net ;ent: Monday, July 11, 2016 3:26 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: Commercialization of GG Parkway Follow Up Flag: Follow Up Flag Status: Flagged We wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We are interested in receiving notices of future meetings. Thank you, Carmen and Jorge Lopez 2831 64th Street SW Naples, FL 34105 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 199 of 220 From: Jo Gennis <josephinegg@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:24 PM To: VanLengenKris Subject: GoldenGate Master Plan This email is to notify you of my opposition to ANY changes in the Golden Gate Master Plan (along Golden Gate Pkwy.,between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara Blvd.). I oppose the commercialization and/or apartments along the Pkwy. We must keep the "estates zoning" ( as promised ) to keep our neighborhood 100% residential. Currently, large single family homes are being built and sold in this area. Many of the older homes have been upgraded. Children who grew up here, are now adult homeowners. This is a prime residential area and we want to keep it that way. Sincerely, Larry&Josephine Gennis 2711 66 St. S.W. Naples,F1.34105 Sent from Jo's iPad 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 200 of 220 From: dapbrock@comcast.net ;ent: 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 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 Crom: ohmantrisha@aol.com ;ent: 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 From: JenkinsAnita Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:23 AM To: Tony Ojanovac Cc: GGAMPRestudy; VanLengenKris Subject: RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) Tony, Thank you for taking the time to attend the meeting and provide your written comments in the email below. Your involvement is very much appreciated and your comments will certainly be maintained as part of the record. We have added your email address to the distribution list and will notify you when the next public meeting is scheduled. In the meantime, please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or would like additional information. Sincerely, Anita Jenkins, AICP Community Planning Section Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-8288 www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies Original Message From:Tony Ojanovac [mailto:amoappraisals@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951) To Whom It May Concern, I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP. I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial.There is no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels. We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone. Anthony M. Ojanovac Cert.Res. RD7070 AMO Appraisals, Inc. Sent from my iPhone Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to ; 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 Crom: Lisa Pearl <lisampearl@gmail.com> gent: 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 isaMPearl@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 From: Eric Solomon <elsolomon65@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 12:22 PM To: VanLengenKris Cc: Jessica Horowitz Subject: Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway Dear Mr. VanLengen We have lived at 2760 66th St SW, Naples since August 2013. One of the primary reasons we purchased that particular piece of property was the longstanding developed residential nature of the community and its proximity to all Naples has to offer. It is important that our voices are heard at the County level. Unfortunately we are unable to personally attend tonight's workshop regarding the commercial rezoning efforts due to prior commitments. To be clear we wish to make it known that we vehemently oppose any changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose commercialization of the Parkway and/or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the Estates Residential Zoning which protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood. We welcome all opportunity to be heard. If you wish to speak with us directly my cell number is (239) 293-7138 and Jessica's is (239) 293-6954. You are of course also welcome to email us anytime and would be most appreciative if you would include us on all correspondence pertaining to this matter on a go-forward basis. Thank you for your time. Eric Solomon &Jessica Horowitz 2760 66th Street SW Naples FL 34105 1 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 206 of 220 crom: VanLengenKris :ent: 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 rith 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>; r:renchJames<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 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(a�DonStevensonDesidn.com Web: www.DonStevensonDesign.com 2 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 208 of 220 3 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 209 of 220 From: Angela Turner<ajturner37@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM To: TaylorPenny; VanLengenKris Cc: barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall Subject: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential. After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am hoping that that promise will be kept! Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway. We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with ANY commercializations. We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway. Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is, especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a stop light would cause more accidents". We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again, Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization. The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic nightmare. Subject: GG Parkway From: ajturner37@hotmail.com Date: Wed,4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400 To: fredcoyle@colliergov.net Commissioner Coyle, We, the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security. Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can actually achieve what they are asking for. 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 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 edwinkoertr@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 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 petitic community leaders to prohibit the allowance of any commercial rezoning effot 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 meetinglworkshor f,:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 11 at Golden Gate Community Center. See the re% meeting is a public workshop held for the purpose of cbtainint the comr concerning the possibility of making changes to the Golden Gate Area Maste chanes could potentially include amendments to the Master Plan that commercial development or apartment buildings along 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 nei,hbor response to the efforts of property owners along Golden Gate Parkway to soil their efforts to commercialize the Parkway. WHAT TO DO: ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING/WORKSHOP, AND FUTURE MEETINGS CONCERNING TH PROVIDE YOJR 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 Al ONG THE PARKWAY. PROVIDE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY. YOU MAY RECEIVE NOTICI MEETINGS BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO COLLIER COUNTY, BY CONTAC- LENGEN AT 239-252-7268 OR THE EMAIL ADDRESS BELOW. YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO C SEND AN EMAIL. WHETHER OR NOT YOU ATTEND THE MEETING, WE ENCOURAGE YOU " LEADERS KNOW YOU OPPOSE THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF THE PARKWAY, YOU CAN TO: KrisVanLeneen@colliert;ov.net STATING: "I WISH TO MAKE KNOWN MY OPPO` CHANGES TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ALONG GOLDEN GATE PARK LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD. I OPPOSE THE COMMERCIAL!: PARKWAY OR APARTMENTS ALONG THE PARKWAY. 1 AM IN FAVOR OF MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL ZONING WHICH PROTECTS THE QUIET, RESIDEN1iAL CHARAC NEIGHBORHOOD_" TALK TC YOUR NEIGHBORS AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BE INVOLVED. 11 IS - OPPOSITION TO BE HEARD. 5 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220 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 collier2ov.net twitter.com/C'oilier PI O facebook.com/CollierGol voutube.com/CollierCav April 27, 2016 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Collier County Requests Public Input on Golden Gate Area Maste: Collier County is hosting the second workshop in a series of public meetings focusing on tl: Area Master Plan (GGAMP). The GGAMP is the county's long-range planning documcn Gate arca 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 hind uses should be arranged to live, work. shop The next meeting will focus on the area of Golden Gate Estates west of Collier Roulevar 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 den vision for their neighborhood. Public participation is needed. Agendas will he posted prior at haus://www.collierstov.net/GMPrestudies. During the coming year,there will be various opportunities to provide public opinion and sh on the (K AMP, including advertised public meetings, digital forums, website information web content. All interested parties arc invited to visit https://www.colliereov.netfi frequently, to see the background materials, current planning efforts and areas for direct pub county planners may research and gather the issues and concerns important to all stakehold' email updates or to provide comments,please email us at: GGAMPRestudy3colliereov.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 prt 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 C Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, Florida 34112, or 239-25: as possible, but no later than 48 hours before each of the scheduled events. Su accommodations will he provided at no cost to the individual. 6 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 214 of 220 Questions and Answers Concerning the Upon announcement that the I-75 Proposed Commercialization of Golden Cate planned. the residents expressed development of the interchange might 1 Parkway.. commercial and conditional uses, consistently made their concerns kno+ leaders, and the response from such I What is being proposed? 1 here 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 prof uses along Golden Gate Parkway way between I ivingston Road development: rcco nizing that interchs and Santa Barbara Blvd (the "Corridor"). The proponents of development. In fact, in consideraticu this change are a group of owners of residential properties that and those of the community at large front on Golden Gate .ParkwayThe proponents of • leaders put in place siamificant harrier commercialization are proposing to ultimately rezone the rezoning and the expansion of conditio entire Corridor from end to end. Many of the lots along the Corridor have been acquired by investors, developers and ►hat 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 tons time, /Dried proposed changes would involve approximately 170 acres of residential zoning classification tl land, Their first step will be to propose an amendment to the commercial grecs: and the Growth Alan part of the Collier County Growth Management Plan known as long time, designated the Cour, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (the "GGAMP„). which neighborhood to he used for primarily t guides future land use decisions and presently prohibits commercial uses along the Corridor. In December 2007. contemporaneous the 1-75 interchange, the Board of C Whv should this change to the Growth Management Plan consistent with a treat deal of comm be resisted° li the proponents are successful in e:ranging the consideration, adopted an amcttdmen GOAMP. it will pave the way for the Corridor to he filled with contained the following policy stateme: commercial uses: very similar to what presently exists on Pine Ridge Road in the area near the 1-75 interchange. In order to facilitate such development along the Corridor, significant "Recognith residential nature of the 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 lots restrictions on conditional fronting on the Parkway to facilitate access to commercial Conditional Uses Subsection establishments. They want to eliminate direct access to Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the t Gate Parkway for many of the existing streets. They want to further commercial zoning install additional traffic lights along the Parktivay and funnel ahuttint+ Golden Gate Purl all neighborhood traffic into centralized intersections. The l.ivingston Road and S commercial establishments, including gas stations, Boulevard. bio new eamnte t convenience stores, retail establishments and offices will be permitted on properties a attract additional traffic and congestion to the area. including accessing Golden Gate Park, transient traffic from i-75. Significant additional roadway above-defined segment. /At improvements and utility facilities. such as sewer and water. exception for that existing , will have to he created to support the development and Golden Gate Estates Com additional traffic. These development efforts and their impacts Subdistrict, which is lot would likely span multiple decades. as has happened on Pine northwest corner of the I Ridge Road. The adverse impacts on the Naples community. Golden Gate Parkway rrrrrl . and particularly on the remainder of the surrounding Boulevard]. neighborhood. will he significant, rind there is no present demand or need for additional commercial establishments in Also, as a result of the same ; the area that can justify these adverse impacts. The same Board of County Commissioners types of businesses and services as are being proposed are requirement regarding conditional uses already nearby. "Recognizing th is this a new issue for the surrounding ueisihborhood? No. residential nature of the it is not. The residents of the surrounding neighborhood have ,.,,,,.,,,,,,,ii,,,, tt„a „i,w,,,,,,c 1-74. 7 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220 Livingston Road and Santa Barbara of local area neighborhoods wer Boulevard, except" [there is a limited anticipated. The only changes that ha exception for David Lawrence Center. are those which were anticipated. Center Point Community Church and provisions of the GGAMP restricting essential services]. Further no properties adopted in anticipation of such chang abutting streets accessing Golden Gate area; actually, in anticipation of the pres Parkway within the above-defined segment to hear as a result of those changes. shall be approved for conditional uses except" [there is a limited exception for The proponents will also assert that the: David Lawrence Center. Center Point desirable places to live. Some prope Community('hutch and essential services]. Parkway. recognizing the value of then have made sizable investments in huff As mentioned above, the Growth Management PlaniGGAMP their homes to make them nice place is intended to guide future land use decision making. widening of the Parkway and increases Commercialization of the Corridor would require first convinced their properly will ult amending the above provisions of the GGAMP. Amending "Commercial" and arc therefore holdit the tJGAMP is an expensive and time consuming process. and their property. Some proponents might amendments must he approved by a super-majority(minimum that a certain level of blight along tl of 4 votes) of the 5 member Board of County Commissioners. favorable to their cause. A clear signa `fhe goal is to keep these substantial harriers in place and to that the area will remain residential wee prevent commercialization the health and viability of the entire ne an even more desirable area for all Nap Why is this happeninz now? Property values have been commute through. rising. The proponents of commercialization see an opportunity to sell or develop their lots and reap large What can you d financial rewards. There have been changes in local government leadership; and the proponents arc hopeful that The good news is that there are signi" . the resolve of the community and local government leaders to and substantial hurdles that the propon, resist the commercialization of the Corridor has dwindled. in order to achieve their objectives. A They believe, perhaps, the time is ripe. Those arc the real why there should be any change to the reasons. GGAMP. On the other hand_ the : government leaders to maintain th llowevcr. the proponents will assert that they arc unfairly appearance and utility of the Corridot restricted by the current provisions of the GGAMP. Yet. surrounding neighborhood and protect t while the community undertook the process of considering the residents has not been tested. It is future land uses in the Corridor and surrounding neighborhood residents of the neighborhood to speal through public hearings. the proponents were almost entirely influence in order to resist the pressures absent. On the other hand, those interested in avoiding the bear by the proponents of commercializi commercialization of the Corridor spoke out. And there was strong community-wide sentiment to keep the Corridor You can expect to be invited by yi uncluttered by cottmiercial uses. involved. You may he asked to sign f government leaders, write letters. atten Note that the above provisions of the GGAMP apply equally voice your opinion. The extent to w to '`properties abutting streets accessing Golden Gate Parkway neighborhood participate in this process within the above-defined segment" (i.e.. the side streets) bearing upon the outcome. You are enc Unfair" stutter with people residing insid neighborhood, to encourage then Furthermore, many of the proponents have purchased their lots commercialisation of the Corridor. along the Corridor subsequent to adoption of the current provisions .of the C;GAMP. 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 cumin=ialization. The proponent. The proponents will assert that a change to GGAMP is Golden Gate Parkway will not prevail I necessitated by significant changes to the surrounding area die surrounding neighborhood act as if 1 resulting from the 1-75 interchange, other roadway and it does not matter. Please take tl 8 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220 Crom: vkeyes239@aol.com lent: 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 From: Jim Duffy<jim@jimduffyconstruction.com> '"\ Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 10:59 AM To: GGAMPRestudy Subject: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study To Planning and Zoning Division, Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to Livingston Ave: We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted. Thank you, Gloria L. Cooley James P. Duffy 2760 68th ST. SW Naples FL34105 239-272-6881 Cell Jamespduffv(a�comcast.net This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. . www.avast.com Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 218 of 220 CHEFFY PAS SIDOMO 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 fbanderson@naplcslaw,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 220 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 PI/I) 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/mmg CC: Larry Brooks Wayne Arnold Enclosures Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220 C9 Z r:--'' LU w 2 Z 0 Q 2cc0 u_.z 0 0 o 0) z o pc N co0 -- � c , = J • L ,-- : . , I. .o W , •..1. • . .`� ..�• -3N•1S-4:1104- ' L 11 C O r ra Ot a U 1 �I r f r IE=verglades•BI•vtl- 14 11"‘. ,,.,.,;:ari '61"".4- ....).: ...": '-:',4,-.: - �. .' ~ NO - rr it u • - i }' C 1'* • - w .•••001+ -, -- .3 "TM I W •- i; ars -=;••••- t•--; - 7 (i) f 22nd St NE= " s U ' r r . t• E „ORA,. t / ? y 4 �..�' m ' . 20th-SFNE- t• 9elo-DX. . r 2222 �- / � • ; .� ='. -••18thSt NE's ` � ' , -: 3 ) r R. . • r = d w M d, -16th St Ft • % - •/pt:f to Proach®tv I ,, Pis )7.--,,,....„..,..., L- tiL aad`�i -f { i 1 4. , - •-..1t- Victory L - - o •• o.�,, L , 14th-•' r~ ,�•r t'T ¢,F��"`.• `t5_, _ j t r- - _ ...A.-•- %—Math-St NE i l i t• Lt'' k -I • o cc4li i.. ' .. ? ;. Ili .I I f 4! 4,0., • �I t cam{ +` �► J. $ lad .' . .44:1 ` ,, i IL {� .. . L1J o T 7L01) , .. ,,,. ...„, _.k? .„,. .,, , 4 c7).. O oco• - ---------- f� „,, a .s CU / 4/. ' t.r '',.....- • '1.7.11.1.11”‘ '—. \ ,J 0 % ./ii&L if . NSI?, ,L, II e1 4 M�.-1 f tr A y (....x....7,-. -•-at- ._ .,:. I ` 'r- 4: I111 JJ t� +. • M- rn 4.._.A ''1; 71"-- 1" • • I i .. •41 1P1 T r f los, . 4111 I 141 Nr 114. ko- 1 a a Itb r t . Z 1. 13 ...‘k..:„..\14, ,44 . y. CU W ' • I ' I. S C. M a) E a)03 O U U O co U 0 4...,,E. D W I, a- •L Ur 0 Z " 73 +.) m — D 2 r13) cr) 0 .4_J ..., o 2 w to c U z •a) z •7' O c E Z co .— N O 0_ 2U< 0 m W N O F.— z a) >, 1-- , a) C) < -0 +' Z v) 0 _I c LU a) +-� W °- 0 '5 2 ._ D ..-. L-9 E a_ 0 Z E O w W +--) O J W p U W .- a) Cr. LLI 4-.) W C Q Fi O0 E 03 o � ZF.., �- V) Z CU cu 2 2 ,G) D c .4-7) F.- N U •- W cu c73 Q O Z oc U_ as Z O CI.) a.) 76 tIn' •D c -0 O a V cda ad a O -O Um. .g cu p >- U V) 7.3 Ln ro`n '^ a) cu a� " Cr)Zli-7, *-7, qa O g ... 1 (...J t a-) W r0 G L. 00 ..= by 0O 121 = --J � 0 L L . = u to cu L C S VH P 0 .C1) .Q O cD +1—' ate'-- L V W o a �, 0 D - c • c 0 °o 1. 1 m CC vi ci'a Was a3 O �3 C "O L a--+ O C a CC +-, O `n 11 O 1:6s JD C ev E LJ.J a, • —r13 O °' 4-1 O O �r�o O E 4 ,TZ DE Ln I-L ri,t11° ° - ro V CO J00 >. 1).... W _00 , _ ›- H Ci") ---Z .7 7; C. � d a X � � do a. i a ,Q; oo a a, `" c a) - L" CI) o. fa. a., Q. .�-, 2 vl 2 `n S cri O r0, 72 rs. , . L O +r O — a.' cr J V Cid t:4L C +-+ 4--' r0 lad = r0 ad v, O . •O 1.1CC Lll z VVo 0 -0 WO Z Q L1J ° a a �' _ .� y L rG 5^ �+ ;- V T a--� J N1 L ... J J1 _ J� V V r0 rG 2 • J - -J QJ V 4- V LUs a., 4- a.1 a) �, V Q V 1 •� vl o4_, O = r,Z ,C. + rG }, W +- 2 v... a I/' V T • O v ▪ -- n3 rG -0 N = O • +- i +- Q ''G L ^ C aJ a' `4- N ` Cl. N L O - O } O O ICC ._ r Cid .• 4-JT e- O m L V JCD MO • w •f = v tD Film. CU +� •.•1,r13 rG O ro a - p 4_, a, p X v, O a, - a Z • Clo n > (U µ_ Cld _ OL -00.,r,, v V o� CL) - +� — 4r ^ V - +- - •▪ 9— 4' a a CI 0 +' r13 O" CIO ` ;a °' Q `„ } +-' .vo N O v Z -4.0 GQ< i O .vr JO — vi Cl..) V ZQ • o y O0.. 0. , +-'V � as •- ./.' rC • • O do I>1. N V'• r rG - _ T — — CC 0 > VI J1 rG e Tj V1 = a., 0 t/1 Cid a, � '1' -- NQ W O o +� ti a� a, ▪ �, 0 (G O s *-' a .0 aJ X e , s T G CU aJ M IT u f s rGa-, ' '_ c p :G uU W _ V J - �, 0a-, � aJ � � ? - J V J !-` - _ CL, +, V V - rG U J>- 4Lj -' 4_, r `rG ` 4- — e▪G Oy O Lu "rG .- Ti U t]Q n ^� �- 4., O h�� rJ rG rG ,-- IT L ▪ L ` J �•• �.u1 L Tj rG v V J1 • - V Q Ti W f V = Z J1 i - Tj Q GC VI T 4- > = Q s...., �, O W • MOI IN IN U (I) o N Q z < w N• _� CU O ,-4 2U � o +1 w� « „� .,. o�roW NVId 311S 1Vf11d3ONOO pro.; ' S 10111+....M PG OLIK`�Sl`�Mi i111.1/1..VM.YVI.. 06 :..IMO 4, 10.`OO.LOS.d.. YOCOMO OVOX'UM'I000K _.JIM -f1�L46W11414 116 1.4 i 0- S.11.00 S.11.00 uw.mn•o3waxw. .iccs:o-L ...... NrTIM MINOS•ill Qflds3MI I ~(JS v 11421,14/014r11.0 On COL,'P3 . „W,�„ S3LLf1gVj A1Nf1WW0'J 113.M 110 p SNd9N3tl h gg 74171 h I- I•. _§ Y `V `V Y `V i V g N e` uJ•`g a 1 E p >S E1 $ S o Q rciga zsol-my Zw W g8 « « « « R if, yN��oR<< �g�yy 4� = ZZ� 7 j 0 T. ,o,„, Z yyX��t]LL C . aUbW gE1;1 � U VmjOi m O W;t 1YO��II y,y�16 Tog,1.. .g yV�pppO .12-132 aVI w g Q rVm LI. p7 g„W,„@U5 N�wZ O:1. '-',r.,.1,,°2 WE<U W 0: VVI l7 trig? . S2N W f CµµIIW< Ri O.' Z <Iy 41,U.., u V T. } N �<jJ <Wq w W u~i57 W '0'6Rut 'Bill p60KKK65829a(7,' 6 icij w UW W«W = pZ r� 0. a Tg Z JZQ 10 IyO flaw7hQ ,. ;O Z <u 2 F vIN w . 1 ' 'SS aZ' W Z gg w 4 < t u1 S W 0u{ H 6.8 x; � c4 pi66- cE Ifi g3` yp N W, �Y LI ��N J N� � YZ�ROSY f_�3F�Z Y1� 7 W g . %V5 S 0 g ; o z ° UJ U n i T/I1N301S3M 1 A11WVf31014S 3Sl0NV1 I 1MI1N301S321 AIIWVA-31ONIS:3S00Nv1 S31tl1S3 3 ONINOZ )IDV913S 021VA 301S A£ �A S 3du SOMl1 S31ViS3.3 ONINOZ w Lt •-i8 .. - ,. 1-- -__Y- -\ ,)-- . 1 0., , ....c, i. . 1 4.,. - ,W 1 .ACc I Z 2 I 1 y W I W ' _. _-__-- -.___.__ W D fn N / i u w I' I r W V ._.. W Ow I• �Z a I.1.1 'p � M W co azo . I 1 �_ W.9 0Oy Nto 'j � cc°y a p 1 gF ` 1 =4 I as w .ZN W~ Jw ..yLu CU I 0 p> ck.0 NI.] I ---` 53 I�x —0 a ur / li _ - W i':-/ I wows _I U <, c. ♦. m Z m W 7 f N Q ri ,,,, .. k 1;:, . w a W - z Vl odz Z I 4 r l 0 N Q it _ ♦ JI Q 33 Qa .+ 1 cuW I pg u,00 5 p~ cc $ ~ b5 :.o ' wa p w W �� '. ♦♦ ZLL LL I Wo WpC XLL y y F-0 m7 j - WN N31 31:p Z U y W m p W ZW )0 CC 1 r y WQ W Ill 1 Cr ZvN� i Q' C ` I•Q LLI W LL r 1 U' W m a. J I Z U rX t w v 1 TI Z k y1.: 2 IOcZ ps. 1 W - OQ ca � RD Z � N QzQ > N O —icu %_i 2ua. o +1 wLw>D ,:F .•• 6aaa.l, "74:N.::::1”,".":k� a 'y� Q - e„�,a,o„i NY1d 311S 1YI11d3ONOO °,404 oC a6cs t� OLIK l�4'„1H ilt+i ila,n Sj, Y+^, Jan MO 4MaC air 0,aai cilli a 6,OLK'o ,a OaIO. O"IPV'nM,'r'z NdfS�CIIA�/NC� 4 0- 6.11,D,4MC0il'OCYLCAM]a 6 ., 6 y,M,p INTIM MHOS mu man �;� ., 9L/1=0,1,040,10,/,LW/ mvto 1.i „...03 , ,a�ano S31111YJV�A11NnowicrJ113N1110 30 a. 0 `- snasma Mr* 191°" 3 yF aN - dz3a3rc6x - tta R ; W ¢ �$ 0F 2 i p0 = Wv = WzW F W 8E 7 W4 .6,„ api66 wa t0P wVm 0' 'i$m�a{OUgil5 x51/ $ NEM U mg )- QJ tg�? F unu084a ;w�_lai- N YS a igZ• .t 11 / W O ta6s2 k(B -' Lq V,LA , W a O E '.614 (T) E 'ciDW HN° u q°3iu A F< °6WgraLy6 uVW g dQQr, Q ° 00 eQ WaW Xnu333t § 6 5 y 4 9 3 00 a >ff >,� zk. z VE 0 � M i TVI1N3OlS321 1 1VI1N3aIS32i AIIWVA•310N1S:3Sl1 aNV1 AIIWVf310NIS'3SfI aNVI ,I siwn8 3dY3SaNVI S31V1S3.3 JWINOZ S31V1S3-3 ONINOZ MOVfl13S CANA 30IS A68 3dA1.9t 1 -_ 7 .__,--moi-- _ __. 12 I I. � c7,-1 .? a° w I W „ I ~ l i I yH W 1 a - - 1 I: cc On � r. I I W CC< LU 0 qpg ', , I p H W W I I r a2 $ cco o. w INa N, iIF=' IUW- y z� � H zLU L' wpm IZ LU 0 ! 10 S, x ° w `. . OZzz w I Z w •. l-Pc .LL : - O J W a.w j w ¢ H �. •. r J 7 �1.� i� COjL Y J 9 N CO u.11, �; � '� w Q �' I yon ��pj �I n J = = O w m co linFc NfL j',N " O 0, -�4. �� I W zLL � �Wa-1 ,. I — -- � w m0 Z=_ 1 I ., I 5LLm N 0. _, IWwN , a I Pe ,'; I - 1 =a LL I i 6� MI_ .E .II L (I) 2 co up O 4o 2OCCI Ntrld 311S 1Vnid33NOO.,.: _MOIL ... �" .....................,...., . 3a x,.y 0.1,.1.6,x. 'In�" O il,C 1,S3UM rw,,ow O N Y N I S w•.roO.r c,SAS. a '°`Sw3�' avca 7]INO St NdishiAva W;, LL cu111.1n urnmq-D,11.1.5ve v1as of V HENN13NN09'SM 0 anddo .NUM.,,wrS rwe.S1 .10.:X , ,11�,q 10 S31111IVd A11NfW 10011 Mll pa '8 C'.... SNCISM3b LONCM % f': W Z z to V `� 2 V V '.1 a3 - uza�3w " e Li 8 g 2 2 8 �i W §aj_p�o�°mom i w lc/ 2i� « « « « « 0 R N o;z wOPa = rc ZJz �€ lolg Q O Wum W Fyp� O W Nod",.4 W x=1-w .saOS WW ,, * " F iN odQp iO W R�VW_-6NN X;! . !iJw ;., U w Y > N w V^ 2 Tizt<OV W W UI VC W red$.W,ig '� Cn w5 0� LQ.b Q w .vq O �� y' �.ixztt j 8g ,-a Z N 1 g Z _2 ` yw� ~ W 2 'pu r w a, 0. ut0� w pa 'v F<JOW='^:!i 7W 0 t�_ N W Via � ! NM' ILI � Vl W � yW V�W N O�Cj �� WU' Jai Z Z ,fi IV J .O§L O 1 S LL' %7M g id bEi�zC�zC°4;g " rl'x Q3 QFQ 86 wLIZ FF3iGGG1 Fu5�33°5vu� � Z VE U M i 1 I TdaN3aIs3a 1 AIIWV1•310NIS 3Sn ONY1 1I 1VIwN301S3tl A1IWV*310NIS 3Sn ONY1 S31V.S3.3 :ONINOZ NbV813S QWA 30IS A6 1214-118 3aVDSaNV1 S31VIS3.3 :ONINOZ 1 81A111. _ E.,) W t b �� I 7 Q �1 y ��'Al II,-$I Q \\\ -_ < F O 1rt:, ir WW 2 raii 1 i:: 1 COIZIIIIINIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIMIMIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIII i 1 W W N N P I i I u 2 1Ns 2o� - I s w liF! 162 ces,J2 I, 1 i '', N > I� I o e)- J W 1 tna I Y QOIy� Y F-> $ 4woz ti 1 m Z ur •" wmc 1 ., p i O 4 u) r.N I V' 7 G.I' 4 W Q W • zo �w I� I > W z Flct ti ri' I D W Q W ce .7 W ,I. Q k who byO- :.o is 1 wQ 0C XLL '. • Jp0 - Wy iN3 1- U N W m pW W ' W m 0 ti I a N am I w�rZ-n 1 lb 1 30 IN NM -- i• ^ i I--1 0 J v m. 2U � � a ,,, ,. NV1d 31IS 1tll1d3ON00 '0 "P'«"«'"WM.R ac oc"`m"°°„Nw E O,a:Oo'ta "ta CV..,a,Bio son y��~a C� p t,,.N,s0,uNWD.s'o0.1C3PA. natam �.,..wa HS-110A 3SINOS'SR (]f�dj`.1 i sumo,uMrown,t, *IOW.'a L.11 O +++'.+MP n, *IOW. aorL.11 S3111llOtld AlINf1WW00113M 110 .4 ,� SNGS N3" .ni-� .,r.«, Q j t W 'H'�` ��7i Qgg 1� `Q'a Q6 ;ii t 23 1 « U VI- t S$ W ,n3 LT 3p, CP yg "- I@ZI�P f .vQ-� 10 $I•i ,. p s 3 1n + w!n 6 V � l g i W RR2 tohi pIpNz u81r,2.614# 13 0. 3V 2 � G v 3 z li C7 ,V ,n , 1VILN301S32! 1VI1N30S321 AIIWVf310NIS 3Sf1 ONY1 AIIWVt310W5 3Sf1 ONtl1 2933fI8 3e1VOSONVI S31V133 3 ONINOZ S31V1S3-3 ONINOZ NOV813S OLIVA 3015 AC g 3dA1.91 1 C (_ 1 I - _ _ _ - �, Z I tE � I a$' •:.I w� - zI- - i I <vIZ `aw w O I. w ---- Ig W- 7 �: << I � Y • I 1 ° Qin 1y w v> it'd." : I � a °, ppQ I WyW __: c.)6 -; i1 .7 1 -JiU J 1 I W I�� 1 W Z u7 w7�n I. b I O_ 11-- U) N w > I o W 12' W �^ I wa LU old g� I w J Z F :j $ Y N < wz •1mw � � a ( wor ms 'f li UJ u I I $g Qaz I :; I0 8� N V~1Ju.IwQ. 0 LL .c I-0 0 , 1 ° w< °O: wpm N31: Z U r LO _ Qtn a. -I w I 3LL 1, E f m° w°Z _ U l I z I W Lu 0-.1 J I W 7co 4 N Q. I o 2 0 o• r; r 10c, ;- - CTS ca. uw CD `JF. �- p.1. -1 ur.,,.. m-a p. A. I=g.J r?.. k< p ,-. . Lin , , " -• a E v 4 .- -- � C < '' O F--- .• ..-i may. ✓ i.. C . i CD ' ,Le,,, l 07=1 +./ ••5 .••.. Corimi C. Fa ',' c, n 0 = ft a g, o 5 e g g E. f 70 ng' 5 .j.--, ;-- o r) aL. l... d t V- ie.,''r PL ,•4. Z) •-• Eil --* > 3 fry O , 5 P P - 4--� .-, . r:14 0 CD ' Q �--� - 2 a C r") r:Y/' -.11 1--b• n = AD ,. CA P - Cv in UIQ C� .....0. �••-� CD 0 n = cr %— [I r^, fT '' 0.. CC e" P _ ,1 ''"'`, : — = ..-t- ,7Z-- rD tn..' CCS u P r-+ + E-10 x a t7 C e--r 7.1 ' < .I p , -ocn o c m m m O I m A zZ cm m rmen T r -< m cmn Z ,m<-4 m .I- ON v ZIN 7.-co < T O m O m m m O Z J *R.>: mR1 Tm O- x -< -nX mdm Cm ,.� "Z r : ' R Pg m i0 '^z f0 o : C%-- N z 0H- C,, W V MEETING NOTES COLLIER COUNTY **** DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT **** r, DATE 8- z2--11 /-/1 TIME ' /�^' NOTES BY Ai, � s TOPIC OF MEETING C/1P/'T ��'+' �`�'`"+^^<'�/ / i�/�j (')fel 6- / ��JAIL G J/ iiL/(,21. ATTENDANCE(print name clearly) J✓e- ,tviw fir'" "N Frei fat'i 414; ) Aldh_G;cTcss;ck 1/tuut0 ��+ral��.�+•�z,.(/ �TC /fl �d' v)<44 Frit- rz' G6E,9 j ell/e4//a S • / f'r�k f-c.,1 cl,l R lc% v-t-A /` w,,t Sw.,,-vs. /hi/CL S4^YLr y KEY POINTS/UNDERSTANDINGS/CONCLUSIONS e C-V /4',4r-her Lv6c44 tec.�071-P"'!„, CU' • tei t-`ct 14.49t'/d-' g yfv, Dr i 5v-he.C a to Zed, 4c/41a, . e A " r •LAVS — /1 e ` ,- C/` ufef ('cy , +,Or Ioc,MP,'e-hQ r Pr''il 1¢U/%►fi'71/0wrc_) ) i f ) . •Y' e .,c 1' T"(�1/i AA- ` efc, Paz 143„ / rOdif/94✓ 1//W Dirt>r,tiezWI) 1-stke/zn - "K'j,t 4,y Doh Lr,oi47 Ce r t� ` Gl'u.rt }G, Ll►,4,'t i i 35 C9rrie�Br G S wedets ipc,.741 5 W. of Sim 144 7.r. ,195 L • P ik7 S* ,b f"wui, His 5,4 /LLJ11i0h $ 4d,) 7r-- -fin tie esf?• of e j ' 7.e5717 6A4/0 - come Surrart - r14fi, - its/I & OF q57/ )-44, ` I�,l�j tcei0°s- Rtitap Wer/=f14/5 *.re 44.).-1.11L/Z-; /loci ? Sf4 ff f-o L411L 6,4t A r resen'f" 'EPS- >f 1-7,6s90." 4A 4',c i Oe n (Alf) , Zo1/ '�Gf"r/��i (l"��pn o G ( ) {►,� 1 Gv<:cvo-cni (•••'14-4G M- Dr C015Gt1-i 1/z 6-141M- or Sv`.,-; /-1-t ' 4/ 10mt T/ ltr L'y"y IJ' . • SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS (CHAPTER 8,COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen(15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s)must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code,Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s)must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post,or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY,PERSONALLY APPEARED Jessica Harrelson,AICP WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER PL20170002897/CP-2018-3 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 SIG 0 APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O.BOX Jessica Harrelson,AICP 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 4th day of October , 20 19 , by Jessica Harrelson , personally known to me or who prod ced as identification and who did/did not take an oath. Signature of Notary Public TOCIA IIAMLP R0SA 1 1 MY COMMISSION I OG 309547 EXPIRES:July 7,2023 Tocia Hamlin-Rosa Bonded tlru Nofary Pubic Uvieruillets Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) Rev.3/4/2015 .Y Ls ". At/ ' r J2 ~^/ / -1' ',' t` �, ;tit - /•,' 1 , - b\tiT�. . y.. k * ~ JI /Y ✓ Y V }.. OC N `. ? f 4-•• O �� " E N E u; C f.l •— < c) _2 _7.,a) a I I itl i i - 'r ,44 4, C G> d i U •o F- 1 U `. _ .r:t` Q E cn O s A. '4- +. '., Cl Z 'C m (13 — N t :' .- —113 �O U ik".•k' • ♦ 1 -a = a Z w Lvat 3 U , ., e-:._ # li C., I N •`1I i .,;(.),,,,rN, 4- a. O • li. ,„:: . irt ,ir Op 4 ' - '1i .: t { pLr& 1aihj PART OF THE USA TODAY NETWORK Published Daily �... Naples, FL 34110 BCC/Comprehensive Planning Dev 3299 Tamiami Trl E#700 NAPLES,FL 34112 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF BROWN Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Joe Heynen who on oath says that he serves as legal clerk 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 Naples,in said Collier County,Florida,and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County,Florida;distributed in Collier and Lee ounties 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 September 27th,2019 Subscribed and sworn to before on Sept 27rd,2019 lt.A_.(u_.Intl car x.c4_l Notary, State of WI, County of Brown MAFIA MONDLOCH Notary Public State of Wisconsin My commission expires: August 6 2021 Publication Cost:$932 40 L..„Ad No: GC10273907 Customer No: 506365 PO#. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on October 17, 2019 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: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING THE OIL WELL ROAD COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO THE ESTATES MIXED USE DISTRICT AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT TO THE OIL WELL ROAD COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW CHILD CARE CENTERS, SCHOOLS,AND AN EQUESTRIAN RIDING ACADEMY AND FURTHERMORE PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 20.16±ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY SIX-TENTHS OF A MILE EAST OF EVERGLADES BOULEVARD IN SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 28 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA. [PL201700028971 at W W —J 0 OIL WE L RD 2 w Project o z __I:4_2 Location J J ? m LLI All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed 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 October 17, 2019 will be read and considered at the public hearing. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is 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 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ' Notice is hereby oven that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on October 17.2019 cornmencerg at 960 A.M.in the R:;ud+,f county Commissioners Chamber Third Floor County Government Center 3299 East TRMI8MI Trail Naples.FL The purpose of the hearing is to consider. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. �./ ORDINANCE 89.05,AS AMENDED.SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY ADDING THE OIL WELL ROAD COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO THE ESTATES MIXED USE DISTRICT AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT TO THE OR.WELL ROAD COMMUNITY FACILITIES SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW CHILD CARE CENTERS.SCHOOLS,AND AN EQUESTRIAN RIDING ACADEMY AND FURTHERMORE PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TOME FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICOPPORTURVTTY.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LS 20.Ifis ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OIL WELL ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY SIX-TENTHS OF A MILE EAST OF EVERGLADES BOULEVARD IN SECTION II.TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH.RANGE 28 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY.FLORIDA. IPL20170002897J W W —J i Q I Y • • 1 ►' Project o z 2Z Location _J • ce LIT MI e All interested parties are invited to appear and he heard Copies of the proposed RESOLUTION will be made available for inspection at the GMT)Zoning Division Comprehensive Planning Section.2800 N Horseshoe Or, Naples,between the hours o18 00 A M and 500 PM Monday through Friday FUMerrnore.Me materials will be made available for inspection at the Colyer County Clerk's Office.Fourth Floor Collier County Government Center.3299 East Tamen Trail,Suite 401 Naples.one week poor to the scheduled hearing.Any Questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the GNU Zoning Division,Comprehensive Planning SecbOn Written comments filed with the Clark to the Board's Office prior to October 17,2019 will be read and considered at the public hearing. Any person who derides to appeal an decision of the Collier County Board of I ivory Commissioners will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore.may need In ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made which record induces the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. if you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order tl:parta.ipate in tins pro;,eeding, 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 devv:as for Me hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office Mark P Strain Chairman 26A I FRIDAY.SEPTEMBER 27,2019 I NAPLES DAILY NEWS .c. L 41110 -2 L a) c CO > a) _c CU' a) -° T N OD vi -p ut v _ C 0 v) +� co co a-. a1 L Cl) C L C a) ro .E a) a) C j, )-•-0 ro — L a) , coo to C > U ••- a) C 0 C •i T = +� L 'O ro •C — C -0 Cl) U a 3 v) L O w • C }' T a) -0 p > a) — C T N } a) v- a C o _ +.. 4_- — o C T a) C E p c a1 -0 (13 .D 0 C = L t a E C a) 4_. L C C 0 C cn EL' v C Cl) CZ Li U a1 > c -p co o E — 0 0 0 a ro ., — 0 O CIS Q u 3 O ro Li t •— U o aoo a) 03 E a c -0 v ° M tea) Q o ) v v U • C U +-+ 0 D ro co a) v) U Q i v) In co v t 0 a--, C i 04 0 U U 0 c C — L N Q co N +� v 'p U w -p 0 as C U t]A ro T C • C 0 +' i Q C QJ o co >• a >� v � >- a U L C un co 0 4- c c a) > _ U T ro p L O C co L o v t �O o 0 a) p a) c a) a) -I-, i U a) a1 i eV a) L 0 a E .n• 'O (a Q 'C U a) Y CO LO •� Ln l]A N a) i U a) v1 (v 0 C 4- i ro C cli a) O « r0 a--� a) a-' U s_ '�'., O p O O C LIZ p C U O • C Ua-- U _ —'- Co c U o o U — u �a f6 a, O Q '' o • Y O • U f° ro Q Q o } C Q Q ▪ U o ^ = C L (p U U 5... V) Q U U m CD Q) O c/) t a) O -0 ,�_ a) v) a-+ �O i –0 a) O U +-+ - cn ,-, v O O + 4_, c O U o L p U Q n O 'L ro • O Q Cl) _Q p i Q Q Q U .4='Li 4- N Q. a) bD 0 Q CZ 4J v) Q o .4-+ Q Q X O �. p' C 'C 4O N w_ (o Q CO O C N a) L CO VC) a) .� Cl) U E T — c Q — a) Q U a) • w z +' Qas n O LL > Q- `� O LL C 0 co NJ C C6 L 0 L 0 C (o iz N E 4) 0 iv) (L. M1. M1. v) c'- (ti. r,-- r-• rti. (l- rl. r- r1. 1:5m Q v CtOC ro I- 0 0 0) m a) Ql Cr) 01 O O1 Ql Ql Cr) CS) ,yam > O o 0 O O O N O O O N O O fo N CI („) lD N Ln N N L l l0 N CU in Ln LI) \ CD\ Ln in Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln L C a--+ O T Cl) L C C 4O C Q L a) c6 T o C C 0 Q 3 ?- o E a c o c - (1) 3 c o a) -, C L- n a) > > .. aJ co o -a CO P (� E CIS v v CO U Lu a) c -c p 0 CU 4 z 2 o > E ccro a) aa) c -c (./) 48 m m U U o c a`� -0 -j Q E — U C -, a) -I a) �. -, = N I— CZ 0E W aEi —• (D U OA 0 ro (1 L U (II QJ (O _c (6 L Q a) CU Q) I- L 0 0 0- 0-•N• CT) 0 N U1 L C 'o -- I— KendallMarcia From: Bari Musawwir <nlrc.bari@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 5, 2019 10:18 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil Well Project Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community.We need a daycare and riding arena for the area. It would be great to provide another outlet for our youth to be exposed to something positive. I am in full support of it. Oil well push-plzoi7oo2898/gmpa-pl2o170002897 Thank you, Bari Musawwir Sent from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Brad <brbennett99@gmail.com> "1 Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2019 10:04 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil Well Rd Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community.We need a charter school, daycare and special needs riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- plzoi7oo2898/gmpa-p120170002897 Thank you, Brad Bennett Sent from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: candice jolly <candicejolly60@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 4, 2019 3:13 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Project oil well pudz-PL 20170002898/gmpa-p120170002897 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Sue, I think that the oil well project is great for the community and we need it for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- p12017002898/gmpa-p120170002897 Thank you, Candice Jolly Candice Jolly(239)289-6696 1 KendallMarcia From: Carol Every <CarolEvery@msn.com> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 3:11 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Pre School Building Construction on Oil Well Road/Bonnie Walsh May 3, 2019 Our family lives in Orange Blossom Ranch. I think that there is a need for a preschool. Bonnie Walsh is an outstanding citizen of Collier County. Reference#: Oilwell—PUDZ—PL 20170002989/GMPA—PL201700002987 Three votes in our family for yes to this project. If it's one vote per household, We VOTE ONE YES. Mr& Mrs. Randall G. Every ( Randy&Carol) Laurie Sapchin, Daughter 2387 Heydon Cir, E Naples, FL 34120-4579 Email: CarolEvery@msn.com 1 KendallMarcia From: Courtney Jolly <cjolly@napleszoo.org> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 1:47 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: REFERNCE: Oil Well PUDZ-PL20170002898/GMPA-PL20170002897 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Hello, This is a letter of support for the project referenced as Oil Well PUDZ-PL20170002898/GMPA-PL20170002897. There is a critical need in Golden Gate Estates for childcare services.There are not any childcare services in this area— however, it is an area surrounded by numerous public schools for families in this area.The Publix schools only meet the needs of families with children ages 5+. There are so many families with younger children that need access to quality child care in this area. My husband and I currently drive over 10 miles (both ways)to take our child to a quality licensed childcare center. We hope you consider allowing this project to help the families in our community find quality childcare in Golden Gate Estates. Best, Courtney \.%Courtney Jolly Goff Naples Zoo at Caribbean Gardens Director of Marketing and Public Relations 1590 Goodlette Road Naples, Florida 34102 239.262.5409 ext. 153 www.napleszoo.org www.facebook.com/napleszoo KendallMarcia From: Donna Vanleeuwen <donnamvanleeuwen@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 5, 2019 7:43 AM To: FaulknerSue Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community.We need a charter school, daycare and special needs riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- pl2o17oo2898/gmpa-pl2o170002897 Thank you, Donna Vanleeuwen 1 KendallMarcia From: Jeremy Kinder <jerkinder@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 8:16 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well project Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community.We need a charter school and riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push-p12oi7oo2898/gmpa-pl2o170002897 Thank you,Jeremy Kinder from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Jessica Sherman <jessica_agha@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 7, 2019 3:44 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well project Hi Sue, I support the the oil well project. It believe it will be great for the community.We need a charter school and riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- p12o17002898/gmpa-pl2o170002897 Thank you,Jessica Sherman 1 KendallMarcia From: lance dawley <lanced200x@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 3:26 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well PUDZ-PL20170002989/GMPA-PL20170002897 I support Bonnie Walsh daycare Oil Well Road 1 KendallMarcia From: Lindsey Johnson, Realtor <lindsey@lindseyjohnson.net> Sent: Sunday, May 5, 2019 10:15 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well push- p12017002898/gmpa-p120170002897 Hello Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community.We need a charter school and riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- pl2oi7oo2898/gmpa-pl2o170002897 Thank you, Lindsey Johnson Sent from my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Lisa Dodson <lisadodson17@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 1:24 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well Project REFERENCE: Oil Well PUDZ-P120170002898/GMPA-PL20170002897 To whom may concern: I am very excited about the preschool being built out here.We are in need of a trust worthy center out in the estates. My husband and I fully support Bonnie Walsh and her project! -Thank you Lisa Dodson From my iPhone 1 KendallMarcia From: Stephanie <sbennott22@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 6, 2019 8:17 PM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well road Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be so wonderful for the community out this way. We are in need of a charter school, daycare and special needs riding academy for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push-p12017002898/gmpa-p120170002897 Thank you, Stephanie Bennett Sent from my iPhone/ *Logic will take you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere. -Albert Einstein* KendallMarcia From: DodsonTimothy ._- Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 11:49 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil well preschool ( Bonnie Walsh) Reference: Oilwell PUDZ- PL2o17o002989 /GMPA-PL2o17o002897 I Fully support the preschool Mrs. Walsh wants to open up out in Golden Gate Estates. Being a county employee I have used her current pre school for years and am extremely happy, the center is amazing, the teachers are wonderful, and will bring a sense of trust to pre schools in the Estates.The current school has an amazing record with DCF and ELC and would be an amazing addition to Golden Gate Estates. Timothy Dodson Wastewater collections-maintenance specialist (239) 821-3132 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. KendallMarcia From: toi andrews <toiandrews@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 5, 2019 7:34 AM To: FaulknerSue Subject: Oil Well Project Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Sue, I'm in favor for the the oil well project. It will be great for the community. We need a daycare and riding arena for the area. I am in full support of it. Oil well push- p12017002898/gmpa-p120170002897 Thank you, Toi Andrews