Loading...
CCPC Agenda 10/21/2021 Collier County Planning Commission Page 1 Printed 10/14/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 October 21, 2021 9: 00 AM Edwin Fryer- Chairman Karen Homiak - Vice-Chair Karl Fry- Secretary Christopher Vernon Paul Shea, Environmental Joseph Schmitt, Environmental Robert Klucik, Jr. Thomas Eastman, Collier County School Board Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to speak on behalf of an organization or group are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item if so recognized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the CCPC shall be submitted to the appropriate county staff a minimum of seven days prior to the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners if applicable. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC 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 to be based. October 2021 Collier County Planning Commission Page 2 Printed 10/14/2021 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call by Secretary 3. Addenda to the Agenda 4. Planning Commission Absences 5. Approval of Minutes A. 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes 6. BCC Report - Recaps 7. Chairman's Report 8. Consent Agenda 9. Public Hearings A. Advertised 1. *** NOTE: This item was Continued from the October 7, 2021 CCPC Meeting *** PL20210001270 AUIR/CIE 2021 - A Resolution relating to the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, providing for the annual update to the schedule of capital improvement projects, within the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan based on the 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on public facilities (AUIR), and including updates to the 5-year schedule of capital projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element (for fiscal years 2022 – 2026) and the schedule of capital projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element for the future 5-year period (for fiscal years 2027 – 2031), providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Mike Bosi, Zoning Director] October 2021 Collier County Planning Commission Page 3 Printed 10/14/2021 2. *** NOTE: This item has been continued from September 16, 2021 CCPC Meeting*** PL20190001333 GMPA Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map and Map Series; by amending the Estates-Mixed Use District to add the 8th Street NE-22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict to allow a 100-seat church as a conditional use. The subject property consists of 5.15± acres and is located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida; and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Companion Item PL20190001326 CU) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] 3. *** NOTE: This item has been continued from the September 16, 2021 CCPC Meeting *** PL20190001326 CU Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel - A resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for the establishment of a conditional use to allow a 100-seat church within an Estates (E) zoning district pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a +/-5.15 acre property located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion Item PL20190001333 GMPA) [Coordinator: Ray Bellows, AICP, Zoning Manager] B. Noticed 10. Old Business 11. New Business A. Election of Officers B. Presentation of the Redistricting Process 12. Public Comment 13. Adjourn 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 5.A Item Summary: 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: Operations Analyst – Planning Commission Name: Diane Lynch 10/08/2021 12:53 PM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 10/08/2021 12:53 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Completed 10/08/2021 12:53 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 10/08/2021 1:33 PM Zoning Mike Bosi Zoning Director Review Completed 10/08/2021 2:57 PM Growth Management Department James C French GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 10/09/2021 11:58 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 5.A Packet Pg. 4 September 16, 2021 Page 1 of 85 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida September 16, 2021 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Edwin Fryer, Chairman Karen Homiak, Vice Chair Joe Schmitt Paul Shea Robert L. Klucik, Jr. Christopher T. Vernon Tom Eastman, Collier County School Board Representative ABSENT: Karl Fry ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney 5.A.a Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 2 of 85 P R O C E E D I N G S CHAIRMAN FRYER: A pleasant good morning to everyone. This is the September 16, 2021, meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. Everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Secretary Fry has an excused absence today, so I'll call the roll. Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: Here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Fry. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm here. Vice Chair Homiak. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Here. We have a quorum of six. Thank you. And as I mentioned, Mr. Fry has an excused absence. He had an unforeseeable business commitment that he had to attend to. Addenda to the agenda, Mr. Bellows. MR. BELLOWS: We have no changes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting is on October 7, 2021. Does anyone know if he or she will not be able to be present at that meeting? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I will not be present. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Okay. I will not be present. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. So that's two commissioners who will not be present. Assuming Commissioner Fry is here, that means we'll have a quorum of five. So we'll continue. But thank you, gentlemen, for letting us know. Same question for October 21. Does anyone know whether he or she will not be present at that time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Looks like we should be pretty close to a full house, then, at that time. Approval of minutes: We have before us the minutes of our August 19, 2021, meeting. Are there any corrections, changes, or additions to those minutes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, is there a motion to approve them as submitted? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Second -- is there a second? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 3 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passed unanimously. BCC report, recaps, Mr. Bellows. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. The Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday, September 14th, heard the Blue Coral Apartments PUD rezone and companion Growth Management Plan amendment, and they continued that item to September 28th. This is to allow more discussion on that frontage road connection issue. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Anything else to report from that meeting? Thank you. MR. BELLOWS: Unless Mr. Bosi has anything. MR. BOSI: None. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, thanks. Chairman's report: None today. Consent agenda: Nothing before us on the consent agenda today. Public hearings, advertised. The first matter that we have coming before us today is -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I'm sorry. I had pressed my button. I was being patient. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see that. Please go ahead. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So it's kind of out of order, because I would have done it in the very beginning. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go right ahead. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And I won't apologize, but I do understand that it takes up a little bit of time. But I just wanted to ask for a moment of silence in recognition of the passing of 20 years of 9/11, since this is our closest meeting. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Very appropriate. Thank you. We'll stand in a moment of silence, please. (A moment of silence was had.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. Very appropriate, indeed. ***Public hearings advertised, the first matter we have coming before us today is PL20200001827. It's the RCMA Immokalee MPUDZ. That is seeking an initial PUD designation for property that is currently zoned rural agricultural. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Ex parte disclosures from the Planning Commission starting with Mr. Eastman, please. MR. EASTMAN: The only thing outside of materials in the public record is I did talk to other staff at the school district about this charter school expansion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. In my case, I communicated with staff and received materials, all of public record. Oh, I'm sorry. I jumped you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: You jumped both of us. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sorry, gentlemen. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just staff materials. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER VERNON: No disclosures. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 4 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. And I'm covered. Ma'am. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just spoke to Mr. Arnold briefly. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I spoke to Wayne Arnold on this project, and I think Austin was on the phone at the same time. MR. ARNOLD: Not this one. The Creekside. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Creekside it was, okay. Just Wayne, then, on this. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Mr. Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I spoke with staff and read the staff materials. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Very good. We'll begin with the applicant's presentation. Mr. Arnold, you may proceed. MR. ARNOLD: Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Planning Commission members. I'm Wayne Arnold, certified planner with Grady Minor & Associates representing the Redlands Christian Migrant Association today. And with us I have Mike Delate, our professional engineer from our firm; Jim Banks is the traffic engineer; and Ted Hoffman, who's the project architecture for RCMA, is here in case there are any specific questions regarding the building. So this project is obviously located in Immokalee. I'm not sure how many of you are familiar with the RCMA organization, but it's been around since the mid '60s and it's a 501(c)3 corporation that really started out helping migrant families and children, and they operate an existing K through 6 charter school near Main Street in Immokalee. They also have their corporate offices there, and this represents an opportunity for them to have a campus to bring their childcare component and a K through 8 charter school out to the Lake Trafford Road site. The site is 62 acres. There's a component that will be a future residential component for the project. Undetermined who's going to build that portion of it. But the property is located on Lake Trafford Road just west of Carson Road and just south of Curry Road. And you can see that it's previously been cleared and was used for agriculture for many years. There's a couple of small wetland areas on the site that will largely be retained as part of the campus plan. We're asking for 700 students in the charter school, we're asking for 250 childcare students, 160 residential units, and there's a really small portion of property that's being requested to be zoned C-3 that's in your commercial mixed-use district in Immokalee, and it's immediately adjacent to an existing convenience store. So we think the C-3 use makes sense. I will get to, in a moment, one of the conditions that staff is asking to impose on us that we do not agree with, and I'll talk a little bit about that in a moment. The zoning right now is agriculture, and we are within Wellfield Protection Zones. The wellfield for Immokalee is near by. The uses that we're proposing are not prohibited in any way. In fact, Section 3.06 of the Land Development Code has the regulatory standards for development in our Wellfield Protection Zones. It is in your high-density residential future land-use category. I think staff was in error. They indicated low residential in your staff report. It doesn't change the fact that we're consistent with the density in any event. But under the high-density residential, we're allowed to seek up to eight dwelling units per acre, and we're seeking 160 units on 60 acres, so we're well below the eight-unit-per-acre allowance under the Comprehensive Plan. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Pardon me, Mr. Arnold. I'm going to interrupt you -- MR. ARNOLD: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- to check on this high versus low, because I noticed the discrepancy in my meeting with staff yesterday. I believe, unless I misunderstood, staff said it was low density. So can we get this straightened out? 5.A.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 5 of 85 MR. SABO: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sir. MR. SABO: James Sabo, Comp Planning manager. It's high density. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. And Mr. Eastman has signaled. You wish to speak now, sir? MR. EASTMAN: Sure, just so I don't forget. I'm told that RCMA does a really good job with what they do. They specialize in working with bilingual students, and they've been in operation and done very well. My singular question is, when will the facility plan to be open? MR. ARNOLD: Ted, I don't know if you can shed any light on that. The first phase is probably going to be the childcare component of this, Tom. They, obviously, have their operations downtown right now for the charter school, so they would need to go ahead and get into the process to get permitted and then construct the school before they could transition away from Main Street. So it's going to be probably at least two years for that. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. And my question is all related to the planning context related to capacity and trying to plan future capacity. So you have no idea when the actual school will open, the expanded school? No time frame whatsoever? MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think it's probably going to be two to three years just -- MR. EASTMAN: Two to three years? MR. ARNOLD: Yes. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: Realistically, just because of the permitting process. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. Thank you so much. MR. ARNOLD: Yep, sure. So I know that -- Mike, I don't know if you can go back to the visualizer, but we left off with staff confirmed that we're high density. This is your Future Land Use Map, and I generally put a circle around where we're located, and that orangish color is HR, high residential, and then you can see that there's a little component of the CMU right at the corner, that the little tip of our property goes through about a quarter of an acre of it. So that gives us the opportunity to ask for the commercial uses. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Could you just -- and maybe you don't know, because I realize you aren't necessarily traveling around that area. But what are the items as I'm driving through that I'm going to see on that road, for my familiarity with the location? MR. ARNOLD: Okay. So, Mike, if you can go back to the main screen. This is an aerial photograph, and the image to the right shows a little bit larger part of the surrounding area. So you can see -- I think that's the Arrowhead community that's located to our south. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Arrowhead. MR. ARNOLD: Arrowhead, yeah. And to the west is the elementary school, and to the north is Curry Road. And there's a variety of things: A mobile home park back there and some other residential, and then to the east that is the fire station, and there's a water facility, and then there's a convenience store right at the corner of Carson and Lake Trafford Road, and then, of course, if you extend farther out Lake Trafford Road, you dead-end at Lake Trafford, so... COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Great. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. ARNOLD: So we've allowed for a couple different things. We have a community facility tract, and we are allowing in that the childcare facility, the charter school. We've asked for parks and playgrounds as well, because if you read the transcript from the CRA meeting that we attended in Immokalee, there's a large push for there to be some additional soccer fields and playfields for children in the Immokalee area. So they've started dialogue, "they" meaning RCMA 5.A.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 6 of 85 with your Parks and Recreation Department, to see if there's an opportunity to build at least a couple of soccer fields that might be of use when the school's not utilizing them for their own recreational opportunities. So that's why you see that use listed, and then; of course, we made provisions for the typical school-related accessory uses, and then for the residential component we're asking for multifamily units, of course, model home sales and leasing centers and typical accessory uses there, too. This is the master plan. It's more of a bubble diagram. But I'll work from left to right. On the left side is the R tract, which is residential. And you'll see our preserve area. And then we have the community facility tract that's in the center and the dominant portion of the site, and then to the far east on Carson Road, there's about a quarter-acre commercial tract, and that's where we're asking for the C-3 commercial. So in this conceptual plan, you'll see that we've got the access point on Lake Trafford Road. We're not proposing any access to Curry Road that's -- Curry is largely an unimproved road at that location, so there's no need to do that. We are proposing an interconnection between our residential and the school. Right now it appears that the childcare will probably be on the westernmost portion of the community facility tract. The charter school would be on the right. We tried to depict sort of the general circulation. Staff was concerned about stacking and pickup and drop-off capacity to make sure that we weren't utilizing Lake Trafford Road for that. So the buildings are going to be set back fairly far from the road, and there's a lot of internal circulation for which they can do their stacking. And so we think there's no issue there. There's a plan to have a shared event lawn, for instance. RCMA does a lot of events. There's a lot of FEMA contact with RCMA, especially during severe weather events, and so they're staging things that FEMA does, and the event lawn also is a courtyard that allows the school to use them as well. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Can you go back to that one? MR. ARNOLD: Sure. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Where's the residential? MR. ARNOLD: Residential is where the R is on the left side of that tract. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Got it. Thank you. MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. So we did ask for two deviations. One you've seen several times now. We've asked for the ability to put chain-link fencing along the property. Because it's a school facility, there needs to be a certain amount of security. Your code prohibits chain-link form of building facades for buildings that have to go through the architectural review process. So this is something you recently saw for the Guadalupe Center project that we worked on on Westclox Drive in Immokalee as well. Staff's supporting that. The other deviation is we wanted a shared buffer between the residential and the childcare facility rather than two separate buffer tracts. I think it just makes sense to build one buffer at the initial start of the school. And, staff is supporting that as well, so we hope you will too. This is a conceptual rendering showing the childcare facility on the left side. This depicts that we could actually fit a couple of soccer fields on the property. So you get a sense of the distance the buildings are going to be away from Lake Trafford Road so -- also the internal circulation on this to depict that there's ample room for vehicular circulation and pickup. And that's all of my presentation. But I did want to go back to the recommendation that staff made. And I'd indicated to staff that we just did not agree with their recommendation -- because we're in the wellfield zone, they asked us to prohibit certain C-3 uses. That section of your code does have certain prohibitions. There's a 500-foot radius around a wellhead in which you can't do a lot of things, and we are within -- the commercial tract is within 500 feet. So there would be certain prohibitions that your code already builds into the process. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 7 of 85 But some of the other uses may be viable uses that don't really call for the prohibitory, like a paint store for instance. I don't know that a paint store's going to go there, but it's a fairly innocuous use that isn't regulated under your code. It's not regulated in the sense that it's prohibited under one of the wellfield zones. So I spoke with Jaime Cook prior to the meeting, and I think we'd be amenable -- I know you don't like to repeat things that are in the Land Development Code, but if we would add a commitment or something in the commercial section that makes sure that people understand that they're in a Wellfield Protection Zone and there are certain other regulatory standards they need to abide to, I think that makes sense from my client's perspective rather than outright prohibitions. I mean, RCMA, they're not commercial developers, but it is their property, and they are a non-profit. So any type of income stream that they can gain is a benefit to them as an organization. So we would hope that you could agree that maybe there's a commitment that we could make in lieu of a prohibition. And then, of course, we don't have an issue with the vehicle stacking condition. We'll demonstrate that at the time of site plan. There's a formula that staff utilizes, and Mr. Banks is well accustomed to that, so... CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Wayne, regarding the wellfield prohibitions, yes, it's in the code. I'll ask you, but I think staff can clarify as well. Regardless, those are still controlled and evaluated by Florida Department of Environmental Protection as well; is that correct? MR. ARNOLD: Your Pollution Control Department does a review, but there are state standards that are applicable to certain uses, yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: State standards, okay. So it -- regardless of what's in the PUD, it's the -- you still -- you cannot circumvent either Pollution Control or the state statutes. MR. ARNOLD: Correct. We had a -- I'll relate another project. You have Pollution Control staff who is apparently working toward new regulatory standards for your Land Development Code that aren't available to the public yet, and we've met with them on an upcoming project in the Estates. The Estates shopping center project, for instance, that Mr. Yovanovich and I are working on. And they were asking the same thing, to prohibit certain uses. And, you know, our point was, the uses are not prohibited today. You know, it's not really fair for our client to concede uses that your code says are okay assuming they meet certain other standards. So we're kind of taking the same position here that we should be allowed to proceed subject to the Land Development Code. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: There's no service station or convenience store with pumps? Because that seems to have been always the issue, the potential for leaking fuel tanks back in the days whether they were not double walled. We had the -- 10 years ago the state went through the yank a tank program where everybody had to replace tanks. But in this case, are there any gas stations or service -- MR. ARNOLD: There are. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: There are? MR. ARNOLD: There's a convenience store with gas pumps located just immediately to the east, southeast of us, in this property. Now, Jaime is much more the expert -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But within your PUD is there -- MR. ARNOLD: We would allow -- C-3 does allow for gas stations and convenience stores. So one of the other regulatory standards is there's a prohibition on gas tanks within 500 feet of a wellhead. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. MR. ARNOLD: So a portion of this property is within 500 feet, so there would be a prohibition today on putting tanks in the ground within 500 feet of the wellhead. So we're subject 5.A.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 8 of 85 to that standard today. So it just didn't seem necessary for me to concede other uses that are currently regulated. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Yeah, you made my point. You're basically -- you still have to meet the requirements. MR. ARNOLD: We still meet the requirements. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And that prohibition still exists. MR. ARNOLD: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. Okay, thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I think -- I think that discussion helped me, but what is the -- go over it again, what compromise you're proposing, because you're not in agreement with staff, but you said -- MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. Staff would ask us to put a prohibition on several uses in the PUD document itself, and what I would recommend -- and I don't know if staff's going to agree with that -- but somewhere in our commercial section we note that that there are other regulatory standards under Chapter 3.06 of the Land Development Code that further regulate certain uses within the Wellfield Protection Zone. That way a user is well on notice that they are subject to these Wellfield Protection Zones. The zones are shown on our zoning maps. They don't go away as part of this PUD rezoning, but I think it would be wise to go ahead and put some sort of directive for a future user to pick this document up and say, oh, I am subject to some other standard and then go to that section of the code to find out that they can't put a gas tank within 500 feet of the wellhead, but they can put a paint store within 500 feet. So that's what I'm asking. I know you -- typically this board has not liked to mirror the Land Development Code, but in this case maybe that extra level of -- yeah, of language might be appropriate. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So my question is, you know, is it really just that little sliver that's the commercial? MR. ARNOLD: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: All right. So is that really -- is that the only piece of land, you know, that actually is -- we're having this concern about? MR. ARNOLD: It is. Staff's recommendation -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And there's a gas station right next to it. MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So I'm trying to figure out -- I mean, you know, I heard -- you know, when I talked to staff, I heard, you know, their concerns, but it's not quite clear to me at this point. And I'm also wondering -- and I want to make sure that -- you know, for the sake of everybody, if we approve something that at the state level will get kicked back then, obviously, that seems like, you know, we're not -- nobody's, you know, advancing anything at that point. So is it your contention that we're -- you know, that we're not -- that if we approve what you're requesting with whatever concessions you've made, we would be -- when you got to the point where it goes up for approval at any state level, then we wouldn't have any problem -- they're not going to kick it back for that one issue. That seems to be the issue that people -- that staff is concerned about. MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, correct. The staff condition is coming from your Pollution Control Department, and I think because they understand, that they're working toward some different regulations than we're living with today. I'm not asking for any deviations. So whatever the Land Development Code gets modified to in a year, two years, whatever that time frame may be, we're still subject to it. So if it puts further regulations on us, okay, maybe there are certain C-3 uses I can't achieve. But it just seems -- for this organization, it doesn't seem to be effective to 5.A.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 9 of 85 start prohibiting uses that today are permitted. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just -- is the entire property in the wellfield risk area? MR. ARNOLD: Ray, do you mind, Mike has a copy of the wellfield map that you might put on the visualizer. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Maybe, Ray, you could also just give us a 30-second description of what that means. And I understand it's a potable water wellfield, and there's a certain distance from it that you restrict certain activities. Maybe just to refresh our memories what exactly that means. MR. ARNOLD: Yes. Thank you, Ray. Just so you know, Jaime Cook prepared this exhibit. This is Wellfield Protection Zone maps. So the orange is the Wellfield Protection Zone 1, which is the most restrictive zone. So you can see a large portion of the property is in that zone. And then as you go west further away from the wellhead, then it becomes less restrictive zones. And the 500-foot radius is the circle that she's depicted on here. So anything within that 500-foot zone, for instance, it prohibits an above-ground or below-ground tank. So that is a restriction that's in your code today that we're subject to. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But didn't you say that there was a gas station right next to your commercial? MR. ARNOLD: There is, but if you look, its pumps are -- or pumps and tanks are probably just outside the 500-foot zone on that circle. You can see the gas station's in the bottom part of that orange -- the orange Wellfield Protection Zone, and the convenience part of the store is right at the 500-foot line, and then I'm supposing that, as most gas stations, the tanks are closer to the -- underground tanks are closer to the pumps. But I'll let Ray weigh in on more. But there's a whole chapter in our Land Development Code that talks about these Wellfield Protection Zones. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I'm just struggling a little bit, because to echo what Mr. Eastman said, you know, what I know about this organization, everything I've ever heard about them is very, very positive. But, you know, just -- I guess I'm struggling -- I feel like I'm just asking the same thing over and over. But what is wrong with the recommendation that you remove commercial for this list that the staff's identified? I mean -- MR. ARNOLD: Well, the fact that they're not prohibited today by your code. They're asking me to concede uses that may be of financial benefit to my client. That's really our issue. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So can we ask staff why they're asking that? MR. ARNOLD: Sure. I'm happy to cede the floor to staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We'll get to that. Let's see if there are any other questions for the applicant. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Well, yeah. I can ask you and then, of course, we'll ask staff and our legal counsel, but I'm just trying to figure out what -- you know, does your client -- you know, I realize you're not an attorney, but -- or maybe you are, but I know you're a planning professional more than you are an attorney, if you are one. I wouldn't want to insult you -- MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: -- and accuse you of being an attorney. Do you see that there's a -- you know, what the legal argument would be? Because, I mean, I'm trying to figure out how we could justify saying no given that the code right now is -- you know, doesn't seem to prohibit those things, how we could just kind of decide to add them. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 10 of 85 I mean, I realize we're acting -- I think we're acting legislatively, so I guess we can kind of do what we want, but... MR. ARNOLD: I think it's certainly within your purview to ask the question of whether or not my client wants to concede on certain uses but, from my perspective, you have a regulatory part of the code that has very clear regulations for each of these Wellfield Protection Zones. We're subject to them. Whether I, you know, have this property zoned or not, so -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right, so right now, effectively, the things that staff is concerned about and for which they're asking these concessions actually is already covered even by the existing code, isn't it? MR. ARNOLD: That's correct, it is. MR. KLATZKOW: This is currently zoned agriculture. They're asking for the rezone. It's within your purview to say yes or no to whatever use you deem appropriate. They don't have a vested right. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: But as to the concern, you're asking for it to be changed to a use, and that use to which it's changed would still be subject to the environmental regulation that would prohibit what they're asking you to concede -- MR. ARNOLD: That is correct. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: -- as a prohibition. MR. ARNOLD: Correct. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So it would be double prohibited. Okay. In some case you can say, well, why don't -- you know, why not just go ahead and concede, or you could say, well, that's not -- there's no reason to have a double prohibition since it's already in there. So you could -- I guess you could kind of make either argument. MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Anything else, Commissioner Klucik? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: No. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Any -- no one else is signaling at this point. Anyone else have questions for applicant? Because I know we're going to have some for staff. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just out of -- as a process, we're going to hear both the GMP amendment and the PUD amendment, or we're going to hear them separately? MR. ARNOLD: Not on this one. CHAIRMAN FRYER: This is just a PUD. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN FRYER: This is quasi-judicial. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Okay. I thought it was also associated. I thought it was -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: No. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And I'm sorry I misspoke. CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's okay. All right. Anything else before we -- anything else from the applicant? MR. ARNOLD: No, no thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Arnold. Let's hear from the applicant now, please -- or, excuse me, the county. MR. BOSI: Good morning, Commission. Mike Bosi, zoning director. I think we've established the location, the future land-use consistency, the request. Staff is generally very supportive of the request in terms of the mix of the residential and the institutional use and the childcare facilities and the charter school being proposed. The only concern that we have, and it's related to our recommendations, we have two recommendations that we've associated with our recommendation of approval. The first is not to allow for stacking to occur on Lake Trafford right-of-way, all vehicle stacking to occur within the PUD limits, and I think the applicant has enough land area they most certainly can. And that 5.A.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 11 of 85 tentative site plan or site plan they did show showed that they will be able to accommodate that. The second is, I'll read it specifically, remove commercial C-1 through C-3 uses that have a potential to impact the public water supply. Examples: Laundromat, dry cleaners, gasoline service station, convenience stores with fuel pump, paint store, automotive services, photo finishing laboratories, automotive vehicle dealers, and any uses that allow retail fuel sales, and remove those from the list of uses within that 500-foot radial setback of the public well. The majority of those uses that I -- that I stated would be prohibited. There are a few additional ones that we have concerns with, and we are asking for additional restrictions. The applicant is correct and stated that there is no code prohibition against it. We're asking for the Planning Commission to provide a consideration based upon the proximity to the well that -- and the concern expressed from our environmental folks related to the potential negative impact associated with such close proximity, that additional restrictions be placed upon this property. As our County Attorney has indicated, the property is currently zoned agriculture. They are asking for an entitlement which they're -- which is within the bounds of the Growth Management Plan, but they are still asking for a request to change the zoning. And based upon that, one of the issues is compatibility. And compatibility -- and if you think stacking these type of uses in close proximity, that's well within the purview of the Planning Commission. But there's also concern from staff of that proximity being potentially negative and harmful to public water and public drinking wells. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mike, why -- why does staff feel that language has to go in the PUD to prohibit something that is already prohibited by state statute in our regulations? Couldn't I -- and the second piece of that question is, then why not just amend the restriction to state specifically that any commercial entity that goes into this area would have to comply with the current statutes and the limitations that are restricted based on the DEP and environmental review? I don't understand why we're duplicating language and duplicating a requirement that already exists. MR. BOSI: That simply -- sometimes we like that type of redundancy to alert the Site Development Plan reviewing team of the additional restrictions. We could most certainly cite to the Florida Administrative Code reference section that points to those regulations to maybe be a little less specific in the restrictions and simply cite the administrative -- or the Florida Administrative Code in terms of -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You made a statement that also seems to indicate that staff -- I heard you say stacking or items that may not be complementary on the existing uses which, of course, would be at the corner there. Is this an attempt by staff to also prohibit the placement -- let's say a service station or a convenience store with pumps next to a gas station that already exists, or was this somewhat of an attempt to prohibit a use that you guys don't want to see be in there and under the guise of some kind of restriction for environmental concerns? MR. BOSI: The stacking comment was related to the traffic. There's no -- there's no underlying concern other than the relationship and the proximity of various uses within the C-1 and the C-3 zoning district to the well. If they wanted to place another gas station next to that gas station, they would have to go through an ASW as well as the PUD. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. MR. BOSI: And, therefore -- and compatibility as part of that request, and the evaluation would be whether -- and the Planning Commission would -- or the Board of County -- the BZA would be presented with the opportunity to make that type of an evaluation. So it's -- that's not -- there's no -- there's no additional concerns other than just the proximity of the potential of some of those commercial uses in relationship to the existing water supply. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would propose that staff come up with language that 5.A.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 12 of 85 clearly defines the intent and that the intent would be that any commercial business that goes in there certainly would have to comply with the requirements of being placed within the restrictions that are required for, what do you call it, within 500 feet of a wellhead. MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And then you would -- it would have to comply with state statutes. MR. KLATZKOW: One of the issues is enforcement. Our Code Enforcement can enforce the PUD. We do not enforce the Florida Administrative Code. So if you want another layer of enforcement on it, that would be a reason to put it into the PUD. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But, Jeff, the staff does enforce it. If it comes in for review and an SDP approval, it can enforce the restrictions. I hear what you're saying. You're correct, and I don't argue that. I'm just trying to understand what are we gaining, and is it a duplication? And -- MR. KLATZKOW: We're gaining an enforcement level. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So it will -- what's the restriction you're proposing, then? Just simply -- where was that, again, that language? MR. BOSI: It was the last page of the staff report. I'm not sure what number it is within your packet, the online -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Page 93. MR. BOSI: Ninety-three. It specifically requests that laundromats, dry cleaners, gasoline service station, convenience stores with fuel pump, paint stores, automotive services, photo finishing laboratories, automotive vehicle dealers, and any uses that allow retail fuel sales be prohibited from the list of allowable uses. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. All those except paint store. What is the -- what's the -- is there a concern that paint stores are potential hazardous dumping contaminates on the ground or whatever -- paint stores are pretty common, storefront paint stores. I can name companies, but I'm kind of trying to understand. All the others make sense to me, but I'm just trying to understand the paint store issue. MR. BOSI: Well -- and I will ask our environmental staff to provide a little bit more specific testimony. When I look at the list, I only assume that some -- that the potential for spills and for groundwater contamination would be the underlying motivation behind that. But if there's something other than that or deeper than that, I think we could -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ms. Cook. MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your director of Development Review. Yeah, the request for the paint store is because paint is considered a hazardous waste, and with potential for a spill, we want to protect those wellheads as best that we can. So by keeping hazardous waste as far away from the wellheads as we possibly can will help to ensure some of that protection. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I'm not quite sure I agree, but I won't argue that it could be deemed a hazardous waste if it were oil based or some other type of paint. Because most paints they sell are water-based paint, but if that's your professional assessment, I accept it. MS. COOK: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: My comments relate to the traffic concern, so if there's other commissioners that wanted to speak to the use issue, I would ask that they be allowed to keep this conversation going and then -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Next one up is Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. Okay. So right now, if we look to that list of prohibitions, would all of those be covered by the other existing restrictions, or is it only the gas 5.A.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 13 of 85 station that would be prevented? So if we didn't add this prohibition, is the other prohibitions that exist in law, are they -- would they cover all of those uses? MR. BOSI: I believe, yes, they would, the Florida Administrative Code. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So we are now saying -- I mean, staff is recommending that in this situation -- I would think you would be consistent. You know, I mean, you would have this going forward. Anytime this kind of situation where there's commercial in an area near a wellhead, we would now always want to add this prohibition because we would like to have our own enforcement power; is that correct? MR. BOSI: Correct, but also there's a fundamental concern from our -- our staff of placing, you know, these type of uses in close proximity -- has the potential to damage public property. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: No, no. I -- yeah, that's not -- to me that's not an argument, because the law already -- we already have a law, from what I can -- you know, from -- that's the discussion. Right now it's already prohibited -- if we were to approve this without this language being added, it would already be prevented under the law. It's a law that the county couldn't enforce. The state would have to enforce. So it's -- so whatever concerns staff has would be covered by the enforcement mechanism that already exists, correct? As long as the state didn't sit on their enforcement ability, then your concern as a staff would be -- would be taken care of. MR. BOSI: Potentially. There is an opportunity for deviations from the Florida Administrative Code within these regards. I don't think that it's a very high bar. But it could -- the applicant could seek that type of an administrative process, but -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Does it seem likely that someone is going to approve a gas station there through that process that you're worried about or that you -- you know, anything is possible. MR. BOSI: It's possible. It's not probably -- probably not probable. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And what I don't -- what I'm concerned with, as someone, you know, who is looking at these from a -- in this case we're sitting quasi-judicially, but I think you're making a policy recommendation saying, as a policy matter, we want to add, you know, a second -- we want to double the prohibition, and I just don't -- you know, I'm concerned that I don't think that that's a good practice. I don't think that's a best practice either for us to kind of add the same prohibitions that already exist for a lot of reasons. You know, I certainly don't think that this is going to go away. You know, if anything, whatever rules there are regarding protecting water, I would think the only thing that's going to happen is there's going to be more protections, you know, as far as -- at any level of government. All we're going to see is this -- the prohibitions on this kind of thing out of the concern for the water is just going to get more strict which is, you know, a good thing. And so I just -- I don't like the idea that we're adding this as an extra layer to what's already there, because I don't see there's any risk of it being an issue because of the prohibition that already is there. Is there some fear that it won't be enforced? MR. BOSI: I don't believe there's fear that it won't be enforced. I believe that we wanted to provide an additional layer of protection. If the Planning Commission feels that that is a redundancy that's not needed, we completely understand and yield to the discretion of the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And I do -- you know, I mean, I understand the idea that you want to place people on notice. I think some sort of asterisk-type, you know, statement to remind everybody that whatever is done here has to comply with the -- whatever the current restrictions are and, you know -- and then that doesn't lock us into anything. We're talking about whatever the restrictions are would apply. You know, but they're going to apply anyways. We're just noting that they do apply. That would be my, you know, suggestion for how this gets covered, and no one's 5.A.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 14 of 85 conceding anything, and we don't add layers of bureaucracy, you know, another layer of, you know, regulation that we don't really need because it doesn't -- I don't see what it does for us. If you can show me that it does something significant -- but I haven't heard that yet, that it would actually make a significant difference. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. French, did you wish to be heard, sir? MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir. Just very quickly. Again, Jamie French, for the record. I'm your deputy department head for Growth Management. Commissioner Klucik, Mike speaks -- you know, you asked a question "with fear." COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I would say "concern" is a better -- MR. FRENCH: Okay. Or even concern, I would tell you, yeah, there's great concern, predominantly because the state is the regulatory body, and this is a county asset, and this isn't just one wellhead that supplies to just a handful of homes. It's a regionalized system. So we believe a best practice would be that whenever you have this type of development, at a minimum we should always be adhering to our recognizing what the State of Florida has adopted because, again, if this wellhead becomes contaminated with a petroleum product or a product that's been listed to be invasive to this wellhead operation, it not only impacts that; it impacts the entire county's water system. So we're -- we embrace that from staff, and what we believe a best practice would be is whenever you have these tanks or dispensary units that fall within this 500 feet, this should not be allowed. This should not be supported, and that would just be in line with what the Florida Administrative Code already says. And it's not to say if the gas station that this -- at the bottom right-hand -- it's not really a corner because it's a circle, but there's already a preexisting gas station. The building in and of itself is fine. They could build their gas station, expand the gas station that's there. They just could not get the tanks or the dispensary for the gasoline or the petroleum product within that 500 feet. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Well, right. That actually was going to be one of my questions, would your restrictive language prevent the existing. So, you know, I have no idea -- MR. FRENCH: No. So long -- I'm sorry. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. I have no idea what the plans are, you know, for the landowner, but I'm assuming one really nice way for them to make some money would be to sell that little -- you know, that little nub of commercial land to the neighboring gas station so that they could create a big -- you know, a nice store on the corner. The gas pumps would stay outside the 500-foot range, and then -- you know, so does this restriction prohibit them from being part of a gas station that's already there that's on the outside? MR. FRENCH: So it's not the building, the retail sales that would go on in there. It would be the location of the tanks and where the fuel would be dispensed, and it's outside -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So as long as the tanks aren't there, then they would be fine? MR. FRENCH: That's correct. And -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And the dispense -- the pumps? MR. FRENCH: That's right. And -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Anything where the spill is going to be over that -- in that 500-foot zone? MR. FRENCH: Right. And so what we would do is, if that was the case, staff may ask for some enhancements to ensure that that petroleum product could not get into that 500-feet area. And, again, we don't regulate this at a local level. It's regulated by the DEP. But what happens is that if the land use is granted, they come forward, as they go through the site development administrative process, they can get approved all the way up to the time of preconstruction, and at the preconstruction phase, before they actually start to break ground, that's when we start asking, okay, show me your DEP permit, show me your water management permits. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And you wouldn't -- our staff and our planning process 5.A.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 15 of 85 for -- if that was -- something like that was going to go forward, we wouldn't -- we wouldn't have a mechanism to say, no, you can't do that. You would have to wait until that time came to say have you -- what did the -- what did the state say. MR. FRENCH: That's right. And so -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. Show us your authorization, that you have authorization to go forward. So it actually is a way to prevent something from going forward prematurely without the proper understanding. My question, then, would be for the applicant at some point, and I'll leave that to the Chairman as to when, to just say, okay, well, having gone through all of that, I'm still -- then what is the downside of adding that language? Because I'm just trying to figure out, as a practical matter, what the downside would be. And, like I said, I'll leave it to your judgment, Chairman, when we get that answer. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I just -- very briefly. I think I have a different view than Commissioner Klucik. I don't think -- unless jurisdiction's been taken away from us, I don't really want to rely on the state government or federal government. I think we should govern ourselves to the extent we have jurisdiction. And I think Joe's questions before that were sort of moving towards poking around at a compromise, which I'd love to see. I'd really love to see that, because I'd really like to -- again, I hear so many good things about this organization, I'd like to support what they're doing. But I would vote -- as is, if we had with to vote right now without compromise or working through this, I'd vote against it because of the staff recommendation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'd like to exercise the prerogative of the Chair, even though I've got two more commissioners who are signaling, to suggest a compromise. And I don't know whether this would be appealing to anyone or not. But what if, instead of the current Condition No. 2, or the staff condition, that it would say in a much shorter fashion, "uses that have the potential to impact the public water supply are prohibited," period. No examples. Just a statement that relates to a legitimate public concern, which is the water supply. Does that appeal to anyone? COMMISSIONER VERNON: I have a thought on that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Please. COMMISSIONER VERNON: I love the idea of a compromise, but I'm just thinking that might be worse for the applicant. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Because it gives a creative lawyer who's against them a lot more leeway and to come up, well, that could hurt -- you know, I could make an argument just about anything could hurt the water supply. So if it -- if the applicant likes that, then, yeah, I think that moves in the direction of a compromise, that's great, but I'm not sure, if I was the applicant, I'd want that. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: That's the exact -- that's the exact view that I would hold on that particular issue. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I totally disagree with Commissioner Klucik. I think this is our water. And I think if I -- I don't know if we can do this now, but I would make the motion we accept this in accordance with the staff's recommendation. I think we need to have a little more control, specific control over our water and not rely on somebody else to come in and enforce something. And if this is truly duplicative, so what? What we gain is control. And to me 5.A.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 16 of 85 it's -- quite frankly, it's a no-brainer. I think we should just accept the staff's recommendation. And if the client -- the applicant doesn't like it -- I don't think it does much harm to the intent of what he's trying to do. It's a minor part of his application. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman, if I could respond. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Sure. Well, all I would say is, you know, I think I was pretty open, you know. I mean, I think in the end especially I want to hear from the applicant as to why we wouldn't do it, because I don't -- like I said before, I think it's kind of, no matter which way, you can make an argument that it's not necessary because it's duplicative or -- you know, it's required or doesn't -- it doesn't do any harm to do it because it's -- you know, the prohibition is already there. But the issue I have is setting a precedent that we impose -- you know, we always are in the habit then of -- you know, it gives everybody the idea that, oh, maybe we should do this in all sorts of other areas, and I just don't want to start the precedent of adding those kind of restrictions, but -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: I think this is case by case, and I think this is our potable drinking water, and I don't think we should take any chances, and I don't -- with all due respect, Commissioner Vernon, I don't think we should be looking for a compromise. I think we should accept the staff's recommendation and go forward. We have a long agenda today. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Eastman. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Mike, I appreciate your concern with traffic and protecting the public road and not having it gummed up. I just wanted to ask you if you would consider buttressing your condition with staggered arrival and dismissal times for the public school and the charter school and making that a possible addition so that we don't have a perfect storm where everyone at both schools is arriving or dismissing at the same time, because that really puts a stress on the public road. MR. BOSI: From staff's perspective, I think -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: I think your mic's not on. MR. BOSI: From staff's perspective, I think a recommendation that further protects the public roadways free and clear from obstructions and requiring that the charter school staggers their start times in relationship to the public school's start time is appropriate, and staff would accept that type of additional modification to the -- to the requested condition. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. -- Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'd agree with Paul. I think though the limitations are more, I guess, aggressive or restrictive to the applicant, I think though it's a duplication, I have no problem with moving forward with the staff recommendation. And whenever you're ready to close the public hearing, we can debate and move this forward. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Anything further from staff? Ms. Cook. MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, again, your director of Development Review. We just wanted to put on the record that as far as that gas station that's on the corner, we have no issue with the potential expansion of that building moving into the commercial tract. We just want to ensure that the tanks are kept outside that 500 feet. So I just wanted that on the record that staff has no problem with that potential expansion with the building going there. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. And I guess I would just ask legal counsel to confirm that the language in that restriction, too, then, would kind of support what we just heard from staff on that particular issue; that that wouldn't be a problem for them to expand that building with that language added. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 17 of 85 MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: No one else is signaling at this point. I'm going to take the liberty of weighing in on it. I'm inclined to want to see the two staff conditions included in the material. I ordinarily do not -- (Cell phone sounding.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Let's see. My concern -- and I will grant that ordinarily it is not elegant; it's inelegant to duplicate senior laws. So I -- philosophically, that's where I am, but I've got to take a look at this particular composition in Tallahassee and the direction that things seem to be going by way of taking away local authority and control and imposing, in some cases, more lenient state rules such as in the case of Airbnbs and the like. So for that matter -- you know, in other words, the state general assembly could appeal or relax the current restrictions and then there we'd be having relied upon something from a group that seems to be trending toward more leniency, less local control, more state control. So that's kind of where I am so far subject to hearing from the public and further deliberations that we have. Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Is there any -- I was going to make a motion, but is it premature? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, you can certainly make a motion, but we haven't heard from the public yet. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah, I was just thinking, do you want me to wait? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, why not? Yes, Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Just whenever, I would like to ask, maybe during the rebuttal, I guess, ask the applicant that question. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I mean, because that -- you know, I want to know why they think it's not important to not have it, because -- after all this discussion, because I'm kind of wondering myself why would -- other than the philosophical point. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Fair enough. Mr. Youngblood, do we have any members of the public who wish to be heard? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, we have one speaker for this item, and that is Mr. Rich Yovanovich. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Yovanovich, you're not counsel in this matter? MR. YOVANOVICH: Would you mind if I go to that podium instead. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go right ahead. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Already asking for accommodations; haven't even started. Is he subject to cross-examination? MR. YOVANOVICH: I actually have to be sworn in. I hope you will cross me. CHAIRMAN FRYER: He needs to be sworn in. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. YOVANOVICH: I do. I'm actually here in my -- as trustee of another property that you're going to hear about in a few weeks. And I think I can give you a little insight as to this whole new prohibition scheme that's coming from Pollution Control. About a month or so ago I was invited to a meeting to talk about my project, the Estates Shopping Center, and I got to meet for the first time Pollution Control where they let me know that they wanted to create prohibition of uses that currently are allowed but they don't think are good, so they're going to create a new list of prohibited uses within this 500-foot -- or expansive of the 500-foot limitation. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 18 of 85 And I just want to clarify on the record and understand what just happened, because I've got the same issue coming up, and I don't want you to start down a pathway and not understand the genesis of how we got here. In the lower right-hand corner you have a gas station. On my particular -- in my particular case, envision that as a vacant piece of property that wants to put a gas station there now, and you have this 500-foot radius. I was told by staff, you can't come in and ask for a gas station even if you keep the tanks outside the 500-foot radius. Even if you keep the tanks out of the 500-foot radius, you cannot have a gas station. Now, what I think I just heard was, yes, you can have a gas station as long as the tanks, not the pumps, the tanks are outside the 500-foot radius. I was told even if the tanks are outside the 500-foot radius, you cannot have a gas station on that piece of property. I said, what are the concerns? Are you concerned about the tanks leaking and affecting the water supply? No, the technology's there. They're double-walled. You're safe. There's all these bells and whistles. We're not worried about the tanks. I said, are you worried about someone backing into the pump and all of a sudden gas goes flowing everywhere? They said, no, we're not worried about that. The technology's there. Breakaway shuts everything off. You're not going to have the catastrophic spill that we're worried about. I said, what are you worried about? They're worried that Mr. Vernon is going to take the nozzle, pull the nozzle up, put his little gas cap, if he has a car that has a gas cap there, to keep it going while he's not there watching. He's going to go inside, buy a soda, and somehow the shutoff is not going to work at the nozzle, and we're going to have a catastrophic spill. That's what they were worried about in prohibiting gas stations even outside of the 500-foot radius. Now, maybe that's changed since I met a month ago, but that's how this all started. I'm glad I was here for another item later, because this is a precedential discussion you're about to have about this whole concept of what is or is not allowed in your wellfield, and I think -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Yovanovich, we -- thank you, sir, and your points have been made. We hear each case, as you know, on its own merits, and when your case comes around, we'll hear it and give you a full and impartial -- give you the full impartial treatment that you deserve, but I'd like you to confine your comments to this particular matter, if you would. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I am. I'm talking about you question about what's the harm in agreeing to staff's language, and I really want to understand what staff's language is, because I think the public should know what you're trying to protect and what staff is asking for. So I'm asking, as a member of the public, are tanks prohibited from the 500 feet and are pumps within the 500 feet as being proposed by staff? And I think Ms. Cook told me, yes, you can have the pumps within the 500 feet but, no, you can't have the tanks. And I think -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I actually think that that was expressly not the case. She actually said pumps and tanks outside of the 500 feet. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Agreed. MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's why I asked her to clarify that. I think the answer is pumps are allowed. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I am of the view that we are straying rather far afield here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Does anybody else feel the same way? All right. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The language that staff proposed clearly states 500 feet. Nothing outside [sic] of 500 feet. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Yovanovich, another 30 seconds, can you wrap it up? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, if you don't want to hear, you don't need to hear it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We don't want to hear it right now. We'll hear it when it comes before us. Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Well, I'd like the clarification from staff. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 19 of 85 MS. COOK: So the -- Jaime Cook, director of Development Review. The Florida Administrative Code requires that tanks be outside the 500 feet. So the pumps themselves would be allowed to be within that 500 feet. The tanks would not. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, I got it. That was -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: That was it? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Staff clearly noted 500 feet, and I'm comfortable with the language. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Rebuttal from Mr. Arnold. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just a clarification. Is staff recommendation just for the tanks and not the pumps? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, they were prohibiting the use. COMMISSIONER SHEA: For gas, yeah. So that would be -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It would be stores with fuel pumps in the 500 feet. COMMISSIONER SHEA: And tanks? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They are prohibiting the actual use. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I agree with that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Anything further before we hear rebuttal? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Mr. Arnold, you're on. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't really have a strong rebuttal. I do want to walk away from here with a unanimous decision hopefully supporting the project, because it is a good project. I like Ms. Cook's clarification, because the one scenario that I do see happening is modernization of an existing convenience store building which might grow into our PUD. And if that were to occur, the language that staff is asking us to prohibit, a convenience store with fuel pumps, that use would still be convenience store with fuel pumps; however, the fuel pumps and tanks would be beyond 500 feet from the wellfield. So if there is a way to clarify that that scenario where the convenience component could be there, however any tank or pump would be outside the 500 feet, I'm okay with that. My client is willing to concede all of it if that's what it takes to get the vote. But if we could have that clarification, I think that is a likely scenario that staff would support. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would agree. I would recommend that the language that staff proposed -- it says convenience store with fuel pumps, but it -- convenience store should be allowed to go in there. The fuel pumps not be within the 500 feet. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Tanks and pumps. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Say again. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Tanks and pumps. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. There's no reason to prohibit the pumps. We don't do it today in 500 feet. You could put a fuel pump within the -- within the 500 feet as long as the tanks are outside. I mean, this scenario that Mr. Yovanovich brought up is -- I guess we have to get rid of all -- everything that -- ladders and knives and forks and spoons and everything else that could be used not as what they were designed for. If somebody -- I won't get into it anyways. But I think that the convenience store certainly should be allowed, the fuel pumps, as long as the fuel pumps are outside the 500 feet. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Did I hear you say, though -- you said pumps and tanks. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The fuel tanks, I'm sorry, not the pumps. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 20 of 85 COMMISSIONER SHEA: No. He said pumps and tanks, and I agree with that. MR. ARNOLD: We're fine with both. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Schmitt, I appreciate your concern. And Rich and I will deal with the other item when its due course comes to you in a few weeks. But in this particular case, my client -- the most immediate need for them is to get what they do for a living approved, which is a childcare facility and a charter school. So we're willing to make that concession if it's clarified that a convenience store is permitted within that 500 feet; however, the fuel portion of that would remain outside the 500 feet. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I think that works for us, doesn't it? Okay. Also, before you leave, the Condition No. 1 with respect to stacking, are you okay with that? MR. ARNOLD: Yes, we're fine with that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman. MR. EASTMAN: And that includes staggering the times. Is that acceptable to you-all, Wayne? MR. ARNOLD: You know, I think it is, Mr. Eastman. I don't know the exact times that the elementary school currently operates, but we're happy to coordinate with them to try to lessen the burden on the road. MR. EASTMAN: Perfect. Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We'll put some language in there, then, to cover that. MR. ARNOLD: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right. So do we have the language that we want to modify it? MR. EASTMAN: I think Wayne heads off to a great start, that the applicant will coordinate with the school district for staggered arrival and dismissal times. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Perfect. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And for the tank -- the convenience store will not be prohibited as long as tanks and pumps are beyond the 500 feet? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. MR. ARNOLD: I like that. Yes, that works for us. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Convenience with fuel pumps and tanks. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I certainly would be happy to make the motion to go forward with that language. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Anything further in rebuttal? MR. ARNOLD: No, thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mike has a comment. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Jamie French just reminded me -- and just for clarification for Rich's conversation that he had with Pollution Control, at the end of the day, Pollution Control is a portion of staff. The ultimate -- the ultimate decision upon what is going to be recommended from staff comes from the directorship; from Jaime Cook, from myself, from Jamie, from other directors. They are a portion of staff. I can't speak -- because I was not at that meeting -- in terms of, you know, what was stated, what wasn't stated. But at the end of the day, what gets to the staff reports that the Planning Commission will review and what the recommendations are are decided upon the administration within Growth Management, with the County Attorney's Office, and the County Manager's Office. Just providing that clarification. Sorry. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. I think we're ready to entertain a motion, if someone wants to make one. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 21 of 85 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So I would move with that language about the tanks and pumps, the convenience stores being allowed as long as the tanks and pumps are not within the 500 feet, and I would just say that I was convinced, because I actually do, you know, think that the local -- you know, if we're doing case-by-case basis, then I'm willing to weigh the principle against, you know, the particular situation, as long as we're mindful that we -- you know, that we don't make it a habit to just, you know, habitually double up because, as you said, it's inelegant or otherwise. There's a lot of reasons, you know, to not do it, but I can see the rationale for doing it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any further discussion? COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. Just a friendly amendment to make sure we're not forgetting about Mr. Eastman's addition to Item No. 1. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Staggering; coordinate with the school district for staggering. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And seconder agrees to that? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second agrees to that. And that we -- staff -- I don't see any need for this to come back. Staff can make sure the proper language is in the PUD. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I think that's right. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, it's been moved and seconded with the two conditions as rewritten or to be rewritten. All those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously six to nothing. Thank you very much. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, applicant. All right. We've got -- I think we have time to start the next matter before our midmorning break, if the -- Madam Court Reporter, if that's all right with you. THE COURT REPORTER: (Nods head.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would -- Mr. Chairman, this is a rather -- I would deem it as an innocuous request to add three-and-a-half acres. Other than reading the request in the record, I don't see any need to beat this to death, and I would ready to move for -- recommend approval. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Let me announce the matter, and we'll see if we can. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm making a suggestion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's put it before us, and then we can move as expeditiously as possible. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Good presentation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: ***All right. This is matter PL20210000731, the Community School of Naples community facility PUDA. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ex parte disclosure starting with Mr. Eastman. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 22 of 85 MR. EASTMAN: Nothing outside of the public record. COMMISSIONER VERNON: None. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Just because I jumped you last time, you were afraid I was going to do it again. Thank you. Let's see. I had conversations with staff and materials of public record. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm not sure. I can't remember; I may have spoke to the agent about this, but I can't recall. I just maybe -- yes, I did. MR. VANASSE: Not me personally. Ken Gallander -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. VANASSE: -- was the one that you spoke to. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Just staff materials and discussion with staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. You may proceed, sir. MR. VANASSE: Good morning. My name is Patrick Vanasse. I'm a certified planner with RWA Engineering. I do have a presentation with me; however, as mentioned by Mr. Schmitt, this is a very simple request. We are adding four acres of land owned by Community School within the PUD. The only reason that land wasn't part of the PUD when we came in 2012 was that there were issues related to that property, and those issues have been resolved from a legal standpoint. And at this point, the idea was to bring it within the PUD and make it one contiguous campus. Simple request. The other minor changes included in the PUD are just cleanup. Over the last few years, a few new buildings have been added. We went through the minor-change process to get those added, and we're updating the master plan just to reflect those changes. Staff also had some standard conditions within PUDs that they wanted us to add in there. We're happy to comply with that. We have reviewed their findings and recommendation for approval, fully concur and support what they're saying. And if there is no need for presentation, I would be happy to go on my merry way. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We'll have you back at rebuttal if something comes up. COMMISSIONER VERNON: I had a quick question. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, question from -- first Mr. Eastman, then Mr. Vernon. MR. EASTMAN: Patrick, you're aware that there's a storm -- a reciprocal stormwater arrangement with Community School and the -- MR. VANASSE: School board. MR. EASTMAN: -- school district's campus there. So you're going to add stuff in. You'll be doing buildings and impervious if this is incorporated. And so this -- the drainage will run through this reciprocal easement; is that correct? MR. VANASSE: Any future development would, indeed, abide by that agreement. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. That's all I wanted to make sure of. Thank you so much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I just want to make sure I'm not missing something. You said there were original problems with title -- legal problems. MR. VANASSE: It was title issues. COMMISSIONER VERNON: It wasn't environmental issues? MR. VANASSE: No, simply title. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Ownership title, things -- MR. VANASSE: No. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Anything further for the applicant? (No response.) 5.A.a Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 23 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, we'll hear from staff. MR. BOSI: As covered by the applicant, staff is fully recommending approval with the additional standard conditions that we normally bring to the PUD, as well as we appreciate the cleanup efforts of getting everything in line with the current -- the current conditions, and recommend adding, you know, the almost four acres to the campus that has existed for a long time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Any questions for staff? Comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Youngblood, do we have any public speakers? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: We do not. That covers registered public speakers. Is there anyone here in the room who has not registered but wishes to be heard on this matter? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, we will close the public part. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'd like to make a motion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Make a motion to approve the petition as approved by staff. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Vernon -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: And Commissioner Vernon has lit up. Go ahead, sir. COMMISSIONER VERNON: No, I was just going to second. Karen already -- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I got it out faster than he did. COMMISSIONER VERNON: She's faster than me. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. It's been moved and seconded to approve. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Passes unanimously, 6-0. Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Patrick, it's good you practiced that presentation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Wayne, you're not going to have the same privilege. MR. ARNOLD: Please. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'll ask the applicant on Creekside, do you want to start and then break at 10:30, or would it be -- would you prefer that we take our break now? MR. ARNOLD: What do you want to do, Rich? MR. YOVANOVICH: Let's do it now. MR. ARNOLD: We can start now. It's a fairly short presentation. I think it's a fairly straightforward request. I need to find my presentation on here. I'm not sure where it went. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. MR. ARNOLD: Maybe staff can help me locate it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I will announce the matter while you're looking for it. ***So it is -- our third and fourth matters are companion matters, PL20190002849, the 5.A.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 24 of 85 Creekside subdistrict small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment, and PL20190002850, the Creekside mixed-use PUDA, which we will hear together and vote on separately. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ex parte disclosure starting with Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: None. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials. COMMISSIONER VERNON: None. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I've had communications with staff and the applicant's agents and received materials of public record. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke to the petitioner and Mr. Arnold. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I spoke to Austin and Wayne Arnold as well. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Staff and staff materials -- or discussion with staff and staff materials, and I would just ask, Mr. Chairman, if I could -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Of course. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: -- that I would want to talk to somebody in IT at our break, for the county. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. MR. YOVANOVICH: We do have somebody from IT coming down at break to speak with Mr. Klucik. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. Perfect. Mr. Arnold, you may proceed. MR. ARNOLD: Good morning, again. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor representing Creekside East, which is an entity of the Barron Collier Companies. Austin Howell from Barron Collier Companies is in the audience. Rich Yovanovich is our land-use counsel, and Norm Trebilcock is our transportation engineer on the project. So you have two applications before you. You have a 9.9-acre small-scale plan amendment that creates the Creekside East mixed-use project, and then there's also a PUD amendment that will perfect that to allow multifamily residential. And this primarily affects the area in the east side of Goodlette-Frank Road that's part of the Creekside PUD. Most of you have seen the Creekside PUD come before you. Most recently it was to approve the headquarters building and the hotel for Arthrex that's located immediately to our west. I think hopefully you've had a chance to see those two beautiful buildings. And I think what has happened is this has become really a marquee research and business park in our community, and we believe having the asset of 300 multifamily units to be located here is a true benefit not only to the two major employers. There's also the Landmark Hospital that would be located immediately adjacent to the hotel or the -- excuse me, to the multifamily residential that would also be a beneficiary of having employee housing near by. So we are creating a new land-use subdistrict. And what I will say is Creekside entities and Barron Collier entities own more than the 9.9 acres on this side of the property, but your limitation for small-scale amendments when we filed this was 10 acres, so we filed this at 9.9 acres. The new statutory change that occurred this past legislative session increased that acreage to 50, so we would have been eligible to include probably closer to 20 acres as part of our analysis. I know that some questions had arisen because of the density that we're seeking. But I think in context of density, you've seen this occur in a couple cases. You know, we don't really measure net densities. We look at gross densities. And in this particular case, you know, somewhere between 250 and 300 units is sort of that sweet spot that the multifamily developers 5.A.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 25 of 85 need to get to in order to construct a product that's financially feasible. So an analysis was conducted for the market and determined that, really, in a couple-mile radius there is not much rental housing, if any, available. There's one affordable housing project located on Old 41 to the north, and then as you go west, obviously, toward U.S. 41, there's really no rental housing in that vicinity. So it became pretty clear that there was a hole in the market for rental housing. And then knowing that there's an expressed desire to have housing near by from both Arthrex and Naples Community Hospital and Landmark Hospital, it became clear that this really could be a viable use and one that's very needed in the community. So the request was fairly straightforward with regard to the Comprehensive Plan amendment. It creates the subdistrict which allows for not only the multifamily but then the continuation of all the other business-park-related uses that are allowed in Creekside. That's the specific language that's in your packet. I don't know that we have any members of the public here, so I'm not really going to dwell on that language. The two parcels that were a subject of your subdistrict are these two. One is largely a preservation area, and the other black square right now is a water management lake and some parking. So on the PUD master plan, it's east side of Goodlette Road, which is on your screen. And so this is a business tract, and we would be modifying the business tract to, in fact, allow for the residential use. It's very likely that because this is more of an urban style project, it's going to have a parking -- structured parking that's in conjunction with it, so it will probably span Creekside East Boulevard. We've made provisions here for a pedestrian bridge to occur across that roadway. It is subject to right-of-way permitting from your county staff, but that would be a component of it. Highlighting the two parcels that were subject of the Growth Management Plan amendment. We listed our development standards. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Clarification. It would be right at that corner, the touching corner. MR. ARNOLD: So the location of the residential building would be -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: No. I'm talking about the bridge. MR. ARNOLD: Oh, the bridge. No, probably not, probably in the middle of what's shown as Tract 8. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: And it would -- the parking would also be on Tract 9, which is already a permitted use in the PUD. And I'm sorry I don't have more detailed graphics. The architects are working trying to figure out exactly how the building will be arranged and how the pedestrian bridge would work with the parking structure. That's generally where the residential building would be constructed. And that's really, in a nutshell, what we're proposing. There were letters of support from both Arthrex and NCH in your packet. We held a neighborhood information meeting for which there were no attendees, surprisingly, but there were none. As far as I know, we've received no comments or any kind of questions from the general public. Obviously, notices went out; signs have been posted on the site. And I think that people have been -- honestly, my opinion is, pleased -- have been so pleased with what Arthrex has done on the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road that this just seems to be a natural extension for the uses in the business park that's there. So with that, I'm happy to answer questions. Anybody from our team will answer questions. I know traffic -- Norm Trebilcock is here. We're not modifying at all the traffic cap that we had. We had a vehicular trip cap that's part of the project previously approved. Just from a transportation standpoint, if you've driven the corridor, you see that the traffic signal that Arthrex triggered has been installed, and that's operational and seems to be functioning 5.A.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 26 of 85 fine from everybody's account. So with that, we'll answer questions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: Wayne, is the use of these units -- is it strictly limited to Arthrex, or is it open to public citizenry as well; firefighters, police, school district personnel, county employees? Would they be able to live here and utilize this? MR. ARNOLD: I think the answer is yes, all of the above. I know that Barron Collier Companies is working directly with Arthrex and NCH and Landmark to figure out some protocol for maybe giving some of their employees first rights to certain units. MR. EASTMAN: Do you know what percentage of the building that would be? Is it 50 percent or 10 percent or -- what are we talking about here? MR. ARNOLD: I see heads shaking no, we don't know what those percentages are yet. It's still -- we're still working with the architect trying to determine all of the unit mix in terms of the, you know, three-, two-, one-bedroom. It's probably going to be heavier to two- and one-bedroom units. MR. EASTMAN: Would you be open to reserving a certain percentage of the units that they would be open to the public and not restricted to just the private employees? MR. ARNOLD: I'll let either Austin or Rich come up and address that. It's a question I don't have an answer for you, Tom. MR. HOWELL: Austin Howell with Barron Collier Companies. The majority of the units are going to be open to the public. It would just be a smaller portion that would have first priority for either NCH, Arthrex, the immediate employers in that area. So the majority of the units are open to the public. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. MR. HOWELL: And should Arthrex not fill any of those units that they -- we don't have agreements with them now, so should someone like Arthrex have first priority on the units, if none of their employees would take those units, they don't just sit there vacant; they would go into the pool for the public. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. And would you be open to having that as be, you know, a condition that the majority would be open to the public? MR. HOWELL: I don't see the need for the condition, in all honesty, but it's just simple; how apartment complexes usually work, they're open to the public. But it doesn't harm in any way that the majority of the units -- if you have a certain percentage that you're suggesting, like I said, we're still going through -- MR. EASTMAN: I'll just use your words, "the majority"; would that be okay? MR. HOWELL: That's fine. MR. EASTMAN: Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Commissioner Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, Wayne, for clarification, you have highlighted in yellow B, Tract 8, that is actually where the structure will go? MR. ARNOLD: That is where -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And the other tract -- MR. ARNOLD: Tract 9 would be where the land bridge would -- or the pedestrian bridge would connect to a parking deck. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's where the parking deck will go. MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. And the parking -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And the other -- the other area that's PU, PW, and L there -- MR. ARNOLD: No material changes to those as part of the PUD. They were included in our Growth Management Plan amendment to get to an acreage for -- 5.A.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 27 of 85 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That remains preserve or water management or whatever else it is? MR. ARNOLD: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. All right. Thanks, I had clarification on that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. All right. So in the actual request, we're taking it from one designation, and the new designation, is it brand new, or is it adding it to something that -- MR. ARNOLD: This is brand new. It creates our own mixed-use subdistrict. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I just wanted to clarify that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Is anything going to be under 750 square feet? Were you here for that discussion? MR. ARNOLD: I did hear that discussion. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Probably will be, yes. MR. ARNOLD: And I think there's an opportunity for it to be, and I know that that's a discussion that we think is important, because in the medical world they have visiting nursing programs, they have visiting doctor programs. There isn't necessarily always a need to have a larger unit available for somebody who -- probably the hospital could lease a unit on an annual basis. They may put a rotating group of people into a studio unit. Studio units need to be a little less than 750 square feet. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: A question for Wayne. In the staff report, we talked about wetlands impact credits. What exactly is -- there's a pond that's on Tract 8 right now. Is that -- and that's going away because you're putting residential in there. Is that what this refers to? MR. ARNOLD: I think it does. It's -- we're not impacting the wetlands that are part of the preserve. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But it talked as if you had to buy some credits for whatever you're doing here. No? MR. ARNOLD: I don't think so. That wasn't part of our discussion, but I'm not sure what that's in reference to. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. This is -- I think this is just a curiosity question, but have there been any discussions about a pedestrian bridge across Immokalee or across Goodlette? MR. ARNOLD: Not recently. I know that we did look at that potential many years ago, and that's before the Creekside Corners retail center was constructed. I think there was some interest by Naples Community Hospital one time to have also some medical office located proximate to their hospital, and there would have been a question as to whether or not a pedestrian bridge would be necessary. This one, at least, it's on Creekside Boulevard East. It's a minor connection, if you will, just to put a pedestrian bridge. I don't know that -- you know, one of the other examples we have in Collier County is downtown Naples with the Naples Community Hospital connecting their facilities. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. All right. It's 27 minutes after 10. No one else is asking to speak at this time, so we'll take a 10-minute break. Please come back at 10:37. We stand in recess. (A brief recess was had from 10:27 a.m. to 10:37 a.m.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ladies and gentlemen, let's please reconvene. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 28 of 85 All right. No one from the Planning Commission is signaling at this point, so I'll turn it back to Mr. Arnold and see if he has anything further to say. MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Yovanovich would like to talk to you a little bit about the conversation that Mr. Eastman had with Mr. Howell. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And this will be about the current matter, Mr. Yovanovich? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm not so sure if that was elder abuse or not. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ooh, that could be. MR. YOVANOVICH: I still -- I think I'm still Mr. Yovanovich, and I think this is the Creekside project, so I do want to talk about the Creekside project. There was a pretty rapid exchange between Mr. Eastman and Mr. Howell regarding who may or may not be tenants of the units and what's the right percentage and not the right percentage, and I really -- I hesitate to prescribe a percentage of how many units can or cannot be utilized by any specific group of people, particularly because, you know -- and this is purely hypothetical. I don't know that this could ever happen. You have two major employers in very close proximity, and if they wanted to lease up 100 percent of the units because, you know, they've got their employees right there, why would that be a bad thing? Why would we force those people to live further away? So I think it would be better to just let the market dictate who the tenants are and not prescribe what the percentage of the tenants need to be and how close or how far away they may live, because I think there's a natural synergy there for some certain employers. And I'd hate to say that, you know, we get to the 50 percent threshold and I've got to tell somebody at NCH or Arthrex I can't rent you -- I can't rent you a unit. I've got to let someone else use it. So we had a very preliminary discussion, Mr. Eastman and I, out -- or actually in here, and I'd like to just let the market dictate the percentage of the units. And we've had no objections from anybody in the community. Nobody from the community was concerned about, you know, who were the tenants going to be, and I think this has been a great research and technology park evolution, and we'd like to -- we'd like to re-think that commitment, if that's acceptable, Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: I'm fine with that, Rich. And we discussed that having an exclusive for the building does affect its value and it could be a premium. And also, as Rich mentioned earlier, having the employees living so closely reduces traffic on the roads. And I think the market is always the best thing to use as a touchstone. So I have no problem agreeing with everything that Rich is saying. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. No, I was just going to say -- I was just going to say Rich brings up a good point, so it sounds like it's been taken care of. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. No one else is signaling at this point. Anything further from the applicant, Mr. Yovanovich or Mr. Arnold? MS. ARNOLD: No, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. And there being no further questions or comments from the Planning Commission, we'll go right to the staff report, please. MR. SABO: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. James Sabo, Comprehensive Planning manager. Give me a second here to pull up this presentation. Oh, this is the wrong one. Sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry, everybody. We're not ready yet. MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Fryer, to be fair, should you say something to Mr. -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: I didn't see what was displayed, and it was probably a good thing. Oh, Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Chair, while staff is pulling up -- while staff is pulling up the presentation, I 5.A.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 29 of 85 did want to provide a clarification or at least an acknowledgment there has been no senior abuse in terms of how we've treated Mr. Yovanovich. I have seen him with a brownie previously, so he's been provided snacks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you for that clarification. Mr. Sabo, are you ready, sir? MR. SABO: I am. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Please proceed. MR. SABO: All right. This is a Growth Management Plan amendment for the Creekside Commerce Park. I am presenting Ms. Faulkner's report. It is a proposed GMPA amendment to create a subdistrict allowing a maximum of 300 multifamily rental units. It's a 9.9-acre site. And as Mr. Arnold mentioned, recent changes would have made this a small-scale, and they could have actually added acreage, but that's not the case before you. This is the location. We already went through that. GMP amendment will not affect the requirements of the CCME. Native vegetation remains. Environmental Services recommends approval. No EAC required. No adverse impact on the wastewater treatment system, and Transportation is recommending approval as well based on consistency with Policy 5.1. These are the findings: Within two miles there's about -- the CIGM identifies about 11,500 jobs, most of those high tech. Proximity of the project to services reduces vehicle miles traveled. Local transit is available within walking distance, and there's no adverse impacts on the environmental, historic, or archaeological. Our recommendation is to approve/adopt a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. I'll entertain any questions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Planning Commissioners, no one is signaling. Anyone have questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, thank you, Mr. Sabo. MR. SABO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Will we hear from Ms. Gundlach also? Do you have a presentation? You don't need to, but... MS. GUNDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners. I don't have a presentation, but I wanted to put on the record that -- I'm Nancy Gundlach, principal planner for the Zoning Division. And we are recommending approval of the Creekside PUD amendment, but it is subject to the approval of the companion GMPA. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood. Thank you very much. All right. No one has questions for Ms. Gundlach? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Mr. Youngblood, do we have any members of the public who have registered to speak? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, I do not have any public speakers for this item. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Are there any members of the public in the room who have not registered but wish to speak? Now would be the time. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Seeing no hands up or no one rising, that will conclude the public comment portion of this hearing, and we'll open it up for discussion and deliberation by the Planning Commission. Do you have rebuttal? MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I don't. We just noticed a typo in the document that I need to put on the visualizer. I just noticed in the table -- or Wayne and I just noticed in the table, that by the unit minimum floor area it says "ground floor." The words "ground floor" shouldn't be there. It should just be floor area per unit. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 30 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: So we just need to strike that from the Development Standards Table. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. That will be deleted. Nothing further from the applicant, nothing further from staff. No one's signaling at the Planning Commission dais, so it would be appropriate for us to entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Vernon moves. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No one speaking, I'll be -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. We need to do two motions, so this is the GMP first. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I ask a question? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yep. COMMISSIONER SHEA: We may have questions on the second one. There's a little more detail on that one. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: So do we need to talk about both, or can we -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Why don't we -- yeah, we talk about these together and vote separately, so I think now would be the best time to raise those, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I guess a maximum height of 100 feet, is that a zoned height? An actual height? CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's actual, I believe. COMMISSIONER SHEA: It's actual? CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's what the material says. COMMISSIONER SHEA: If they -- what is -- is that allowed under the code, that height, maximum actual of 100 feet? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. The Land Development Code doesn't have a height limitation per se, or the Growth Management Plan. It's determined on a case-by-case basis for PUDs, so they could ask for an actual height of 100 feet and be consistent with our codes and regulations. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So they're consistent with the code? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: They're consistent by not being inconsistent. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Anything else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. So there's been a -- has there -- let's have another motion on the GMPA motion first, please. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'd make a motion on the GMPA that is PL20190002849, GMP amendment for Creekside; make a recommendation to approve as proposed and approved by staff, or at least as proposed by staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Shea, did you -- all right. I just would like to say for the record that ordinarily, for me, 30 dwelling units per acre is a bridge too far, but it's -- I believe it is certainly appropriate in this case, and I think that this is a very positive opportunity for the county, and the petitioner is to be commended for that. Without any further questions or comments, all those in favor of the GMPA, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 31 of 85 COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously, six to nothing. I'd entertain a motion now on the PUDA. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Make a motion likewise, 20190002850, Creekside Commerce Park PUDA. And I, too, agree 30 units per acre is a lot, but in this case, when you look at it holistically, when you look at the entire Creekside community and the PUD, it is, I think, a very suitable blend for what's being proposed. I would recommend approval based on the recommendations as approved -- as proposed by staff with the minor amendment as discussed on the record. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: There being none, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes six to nothing unanimously. Thank you very much. And we do not need to take action as an EAC on this. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you so much. Appreciate that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, applicant. ***We now go to Items 5 and 6, which also are companion items. They are as follows: PL20190001333, the Iglesias Pentecostes small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment proposal, and PL20190001326, the Iglesias Pentecostes conditional use. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Before you jump into that, can I bring up a minor but urgent matter? CHAIRMAN FRYER: You may, sir. COMMISSIONER VERNON: I was approached by a reporter to talk about the RCMA issue during the break. And I've sat in your chair -- and I think this is a very noncontroversial interview. But I've sat in your chair where I wake up the next day after the meeting, and I've got seven board members saying seven different things, and I've never been a big fan of that. So in my mind, you know, there probably should be a spokesperson that the press deals with on our board. I mean, it's certainly up to you and the fellow commissioners, but that's what I'd recommend. I'm happy to do this interview, not a problem, but I just didn't -- I don't want to start down a road where we end up with a controversial item and all of a sudden we create problems. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood. Anyone else want to be heard on that subject? 5.A.a Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 32 of 85 COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. I think in the past we've had the Chairman be the spokesperson, and I would recommend we continue with that so we don't get seven different messages. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Certainly can -- MR. KLATZKOW: I would just note that no good comes from -- I'm -- this is not a joke. No good comes from being interviewed by the press. CHAIRMAN FRYER: My policy has been that I will not say anything to the press before a matter has come before us for the final time, and only on one occasion that I can think of did I make a comment after that. But having said that, I agree with the County Attorney. It's -- we do it at our peril and -- but I leave it to your discretion if -- as a planning commissioner if you want to speak as an individual at your own risk, and if you clarify that you're speaking as an individual, certainly that's your prerogative. If you want me to speak for you in a noncommittal fashion, you can refer the matter to me. I won't speak on it until it's been heard by us for the final time, if then. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Well, I do like the idea of having -- communicating with the press when appropriate. I just don't like the idea of a rogue situation. So I would like to talk to the press, but if you'd prefer to talk to them, I think they'll be here at noon. So I agree, I think the Chairman should. And I understand your point about before we vote on something. But I do like to have some kind of communication with the press, although I understand. Certainly, I've seen how that can go awry, but I don't like nobody on the Board communicating with the press. That's my personal thought. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, and that's a valid point. I'll say it again. If there is to be commentary from the Planning Commission before we vote on this, I think that's inappropriate, and I would -- I would decline to comment on behalf of the Planning Commission. Afterward my comment would likely be something like, you saw the proceedings, the commissioners spoke and you heard the vote, and that's the way the matter was left by the Planning Commission. I'm not sure that adding color beyond a statement like that is very useful. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. I would just say that I agree with what you responded to. I mean, I don't think there should -- you know, I don't think we can prohibit anybody from giving an interview if they feel like it's important to give an interview. But I personally told the reporter that based on the fact that every time I've been interviewed, you know, the story doesn't seem to reflect the discussion very well, I won't be giving you an interview. That was my response. But I agree that, you know, in the middle of -- in the middle of a hearing like this, when approached by a reporter because they didn't get here on time, I think that was kind of the situation here, to explain things. It makes sense that somebody, you know, could inform them. Fortunately there were other people in the room that were able, I think, to do that. But I kind of just said, yeah, it passed and, no, I won't give you an interview. But I agree with your concern that we don't really -- in the midst of everything, we don't want to have a bunch of people -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I make a suggestion? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: My experience is the same as Commissioner Klucik's, that very rarely does what I say come out the way I said it. What we did as a practice is we said, if you want an interview, you want to talk to somebody, submit your questions in writing, and then rather than any misunderstanding of what the question and the answer was, and we submit an answer in writing. CHAIRMAN FRYER: These are all good points. I would suggest at this juncture that if we want to talk about this further today, we defer it to new business, and let's continue to hear the matter at hand. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. And I apologize for bringing it up. It was just -- 5.A.a Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 33 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: No, no. COMMISSIONER VERNON: -- I did submit that somebody would talk to the press at noon, so I feel like I have an obligation to do that interview. Going forward, I'm simply going to defer it to the Chair, and if the Chair wishes to say submit the questions in writing or no comment, that that's the Chair's prerogative, or if the Chair wants to request me to speak. That's the way I'll handle it in the future, but I just -- I don't want to tell somebody something and then go back on it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: My suggestion -- of course leave it to your discretion as a commissioner and a lawyer -- that we would not be commenting on these matters until it had finally concluded our involvement. And this is a small-scale, so we're only going to have one shot at it, but be mindful of what the County Attorney said, because there's wisdom in that. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mic test. Can you hear me now? Is that better, or is my mic not working? Okay, great. CHAIRMAN FRYER: ***Okay. Thank you. I'm going to call the items again, fifth and sixth matters, PL20190001333, Iglesias Pentecostes small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment, and PL20190001326, Iglesias Pentecostes CU. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Disclosures beginning with Mr. Eastman, please. MR. EASTMAN: No disclosures. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials. COMMISSIONER VERNON: No disclosures. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I've had communications with staff and the materials of public record only. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: None. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Other than encountering the crowd as walking in, I asked a few questions. Those were the only involvement I had. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Staff material and discussions with staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. With that, we'll begin with the -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry. I did -- I actually did broach the subject briefly with Commissioner McDaniel as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Commissioner, you're going to have to excuse me. I have a phone call. I have to be absent for about 15 minutes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood, Commissioner. We'll begin with the applicant's presentation. Sir, please identify yourself, and you may proceed. MR. DE AZA: Good morning, everybody. My name is Ronny De Aza. I am with RDA Consulting Engineers, and we're here representing Iglesias Pentecostal Peniel on the church they are trying to get approved in the Estates, Golden Gate Estates. THE COURT REPORTER: Can you spell your name? MR. DE AZA: R-o-n-n-y, Last name De Aza, D-e space A-z-a. Talk about the project. The project is located in the corner of 8th Street Northeast and 22nd Avenue Northeast in Golden Gate Estates. It's two lots that will need to be combined if this gets approved during the SDP process, and total of about 5.15 acres. We are proposing a 100-seat church. The zoning for this is Estates, and we are able to do a conditional use to approve a church here, but we'll only be able to get a conditional use approved 5.A.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 34 of 85 after a Growth Management Plan amendment. The church is currently on Randall, and they're trying to get their own building relocated. And this exhibit here just shows where the congregation is. So this location is perfect for everybody that goes to this church. On screen is the master site plan that we're proposing. The church will be approximately 5,000 square feet. The property to the north and the property to the west is residential property. And to the east and to the south we have a right-of-way followed by residential property as well. We have some existing wetlands that we are not going to be impacting, and we are respecting all the buffers, 75-wide buffers that will need to be in the Estates when the property is abutting residential. On the screen, again, is just an example of how the proposed church will look like. And the county has conditions of approval. The church members agree with all the conditions that the county has brought down. We did traffic analysis originally based on a 250-seat church, and it was very positive, very little impact. Bringing the church down to 100 seats, it's even better now transit-wise, and we have our transit engineer here with us if you have any questions, and we brought those calculations in case you wanted to see them. That's pretty much all we have is a small church, small community church, about 60 to 80 members, and we are asking approval for just 100 seats. And it doesn't seem that we have a negative impact to the community. And we would like to both get the conditional use approved and the Growth Management Plan amendment for this. And with that, I conclude my presentation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. MR. DE AZA: The pastor would like to speak. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Pastor. PASTOR MARTIN: Yeah. My name is Jorge Martin. J-o-r-g-e Martin, okay. More distinguished planning commissioners, I am here to speak about the fact that for several months we have applied for conditional use and permit with the sole objective of constructing a building to be using as a church by our congregation. I would like to make known why we are requesting this permit. First, I would like to explain why we feel the need to construct the church. The members of the church have been meeting at different homes and commercial rental space for the past several years. The growth of our small church community has driven us to seek out the option of owning our own space. We are calling [sic] to good stewards of finances, and the sum of the monthly rental payments throughout the year is a very high cost for our congregation. When we first are meeting to have a conversation with the Growth Management, a question about why we did not verify if we could build a small church in a residential area. To that, we reply that our mistake was to assume that we have no objection since our sister church in Immokalee city present [sic] a time the permit to building in the residential area with little to no effort. We have our experience -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Sir, could you repeat that sentence, because I didn't understand what you said. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. I say -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: You were talking about the obligation that you had based -- somehow connected to the sister church. I didn't understand. PASTOR MARTIN: Oh. In Immokalee, we have a sister church where we work together. So we buy the property -- I mean, they buy the property over there, and they asking for a conditional use in a residential area, and they have the permit with not options, with not -- I mean, were not refuse. Would not discuss, okay. That's what it was. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 35 of 85 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So it was approved in Immokalee? PASTOR MARTIN: Yeah. In Immokalee, is one approved. One church is approve over there. Okay. We have -- our experience led us to assume that the process will be similar. In the Estates, we never could have imagined or prepare for the controversy this will bring about. We never expect be in the news to having misinformation spread to having people who are so strongly oppose to a church being built. Our intent has never been or will to be cause division, anger, or upset people. I don't know if you understand that. Okay. We simple -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. PASTOR MARTIN: We simply want to create a space that will be able, through the community, as a place of worship where people can come together and the community -- in the community in peace. We want to help the community and provide resources. I understand that some of the opposition is because of the belief that we will disturb or cause more traffic in the area. I can assure you -- I can assure you that that will not be the case. Our meeting times are only twice a week, Sunday -- Sunday morning and Wednesday evening well after everyone is home from work. Our meeting will be never considered to typical high traffic hours. We want to help the community with what is within our reach. We want a space that it created by the community for the community. Historically done, we're building our own church -- was building our own church. What we want is for a church to be easily accessed by our members and all that wish to join. That is same way to the community recreation park, wherever the residents can be sport, et cetera. We understand the church is very important for the people come to worship. Thank you for your time, and that's my presentation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Pastor. Commissioner Vernon? COMMISSIONER VERNON: What time are your Wednesday services? PASTOR MARTIN: 7:30. MR. MARTIN: 7:30, in case that didn't come through the microphone. CHAIRMAN FRYER: 7:30. 0730 or -- MR. MARTIN: Wednesday -- no, 1930, 7:30 p.m. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MARTIN: Good morning, Commission. My name is Justin Martin. I'm the brother of Jorge Martin, Pastor Jorge Martin. The church couldn't afford to hire Mr. Yovanovich, so that's why I'm here. I'm not an attorney. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Don't worry about it. He'll speak anyway. MR. MARTIN: I'm not an attorney, but I'm familiar with the project, and I'd like to say some things in support of it. I was surprised by a lot of the opposition that was created over the months about this project, and I think a lot of that opposition is on misconceptions. And I can read to you the things that were in the petition that -- I think there was 250 that signed in opposition, and it stated these things: It says, it will set a precedent. It will allow commercial. It will change the zoning to nonresidential. This is all this traffic. Inappropriate residential in a residential zoning. Add additional uses in the future. Existing buildings along Randall and 8th Street are sufficient commercial for the area. I'd like to address each of those. All right. Setting a precedent. This project will not set any precedent. Precedents are already set. There are churches within even the Estates zonings that have conditional uses. There are over a dozen churches within Collier County that are within residential where you have houses right next door, right across the street, and I'll get into some of those. So this is not setting a precedent for that. This is not changing zoning. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 36 of 85 There was a lot of talk and misinformation on social media and the media about rezoning. This is not rezoning. As you're all aware, this is a conditional use for a specific use for a church on this residential zoned property, and that will not change. We're not asking for a rezoning. So a lot of the people who signed that petition were misled. They were thinking this is rezoning. If you look at that petition also, a lot of those are not even from the Estates or even from the county area. They're from Cape Coral, Hialeah. There's -- if you look at the addresses of all those that signed that. The church did get its signatures in favor, and it was over -- I'm not sure the exact number -- it was over 400 signatures. And those are primarily residents that live in Golden Gate Estates. Traffic. We talked about the traffic. There's two services: One 7:30 p.m. on Wednesdays and then one Sunday morning. Those are not peak traffic hours. Also, that was mentioned in there that this is going to bring in a lot of traffic from outside. Well, the traffic is going to be from the residents that live in the nearby area. You're not going to have people from Fort Myers coming down to a church in Golden Gate Estates. I'd like to see if I can connect to this. If you bear with me just a second, I'll do that. Let me push the laptop button. Okay. Okay, here we go. What I'm showing you here is examples of existing churches. And I did this this morning in a quick Google search. Existing churches in Collier County that are in residential zoned areas with conditional uses. This is the First United Methodist Church. This is in the City of Naples. You've got First Avenue, Third Street, in between Third street and Fourth Street. Bear with me here. This is the photo of the church on the left, and right across the street is residential homes. So a church is not an inappropriate use within a residential community. This is the Naples Alliance Church. This is on Estey Avenue -- on the corner of Estey Avenue and Pine Street. The next -- and you can see right across the street, this is all residential. This is all residential area. Here is a photo of the church. Across the street, you have homes. It's not an inappropriate use within residential zoning. This is in Naples Park. This is 109th Avenue. This is 8th Street. You've got two churches. One is the Romanian Orthodox Church, and the church where my brother, Pastor Jorge Martin, is on 107th Avenue, Iglesias Pentecostal Church. And here's a photo from the street. That's a street view. Right across the street. Right across the street from residential homes. This is not a commercial use. This is not a tire shop. This is -- we're not proposing a department store, a bar, anything like that. This is an appropriate use within residential zoning and a conditional use. This is the Romanian Orthodox Church on the corner of 109th Avenue and 8th Street. Right across the street you can see residents -- residential homes. This is on Price Street in South Naples in Collier County. These are estates-sized lots, and these are homes. Right next to these homes is St. Demetrius Orthodox Church. Here's a photo of St. Demetrius Orthodox Church right across the street and right next door to estates-sized homes. Now we're looking in Golden Gate Estates. Golden Gate Estates, right on Golden Gate Boulevard, you've got Kingdom Hall, which is a church; you've got Grace Romanian Baptist Church; and you've got Max Hasse Community Park, which is a conditional use on Estate-zoned property. You also have this Big Cypress Elementary School which is a conditional use on Estate-zoned property. Now we're looking at the Church of Latter Day Saints. This is within Golden Gate Estates. This is right off of Randall Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard. It's a conditional use. This was recent. This is not something that was done, you know, 30 years ago. This is recent history. And here is a closeup of the Church of Latter Day Saints. And you could see with today's Land Development Code requirements for landscape buffers, setbacks, spacing of driveways from 5.A.a Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 37 of 85 intersections, this church, Iglesias Pentecostal Peniel church in Golden Gate Estates will meet all of the development order requirements. There's another one. This is also in Golden Gate Estates. This is on 18th Avenue Northeast near DeSoto Boulevard, and this is within the campus of Cypress Palm Middle School, which is another conditional use in Estates-zoned property. And I just would like to conclude that, you know, this is an appropriate use in the Estates-zoned property. We're not asking for something that hasn't been done before. It's not setting a precedent. We're not impacting traffic. And, you know, the church is there to help the community. Just like you have community parks that are close to the residential areas within residential areas that are accessible to those residents, so should churches and schools. Schools are. And also, this is just a small community church. During the planning review process, the initial application was for a 250-seat church. With staff, with county staff, the church made a concession to reduce that to 100. There was reports in the news that this was a three-story church. That's false. This is a one-story church. And like the engineer mentioned before, it's 5,000 square foot. It's not a large church. So, Commissioners, I appreciate your time, and I'm here to answer any questions. I'll be standing by. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I just wanted to clarify. We are hearing this legislatively; is that correct? CHAIRMAN FRYER: This is actually both, and so we treat it as though it is quasi-judicial. The CU part is quasi-judicial, and the GMPA is legislative. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Got it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner -- Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: Based upon the -- your presentation, I have a question for Mike. Mike, our public, elementary, and middle schools in the Estates zoning district, those schools, those public facilities, are they a conditional-use requirement, or are they a permitted use? MR. BOSI: At one point in time, they were a conditional use. They are now a permitted use within the Estates zoning district, public schools. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. So today they're a permitted use? MR. BOSI: Yes, yes. MR. EASTMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: No one else is signaling at this point. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Based on that question, is there a reason that churches don't enjoy the same status? CHAIRMAN FRYER: As public schools? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I'm not sure I'm the proper one to answer. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah, no. I'm just figuring somebody must have some history on that. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: It's in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. There is -- there is a very limited opportunity. I think Tract 22 of Lot 97, churches are allowed but, otherwise, it would take a GMPA, and that's why we've got a GMPA and a CU in front of us. Any other questions or comments for the applicant at this time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Before we -- before we go to staff, I want to ask the Planning Commission to -- about stewardship of our time and our agenda today. Begin by asking, 5.A.a Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 38 of 85 Mr. Youngblood, how many registered speakers do we have, sir? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, I don't have an exact count, as I'm under the understanding that not everyone who has registered to speak would want to speak, rather voice their support or opposition. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Can you give us any kind of a range? I won't hold you to it. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Just ask them to raise their hands. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: I would say two dozen. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Two dozen, good. Ordinarily, we would want to hear from the public before we get to the end of the day. We're moving along rather expeditiously, so the question is whether we want to try to hear from the public before lunch and then hear staff or whether we want to have our lunch and then come back and hear the public. COMMISSIONER VERNON: I'd like to go ahead and hear them, but I'm deferential to the rest of the commissioners. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Hear them. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I’d like to hear them. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I'd like to hear them just because they're here, and I know what it's like to be here and not get to speak your piece. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. How long -- how long is the staff presentation? MR. BELLOWS: My speaker button. For the record, we have a short PowerPoint presentation. It shouldn't take very long at all. It will be a short presentation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, if it's short, my suggestion is is that we continue on in the usual order, and we'll start with speakers as soon as we're completed with staff. And we may not get through all the speakers before 1:00 p.m., but that we would take a lunch at around 1:00 p.m. and then return for the rest of the speakers. Does anyone have a problem with that approach or suggest a better one? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I think we should just do the speakers so they can leave if they need to. I don't think they need to be sitting here all -- I don't think -- they probably can't sit here all day. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, the question really, and I didn't express it well, is when are we going to have lunch? COMMISSIONER SHEA: It depends on how many -- how many comments we get from the public, but I would -- I would like to stay as long as we can before we break. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Well -- COMMISSIONER VERNON: I agree. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Well, we'll play it within reason. But, you know, when it gets to be about 1:00 or 1:30, I, for one, begin getting hungry. Okay. We'll do it that way. So before we hear from staff, I have some questions of the applicant, if I may, just to set the tone here of my concerns. First of all, I met with staff yesterday, and they were quite complimentary of the applicant for your being instructive and flexible and willing to make concessions. And for that, of course, we are all thankful. There still remain significant questions in my mind, and I want to go over those first of all, the picture, the image that you're using of your church, in my mind at least, conflicts substantially with the language of the CU that's being proposed. You're looking for a 30-foot church with a 50-foot steeple on top of that for a total of 80 feet. There's no steeple on this image. And just based upon -- in relation to the humans that are also depicted in this image, I would say it's about 20 feet. MR. DE AZA: That was an image that the pastor had that they were going to go off. They haven't gone through the architectural process. The church is not going to be big. It's just going to be probably 10-foot ceilings with, like, 5 to 6 -- 5 to 12 pitch and a little steeple. It will 5.A.a Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 39 of 85 not be a large structure. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Are you putting a steeple on it? MR. DE AZA: That would be a question for the pastor. PASTOR MARTIN: Is any limitation about that, we don't put it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, there might be. PASTOR MARTIN: Well, we want to build the church; that means we not putting if that will be. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, my point is, is that based upon my interpretation of this image, if this is what you want, this is substantially different than the language that is in your CU. This is not an 80-foot structure including a steeple, and even without a steeple, I don't believe it's 30 feet. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. We having that image from the company of a building that kind of structure. So I ask him for some kind of church, and the limited about the 8,000 -- was 8,000 before? MR. DE AZA: Before it was 8,000. PASTOR MARTIN: Before it was 8,000, and they send me that, but we updated that with the new -- with the new size of the church we already apply for. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I understand. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. And, again, I complimented you on your flexibility but, unfortunately, there remain significant issues, at least in my mind. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And this is one of them. I think if you were proposing in language what is depicted in this image, we could get beyond this. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: But that would be, like, a 20-foot high building without a steeple. Let my brother come. MR. MARTIN: I guess what the pastor's referring to is that we're so early in the process that it is, like you said, flexible. So whatever's approved is what -- is how the architectural plans will be prepared. If it's a 30-foot limit, then that's what it will be. That was just a sample photo. It's not -- it's just a rendering from the actual building manufacturer. It's not what the actual building's going to look like. If you look at all the LDC architectural standards, you have all these requirements for undulations of your facade. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Let's just stick to height right now, please. MR. MARTIN: All right. So the applicant is flexible as to the height limitations that would be approved. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, thank you. And I'm just planting that idea for our discussion when the time comes, because it's a point of significant concern, and I must say -- and I'm not saying that anyone intentionally misled anyone, but at the NIM when you show this picture, it depicts something that is quite a bit more modest than the language in your CU application. And, you know, we want to be sure that, even though it's not an intentional misrepresentation, that the public adequately understands what it is you're proposing. So then -- MR. BOSI: Chair, excuse me. I'm sorry to -- it's Mike Bosi. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. BOSI: Just for clarification, the GMP language has the height limitations expressed within it, and it says, starting on the second line, the maximum height of the building shall be 30 feet. Architectural features such as steeples may be to a maximum height of 50 feet. It's not 30 and 50 to get to 80. It's 30 feet, and then a steeple could be 20 feet above there to a maximum of 50 feet. Just for clarification. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I think that needs to be rewritten if that's what is meant. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 40 of 85 MR. BOSI: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I don't read it that way. That is helpful. MR. BOSI: That was the intent of that restriction is 50 feet would be the maximum that the steeple could go to. But we'll -- we will most certainly clarify the language to make it more clear. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. And I have to say that I'm catching myself violating an admonition of the court reporter who, at our break, told me please ask everyone not to interrupt answers from questions, and there I go doing it myself. So with apologies. And we'll all endeavor to let one another speak unimpeded. Okay. And that includes people on the phone. All right. So we've got the times of the services. You said 1930 -- 7:30 p.m. MR. DE AZA: Correct. On Wednesdays 7:30 p.m. And Sundays morning. CHAIRMAN FRYER: What time Sunday morning? MR. DE AZA: 10 a.m. CHAIRMAN FRYER: 10 a.m., okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Just one service? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, one service each time? COMMISSIONER VERNON: On Sunday? MR. DE AZA: One service each time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. My next concern -- and I've got multiple points of concern on the conditions of approval, which is Exhibit C. Many of these are really not conditions of approval at all, but I think they could be recorded to become conditions of approval, and in some I think there are surplus words that have been added that make it unacceptably flexible, from my perspective at least. For instance, in No. 2, it says, days of operation the days of normal church operation will be Wednesday and Sunday. Well, I would propose to take out the word "normal." And I've got a half a dozen or so others of these. And we can go through them now, or we can go through them later. I think in the interest of hearing from the public, I'm going to opt to go through them later. And if -- unless we can get exact drafting language that's agreeable and if we're of a mind to approve this as amended, I'm going to ask that it come back on consent so that we can see the revised conditions of approval. But I'm just -- I'm setting up a record for myself now to let you know that I do have these concerns. And with that, unless anyone else wants to be heard at this time. Commissioner. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I do have a question, and sorry I had to step out. But did you discuss the monthly special events? It said -- I think it was one month -- one special event per month. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Quarter. MR. DE AZA: It's one per quarter. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: One per quarter. PASTOR MARTIN: Every three months, one per quarter. MR. DE AZA: One per quarter. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Well, what do you clarify -- what do you classify as a special event, then? PASTOR MARTIN: We invited another missioner from some other places to come into doing the service for us to -- preaching. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I understand. PASTOR MARTIN: And the people may be from other churches coming to be together with us to hear what that missioner is going to preach. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, what about what other what I would call typical religious events like weddings or funerals? I mean, those are not -- weddings are preplanned, certainly, in significant advance time, but maybe funeral arrangements or other type of special 5.A.a Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 41 of 85 events. Are those deemed special events as well, and would it count as a special event if you had a wedding or a funeral or celebration of life or some other type of event that a church typically holds? PASTOR MARTIN: Well, we cannot regulate that. People can, you know, pass away. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, I understand. I'm just -- I'm not arguing that. I'm trying to get clarity as, did you say two services a week -- PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- and then a special event quarterly. PASTOR MARTIN: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm concerned about these other unplanned events, weddings, celebration of life ceremonies, other type of things that congregations typically cover. MR. MARTIN: Commissioner, we would defer to whatever the regulations are for all the other churches in the county. Are those deemed special events for -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That I don't know. That's why I want to make this clear, because you cite two congregation meetings and you cite one special event. I want to make it clear that I'm not going to attempt to bar you from doing that. I just want to make sure that the language identifies that there may be other circumstances to allow for a congregation to meet. MR. MARTIN: Understood. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And we didn't cover that in this. That was my only real question. MR. MARTIN: Understood. It's -- churches have weddings and churches have -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Certainly, no argument. MR. MARTIN: -- funerals. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I just want to make sure staff didn't prohibit you from having that -- those type of services. MR. MARTIN: And it's -- it would be difficult to try and put that in language of, okay, we're going to have one -- two funeral services per quarter. You can't do that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I agree. MR. MARTIN: So I'm not familiar with it, but whatever the regulations are for all other churches in the county, this church will be -- would abide by that. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? MR. MARTIN: I'll defer to staff to further -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm going to -- I'll call on you in a moment, Commissioner. I just want to follow up. You've got six hours on Wednesday and six hours on Sunday. Would that be enough time for you to do your weddings and your funerals and your service? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Weddings are typically on a Saturday or Friday night. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I was just going to say, I think the reason for the language that you were concerned about that is a little bit wide where it says, normally the services are on Wednesday and Saturday -- or Wednesday and Sunday. PASTOR MARTIN: Sunday, Sunday. It's not going to be six hours on Wednesday. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. I think they have programmed activity for those six hours. This is additive. These are things that aren't generally -- they don't know, and they would be in addition to -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, we're going to have to -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Which is -- the only reason I mentioned that in relation to your point is that's why I think that language would be in there as to the regular, because they're going to have all these irregular things that are just part of church life. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And I think it's up to us to try to nail this down. And I'm glad we raised the point, but at the end of the day we're going to have to come to some conclusion that is understandable on your side and on our side as to how many times the church will be in session for some kind of a purpose. But this was setting the stage, and we'll have more comments on that. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 42 of 85 Commissioner Klucik, did you have more? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: No, I'm sorry; that was it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Anybody else? And I'm reserving a lot of comments for -- on the conditions themselves because I want to get to the public. But we've set the stage, I think, for those. If not, then let's hear from staff. MR. SABO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. James Sabo, Comprehensive Planning manager. Give me a second to load up this presentation. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We're already at the summary. MR. SABO: Okay. I'll go through this quickly. It's a conditional use and a Growth Management Plan for the church. The site is five-and-a-half acres. They propose to allow a 100-seat church as a conditional use. The proximity is close to their current church location. This is a map that they provided of their parishioners that live in the area. The site's currently undeveloped. It conforms with the rural Estates sub-element policy, which provides for a 75-foot buffer of native vegetation. No parking or water management permitted. Environmental Services recommends approval. No adverse impacts on public facilities. Transportation recommends approval. The original project was 250 seats and 9,000 square feet of building area. They reduced that to 100 and 5,000. Again, Transportation recommends approval. Findings and conclusions: Only a few churches within the Golden Gate Estates area. Most are on the perimeter. No adverse environmental, historic, or archeological impacts. No utility or transportation adverse impacts. And the applicant has stated that most of the congregation live in close proximity. Recommendation here is to approve, adopt, send that to the Board of County Commissioners and DEO. I'll entertain any questions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: It's subject to the 16 conditions, right? MR. SABO: Yeah, the CU, Mr. Bellows is going to handle the CU -- the conditional use. Pardon me. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Okay. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: This has private water and private septic, right? MR. SABO: That's my understanding, correct. COMMISSIONER SHEA: An education question: Say you've got 100 seats and 200 people show up. How do you manage and police that? I mean, just -- I mean, I go to church, and when I go there, especially if you go on a holiday, there's as many people standing as there are sitting. So how does the county police that? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. French is approaching. MR. BOSI: As part of one of the conditions of the conditions of approval in Exhibit C to the conditional use, this is the GMP that James was speaking to. The Mr. Bellows is going to provide staff's review of the specifics related to the conditional use. But to address your question, Commissioner, additional -- Conditional Use 11 talks about traffic coordination and the requirement for a law enforcement officer to be employed by the church on site if there is times of overflow or there's issues of overaccommodation by the church facility. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So will that person, if he gets beyond 100 seats, will he send people away? MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no. It's not 100 occupancy. It's 100 seats. COMMISSIONER SHEA: A hundred seats. So -- MR. KLATZKOW: So if people stand, they stand. We're not counting how many people stand. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So the 100-seat is meaningless. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I guess the fire code would be the only issue there. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 43 of 85 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just the size that restricts it. Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I just wanted to follow up on Joe's questions, the weddings, funerals, you know, and I think the applicant said, what do other churches do. And I don't know. That's a good question. What's normal? What have we approved in the past? MR. BOSI: Normally the hours -- the hours of operation will be dictated. They will talk about the number of traditional church services, and then those other activities are normally not specifically regulated in terms of anything that we would put in terms of additional conditions. Certainly, they can be, but normally we just allow that for the individual religious facility to dictate in terms of funerals and weddings. Now, if it's a special event, there is limitations upon that. A wedding and a funeral would not be considered a special event. COMMISSIONER VERNON: So we don't -- typically, we don't have it set up here in the county here where it's -- funerals and weddings are on weekends or after business hours? No such -- MR. BOSI: In the conditional uses that we've had for churches, we've never gone to the extent of limiting weddings or churches -- or funerals within churches. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Mr. French, do you wish to be heard, sir? MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir. So, Commissioner Shea -- again, for the record, Jamie French. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: If I could -- I wanted to follow up on that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead. Follow up, Commissioner. Sorry. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So my question would be -- I understand the limitation on the -- yeah, can you hear? Sorry about that. I understand the limitation on the duration, which is six hours, correct? But then I think I read that -- and that would be on a Sunday. I think I read that there's just one service. Is that a restriction, or is that just what their plan is? Because if it's a restriction, I think then that gets a little difficult to see how that would practically impact the church. I would think they would have children services or teen services or, you know, or they might want to have a service for -- you know, at 10 a.m. and another service at 1:00, and I -- if we are limiting it to just one service, I think we're getting into a -- MR. BOSI: I'm not sure where the term "services" came from. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We are not limiting it -- MR. BOSI: The condition of hours of operation, we limit it to, specifically to -- on Wednesday or Sunday to maximum of six hours, and the normal church operations or services will be on Wednesday and service [sic]. We are not trying -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So there is no -- it's not like they can only have one service on Sunday? MR. BOSI: That's -- we are not trying to state that. We're saying we have an hour -- they have a window of operations of six hours on Wednesday and Sunday. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right, thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. French. MR. FRENCH: Yes, sir. So, again, Jamie French, for the record. To Mr. Shea's point, it sounded like you asked a question as far as people standing. So that gets into occupancy, types of occupancy, protections all addressed under the Florida Building Code as well as the Florida Fire Prevention Code. That wouldn't be determined here. You've got authorities having jurisdiction that would make that determination to go as far as how much spacing is required when you actually put in a seat. So there's passive ingress/egress, escapes, number of escape routes, and then also through the fire code as well as ADA, we would look at parking calculations. They're still going to have to meet setbacks. So even though they may come forward with 5.A.a Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 44 of 85 a 100-seat church, that building may be much smaller just simply because of the Land Development Code requirements. And just to clarify the record, it doesn't matter if it's a park; it doesn't matter if it's a school; everybody follows the same code. That's just the way it is. The only exemption -- and I'll rely on our trusted County Attorney to correct me -- is that if you're using it for agricultural purposes on bona fide agricultural land, that's really one of the only exemptions, and then you've got FEMA standards that they must abide by. But for -- they're going to follow the code like everybody else. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. No one is signaling at this time. Anything further from staff? MR. BOSI: We do have a short presentation we put together for the CU. It really addressed some of the questions that we had in terms of the restrictions, and I'm not sure if you would like the formal presentation from Ray. CHAIRMAN FRYER: What's the wish of the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: If it's brief, I'd like to hear it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: How brief is it? How many minutes? I'm interested in getting to the public; that's why I'm asking. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I've been working on this project with our project manager, Laura DeJohn, and we are recommending approval of this conditional use. As you see on the -- your screen, we have Conditions of Approval 1 through 11 that is contained in your draft resolution, and then we added additional Conditions 12 through 16. I don't believe I need to read through those all. Unless you have questions about those conditions, I'll be here to answer them. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I've got a lot of questions about 1 through 11. MR. BELLOWS: Okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And just one or so on the staff-generated conditions, but I'm going to raise them later after we hear from the public. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have questions on the conditions as well, but I'll hold until we deal with it as well, because I think some of it has to be clarified. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Otherwise, it's going to open up opportunities for folks to call code enforcement to file complaints on some of these conditions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. All right. Mr. Youngblood, we have registered speakers, sir. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, we have several registered speakers, again, some of which may not wish to address the Commission rather than just voice their support or opposition. So whenever I call their name, if the Chair would indulge me. If they do not wish to speak, just say they support or oppose. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. They'll need to come to the microphone to say that. But if that's all they wish to say, that would be quite in order. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: All right. We will start off with Rae Ann Burton followed by Elisabet Marquina. And forgive me if I mispronounce your name. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ms. Burton, are you here? There she is. MS. BURTON: Thank you, Commissioners, for your time. I've had to change my speech while I'm here. It is with great concern that the desires and concerns of the taxpayers of Collier County are not being considered on this project. This church is an invasion in Golden Gate Estates. It does not conform to the buildings in the Estates. It would disrupt our quality of life of living in a rural area of quiet lack -- of traffic pollution and noise. It will take out wildlife and destroy their habitat 5.A.a Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 45 of 85 on five-plus acres, which wildlife is already endangered because of reduced habitat due to overdevelopment. There will be traffic on more than just two days that the church is stating. There are peak times on weekends that are also considered important to the residents. The area is already impacted with current road traffics, and this will create even more traffic and even possibly accidents or deaths. It took me 55 minutes to go 26 point [sic] miles to go through 44 stoplights, unless I missed one. If it's not a problem, why has the application for the church stated it will hire law enforcement to manage traffic? This was not properly advertised to the Estate residents nor properly public meetings provided so the residents could ask questions and get answers. There are sites in Collier County and Lee County that are not in residential that are better suited, but they only looked in rural estates. The home addresses of the church members and the proximity to the proposed location does not satisfy the statutory requirements to demonstrate the need for more land, nor does it demonstrate it to be an appropriate location. These people do not live in the Estates and, therefore, pay no Collier County property taxes, nor will the church. But the Estate residents will be paying taxes for any infrastructure that will be required for this project. The residents of the Estates that pay county property taxes find that this church is in conflict with the Estate desires and quality-of-life issues, such as noise, traffic, and excessive light pollution. Therefore, we, the taxpayers, residents of the Estates should have precedence over what is built inside the Estates. It's not the church that we are -- go against. It is -- it is giving concessions -- consent for building. Do not approve this project. It is not compatible with the unique rural area of Golden Gate Estates. Help us keep our environment pure from even conditional building. It needs to be built outside the residential area with better traffic access where it won't congest residential roads or interfere with quality of life of the residents that chose the area because of the wildlife and open space. The examples given mostly were not rural Golden Gate Estates. Only three, they were. The ones used for residential have major road access. Now 100. What's to keep it from going to 250? Please consider our concerns and our desires. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Ms. Burton, thank you for coming today. I have a couple -- several questions based on your comments. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ms. Burton, you might want to -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Ms. Burton, you might want to stay up there. I have several questions based on your comments, if you would, please. Thank you for coming today and your time. The first question said -- it said -- you stated emphatically it does not conform. Is that a personal or professional opinion? If it's a profession opinion, can you state your qualifications to make that professional opinion? MS. BURTON: Basically it is a church. It is not a residential residence; therefore, it would not conform with our unique area. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I take that as being a personal -- MS. BURTON: We moved out there for the open space, for the space between the homes, have area, enjoy wildlife. The development is encroaching on us and destroying us. As long as they're on the out-fringe, we can't control it. But this is in our area. A church is fine, but it should have better access to roads. The Randall Road is already impacted, and Wilson is also already impacted. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 46 of 85 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next question. You talked about wildlife on the five acres. This is Estate zoning, all of Estate zoning. So what difference if a house was built there versus a church? How does building a church adversely impact wildlife versus if I built a 2- or 3,000-square-foot home? MS. BURTON: The five acres has trees on it right now. We don't know what lives in the area. We don't know if we've got gopher turtles -- tortoises or what is in the area. I have seen the wildlife in my area depleted because of the growth out there. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. Are you a -- are you a wildlife professional? MS. BURTON: No, but I am a concerned naturalist, and I am concerned about the wildlife that is out there. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. That answers my question. You said it was not properly advertised. Staff, was this properly advertised? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. Yes, and we are compliant with the recent LDC amendment that moved the notice requirements from a thousand feet to one mile for projects in the Estates. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. And this was properly advertised and -- MR. BELLOWS: More than one mile, yes, it was. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Advertised. MR. BELLOWS: Signs posts -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Signs posted -- MR. BELLOWS: -- newspaper ad. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- posted in the newspaper. The public -- the NIM was properly advertised? MR. BELLOWS: (Nods head.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you. You made another statement. These people do not live in the Estates. Do you know that personally? Is this something that you've -- MS. BURTON: I have found out that most of them do not. They live in Bonita Springs. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Do you have any type of -- MS. BURTON: I don't have documentation with me, no. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. So you made the statement, but you have no validation other than that's your personal opinion. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's all the questions I have. Thank you very much. I'm done. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MS. BURTON: That is valid information I was given. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Ms. Burton. MS. BURTON: I would like to clarify something on the advertisement. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead. MS. BURTON: The advertisement goes in the Naples paper. A lot of people don't read it. The only other way we find out what's going on is to go online, and sometimes it's very hard to find the actual information that you want to. I spent over 30 minutes just trying to get information on the church. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MS. BURTON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Ms. Burton. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Elisabet Marquina and/or 5.A.a Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 47 of 85 Diogenes Marquina. MS. MARQUINA: Hi. So I just wanted to show my support for the church. I am the pastor's daughter. I moved to Lakeland last year for college as well. And I went to a college university but within the area just as the Estates. A lot of churches are built over there, and I see communities being built together and everyone just coming together, and, you know, being one, and, you know, having love for one another, which is, like, really important. I've been going to church my entire life, and I -- we moved -- well, my dad and I, we moved to Iglesias Pentecostes Alba de Peniel, like, six years ago, and I see the growth, not just in youth, in children's ministry, but in adults and even, you know, the older women and men in our church. Our church is overgrowing. It's getting bigger. We have amazing officers and amazing leaders who help and pull out all the chairs for people to sit down. But it's coming to a point where it's overpopulating. Children from three -- I'm the children's ministry, and I take care of youth ministries. And I thank God for that opportunity to be speaking and to be a part of that. But I started to see three-year-olds to 19-year-olds all cluttered in one small classroom. There's no -- how do I even teach? How do I get the message? How do I get God's word through their lives and stuff like that? How do I speak love and life into them when it's a bunch of ages just being cluttered together? We do have children's and youth services during service. During the main service, we have children and youth services in the back in another room where they can learn, you know, what their, like, development with their mind and how old they are. And I -- I just wanted to show my support for the church and also, like, it's not a big church. It's 100 seats. And just to say something: Almost every single member from that church is from Golden Gate Estates, and I can confirm that because I've been a member of the church for I don't know how many years now. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Next speaker, please. MS. MARQUINA: I will be translating for my dad. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Go right ahead. PASTOR MARQUINA: My name is Deogenes Marquina, the Pastor at Iglesias Pentecostes Alba de Peniel. She is my translator. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman, if I could just get a clarification. I guess I misunderstood. I thought that -- one of the gentlemen who previously was the pastor. Is this another pastor? CHAIRMAN FRYER: I was going to ask for the same clarification. Are the two pastors brothers? PASTOR MARQUINA: No. I'm the mother church in Naples Park, and that's our daughter, the church in the Alba de Peniel. He's working Alba de Peniel. We are from Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel in Naples Park, okay. So this is almost the same thing, but they get their church over there. We are in Naples Park. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So to clarify, you are the pastor for the existing church that's in a shopfront. PASTOR MARQUINA: Yes. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Great, thank you. PASTOR MARQUINA: (Through interpreter) So the church has been functioning for many years now. We've been in schools, and now we're in the local market of Armando's, within that plaza. It's not a church that we're now constructing -- or we want construction to happen and we're like, oh, like, you know, we want this many people coming. No, this church has been building up for years. It's been, you know, growing with people. So one of the big issues from the opposition side is that -- like, the traffic, you know, it's 5.A.a Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 48 of 85 going -- it's the biggest concern. And we've been in Armando's Supermarket, and it's a small facility, and yet we still manage to smoothly go through traffic every single time we go to church. He's been living here for 22 years now in Naples, Florida, and, you know, Naples is growing every day. You know, new buildings, new facilities, new creation is happening, new buildings and everything. And he says that I don't -- he doesn't think it's going to impact traffic for two days of service. He says to really think about your decisions and, like, decide wisely, like, on how, like, it's going to affect not just, like, people who can come to the church and people who can find out about the church. And also this is a Hispanic church. You know, like, diversity. It's beautiful. I think it's beautiful. My dad thinks it's beautiful. It brings diversity. And it's not just Spanish speakers. It's also English speakers. We have people who translate. We have people who help. He says that we love working with the community. We want the community to build and get closer. And all of the people may not like that or they might not want to see, you know, people come together, but it's something that it's -- we need it right now, especially in the times that we're living. We need, like, revival for the youth. We need revival for children and for the church. And that God may bless the people who decide. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Ms. Martina [sic], would you please tell me the name of the witness who just spoke, last name. MS. MARQUINA: Diogenes Marquina. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Martina, okay. And I'm not -- you're the daughter of the pastor who's seated? MS. MARQUINA: I'm his daughter, right here (indicating). CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. I think I understand. I'm not sure it really matters. MR. MARTIN: I want to clarify. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MARTIN: In Naples Park there's an existing church Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel, which my brother, Jorge Martin, is the pastor of that church, okay. From that church, another church grew, which has received a conditional use in Immokalee. That's the Iglesias Pentecostes church in Immokalee. And this would be the third church, which -- Pastor Diogenes, who just spoke. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MARTIN: He would be the pastor for the church in Golden Gate. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you so much. MR. MARTIN: Marquina, not with a T. It's with a Q. CHAIRMAN FRYER: With a Q. Sorry. MR. MARTIN: Yes, that's the last -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: In all cases, all the witnesses whose last name is Marquina. MR. MARTIN: Right. The two witnesses that just spoke, those are last name Marquina. The pastor is Martin, which is Martin, and so am I. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I just want to say, regardless of this particular petition and whatever happens with what they're asking for, I do very much appreciate the work that you, Pastor Marquina, and your daughter are doing, and I commend you both for trying to make the world a better place in a very important way. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Angus Gilmore followed by 5.A.a Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 49 of 85 Heidi Severeyn. MR. GILMORE: Good morning, Commissioners. Thank you for hearing us out. I've lived in Collier County for 26 years. I live 330 feet away from the proposed location. Here's the slippery slope. We just heard the growth rate, and if we've gone from a 250-person church and they've reduced it to 100, who's going to monitor this? We, the neighbors, are going to be left with this. As it is, you know, they've changed that whole area in the last, say, seven years. They widened our street, put a bridge in, increased traffic just like, you know, anyone else here can tell you. I'm definitely not for it, and I know -- I didn't go around canvassing the neighborhood, but I did go to a previous meeting that was held in their present location for the church. Very tight, very cramped. And there were quite a few people there that live immediately around us. And if you're familiar with the area, it's big. And we have -- there are many days or weeks you can go by you don't even see your neighbors. So there isn't a lot of opportunity to speak to people. My biggest fear is just going down that slippery slope of anywhere from -- we go from 100 to 250 people. I hadn't even thought of the events which were brought up. And it's -- I can only see it getting out of control. You know, I have nothing against a church or religion or anything. And, you know, I'd just like to figure there's got to be a way that we can do this and not do it within a residential area. There's -- also what goes into -- I know this is a conditional change to the plan for the community, but let's say once we allow it for a church, what's it going to be the next time? They put that bridge in. This has now become a very popular corridor for everyone to go through. It's -- thank God my wife and I retired, because to get out of that street to go to work is terrible in any direction. And I think also I think the Collier County Sheriff's Office is fully aware of the danger right now of that cut-through, because they're there almost 24/7, and they're generating an awful lot of being in, or at least for the traffic courts. So I'd just like it to be known that I'm against having this. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Gilmore. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Heidi Severeyn. She has been ceded time by Judy Rapp. MS. SEVEREYN: I'll try not to take up the 10 minutes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Judy Reck. Is Jury Reck here? MS. SEVEREYN: Rapp. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Rathe? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Rapp, R-a-p-p. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I see you. Thank you. Okay. MS. SEVEREYN: Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sure. MS. SEVEREYN: My name's Heidi Severeyn. I live on the street, the dead-end street where you'd have to get through, just so that you know where I'm coming from. I know everyone on our street because we always walk down the street, all that. So I would like to start talking about why it's inappropriate residential use because, you know, they want to change it to a conditional use. Well, you did bring up really good points, which I completely appreciate as far as -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Ma'am? Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Just because I want to understand -- make sense out of your initial comment about the dead-end and -- MS. SEVEREYN: Yeah. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 50 of 85 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: -- where you live. I'm just trying to put -- I have Google Maps up. I'm trying to figure out where you're at. MS. SEVEREYN: Okay. If you're on -- we're on the west side on 22nd. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Oh, because this road goes into a canal, that's what you're talking about. MS. SEVEREYN: Yes. It's a dead end. And that's actually where it enters and exits from the church as well on 22nd, not on 8th. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right. So you're going to always -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm going to ask that we try not to talk over one another. I know we're all enthusiastic, but let's keep that in mind. Okay, Ms. Severeyn. MS. SEVEREYN: Sorry. Okay. I did list a couple of reasons as far as if that property is changed to a conditional use, all the adjacent properties can be changed to an additional [sic] use as well. And if you look at the area where we are, there's 24th Avenue, and then there's Randall. Randall's already going to be expanded. It's going to have commercial on it, you know, in the very near future, because that was always planned. Nobody's even contesting that. And then there's 8th. Well, this is on a small side street, and what the Golden Gate Estates -- maybe there's different verbiage that people have used, but nobody's trying to misinform anyone. Basically, what -- the Golden Gate Estates, a lot of the residents in the Golden Gate Estates want to keep the interior parts. Not the exterior parts; we know that that can be commercial and different uses. The interior to just be residential only. The -- okay. So to preserve the Golden Gate Estates as purely residential. Even in their presentation with all of their -- with their -- with their presentation, most of the churches that are approved are on the perimeter, and there's a reason for that; because they're larger roads. You can get in and out easier than on a small side street where we go walking all the time. And, I mean, I know all the neighbors on our street. It's, like, most -- 90 percent of the people on our street, oh, gosh, you know, what's this? And there's also -- some of their reasons for, oh, well, this is exactly like the other church close to here, which is the Oil Well and Everglades church, but that's two main intersections, and some -- when he was explaining the different churches that are in the Golden Gate Estates areas, well, there was one of however many there were that were a dead-end street as well. And most of them had a lot of different outlets where people could get out of -- out of things. And, also, it kind of does set a precedence as far as really close to -- you know, things always start from the outside in the Golden Gate Estates and go in. Well, this is pretty close to that boundary where there's Randall, and we want to keep it where it's not a lot of commercial and a lot of things that are not houses because it's an -- it's a special place to be where you don't have a homeowners association. There's only so many sites where you can have land and a house without all the other conditions. Most things are not like that anymore, and most of the Estates, when you go to the Estates, that's generally what people move there for. And so I think that having this church with some of the good questions that you guys brought up, which I appreciate, because that means you thought about it before coming to the meeting. What defines a special event? Like, do they get to decide what a special event is? And if there's not, if they just go, well, that's not a special event, it's just an event. And you know that it's going to be more than four times a year. And it's not that we -- we are not against a church. We're not against anything in that sort. We just wanted to make sure that rezoning does not happen in the interior, so we're not trying to be, like, bad people. We don't -- that's not our entire case at all. The problem with -- at least with the traffic management, they actually -- I mean, I'm sure that you have reasons for this, but when I was reading why traffic isn't impacted with this, there's, like, a reasoning away of why the people that live on that actual street don't actually count because, 5.A.a Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 51 of 85 apparently, there's not enough people that get impacted from it. I understand that, but we do, because we live there, and we walk our kids to cross the street, that kind of thing. Also, there's different criteria they use from the very beginning of the application process where it has to be 10 miles from 75 -- and I'm sorry this is ad nauseam -- not on a canal, less than $40,000, located within one mile of an arterial road or a collector road, sorry, and the boundaries between 75, 10 miles east, and Lee County border and north of Golden Gate Parkway. Well, they kind of reasoned away many things. Like, oh, it's on a dead-end, so we don't want to have the church there, or a little bit more expensive, but when you can pick your own reasons for why you have it in this exact specific place -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ms. Severeyn, pardon me. You're at five minutes. You did have to pause and answer a question, so I'm going to give you another minute. MS. SEVEREYN: Sure. Oh, okay. Yeah. And then so what I was looking at, though, for alternative things -- and I don't even know if you can do that -- but it seemed like it made a lot of sense to me. I drive over in Golden Gate City, and, like, Golden Gate Parkway and right on the border where they were talking about looking for this church, and it's the Iglesias de Cristo Ebenezer, they're actually advertising for timeshares for that church, which would accommodate their larger congregation they wanted in the first place with a large -- with a large parking lot. It's right off 75. Easy access. Already approved. It's ready to go. And I would think that would be a good win-win for this, because it's everything that they wanted, and it would probably be less costly because they could share it with that church in general. And, I mean, they had times for everything. I just thought I'd bring that up. I don't know if I can technically bring that up, because this isn't something I'm a professional at at all. CHAIRMAN FRYER: You can bring up anything you want that's relevant, but there's only -- there's a limit to what we're able to do. MS. SEVEREYN: No, that -- okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Does that complete your presentation? MS. SEVEREYN: I think so. I just wanted you to basically consider what, you know, I've said, and that we don't want to have rezoning or conditional use expanding in the Estates is basically what every -- a lot of our neighbors want. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thank you. MS. SEVEREYN: So I appreciate it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt has a question. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Not -- based on a statement made, but I'd ask staff to clarify. The claim or accusation was that if this is a conditional use, it opens up all the neighboring properties for conditional use. Can you clarify whether that is accurate or -- in my understanding, conditional uses are all considered separately and they're not -- it's -- one conditional use does not adversely or otherwise impact another application. So can you clarify. MR. BOSI: Every -- every one of those properties has a list of the permitted uses in the Estates zoning district -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. MR. BOSI: -- and the conditional uses. Every one of those properties lists a church as a conditional use. The uniqueness of this -- of this area is there's additional restrictions upon where those conditional uses can be applied for. So, therefore, all those properties on those streets would need GMP amendments as well as the conditional use for them to go forward. But this does not trigger anything different than what currently exists and what would be allowed or what's permissible to seek for any one of those properties. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: As I thought. Thanks. I just wanted to get that on the record. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Klucik. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 52 of 85 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And in the future, any other lot that wanted to do the same thing would have to go through that double process with the GMP if it was, like, next door. MR. BOSI: Correct. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And then based on what the kind lady just said, I was just thinking about -- because she was talking about other churches. And maybe now is not the time to talk about it, but I do think it would be relevant to bring up for -- at least for my edification. We do have a fairly recently approved and constructed church at the corner of Randall and Everglades and, you know, I'm just trying to figure out how this compares. It sounds like you already mentioned one of the differences is perhaps there was no GMP -- MR. BOSI: There's a GMP that was required. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Oh, it did require that? MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. So I would just try to figure out, how does this compare to that, and why would we treat it differently or similarly? And it's certainly something for us to consider as the Planning Commission. MR. BOSI: The processes were identical for the two churches to get how -- if they were to seek -- or to seek approval. The only difference is the locations were -- one was at Everglades and Randall, and this is at 8th and 22nd. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And then, again, following up on, you know, the concerns or points that we just heard from the witness, the resident, Everglades seems like it's, you know -- perhaps it's going to expand, but it's definitely just a two-lane road now, and I noticed 8th Street right in this area seems like it has some -- it's anticipating being wider, or certainly all those sidewalks look like there's something going on, because the sidewalks are a lot -- very much recessed into the lot. I'm just trying to figure out, is this -- is this going to be a wider road, or what's going on with that? MR. BOSI: I will defer to our Transportation Planning staff on the -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Does the question make sense? MR. BOSI: Oh, yes, yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Sawyer. MR. SAWYER: For the record, Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. We do not currently have any plans to expand 8th Street. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So what is the genesis of the -- kind of the odd configuration of the sidewalks there? MR. SAWYER: Currently, what you're probably seeing is the connection towards Randall, which is going to -- in the future, when we expand Randall, is going to be a signalized intersection, and that's probably what you're -- I'm assuming what you're seeing. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I'm looking at the corner, that very corner that we're talking about. MR. SAWYER: Correct. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: What is it, 22nd? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And 8th. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And the street north and south on 8th Street Northeast. North and south of that corner, you see all the way along that road for -- you know, it's not -- it's not like it's just that corner or, you know, just north of that corner. It's north and south. The whole way I see pathways where it's extremely wide on the west side as if people are anticipating that -- you know, there's a right-of-way for some reason. It's very unusual compared to how the rest of Golden Gate Estates seems to be when they aren't anticipating something, and I'm just -- so I -- did you say that the whole -- it's just going to be the intersection and not the whole street, or is there a reason those sidewalks are back? I mean, maybe you could pull it up and address it. If somebody could pull it up because it's -- MR. SAWYER: I can certainly look at that for the Commission. Quite honestly, I can 5.A.a Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 53 of 85 tell you that 8th Street is definitely not on the LRTP as far as being expanded anytime in the near future. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. That's good to know, because that certainly seems like it's something to factor in as to whether people are expecting that road to be more heavily trafficked or not. MR. SAWYER: Some of the work that has been done on 8th is reaction to the bridge that was constructed. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Ms. Severeyn. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Emanuel Vazquez, followed by Gustavo Marin. MR. VAZQUEZ: I support the church. CHAIRMAN FRYER: State your name, please, sir. MR. VAZQUEZ: Huh? CHAIRMAN FRYER: State your name, please. MR. VAZQUEZ: Emanuel Vazquez. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. VAZQUEZ: I support the church. And I want to say how little it is, you know, express how little the church is and that we need bigger rooms for the kids so we don't have the little ones shouting right next to our ears and the teachers trying to give a class. And someone like me, I really want to learn more about the Lord and everything that is in the Bible. So for that, I really want this new church to be built. And it will be a blessing that we have it sooner and constructed right next to the Estates. So I conclude. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Vazquez. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Gustavo Marin, followed by Leo. MR. MARIN: Good morning, Chairman. Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Gustavo Marin. I'm a member of Iglesias De Dios Pentecostes -- Pentecostal. And I see the concerns that the citizens have, but I can assure you that that won't happen. Right now our church that I live in -- that I go to is in Naples Park. North, south, east, west we've got little homes, not Estates-like acres where they separate the homes. The homes are right next to each other, all around the church, the whole church. We never have a traffic problem. We never had complaints from the neighbor. They say -- I think I only gone this year one funeral and one wedding the whole year that I've been there. So it's not a big -- I know a lot of people freak out because they think there's going to be a high-traffic problem and think there's going to be a lot of congestion, but I can assure you that's not the case. We're at -- our church is 77th -- 107th Avenue, right close to Immokalee. I mean, how much traffic is in Immokalee? And we don't ever -- never have a traffic problem. We're there to help the community. We're there to teach -- to bring people to Jesus Christ. We're there to be a positive, to teach people the 10 commandments, not to be a negative, not to be an eyesore, not to cause problems. We're there to help the community. We're there to be a positive thing for God and the community. We're there to teach the 10 commandments. When you learn the 10 commandments, you become a law abiding citizen, and that's what the church is about, to bring about people to honor and defend this country and love the Constitution and love America. That's what the church is about. Unfortunately, the church doesn't have -- it has -- why we need another? The church -- the church has to pay a lot of money every month. You know the cost of maintaining a rental -- a 5.A.a Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 54 of 85 rental. It's very high. And that's why we want to build our own church, to become independent and live not to worry about every month coming up with thousands of dollars in utilities and rentals. So that's the reason that the church wants to build it. But we want to be -- assure the people not to freak out. The people in opposition, don't freak out. It's not going to affect you. We're there -- it's a small church. I mean, it's 5,000 square feet. You're not going to put 500 people in a 5,000-square-foot building, you understand? It's going to be a church, small church. Our church is like a little -- maybe has 80 to 100 members, depends how many people go each week, and we never have a problem with the community. We never have a problem with the neighbors. We never have a problem with the traffic. We're -- we live peacefully with each other, and that's what this new church is going to be about, working with the community, being peaceful, and teaching God's commandments to the people. God knows we need God's commandments now with a society that's all disrupted right now, and we need help, and this church is about to help the community. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. Next witness, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Leo, followed by Barbara Lopez. LEO: Hello, Commissioners. My name is Leo. I wanted to let you know I'm for the building of the church. I understand the concerns of the community in the Estates. But I also wanted to bring up the building of Collier County. I came to the U.S. when I was 21. I've been living here for 21 years now, and I've noticed incredible growth in Collier County. Florida State is one of those states that are -- you know, everyone -- everyone wants to come to Florida. We know that. We're not talking about a mega church. We're not talking about -- last time when I did some digging around, some looking around, a mega church had -- can have all the way up to 19,000 members. We're not talking about that. This is -- again, as we've been stating before, this is just for the help of the community. And it's -- it just -- I find it unbelievable that, you know, just a handful of people can oppose the growth of a county. It's -- I think it's not going to stop because Collier County keeps growing, and it's for the better of everybody. So consider it. I thank you guys for your time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. LEO: That's that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Next witness, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Barbara Lopez, followed by Jefferson Vigil-Castro. MS. LOPEZ: Hi. My name is Barbara Lopez. I'm the pastor's wife, Diogenes Marquina. We work with the congress [sic] over there. We need more space. We need -- the young people is grow up on the Bible study. That's we need help. We can stay over there for hurt the people. I come into the Florida in 1998, and I saw the Estates grow up. I working for the CCPR and the bus station, and the bus transportation, and I saw the Estates is grow up. It's more -- 20 construction [sic] is the building over there. But -- and I'm talking with my -- the people working with me, and when I said we come church and we had the problem over there -- and those people too happy, because they need to go to Golden Gate City for worship God. And we have more close over there for this Hispanic people or any language. We can come into the church for we don't need to go to the Golden Gate Estates for we worship to God. With that, I think that's place, we had the problem for the blessing. Blessing the community, blessing the neighbor, blessing the people, blessing everybody. It's a good thing we share. We teach to the children we have. The young people we have 5.A.a Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 55 of 85 there, and the woman and everybody. The God is for everybody. And I think this is a good project. We blessing that place. The traffic, I go on the bus transportation over there, and I think everything we can fix there, everything. The city is grow up, and we need it. You know, I spent -- you need more pray. We need some church expanding over there for we worship God that's more important, I think. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. LOPEZ: And thank you for listening. Commissioner Klucik, did you have a question for this witness? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. I just wanted to clarify. Were you saying that it wouldn't really be helpful to go to Golden Gate City where that other opportunity was, is that -- MS. MARQUINA: She was trying to say that a lot of people that she works with, they have to drive all the way to Golden Gate City or all the way to North Naples sometimes for a church in Spanish or a church that, you know, that can help them with that, and a lot of people that she works with have told her, you know, that's great, like, we have a Spanish church, like, trying to build up closer to us. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. Okay. So the point is that their congregation really meets a need in the local area. MS. LOPEZ: Yes, that's what. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Before we call for our next speaker, I need to check with the court reporter. We've gone two full hours now since our midmorning break. Ordinarily, that's longer that we usually go. Should we have a 10-minutes break and then -- or should we have an hour break and go to lunch? One or the other. What does the Planning Commission want to do? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: How many more speakers? CHAIRMAN FRYER: How many more speakers, Mr. Youngblood? We'll do a cross-check. Everyone who wants to speak and hasn't spoken yet, please raise your hand. MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Chairman, I have 15 speaker slips. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. So what is the wish of the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER VERNON: I'd vote for a 10-minute break, and I suspect that we'll speed up the pace as things come out. There will be some redundancy. But, again, I defer to my team, if you guys want to take an hour. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Other planning commissioners want to weigh in? Then let's stand in recess for 10 minutes, and then we'll come back. And that puts us to 12:35. We'll be back here at 12:35. (A brief recess was had from 12:25 p.m. to 12:35 p.m.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's reconvene, everyone. All right. Our next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Jefferson Vigil-Castro, followed by Ancelia. Am I pronouncing that correctly? MR. VIGIL-CASTRO: Hi, I'm Jefferson Vigil-Castro. If you need to spell Vigil, it's V-i-g-i-l. And I am part of the youth, and I know there's a couple other members of the youth here. And I want to talk about what other speakers were talking about, about the size of, like, the rooms, and, like, the size of the church. I come from Virginia, and about three years ago I moved to Florida. And I've been at the church for almost two years. And it's grown; it's grown. And I've learned a lot. And -- but, the room where all the youth and the children are is very small. Like other speakers have said, it gets very crowded. And the kids, it's hard to control them with such a small space, and it gets loud. And with the church, I believe that we could get bigger, like, space for the youth and the 5.A.a Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 56 of 85 children, to have better control and, like -- well, ways to be with them so they can learn as well. Sorry. The youth is very important. It's really changed a lot. The youth have grown, so have the children and the adults. And the church is, like, the principal -- like the main area where the adults, per se, like, they attend while they learn by the pastor or his wife, while she's preaching, is pretty small, and that gets crowded as well. So like other speakers have mentioned, we have to add new chairs. Some people have to stand. But in all, it's very -- all that matters is that they're learning. And I feel like the youth these days have to learn more and that they've strived away from the word and the Lord and from, like, the good things in life, and now they're stuck on, like, technologies or other -- like, other stuff that wouldn't really help them much. So, yeah, I just want to say that it would be a great way -- that it would be great to have more space for the youth, the children, and the adults who want to learn more. And I'm done. Thank you for your time, and God bless you all. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Ancelia. I'm sorry, I can't read your last name. Ancelia lives on 58th Avenue. Is Ancelia with us? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ma'am, when you come up, we'll ask you to, perhaps, spell your name or say it slowly so that we can all get it. MS. PARRA: My name is Arecelia Parra. MS. MARQUINA: She wants to represent kids ministry. She's the one that also, like, gives classes on Sunday mornings. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Before we move into this -- and my apologies, but would you please spell her last name for me. MS. PARRA: (Through interpreter) P-a-r-r-a. CHAIRMAN FRYER: P-a-r-r-a. Thank you so much. Sorry to interrupt. Go ahead. MS. PARRA: (Through interpreter) The kids have been very explicit. We need a bigger, like, place where they can also, like, as well have, like, physical activities and play as well, have different age groups for the kids so they won't interrupt each other so they can learn, so they cannot only learn about the word of God and, like, their -- like, their mindset but that they can also, like, learn how to be with community and be together so it can be for the best of us. That we defend this country as well tomorrow. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Anthony Weaver followed by Melanie Miller. MR. WEAVER: Hello. My name is Anthony Weaver. I'm a resident on 22nd Avenue, and I have a few questions on the conditional uses of this property. If I could just go through those and voice my concern. I wanted to make sure that all the parking will be confined on the designated parking lot and nothing will be parked on the actual 22nd Avenue side roads. Should I just keep going through the list? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go through your list, sir. MR. WEAVER: Secondly, on these non-special event days -- and appreciate you bringing that to my attention. I didn't think about that as well. You know, weddings, funerals, baptisms, other religious occasions, will they -- will these events stay within the two-day, Wednesday, Sundays allotted time frames, six hours each, or will these be on any other day and did not confine to those two time periods? And will those also be traffic monitored by a Collier County sheriff? 5.A.a Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 57 of 85 One more is the -- what are the hours of operations on those two days? I know it was a 10:00 a.m. mass and a 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. mass, I believe. But if it's a six-hour period, where does the six-hour period begin -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: The application does not provide the beginning and ending time. It just provides six hours and the days in question. So I can answer that one for you. MR. WEAVER: Okay. So then if it starts -- let's say the mass starts at 10:00, that would be the technical starting point of that six hours? And the capacity of the church, I wanted to ask a -- I'm a little confused on that. The capacity is mentioned that it's a 5,000-square-foot building with 100 seats. What is the actual true per-person capacity of the actual church? And that's the last of my questions. I just wanted to see if I could get some clarification. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, thank you. We will certainly be discussing these items, and to the extent we can get answers from staff, we will. MR. WEAVER: I appreciate your time. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Melanie Miller, followed by Miguel Cruz. MS. MILLER: Hello. Thank you for your time. I live on 8th Street Northeast. I'm a resident in the area. I want to say I'm against the single-family home lots in Golden Gate Estates being approved for this type of amendment and conditional use. And I wanted to address a potential answer to Commissioner Kluciks [sic]. The area between the sidewalks and the road is drainage. It's a lower profile, and so all along that side along the sidewalk it's for drainage, so -- at least in my opinion. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: The mystery is solved. Thank you. MS. MILLER: So my family moved to a home on 8th Street Northeast in 2019. We visited the area since 2012. Over those seven years, we found the type of community we want to live in, and it was Golden Gate Estates. We wanted a rural community with larger lots, low density, minimal traffic, minimal proximity to commercial areas, minimal light pollution, minimal noise pollution, especially from traffic noises in the mornings, evenings, and weekends, which is when we more often are at home. We chose a longer commute to our jobs and extended proximity to resources of shopping and businesses in order to have those aspects and quality of life we valued. We chose to live in this amazing community for the reasons I'm sharing today. We chose to invest in this community for those reasons. We chose to buy and build our homes, as many of my neighbors, in this community for those reasons. I moved from another state where I actually attended a church situated in a neighborhood proximity such as this. I remember having the thought many times over the years I went, I was so glad I do not live next to it like the houses I saw every Sunday. The neighbors were having to deal with the traffic, the people conversing in the parking lot, watching them in their front yards, their families, their activities. And so as a parishioner of worship, I respect the value that churches have in our community, but it does not belong on my street, in my opinion, near my home. One thing I wanted to read is in the Golden Gate area's master plan, the Rural Golden Gate Estates Vision Statement that was adopted in 2019 is, the Rural Golden Gate Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with limited goods and services and neighborhood centers defined by rural character with appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings. So along with that, I don't believe this fits -- or and the -- that this should be approved. I honestly would never have chosen to live on the street and buy the house I did if there was a church already on my street. I presume many of the people currently buying and building homes or that have already bought there on my street would say the same thing. I believe it will impact my property value. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 58 of 85 The conditional use approval will impact my family's quality of life in a negative manner, and I presume many of my neighbors would make the same statement. We're already on one of the few streets that connect heavy traffic roads between Randall and Golden Gate due to the bridge. We don't want more traffic in this area. Regardless of the time frames stated for Sunday and Wednesday evenings -- I appreciate all the points that have been brought up about that because, honestly, it's naive to believe that traffic or business activity will not occur at the church outside of these stipulated time frames. My family walks. I jog in the mornings. My family walks in the evenings. We have a bicycle lane that is heavily used. There's bicycle traffic heavy on the weekends, all days, on this road. So I do think it's an impact. We want to keep our darker skies in the evenings. We don't want a parking lot that's lit up. The intersection at 8th and Randall, we've heard a lot -- or not a lot about traffic, some, but it's already a very unsafe intersection. Actually, we were at a meeting last night and heard deputies talk about traffic is the number-one issue in our district in District 4. The Sheriff's Office is dealing with traffic. That's their number-one use of their time. And there is -- that 8th and Randall, if you've ever driven by there -- if you haven't, please do -- there are wrecks there all the time. There is no light. I understand there's future expansion, but that is the main entryway. That is the main access point to this church, to this land, and it will negatively impact the safety. It is difficult. There are often wrecks there. The traffic, like I said, is already the biggest problem of our deputies in our district. CHAIRMAN FRYER: One minute remaining, please. MS. MILLER: Okay. I do think the groups bring -- brought together multiple times per week will negatively impact my life and the life of our neighbors, our quality of life in this area. So a couple of things. I know a lot of people have stated that it is an appropriate use in this area, but I don't agree with that because, again, it is having to adjust the Growth Management Plan. It was not planned to be used in this way. So I disagree with that. And, again, if you have not, I encourage you to drive by this area, see the bike lanes, see the walk, the activity, see the traffic that is already in bad conditions, and I would respectfully ask that you deny this. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Ms. Miller. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: The next speaker is Miguel Cruz, followed by Jule Funtas. MR. CRUZ: Good afternoon, Commissioner. I support the church. I think our neighborhood that (indiscernible) is very important. Let me tell you why. Please, could you help me. Several years ago in our neighborhood -- (Through interpreter) -- we were victimized by a gang. The majority of the people in the gang -- MR. CRUZ: Was just people, teenagers. What is the place in where the teenage learning the moral to be a good person in our society in the church? It's sad. We saw in TV -- in TV news several just [sic] people with gun in the school kill each other. With reading in the newspaper how many accidents we have in our street in our city because of just people is in drunk. What is the benefit of the church in our society? Prepare the future of the country. You see the just people here, teenage talking with us how they thinking. The moral, the good -- good neighbor, good citizen they learn in the church. The other thing, in disaster, who help the people? The church. In counseling, when the people have big problem in sad situation, where is the counseling? In the church. The church in our society mean freedom, good thing, bless. The great seal of the State of the Florida say in God we trust. Our military, when we go -- go to different country, defend our liberty, trust in God. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 59 of 85 Our people in the school sometimes ago take off the prayer, and it started, our student kill, fighting. My brothers, Commissioner, people here, the church prepare the future of our country. The church is a blessing, our neighborhood. I talking about -- I hear talking about the traffic. What kind of traffic 7:00 after people finish the job, the working; 7:00 the nighttime. Sunday morning, 10:00, what is the problem with the traffic? We have a problem more important. Prepare the future and our country, and the church have wonderful role in this thing. Thank you very much, and God bless you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Next speaker is Jule Funtas, followed by Martha Bants. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ma'am, I'm going to ask you to say your name for me slowly. MS. FUNTAS: Good afternoon. My name is Jule Funtas. And here I am. I want to say thank you for you, for your service, for your time. And I want this afternoon God touch your heart, and I want to stand up, see my two hands. I want do this (indicating). Let we stand up together, and God help for us. Right now we live difficult time. Let's see hospital, how many people sick. We never have this problem. We have storm, flood, everything. God try and show something for us. So let God help for us, and we stand up to live back again our life which when we used to have freedom, party, business, everything. And I know God been copilot this morning for me to come over here and ask you, please help for us to help this church. We be ready. Each person have -- need to have two passport. You know for what? One to go different world; another go to heaven. When we reach there, let God open door for us. And you say in hands, God, I did for you this. God say, blessing pure heart. So please, I know God give for you for each one big heart. So I'm here in this moment, and I know we need God more like never before. We no need more COVID. We need peace in the world. We want live back again. God bless you. Thank you for listen us, and let God prepare your heart and give you blessing and supply whatever you need every day to listen over here, our problem. Thank you for serve, you for us. We in your hands. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, ma'am. MS. FUNTAS: I love everybody. God bless each person who -- who's in this room now. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. MS. FUNTAS: God bless. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Martha Bantz, followed by -- forgive me if I mispronounce this. Neisy Alvarez. MS. BANTZ: Good afternoon. Name is Martha Bantz, again. I'm going to read you something that was sent to me. It's going to sound very specific. It's from somebody who is in the know about the process, and then I'll get into my specific comments. And this is my comment also. The church is welcome in the Golden Gate Estates community. That is not the question. The concern -- or the concern. The concern is where they want to be located. I think the Estates community is in full support of them coming in. I love what I've heard about what all you do and the impact that they want to make, but I just don't think the location that has been chosen is the correct one. The church, I believe, already bought the property. It's not -- it wasn't put under conditional use like a lot of times they do when they buy it. Like, we'll buy this if this passes. So if they're -- the community should not have to pay for a bad business decision of the church. Also, the staff informed -- that's the county management staff -- informed the church representatives at the pre-application meeting almost two years ago of concerns about this location and that the 5.A.a Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 60 of 85 Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy did not identify a community desire to have conditional uses in the interior of Golden Gate Estates. Okay. Now for my own personal comments. And, again, I want to stress, the community, I do not believe -- the Estates community is not against the church. It's just simply the location. You've heard people talk about the traffic issues: Oh, my goodness, I hate to go into Naples anymore because of the traffic situation. Even around the Estates on Everglades Boulevard, Randall Boulevard and stuff, the traffic is increasing, and especially you heard conditions with the 8th Street and 22nd Avenue -- do I have that right? -- area. I moved out to the Estates because I wanted peace and quiet and wanted to enjoy the wildlife. I don't want -- I didn't want all the streetlights and stuff that you would find in an area of Naples. I love sitting in the morning on my porch swing drinking my coffee, watching the birds at the bird feeder that I put up, watching the wildlife that comes into my yard because of the landscaping I purposely did to bring them in. The church, I think, there could be a better place for it to be located on the fringe. I thought that was kind of what was planned through the master plan was that businesses could come in and that type of thing, but on the perimeter of the Estates, not inside the Estates. My other concern I heard -- and I think it's great that the church is growing. But if they're already sitting at 80 to 100 members and they're saying how well their growth is coming along, how long will it be before they outgrow the church that they're saying they're only going to have 100 seats? Then we're going to be talking about additional services, expanding the church building, et cetera. And, again, that's further degrading the quality of life that people moved out here for. So I think that's something that you need to keep in mind. I'm sure there's other things that I could say, but right now I've kind of gone blank. So just please consider the residents' opinions. We are the ones that will be living under the conditions of what you -- what is that word? -- suggest to the Board kind of thing. Please understand we moved out here for that quality of life, and we would appreciate your not approving things that will take away from that. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Grettel Lobo, followed by Myriam Guerra. MS. MARQUINA: Her name is Grettel Lobo. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Please use the mic. MS. MARQUINA: She lives in DeSoto, 31st Avenue. When she goes to church in the mornings, she passes through the church that you guys mentioned before, the Everglades and Randall. When she goes by there, she sees the church and there's no traffic there. There's not -- like, there's no noise, and it catches her attention because, regularly, you would hear something. But on the Sundays, she goes by there, like, around 10:15 in the morning and there's no traffic or noise. So it's her testimony that there is a church, but there's not a lot of -- we don't do much impact with, like, being loud or having a lot of traffic. And same when she goes to church on Wednesdays, because she's a member from the church, and she doesn't see traffic or anything. She said, as you can see, she's supporting the church. It's more than just a building. It's a family. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, our next speaker is Myriam Guerra, followed by -- is it Maria Martin? CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'll ask you to spell your last name for me, please. MS. GUERRA: Yes, my name is Myriam Guerra, M-y-r-i-a-m; Guerra, G-u-e-r-r-a. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. MS. GUERRA: Yes. I'm here to support the church because I believe our church makes 5.A.a Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 61 of 85 a better community, better family, better youth. That's all I can say. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Next speaker. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Next speaker is Marie Martin. MS. MARTIN: Hi, my name Marie Martin. And if you want to know how Naples has grown, ask me; I've been here since 1971. One high school only. And I support the church because we was going through divorce and going to church, we accept the Lord, and we've been married 41 years. And I support the church because the young people, they start when they kids; they can be better teenagers. They can be better people. And the church, what it do, it help counseling, do so many things. And that's why I support the church. God bless you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, ma'am. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker -- and forgive me -- Yanelis Barrameda, followed by Marie Hinajosa. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ma'am, I'll ask you, if you don't mind, to please spell your last name for us. MS. BARRAMEDA: Sure. My last name is B-a-r-r-a-m-e-d-a, and my name is Yanelis. Good afternoon, everyone. I think my pastor say everything. I just want to say I support this project. I think the church always blessing to the community. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Next speaker. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Our next speaker is Maria Hinajosa, followed by our final speaker, Michael Ramsey. MS. MARQUINA: Her name is Marie Hinajosa, and she really loves the church. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Next speaker. Mr. Ramsey. MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Michael Ramsey will be our final speaker for this item. MR. RAMSEY: Members of the Planning Commission, good afternoon. Thank you for your time. My name is Michael R. Ramsey. I'm the president of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association. We've been in existence out in the Estates since about 1978, '79. Our concerns with the petitioner on this issue, first and foremost is -- from today listening to the speakers, I was -- I got a little confused in the beginning who was the pastor. I think you-all cleared that up. Thank you. Having said that, I'm a little more concerned about some of the lack of information that's been presented, the specificity. I think it was well said that there was a lot of unwritten flexibility here that causes us concern, especially in the area of the buildings and construction and services and activities that will occur on site. There needs to be more specificity in that area. Number two, we were very concerned about the conduct of the NIMs held in Naples. There was a large turnout of Estates residents that wanted to attend this NIM, but they could not. They were turned away because the choice of the location couldn't handle the number of people, and the location couldn't handle the parking. The second issue with the location, during April 2021 there was a huge issue with COVID, and this was a standing room only area of about -- I think of a fire code of about 35, and there was 60 in there. Again, it was turning people away. So the information that's usually transmitted in a NIM was not transmitted to most of the residents. That was a concern to us, because we've attended many NIMs, and this was very unusual. The community did not get to really participate with what was going to happen and what was going on. We do have a huge concern as it was listed in the pre-app notes about the statutory 5.A.a Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 62 of 85 requirements. So how do you prove in statutory requirements a church is needed? I really don't understand that, and I don't know how it was presented in the pre-app or how it's being described. But our reading of the material, it was not done. It was not proven that this was needed statutorily. Statutorily, number two, the alternative site analysis, if there's churches in North Naples, Immokalee, the alternative site analysis apparently was very narrowly located in Golden Gate Estates. That seems to be incorrect in its application statutorily. It looks like that could have been looking at a wider area. Golden Gate Estates Civic Association is most -- is very concerned and has always supported the quality-of-life concepts of the residents in the Estates. We are the most unique subdivision in Collier County, and it's becoming apparent we're becoming more -- very unique in the state of Florida and maybe in the United States, because we have low density, rural activities, and no HOA, which is also a problem in this area, too. The quality-of-life components that are important to our people are: They want a single-family home, a little bit -- little noise, little traffic except for single-family home, not a lot of bright lights at night and odors that go along with construction and other working activities. The application for this church makes this more difficult to have quality-of-life components in the area around it and near it. In looking at the alternative site analysis that was provided to us, I noticed that they said that this was a good location for the church, and they got a lot of red thumbtacks on a map saying this is where all the parishioners live. I was wondering if staff verified all those addresses for the parishioners. That would seem to be a logical -- a reasonable request. The petitions that were submitted on -- by the church from these parishioners online -- which I understand the reason for Ms. Rae Ann Burton's comment is that it indicated about half of the petitioners [sic] on this stuff were not living in Collier County, which would be a reasonable request to know. It was very interesting to learn about the hours of service on Wednesday and Sunday. All the churches that we now have in the Estates have all increased their services once they've been allowed to have a permit and construct. For instance, the Emmanuel Lutheran Church at Oil Well Road and Everglades, I just received the application notice yesterday that they now want to expand their church services and have more area so, again, we're going to lose single-family homes to this church, and it looks like we're not going to be able to stop it. So is that the same issue with this church once they get established? Will they just continue to creep out and increase services? It was also interesting that on Wednesday, if they start at 7:30 p.m., 1930 time, and they have six hours of operation, will the residents have to bear with them stopping at 1:30 a.m. the next morning? Is that going to be allowed? That seems to be unreasonable for a single-family area. And then the noise issue. Are we going to have to deal with lots of noise? And the quality-of-life component, most of the quality-of-life components, especially noise, is important after 6:00 p.m., weekends, and holidays, which is the prime activity areas for this church. That is a severe change in quality of life for the existing single-family-home residents. Last, 60 percent of the natural vegetation's going to be removed from the property, and it will have a significant impact on wildlife. It will make it practically unusable by species of concern for Collier County. In closing, Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association wants to preserve quality of life and acknowledge that the residents that live here should be able to maintain that quality of life as we move forward. It's very important that it's understood that we are the last place in Collier County that can actually offer low-density rural area for single families. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. And for the record, we allowed Mr. Ramsey to have seven minutes and would have gone, perhaps, up to 10 because he's a representative of an 5.A.a Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 63 of 85 organization. Thank you. Oh, we've got -- we have questions, starting with Commissioner -- MR. RAMSEY: Thank you, sir. Appreciate that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mr. Ramsey, you said you're the president of the Golden Gate Civic Association. MR. RAMSEY: Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And can you describe what that association is. MR. RAMSEY: That association is a voluntary group of members as a part of a 501(c)4 group that is interested in the quality of life and protection of the quality of life in the Golden Gate Estates. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: How many members are there, active members of that? MR. RAMSEY: Around -- right now around 180. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And that -- but is that the only organization in Golden Gate? Are there -- are there not other organizations in the Estates that claim or allege that they represent residents of the Estates? MR. RAMSEY: That is correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. So what's the other -- what other -- MR. RAMSEY: There is no other. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: There's no other organization? Okay. You talked about the NIM. I ask the question about the NIM. Was the NIM deemed to be compliant with the county ordinance? Mr. Ramsey stated that there was not enough room and people were being turned away. Is that what you stated? MR. RAMSEY: Yes, sir. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I did have a discussion with Laura DeJohn who attended the neighborhood information meeting with staff, and it is reflected in the NIM minutes that she had raised that as an issue, and they were making room for anyone who wanted to attend, either -- it might have been standing room, but it's my understanding that they were being able to accommodate them. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Because in the past we've had NIMs scheduled, and if the venue wasn't large enough, they would have had to reschedule it and hold it in a bigger room. MR. BELLOWS: That is correct, and we have done that. And my understanding in this case, there was ability to accommodate everyone. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. So other than -- MR. BELLOWS: Maybe inconveniently, but they were accommodated. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: What Mike said here, Mr. Ramsey said, then -- then the staff deemed it appropriate. Legal counsel, would you have -- can I get a legal opinion on the -- what you assess the -- did the NIM meet the requirements? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: We'll need to rely on staff factually as to whether people were turned away or not. As previously stated, there needs to be a room of sufficient size to accommodate all the people that come. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: So we'll rely on what staff says as to whether or not people were turned away or not. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's ask Ms. DeJohn to address that. MS. DeJOHN: Good afternoon. Laura DeJohn. I'm working on behalf of Collier County in the review of this petition. I was at the neighborhood information meeting. It was a crowded meeting. About 10 minutes into the meeting, I noticed the door was propped open so that attendees near the door could hear and be participating in the meeting. So I said, please, everyone scoot in and allow those people by the door to be in the room. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 64 of 85 There was no turning away of people that I saw. And this comment or concern or raising of a question of whether the NIM was sufficient or accommodated all people has not been raised to me as the planner who was there until today. This is the first I've heard. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is it your understanding that those who wanted to ask questions, those that wanted to be heard, that the NIM was sufficient to accommodate all of the questions and concerns? MS. DeJOHN: Yes. And you might also be aware, it was noted that this is a period of COVID, and virtual attendance was also available. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MS. DeJOHN: So there was a Zoom link, and there was the ability for those who wanted to be there and who were there to be accommodated inside the room. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you, Laura. Mr. Ramsey, you made a statement about the parishioners not being from Golden Gate Estates. Was that because of the -- I guess the map that was shown, the exhibit that was shown where the folks lived, or are you basically of the opinion that if you don't live in the Estates, that you are not eligible to attend the congregation? MR. RAMSEY: The question was in the packets of information available about this project, staff has put online that there is a map that depicts the location of the proposed church location, and it has arrow points on a map indicating where all the parishioners live in the Estates, and my question was, was those addresses and locations verified? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. So legitimate question, but I don't know if verifies -- MR. BOSI: I can confirm that was an exhibit that was submitted by the applicant. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: By the applicant. MR. BOSI: And staff did not verify that all of those individual addresses were, in fact, members of the -- of the church. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have one last question. As I asked Ms. Burton, you mentioned the 60 percent of the natural vegetation being removed. I'm always amazed how those who all of a sudden want to protect vegetation and the environment when they don't want a project to be approved, how would the approval of this be any different than a 4,000-square-foot home being built on that site? Would you not still have an impact on trees and vegetation? MR. RAMSEY: The construction -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just to finish, it's -- it is zoned Estates. It's allowed for a single-family home. So if it's a 4,000-square-foot home or a 5,000-square-foot building, how is that different? MR. RAMSEY: The construction in the Estates, according to the LDC, when a building permit is issued, you're allowed to clear, reasonably, one acre to put the house in. All other vegetation remains. In this case, they're going to clear the interior of the property and leave 75-foot strips on the border, which is nearly -- not practical for endangered species of concern in this county to use. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are there endangered species noted on the site? Have you done an endangered species inventory? MR. RAMSEY: I did not do one on this site, but I'm very familiar with this area. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I know it's zoned Estates, so it's basically -- MR. RAMSEY: It's basically located in Panther 1 habitat. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's located in? MR. RAMSEY: Panther 1 habitat designated by U.S. Fish and Wildlife. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I understand. Let me ask the applicant, then. Are you required to conduct any kind of endangered species survey in accordance with either the Endangered Species Act, Section 7 of the -- MR. DE AZA: There are preserve requirements. We were complying. We're not 5.A.a Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 65 of 85 touching the wetland. And if you look at the table we have, we're impacting less than 15 percent. Those two 75 strips is actual native vegetation that we will not touch. We're actually enhancing, other than removal of exotics -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Have jurisdictional wetlands been identified and required? MR. DE AZA: There are wetlands, and we're not touching the wetlands. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So there's no request for a Section 404 permit? MR. DE AZA: No. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Or through the Clean Water Act, or now through the state rather than the Corps of Engineers. So -- MR. DE AZA: Correct. And the buildable area that we're proposing, without having to -- going through the SDP is less than 15 percent, and we're not touching the native vegetation. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. And the -- from the standpoint of water management, you still have to go through a South Florida Water Management District -- MR. DE AZA: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- permit, environmental resource permit application, and you still will have to go through an application for any type of septic or drainfield. MR. DE AZA: Correct, correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. So with that, how does that -- my question goes back to, how does that differ between a home -- and you're just -- that's just your opinion that -- that 60 percent of the native vegetation will be destroyed? MR. RAMSEY: In the interior, yes. To further clarify, the comment was made, because the current light is important to quality-of-life issues to the surrounding residents. A house there is less harsh than this structure that they're proposing. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And that's a personal -- MR. RAMSEY: And there is no -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's a personal opinion. MR. RAMSEY: -- retention area. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's not a professional -- are you a professional engineer, professional planner? MR. RAMSEY: I am a certified wildlife biologist recognized by the State of Florida, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, and -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. RAMSEY: -- and Florida Wildlife. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And you've done an endangered species survey on the site? MR. RAMSEY: I have, yes -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are you -- MR. RAMSEY: -- personally. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are you going to submit any type of -- MR. RAMSEY: No, I don't have to submit anything. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. All right, thanks. That's all the questions I have. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. Mr. Ramsey, I just have, I think, one question -- oh, a couple comments. First on the specificity, I think most of the people -- most of the commissioners here agree that we're going to look at some things to have more specificity. And I certainly think that a "no later than" time on Wednesday night is probably a good idea, you know, because you were talking about if it was 7:30 and six hours, that's -- that goes really late. And I -- from what I can gather, it doesn't seem like the church would have that intent, so I 5.A.a Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 66 of 85 don't think that will be a problem to hammer out something that does restrict that, but it's good to point it out. I would also point out that when I go visit friends in the Estates, we shoot; you know, we do target shooting in the backyard, and people are riding ATVs. And so, you know, this -- the idea that, you know, you buy a five-acre or two-and-a-half acre, you know, plot of land and it's going to be pastoral and bucolic, I get it. Much of the Estates can be that way, but you don't know what your neighbor's going to do because you, yourself, said there's no HOA. And so all I would say is the -- you know, pointing out that you'd like -- you know, everyone would like things to be calm and peaceful and quiet and natural, I think that's true. That's generally how a lot of people like it, but I think in the Estates it's not going to be like Ave Maria where I live where I have bears on my front porch and alligators in the back, but it's more of a, you know, semi urban area. And so we live differently there. In the Estates, people know they can have pigs, which the same friend has that, and they can -- oh, he's raised pigs for the fair for sure, absolutely, and he's a lawyer, and he knows the rules for sure. And they also -- you know, I've done target shooting on his land. I mean, are you saying that none of those are actually uses in this neighborhood where this church would be? So you actually could have somebody -- from what I understand, you could actually have somebody buy that parcel and have target practice and have ATVs running and doing other things -- and raising hogs, you know, to show at the fair, which a family would do. I mean, this guy is a -- you know, it was his kids raising a hog for the fair. So, I mean, the point is, you make a point, and everyone has concerns about what their neighbors are going to do, and those are good points, but they only take you so far. And certainly, if you want to reply, I'm happy to hear what you have to say. MR. RAMSEY: I do have a further clarification. On the issue of the NIMs, if you were inside the building, you cannot see the people that could not park and had to leave. They were parking down the access road into the BP station next door because there was not enough parking to allow people into the NIMs. So you would never know if they were turned away. If you were outside watching, you would have seen it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Mr. Ramsey? MR. RAMSEY: Sorry. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Do you represent the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association? MR. RAMSEY: I'm the president. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But are your comments representative of the 180 members? Is that -- MR. RAMSEY: Our comments represent meetings since June or April 2021. We've had meetings about this issue every month, the general membership. COMMISSIONER SHEA: How many residents are there in Golden Gate? That's just more for information. MR. RAMSEY: I'll take a shot. East of 951, probably around 30,000. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Wow. And you represent 180? MR. RAMSEY: No. I represent the attitudes of my membership that have expressed this. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But is it -- MR. RAMSEY: I can't represent every person. COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- 180 that you represent that are against it, or is it 180 that's your total representation in your association? MR. RAMSEY: My letter expressed what-all the membership said to send. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So that's 180 against? 5.A.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 67 of 85 MR. RAMSEY: Approximately, yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. That's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Yes, go ahead, Vice Chair. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And your association had a major part in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, correct? MR. RAMSEY: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And that area was definitely intended to stay residential in the mind of your association? MR. RAMSEY: For those that are not aware of the Golden Gate Master Plan, in that master plan, since its creation, we have, as a group and my members, participated in the development and articulation of it as to where we want development/commercial retail, and this is not one of those places. This is very interior with many single-family homes. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Well, I agree with you. I just -- if it needs a Growth Management Plan because church isn't allowed there -- this is just a bad spot, I think. There's too many homes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Too much noise. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Youngblood, do we -- are we at the end of the speakers? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ramsey was our final speaker for this item. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. I'm going to ask, then, that anyone who did not register to speak but wishes to be heard and hasn't spoken yet, please raise your hand, signal. And I see no hands. And there is no one signaling from the dais, so with that, and without objection, we will close the public comment portion of this hearing and turn our attention to how we're going to proceed. I've got, I would estimate, maybe 30 to 45 minutes of issues that I want to raise, and I think they overlap with some issues that others wish to raise, such as the weddings and funerals question and the hours of operation, that are going to turn on policy decisions, and we may be able to hammer out some compromises. We may not. But I can imagine there's going to be a fair amount of conversation that has to take place to get to that point. So with that said, and recognizing that there are others, I know Commissioner Schmitt -- we may have some overlap; we may not. It seems to me -- I'm speaking for myself. My preference would be that we break for lunch, but that's up to the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'd just as soon not. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. What do others say? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's 1:30. I mean, break for lunch, come back here at 2:30, it would be almost time to leave. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. It sounds like the -- anybody else want to weigh in? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Well, we'll -- we will continue. And I brought a snack, so I -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Fortunately for me, during our 10-minute break, I had my lunch. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I saw that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I do have questions, more of staff, though, that I'd like -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Well, we're going to continue. We've got Commissioner Shea and Commissioner Schmitt both lit up. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I know we try for compromise a lot of times. I view this as a yes/no type situation. I view us as the gatekeeper of the plan, and if you're going to change the 5.A.a Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 68 of 85 plan, it has to benefit the community. I'm not feeling like there's universal agreement that it benefits the community to make this change. So I have a lot of -- I can't support it just because I think you shouldn't change the plan unless you have a good reason that benefits the community. I don't see -- I'm certainly not against the church. I think the church in that community would be phenomenal. I think it's the wrong location. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, staff -- we already asked the question, how many homes are in the Estates right now; do you know offhand? Mike Ramsey said, what -- what'd he say, 30,000? COMMISSIONER VERNON: I think 30,000 people. MR. BOSI: He said -- he estimated -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BOSI: -- population of about 30,000. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: How many square miles is the Estates? MR. BOSI: Oh -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, you don't know. Come on. Come on. MR. BOSI: It's -- I know it's often described as larger than -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's the largest subdivision in the state of Florida that is -- was -- platted subdivision, other than I think Lehigh Acres may be a close second. But this was -- this was -- well, counting the southern blocks, it was the largest subdivision in the state of Florida, because -- I ask that because it is an extraordinarily large subdivision. I hesitate to even guess how many homes. God, it probably -- it must be at least 15- or 20,000 homes out there, capability to build that many homes. MR. BOSI: Oh, I believe the capacity is -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: How many churches are -- can you put the map up that shows how many churches actually exist in the Estates? MR. BOSI: This is only for the -- this is only for the northern Golden Gate Estates, as you've mentioned. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. The south blocks no longer exist. That was turned over to the state. MR. BOSI: But here's the location of the churches. The one that's in pinkish-red, 9, that was an application that was denied for a GMP and conditional-use application. The proposed church is 1, and then the various other locations are shown. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: What is the -- the reason that this has to come in for a conditional use is because of -- the Golden Gate Area Master Plan required it for this area to be a conditional use for a church? MR. BOSI: The Golden Gate Area Master Plan was modified at some point in the past, I believe mid to late '80s, to restrict the amount of conditional uses that could be requested within the Estates because the price of land at the time, and it's still reflective today, was extremely high within the urbanized area, and what the staff was finding was there was a proliferation of conditional uses that were starting to creep up within the Estates. And to prevent that, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan was modified to restrict the location. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And what drove that, quite honestly, was because of the difference in the price of land in the Estates versus elsewhere in the county. It motivated those who wanted to open up a business or a church or whatever; it was far more financially favorable to do it in the Estates. MR. BOSI: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So that was the reason that drove the conditional use and, as I recall, pretty much required -- now prohibited. The real issue here is in comparison to many other communities, whether in Florida, 5.A.a Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 69 of 85 anywhere else in the country, a church is pretty much deemed compatible with a residential community; is it not? MR. BOSI: Correct. And let me point out the Golden Gate Estates -- the zoning district in Golden Gate Estates, when it was originally created, it identified a church as a conditional use. It was only the restriction that was later put on through the Golden Gate Area Master Plan that said conditional uses can only be applied for at specific locations. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And that's what necessitated now the GMP amendment. MR. BOSI: That's where we necessitated. So what that means is, when the Estates was originally created, it had identified the traditional conditional uses that are associated within residential areas. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Because -- again, when I look at it -- and I'm torn between this, because churches are compatible with communities, and churches usually are developed in and around communities -- residential communities. Now, that doesn't mean in a gated community or a PUD, they're only restricted, just because the PUD identifies certain boundaries of where properties can be developed. But in straight zoning in most any city, if they're a church -- a church on a corner is a pretty common thing, usually within walking distance. And I grew up in the Northeast. Typically, schools and, especially parochial schools, they were usually within walking distance. There was a church every four blocks, I think, in some of the northeastern cities. UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But they had a capacity of -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Excuse me, sir. Thank you very much for your opinion. But -- so in this regard, the opposition is, as I see this, is mainly folks believe that this church is incompatible with the community. MR. BOSI: I would characterize the opposition is just saying that it's incompatible with the existing Golden Gate Area Master Plan. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. That's good. So it's basically deemed incompatible because it requires a GMP amendment? MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. That's -- I want to review the conditions, but I'll hold off on that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. Just to take on -- another take on Commissioner Schmitt, a point that he just made. I mean, I grew up in a rural area, in a rural county, and we had a couple cities, but it was largely rural farm area. And in rural areas, churches are very common. That's a very common thing. So I also -- when I hear that argument, that's what I think of is that that's -- you know, that's not my experience. And we're seeing the -- we're looking at the GMP amendment legislatively, and so it's really a question of what's good public policy. And, you know, my experience, and I -- you know, is that it's actually good public policy to have churches in neighborhoods, which kind of -- and in rural areas where people live. That's where they would be; otherwise, it becomes difficult to attend the churches, which is really, you know, one of the problems they have now which is why they're putting this application forward. I also was wondering, what are the alternative locations? Because that's -- people have heard -- or mentioned that. Obviously, they have this land, so that's where they would like to do it, but what are the alternatives? Where can a church be? Because it seems like there's two things. You know, there's a limit to where it can be as far as being close to their current geographic area, which is what they would like to do, and then there's pricing, because there are so few areas. I don't think the intent was to make it really expensive to put a church in. I don't think that -- when this was modified in the '80s, I don't think that was one of the things that they wanted to happen or they even maybe thought would happen so that churches were priced out of the market. So I have a concern there as well. I don't know what the alternate locations were, but I imagine cost is -- excuse me, cost is one of the prohibitions, as a practical matter, for a church. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 70 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: No one else is signaling at this point. Anyone else on the dais want to be heard? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Let me tell you where I am. I've got a significant number of concerns about the wording of the conditions of approval, and I think most of them probably could be worked out to the satisfaction of the applicant and staff, but there's one that I'm having trouble getting over, and that is, how could we possibly limit -- well, let me say it this way. There's been testimony this afternoon that this county is growing and it's robust and it's going to continue growing, all true. This congregation could grow as well. And I'm not at all sure how we could legally or properly limit the growth in this congregation. And if we can't, then are we setting ourselves up for the kind of a problem that the opponents of this proposal are identifying? And I'm having trouble getting over that. If I thought that there was some compromise language that could be put in, and assuming we could resolve my other concerns and the conditions, I might be a yes vote. But right now, I am at the point where I think I hear three yes votes and two no votes, at least in the making, and unless I can get over these hurtles, I'm going to be a no vote, which means we'll send no recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Wouldn't the growth be controlled by the size of the building? And if they want to -- if the growth goes to 200 or 300, they have to come back and amend the conditional use. Isn't that the controlling factor? MR. BOSI: (Nods head.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I thought. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And legally you could go in, again, we talked about it, with the fire code being violated. If they're stuffing the building, you know, that's a -- and the parking lot only has so much size, and I don't know, can they just park on the grass. Is that a -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right. So there are some built-in restrictions. If you can sit back just so I can see the commissioner -- or the Chairman, sorry. I also would say that it seems the modus operandi or the -- maybe to the experience of this church from what we've heard is that they have a church, they get bigger, and then they plan another church somewhere else. So they almost -- you know, it almost seems like the church doesn't want, you know, to have that growth. When they grow, they then branch off and then create another satellite or daughter church. But -- you know, I don't know, but I think -- in my mind, I thought of the exact same concerns, and that's what I came up with as how I can feel comfortable approving this. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I can certainly accept -- and it's a good point made -- that the size of the structure, the 5,000 square feet is self-limiting because of fire codes and the like. But I think as we look at this, we all have 100 congregants in our mind, and I think that that's unrealistic. I think it could be considerably more than that. And if we amend the Growth Management Plan at this point, I think it would be considerably easier, if they do grow to 500, to get whatever they would need by way of a conditional use, perhaps, or a density amendment of some kind to the GMPA -- to the GMP, and we really would be opening a door that maybe it's okay for us to open, and, Lord knows I'm -- like everybody else, I'm all in favor of churches, and -- but we've got to be dispassionate about this and look at it whether it's a church or a development and what's in the best interest of the county and what are the reasonable expectations of the occupants of the area as reflected in the Growth Management Plan. So I'm still in a quandary on this. Staff, can you help me out here? Am I overlooking something, Mr. French? MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, for the record, Jamie French. So I happened to -- a little self-initiative here, and I happen to have -- I am neither a building official nor am I a licensed professional engineer, but our building official is for Collier County. So you've got a 5,000-square-foot building. Depending upon the layout of the building, 5.A.a Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 71 of 85 depending upon the type of construction and the way the building is designed, rough numbers, you're 15 square foot per person. So even though it's been presented to you today that it's a 100-seat facility, the building could occupy better than 300 people just based off rough numbers, and we do not have details. So if you wanted to self-limit it, and just for some help, that would be a way to self-limit it. You could limit or not allow for or not permit any type of outside activity, and you could limit the number of people occupying that building based off of its size. And also, for correction to the record, there was some state legislation -- in my conversation with Mr. Walsh, there was some state regulation that exempts churches from ADA. So they are not exempt from Florida Building Code. They are not exempt from the fire prevention code, but there are some ADA considerations that they are exempt for -- from as an act of the Florida Legislation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, I wanted to ask a question on Condition No. 5. It says, the total numbers of groups using the site, and then it says the church building will not be used for any other type of group, organization, or club. I understand what the words say, but what if the church has a, I don't know, a Boy Scout troop, some other type of organization, is that considered a prohibited group, organization, or club? If the church has a, I don't know, a reading club, are they -- are they church groups or external groups? MR. BOSI: Those are meant to be applied to external groups. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further, if I may, Commissioner, I was going to and will suggest that the words "type of" be changed to the word "entity," so as to be clear that this is something that is only church-sponsored events, and the facilities would be used only by the church for the church. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Correct. I accept that, yes. MR. BOSI: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's see. I don't have anybody else lit up here. I would -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: I did. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I guess I'm going to repeat myself. I guess, if I'm a resident of this community, who do I rely on to stick to the plan that we as a county decided we were going to have? And to me, we're talking about negotiating a change that the local neighborhood doesn't want. I don't know why we're negotiating it. It's -- our job is to stick to the Growth Management Plan unless there's some insurmountable reason why we need to change it. Why are we even talking about accepting it and changing it? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Other comments? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I agree. The Golden Gate Area Master Plan is -- the approval of the changes is not that old. And the church is not allowed here, or there wouldn't be a Growth Management Plan amendment. That's what the people wanted. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But in the same vein, we have opportunities everywhere in this county to do small-scale amendments, to do other types of amendments to the GMP. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But it's usually accepted locally. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Exactly. That's the issue here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: You got the people that worked on the plan opposed to it, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. The association worked on it for a long time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. I would go back to my question that I raised earlier. How does this compare to the church that's on the intersection of Randall and Everglades, and why would we be -- you know, maybe the idea is that was a mistake, but why would this be treated differently? 5.A.a Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 72 of 85 CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm going to ask staff to answer that after I give my two cents. I think the difference there is that the intersection mentioned is at a crossroads of major throughfares versus the proposed site, which is quite a bit internal to rural Golden Gate. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Right. So it's rather -- it's more -- it's not necessarily on the fringe, but it was less in the interior. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I would think so. Staff, do you want to -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I would only ask then, did we have the exact same opposition to that, even though it was on the fringe, because my thought is that no matter what is proposed, you know, we're going to hear from the -- especially from the people most -- you know, closest to it, that they're always going to raise opposition because it's something different. MR. BOSI: Staff's perspective is each individual petition, as you know and as the Planning Commission has echoed many times, is based upon its own individual merit. I think in terms of the two specific locations that you talked about, the Chairman had identified one of the major differences is the intersection of two -- two major roadway systems, this being more towards the interior. There was -- at the time of that GMP and CU hearing, there was similar type of oppositions based upon similar type of concerns. But the unique nature of that individual location, obviously, was persuading to the Planning Commission and ultimately the Board of County Commissioners, which they -- they found a recommendation of approval from the CCPC, and then the Board of County Commissioners approved it. And I think it's because of the difference in terms of where it sat within the transportation system. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And do you stand by -- I mean, does the planning -- planners, do they stand by their recommendation of approval after hearing all the testimony? MR. BOSI: Yes, yes. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. And I just want to -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Subject to the 16 conditions. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BELLOWS: 8th Street is deemed to be a collector road in our Transportation Element. So, technically, it's a collector road like Everglades. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: 8th Street? MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, but it doesn't function quite like those roads. CHAIRMAN FRYER: No one is signaling now, so I'm going to use this time to go through, as quickly as I can, all the concerns I have on the conditions of approval. And -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Can you point me to the page where that's at, because I haven't -- for the life of me, I haven't been able to find it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: It's Exhibit C to the ordinance. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay, great. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. That's the best way to get at it. And -- all right. First of all, my first concern is the six hours per day. There was a point that was well taken by both planning commissioners and also some speakers that if we have a 1930 start time, that would run into the wee hours of the morning to get the full six hours in, and we certainly want to limit that. How that is to be limited is a subject of discussion, if it be the wish of the Planning Commission to try to negotiate that out. But let me just go through all of these. The second one, days of operation, normal church operation. We raise that point, of course, because there are weddings and funerals and other events that would not considered -- would likely not be considered part of the one quarterly event that would be recognized. So right now we're talking about more activity at the church based upon one's interpretation of the word "normal." Then the seats, 100 seats, but we've heard that 300 people could be in there. The total 5.A.a Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 73 of 85 number of members. I just don't see -- you know, I think it would be unfair to the church to tell them that they can't exceed 100 members and -- so I'm not willing to do that, but I can't think of any other reasonable approach to deal with the major concern that they could grow to 500 members and be back here with a Growth Management Plan amendment under their belt and a conditional use under their belt. Then I mentioned my proposed change in No. 5 to change "type of" to "entity" for the reasons I mentioned. Number 6, one structure being proposed. I would like to say there shall be but one structure on the church project. Number 7, "the church plans on having," well, that's not a condition of approval. Let's make that into a commitment. The church will be limited to one special event quarterly. Of course, that begs the question because we haven't defined what a special event is yet. Going to No. 9, the church plans on -- excuse me. Yeah, going to No. 9, plans on having one special event quarterly. It says the same thing; it would need the same fix. Number 10, I realize that we base our limitations in traffic transportation to peak p.m. But I think when we're talking about compatibility and roadways, it would behoove us to also give consideration to the practical impact on these roads, albeit at times other than peak p.m. weekday. So those are my -- well, then I have one -- one more in the staff proposed No. 14. It says special events, and it says, "must be operated by the church." I would say "by and for the church," because the church could operate a special event for another organization, and I want to make it clear that it would be by and for the church. So those are my concerns. And I suppose if we could get over all of those, I could find myself voting yes, but as a practical matter, I can't see how I'm going to get to that point. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I really do want to nail down this term "special event," because I heard what the pastor said. It would typically be involved with a guest speaker or guest pastor or something else. But churches have bake sales. Churches have rummage sales to raise revenue for events, other types of activities that certainly would bring not only petitioners -- parishioners to the church, but it would also bring other residents of the community. Those kind of things we have to nail down. And are they prohibited from having any of those other type of events? I think about Easter -- on Easter Sunday sunrise service, is that a special event, or is that outside the window? The nativity event, all the other type of things that come up. I find it very hard to understand how the county can prohibit a religious service and a practice of their faith if they want to have some kind of congregation involved in something related to a religious devotion. I don't know -- I don't know how we can do that, and I don't know how would we [sic] be enforced, even if I put it in the PUD? I just -- I need more clarity on what this is, because right now what I'm reading is congregations twice a week and once a quarter. That's basically what I'm reading this as. I have to -- I'm not in opposition to the church. I just need something -- I need clarity as to what the intent is because, again, if we approve this, we open the door, and now I throw the burden on staff and Code Enforcement and everyone else to try and enforce what is going to generate complaints from the community. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. I would add a few in response -- as well as some additional items. But in response, I would suggest for Item 4, Condition 4, that maybe language talking about simultaneous users. That way it has nothing to do with membership. You know, more about occupancy, which there's all sorts of reasons to limit the number of occupants as well as, I think, existing ways that that could be done based on parking or fire code or just what -- I guess we could put a limit in here. Number 8, I think if we say "worship services," I think almost every church I can think of 5.A.a Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 74 of 85 does a lot of stuff that isn't really objectionable that's outside of worship services, so I think we should be careful. We talked about the counseling. We heard about, you know, the faith-based counseling and faith-based education. Those things, I think, should be specified just so that we don't, you know, unknowing -- unwittingly limit them if it ever came to a head. Also, Number 7 -- and this is certainly a concern, I think a justified concern of Mr. Ramsey as to quality of life. If we talk about a no-later-than time, I think that other than -- no later than 9:00 p.m. other than the four special events, and even then, I don't know -- you know, I mean, I think there should be a limit. And then we really want to talk about there can't -- in my view, it would be -- you know, I don't know how we would justify any limit on funerals, baptisms, or weddings, and I also think we should be mindful, you know, of something that's going to happen or certainly is going to be an issue right off the bat is, for instance, the universally celebrated -- somewhat universally celebrated religious observance of Good Friday. It's a Friday. It's not a Wednesday. It's not a Sunday, and that's going to happen every year, and I think there might be some other things like that. And I also just think that we get into -- we get into an area where I don't even know if we could enforce some of this stuff, depending how specific we get, if push came to shove. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I share all the concerns that have been expressed. I'm not sure -- well, Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, I'm just going to beat -- keep beating the same drum. I struggle with who are we to go in and tell the community who spent all this time, as Karen said, developing a plan that we're smarter than you and we know better than you and you're going to accept this. I just don't buy that. I don't think that's our job to negotiate for somebody outside to move into a community that -- for something that doesn't benefit the community as a whole. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Well, I see a couple or three options here that we have before us. One would be if the applicant wishes to have this matter continued, and I'm not sure I can hold out a lot of hope for the applicant that the result would be different, but at least to try to address the concerns that have been addressed with respect to Exhibit C, conditions of approval, and come back anew and see if we can -- see if we can come to closure on those. As I say, I'm not -- I'm not really optimistic that we're going to get there, and I want to -- I want to be candid about that. I would be surprised if all of my concerns would be adequately addressed even if you came back. But I'd want you to have that opportunity if you wanted it. Another -- another approach we could take is to simply take a vote right now, and, you know, whatever we vote, it's going to then proceed to the Board of County Commissioners with or without a recommendation on our part. And that's -- we've done that before. And -- well, I guess those are the two options that I -- well, a third option would be to try to hammer out the language right now this afternoon, which I'm not sure would be productive. And I'd like to -- okay, I've got two planning commissioners. First, Commissioner Vernon, would you like to weigh in on that, sir? COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah, I'd like to weigh in just to tell the applicant what I'm thinking because I'm -- I'm one of the newer board members but -- commissioners. This is the hardest thing I've had to decide since I've been here, and that's why I've been very quiet and listening to everyone. So if they're going to be offered the option to continue, I just want you to know where I'm sitting right now. You know, this clearly appears to be a church on the rise, and I think, you know, as much as you guys try to abide by everything, I can see multiple services, and I can just see this -- it's going to naturally grow. And I'm linking to Commissioner Shea, and I guess it's -- you know, where I'd come down now probably is I would probably vote against this. So I just wanted you to know before -- if you're asked whether you want a continuance, I think it's fair to you to know that this is an extremely close call, because I think my colleagues on the end there make some great points 5.A.a Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 75 of 85 and -- very close. But if I had to vote right now, I'm probably going to vote against it, and I wanted you to know that before you -- if he offers up that option. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. For the record, from the standpoint I'm impressed with any initiative that gets kids away from, what is it, TikTok, Facebook, all the other garbage that is out there, and if they can get away from it for five hours a week, I'd be happy. And I'm impressed with the young folks that came here, because it's something they believe in. I do agree with Commissioner Shea; this is a tough issue because it is all of a sudden shoehorned into a growth amendment to modify something that we just approved a little less than a year ago, or a little over a year ago. I'm still split. I would -- I would have asked -- I think best approach -- or I think I would recommend that staff get with the applicant, bring this back. I hate to do this, because I hate to kick things down the road as a continuance, but I need answers on the issues I brought up, and that's going to take legal. Heidi's going to have to do some research, because I don't know how I can restrict church attendance. And I'm not -- I'm not talking about the denomination. This could be any denomination. The one thing that was said that always make the hair on my neck stand up -- and when I heard the quote "these people don't live here," I mean, that infuriated me. I was just absolutely -- I won't say any more in public. And I'm sadly of the belief that that is what's motivating some of the opposition to this, and enough said. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Staff, are there other options before us other than the three I mentioned, based upon the comments you've heard and the preliminary positions that have been stated by planning commissioners? MR. BOSI: There's no other options that I -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Your mic, Mike. MR. BOSI: There's no other -- I mean, the options of continuing it and going back and trying to work out something that addresses the number of concerns that have been expressed by the Planning Commission, that's one option. And the other option I heard was to call the vote today. And if there's this expression of how can we get the conditional use in line, I think the real question is, how do you get the GMP amendment in line? Because a conditional use doesn't happen without the GMP. And if you're not -- if you're going to be able to vote for the GMP because of the issues of the recent restudy, this not being in an area that had been identified and designated as an appropriate location for a conditional-use location, if you can't get past that, all we're doing is spending more time and more resources from the church. So, in that regard, I think the Planning Commission has to say, on the issue -- don't worry about the conditional uses and the conditions we have. On the issue of the Growth Management Plan amendment, if we can't -- if I personally can't arrive at a recommendation of approval, then let's not continue this and try to work down to the specific details of a conditional use because -- and then it's -- you've said this is an appropriate location. Now we're just going to work out the details. So for me, what I've heard, it sounds like the Planning Commission really needs to answer that first question. Can the GMP be supported by -- amendment be supported by the Planning Commission? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, if we voted, we would certainly vote first on the GMP. Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. I would just say that I'm assuming that everyone on -- you know, on this commission would take them as tandem, you know, issues. So if we're voting to send it back with the idea that perhaps the conditions could be hammered out to be 5.A.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 76 of 85 acceptable, then that means that in that situation, you know, we could support the GMP resolution, the change to the GMP. So I just kind of thought that was -- they went hand in hand together. I can't imagine -- you know, it is -- it's a colossal waste of time if we're just going to say hammer out the conditions where we could vote for them but then we wouldn't vote the same way on the GMP. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Your logic is excellent. The only reason I wanted to be heard on the CU is because when this goes to the Board of County Commissioners, I want to have made a record of the concerns that I have in case they take an altogether different tack than we do. So that was -- that was my motive for going through these. I'm now going to ask the -- Commissioner Vernon? COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I'm not stating a position but just trying to look at where we are. It seems like we've got -- I'm guessing, but it looks like we've got three people who are going to vote against it, four people really struggling who may all vote against it or all four vote for it. It sounds like maybe more against it if we have to decide today. We've got a staff that recommended approval. This is a really tough one. I mean, I'm not really, you know, trying to advocate. I'm just saying this is where it appears to me we are. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to ask the applicant's representative to step up to the podium. Vice Chair, did you want to say something. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I was going to make a motion; get it over with. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, let's -- I want to -- sir, you've heard our candid and detailed expressions of concern. We're going to make the decision whether we vote, not vote, or continue it; that will be our decision to make. But before we commit to that, we want to hear your observations and what preferences you might have, recognizing that if we do continue it, there are absolutely no promises being made that when it comes back it's going to be suitable to us. So there you have it. MR. MARTIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Justin Martin, again, for the record. I heard all the discussions, all the concerns, and I could tell you that the church is willing and able to make whatever accommodations are needed in order to be able to move forward with this. So I'm more optimistic that we could meet all of those concerns that you have. I just want to -- a couple of things that I noted while I was sitting here listening and I'd like to share. There was a question asked, what is the geographical area of Golden Gate Estates? As we look at the map, and I think it's a total, if you include everything, it's, like, 163 square acres. It's hard to imagine. CHAIRMAN FRYER: 163 what? MR. MARTIN: I'm sorry; 163 square miles. I misspoke. Miles. It's hard to imagine a scenario where you prohibit churches in the community of 163 square miles. If you look at the plan, there's very few that are up there, very few. And I heard about the Growth Management Plan amendment. I'm not familiar with it, but I think I heard that it doesn't specifically prohibit churches. It doesn't -- it prohibits the number of conditional uses, I think is what I heard, but it doesn't prohibit churches. And what we've tried to convey is that a church is an appropriate use within a residential community. It's really hard to understand that we're struggling with that. If you look historically throughout the U.S., there is examples mentioned here of churches on the corners of residential zones. I laid out at least eight of them here at the beginning of this. So it's not an inappropriate use. It's not something that we're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. It's an appropriate use, and I think that at some point the county, or the Planning Commission, will have to take that issue up as far as how schools are a permitted use, how parks are a permitted use within a residential area of 163 square miles but churches are not. I can't get my hands around that. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 77 of 85 COMMISSIONER SHEA: I don't think we're saying that, though. You paraphrased. I think we're saying at that location. MR. MARTIN: Right. But 163 square miles of Estates-zoned locations. All these other locations are similar to that. What I do want to add is one other thing. The church that was mentioned, Latter Day Saints church, that went through a Growth Management Plan amendment and it went through a conditional-use approval. This church is willing to abide by all the conditions that were in that approval. That way you're not setting any precedent. You're doing the exact same thing that was done, the same exact zoning. It was mentioned that 8th Street is a collector road. This is just -- it's not far from Randall, but it's within Estates zoning. And I understand the continuance. The church is very limited in its funds. They don't have funds to pay for an attorney. That's why I'm here. But what I can tell you is that we can accommodate whatever concerns that you have in order to move this forward. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just a question. A lot of -- what makes this more challenging is -- for me is I don't know who the two people are and say, have you guys, gals, whatever, gotten together and tried to work it out? It's a little harder here because of the way it's organized. The way -- you know, the church versus the Estates area. Have you -- I mean, to me it would be a lot easier if you came in here and there was nobody with 160 names saying I'm against it. And a lot of times that's what happens here is the applicant gets with whoever's opposing it and tries to work out the details rather than us trying to negotiate the details. Sometimes we fine-tune the details, but we don't usually -- have you had -- have you had any success trying to talk with the opposition? MR. MARTIN: We had neighborhood information meetings, and also Commissioner McDaniel has monthly meetings with Golden Gate residents. We -- the pastor has -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: We need to -- excuse me, sir. MR. MARTIN: Yeah, the night with the commissioner. And every month that's held, and the pastor has attended that and addressed questions at each one of those. Now, when you have someone who's determined and organized and puts on social media their opposition and then they go to a 7-Eleven and try and get as many signatures as they can, here, sign this, and then you have people from Cape Coral, from Hialeah, from all these other places that sign a petition, they don't even know what they're signing. And I understand the gentleman that was here with the civic association, but he doesn't represent 30,000 residents out in the Estates. Again, it's 163 square acres. It's hard to imagine -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Square miles. MR. MARTIN: I'm sorry, 163 square miles, thank you. It's hard to imagine a situation where the churches are prohibited there. And this is a de facto prohibition saying that it's not an appropriate use in that zoning when we believe it is. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Sir, I think you've answered at least my question. You don't seem to have an appetite for a continuance because of financial reasons, which I understand completely, and that was the reason I asked you to come up. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Actually, I didn't understand that. I understood that he was willing to accommodate every single request that was made for the conditions. That's what I heard. And so if that required a continuance, he would be happy to do that. MR. MARTIN: Either we can hammer it out here, like you said, we can agree to wholesale conditions that were placed on the LDS church, or we can do a continuance if we have the confidence that this will be moved forward in the future. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, it will be moved forward no matter what we do, for sure, because we're just an advisory body. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I did have a question. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah, I know you do. And, in fact, I'll -- go ahead, 5.A.a Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 78 of 85 Commissioner Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Sure. So these two lots are owned by the church; is that correct? MR. MARTIN: Yes. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Okay. And so what I would say is these people own this land, and they're already members of the community. So I think these people actually are part of Golden Gate Estates. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The prohibition or the requirement for the GMP amendment, specifically for this area that necessitates -- the GMP amendment was required because of the conditional use. I've got to figure out how I phrase this. But churches are compatible uses in a community. I somehow am -- have the belief that this is almost an unintended consequence of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. As I asked the question before, what was driving -- and the motivation to purchase property in the Estates for commercial was because of the favorability and the price of land in the Estates, especially 15, 20 years ago. And we know how the Golden Gate Area Master Plan evolved and got the -- got through the approval process in 2019. But I'm of the belief -- and maybe I'm wrong; that's why I'm going to ask the question -- the conditional-use process was, again, placed on this area to prohibit uncontrolled growth in commercial. All of a sudden I feel that churches somehow got wrapped up in this as an unintended consequence. Was there a belief there that were too many churches coming into the Golden Gate Estates? MR. BOSI: That's what it is, because a conditional use -- like I said, Estates zoning district, if you read the -- if you pick up your Land Development Code, go to the Estates zoning district and look at permitted uses and conditional uses allocated for the Estates zoning district, church is one of them, but commercial uses aren't. So this was never -- this limitation of where you can seek a conditional use in the Golden Gate Estates was never motivated by trying to resist commercial development. The restriction was the fear of unlimited daycare seeking applications within the Estates, churches. So there's a very narrow list of conditional uses that are allocated to the Estates. It's the master plan that says, oh, you can only seek a conditional use -- out of all those listed uses that are identified in the Estates zoning district, you can only seek them at these locations, and those locations are pretty limited. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And this location -- MR. BOSI: Is not one of them. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- necessitated in the GMP amendment. MR. BOSI: This is not a location that is designated by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BOSI: -- to be -- to allow a conditional use to seek approval. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Just so I'm clear, so to summarize, it's more about where the churches can be within the Estates as opposed to how many churches? MR. BOSI: Yeah. There was never -- there is no prohibition of churches. That's -- those statements are incorrect. There's no prohibition of churches in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. There is only a restriction upon where a conditional use can be sought within the Golden Gate area. COMMISSIONER VERNON: So right or wrong, it sounds like this was thought through? MR. BOSI: It was specifically contemplated when the plan was updated as to where they wanted to have these locations, and they are very -- they're very limited in their locations. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Commissioner Klucik. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 79 of 85 COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. So I would just say, then, I don't -- I guess, you know, a public policy decision was made that non-profit churches have to compete for a tiny little sliver of land in Golden Gate, you know, to purchase land that would -- where they wouldn't need a GMP amendment, and it would be a conditional use that they would kind of get as a matter of course. And I don't know as that's good public policy. I just -- how is that good public policy that groups, churches, whoever it is, nonprofits like this, that actually, you know, provide services that are needed in communities? And, you know, why would we set that up -- I mean, apparently we have, but as a public policy matter, I'm -- you know, we're voting on this legislatively, I think, so then my views on public policy matter, you know, because that's what -- our votes are all based on what we each think about the policy, at least in the GMP change, and that's -- that's why I think this is a really good thing to approve. Because the conditions that we've set, while they may have been -- you know, may have taken time and consulted with the community, communities don't -- you know, they think about what they've got and what they want and what they have now. They're not thinking about the growth -- they're thinking about the growth in terms of being frustrated or concerned or scared of what might happen with growth. And I don't think -- I think it's good to limit the commercial, but I think something like a church is just such an essential part of communities and residential areas that it just seems short-sighted, or maybe an oversight, or maybe misunderstood at the time, and we didn't see the consequences of doing that, and now we see it. And we see -- we saw fit -- certainly the county. I wasn't on the commission. But the county saw fit to approve a church recently, the one that we've been talking about that's not too far away, and I think this is a very similar situation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I think the residents aren't thinking about the change as much as they're thinking about what we promised them when they moved in there. We promised them residential, and that's the way the planning has gone on. And a question I'd have, Mike -- ask you, Mike, is I'm not sure of the different roles. They don't comply with the GMP because -- so why would you recommend approval other than they have the right to ask for conditional? MR. BOSI: They have the right to ask the Growth Management Plan. In this case, it would be the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. We had -- when this application originally came in, we reviewed it. We knew that the interior location was going to be problematic. Because of 8th Street and its formal classification as an arterial, sort of some of the conditions that helped approve the other church at the -- Everglades and Randall, that there could a reason there could be support. But when they had the size at 250, we thought we were -- really weren't -- we were trying to squeeze too much in. They weren't providing for the 75-foot buffer. The buffers were -- the buffers were more of an urban style and reduced. And the concessions they made -- and from the concessions they made, staff arrived upon a position that even though it's not two collector roads that it sits on, it is one collector road, and based upon that classification, based upon the reductions, we made a recommendation of approval. But I understand how difficult of an issue this is, because there's merits on both sides of the argument. And there's nothing that I can tell you that's going to be able to alleviate the difficultness [sic] of this type of a decision, because each side there's a counterargument for, and that's why what we do is so difficult. When you have impassioned pleas from an applicant, when you have impassioned pleas from existing neighbors and residents, it makes the decision extremely difficult. And I understand at some point in time the comments that come from the Planning Commission and sometimes even the Board of County Commissioners is, is there a box I could check that's going to make this decision for me? But when we -- when we're evaluating these type of questions, it's the scales of justice is the most appropriate kind of liked analogy. You weigh the 5.A.a Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 80 of 85 pros and cons of each side, and you try to arrive upon what you think are the factors that need to be identified as the highest priority. And I completely understand and have empathy. We struggled with this decision in terms of where our recommendation was going to be, and we ultimately arrived upon a recommendation of approval. But the considerations and the discussion from the Planning Commission, I think, what it does show the public is the extreme length and difficult nature of this decision-making and the tasks that the Planning Commission has to perform, and it's not easy. Some petitions are pretty straightforward. This is not a straightforward petition. It is difficult. COMMISSIONER SHEA: The other question I had, though, is Commissioner Klucik refers to another church, and I don't know all the details of those, so I don't subscribe that they're similar, because I believe these are case by case. You could probably have a different group of people that lived around this site right there that were all fine with it, you know, that all belonged to the church and said it's fine, and they'd come in holding hands saying we all support this. Our decision would be easier. So I think every decision we make is case by case on something like this. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Schmitt. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. On Page 17 -- correction, 7 of 13, my Page 1343, and I quote, the project falls under the idea of a special exemption to conditional use. That's in the GMP. And I read that as staff is looking at this as a special exemption. You basically recommended approval. MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. For the members of the church, just so you all know, we're all volunteers. We don't get paid for this. And that's why the Board of County Commissioners gets the big bucks, because this is going to go to them, and they make the big money. Regardless of how this goes, you've got a struggle because you've got to convince five commissioners, and the GMP requires -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: Four. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- four votes, four out of five for the GMP amendment. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So that's where we're at. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Vernon. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Yeah. I guess I just -- and I'm just talking so you guys can hear what I'm thinking. I just kind of feel like, if I really look at it, the box to be checked is denied. I kind of feel like if I kind of follow -- I don't want to say follow the law, but just follow -- but my opinion, the church would be great for the community. I just -- you know, I want -- you know, it's kind of like a heart-head thing. You know, I want to support them, but if I've got to check the box, I just feel like I have to check the box no. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Before I call on Commissioner Klucik, I think it would be appropriate at this point to entertain a motion to dismiss and a second, and we could continue having discussion. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah, that's what I was going to do, Mr. Chair. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead, then. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I'm going to move that we send it back to see if we can hammer out those conditions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: So your motion is that it be continued to a date certain? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Our next meeting or whenever the staff thinks they can get that done. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Wait a minute. You're sending back the -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Both of the items -- 5.A.a Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 81 of 85 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Both items. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: -- until we get the conditional uses looked at to see if we could come up with something that was acceptable. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is there a second? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: May I interject for a second? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Would you like to continue it four weeks so that it doesn't have to be readvertised? That should give staff sufficient time to consider -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yes. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- modifying the conditions. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: That would be -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: You said for a week? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: For four weeks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Four weeks. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Four weeks, would which be -- what date is that? MR. BOSI: October 21st. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. There's the motion. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER VERNON: You know, I second it. I just comment, I think, you know, if you want to come to the podium, I mean, if you guys don't want us to continue this -- if you want the vote now, I'd prefer to give you what you want on that point, but if you want the continuance, then I'm -- I would second the motion. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: You're going to lose the vote right now if we vote on this. MR. MARTIN: I'd like to have the support of those who are -- have some concerns about the conditions of approval, and I am very confident that we can get there, so I concur with the continuance. COMMISSIONER VERNON: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not -- no one is signaling. All those in favor of -- COMMISSIONER VERNON: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I think it passes 4-2. Did I do that right? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It sounds like it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Okay. So 4-2, it's continued to a date certain, and that's at our second October meeting. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And I would ask, the issue really here is to clear up the issues that were raised on special events, other religious activities and, of course, Heidi, it's going to take some -- we need some legal guidance because this gets into what -- what are our parameters and what can we prohibit. I just don't -- we talked about Good Friday. We talked about Easter Sunday sunrise service. Again, those are Christian faith. But if it were a Muslim faith or any other faith, I mean, it's -- you've got -- you've got these -- I don't know how government can restrict the number of weekly congregations other than define it on schedule, but then there's these other special events that I thought were special events, weddings, funerals, baptisms, those kind of things. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I'll work with the planner, Laura, and the church to see if we can work out some additional conditions that the church may offer to make the CCPC more 5.A.a Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 82 of 85 comfortable with the proposed project as well as the residents that are here in opposition. I do think that once you have a church in place, it will likely grow, and I don't know that there's much that we can do to stop that, but we'll see what we can do for compatibility. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. So that matter has been continued to a date certain, and we've gone another two hours, so we need to have a break for the court reporter, and then we'll return. We've got -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: May I ask one more question, just of Heidi? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Did I hear -- are you going to try and engage both parties? I mean, it may not be -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I'll be working with Laura, and Laura will work directly with the church. I don't know if she has any members of the opposition that she is in contact with. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, for me, it would be good if we tried to reach -- I mean, you may not come to an agreement with them because they're probably more scattered than a lot of the other groups we deal with, but I'd really love to see us try and put the two parties together. It may not work, but -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: I would only add that we've made a record, primarily Commissioner Schmitt and I, of the specific concerns we had on the conditions of approval. I'd ask that you address those. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: We will, and I think there's a few more we can address as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. All right. We will stand in recess for 11 minutes until -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman, if I could, I just wanted to recognize this young gentleman here. I just -- he's going to be a leader. He is a leader right now, and I just wanted to thank you for that and thank your parents for that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And thanks to all the young people here. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Talk to him about joining the Army. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. It's 2:30. We're in recess until 2:40. (A brief recess was had from 2:30 p.m. to 2:40 p.m.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's reconvene. We have just two short items, I believe, under new business, and then we'll be out of here. First of all, County Ordinance No. 2009-29, Section 1, as amended, provides that Planning Commission officers' term shall be, quote, for one year with eligibility for reelection, unquote. So we've customarily attended to this matter in our October meeting. And when I met with staff yesterday, we were scheduling it or -- intent upon scheduling it for October 7th. But then as it turns out, two planning commissioners will not be here, and the numbers would work out then that if -- incumbents could basically re-elect themselves, and the vote would be 3-2. And I don't -- I mean, I wouldn't feel comfortable with that. I'm -- personally, I'm willing to and, in fact, believe it or not, desirous of serving another term if it be the wish of the Planning Commission, but I want -- I want as many people here as possible to express what I hope will be a vote of confidence. So without objection, we will, then, have the annual officers' election on the 21st of October under new business. Is that okay with everybody? (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Will I be here? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. When I asked for attendance, everyone -- or no one signaled that they would not be here. Okay. All right. That's what we'll do. Then, secondly, we need to talk about LDC amendments. Mr. Bellows or Mr. Bosi. MR. BOSI: Yes, thanks, Chair. We were -- we're trying to find a night that could serve for the LDC amendments for a night hearing. We arrived upon, I think, the November 19th [sic] meeting as the meeting where the Commission was agreeable to that. I wanted to explore -- we had only one item on the 21st of 5.A.a Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 83 of 85 October, and it was an informational item. It's just staff describing the redistricting process that is currently ongoing to the Planning Commission. And my idea was, okay, well, that's -- if we have only a small -- one item, we wouldn't hold the Planning Commission meeting just for an informational piece. Maybe the 21st would work for the night we could have the night meeting because there are also LDC amendments that are associated with the night meeting and Growth Management Plan amendments that could be heard prior to it. With the inclusion of the -- of the church, I'm not sure if that's the best plan anymore. I think maybe sticking to the November 19th original date for our night meeting is probably wise, because trying to gauge when should we start related to the continuation of the church, I'm not sure if that gives us the freedom and flexibility that at one point in time -- with the assumption I came in today that we were going to get -- you know, that we were going to make a decision on that, that we were only going to have an informational piece, that's changed the discussion a bit. And so what I was going to suggest was to see if the Planning Commission members were agreeable to having a meeting where we started later, but because of an issue that is of high controversy, I think it probably best just to leave it as it is scheduled with the 19th of November being the night meeting. COMMISSIONER SHEA: It's the 18th. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's the 18th. 19th is a Friday. MR. BOSI: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So it would be the 18th, right? MR. BOSI: Yes, the 18th. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Do you think -- I don't think the church is going to take that much longer, do you? I mean -- well never mind. MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. MR. BOSI: Yes, I do. These same conflicts that we had, even when -- and I'm not -- I don't want to speak too much because that's outside of the public course of the -- I just think they're very -- it's a very difficult decision. There's pros and cons on each side that you've articulated, we've articulated. I just think it's still going to take a considerable amount of time and consideration. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: But aren't we limited? There's not going to be public comment, is there, or is there? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, public comment is closed, but we can always ask for the applicant -- we can ask for anybody to comment outside of -- even after we've closed it. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: But I'm just saying as far as the time -- how much time it will consume, we won't have to worry about that. We can limit it to exactly what you want as Chairman or we, you know, agree to as a -- MR. BOSI: I'm not sure how we could limit public comment if we are discussing additional changes and restrictions to conditions of approval. I think we would want the public to be able to weigh in on that. CHAIRMAN FRYER: In fact, we didn't structure this hearing by consent. So we probably -- we would be remiss in not letting the public speak. MR. BOSI: I would think when we opened that up, we're opening it back up at -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So we have the whole thing all over again? MR. BOSI: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, from my perspective, it doesn't matter to me whether we do it on October 21st or November 19 -- or 18, rather. What do other planning commissioners have to say? COMMISSIONER VERNON: As proposed is fine. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I can't do -- I can't do the 21st at night. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, you can't do the 21st. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 84 of 85 COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's the -- they have to be at night, right? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I can do the day. COMMISSIONER VERNON: My suggestion is to keep it the same, which would work for you. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yep. I'm fine with the way it's scheduled now. COMMISSIONER VERNON: Works for me. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. So it would be November 18. Does that work with everybody, then? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Then that's what we'll do. And I don't think we have anything further, but we'll go through the formalities. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So say that again. It's what day, the 18th? CHAIRMAN FRYER: 18th at 5:05 p.m. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And then when are we expecting our day meeting, normal meeting to start? MR. BOSI: Well, that's -- we'll look at the -- right now I don't -- I don't believe we've identified the number of petitions. I don't think that there's a tremendous number right now. So if there's only one or two, we will coordinate with the Chair and the Planning Commission in terms of what we think is appropriate, whether it be 1:00 or 2:00 or 3:00 based upon the number of petitions and the complexity associated with them. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Did we have a start time? Is it 5:00? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: 5:05. CHAIRMAN FRYER: 5:05. And staff will thread the needle for us so that we're not here unnecessarily based upon their best estimates, which must be held in abeyance until we know what matters are coming to us. All right. Is there any other new business to come before the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, is there any public comment on any matters that we haven't covered yet today? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I don't see any members of the public, so I take that as a no. And, therefore, without objection, we're adjourned. Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: One comment. Staff, thank you for guiding us through today. It was a difficult petition, and I hammered staff. So, thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I share your kudos to staff. Thank you, and thanks -- COMMISSIONER VERNON: Good job, Mr. Chairman, as well. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thanks to all planning commissioners. I think we had a very constructive meeting. Thank you. We're adjourned. ******* 5.A.a Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) September 16, 2021 Page 85 of 85 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:47 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION _____________________________________ EDWIN FRYER, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on __________, as presented _________ or as corrected _________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. 5.A.a Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: 09-16-21 CCPC Meeting MInutes Formatted (20313 : 9/16/2021 CCPC Meeting Minutes) 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.1 Item Summary: *** NOTE: This item was Continued from the October 7, 2021 CCPC Meeting *** PL20210001270 AUIR/CIE 2021 - A Resolution relating to the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, providing for the annual update to the schedule of capital improvement projects, within the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan based on the 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on public facilities (AUIR), and including updates to the 5-year schedule of capital projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element (for fiscal years 2022 – 2026) and the schedule of capital projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element for the future 5-year period (for fiscal years 2027 – 2031), providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. [Coordinator: Mike Bosi, Zoning Director] Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: Operations Analyst – Planning Commission Name: Diane Lynch 09/24/2021 3:42 PM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/24/2021 3:42 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Skipped 09/24/2021 3:37 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Diane Lynch Review Item Skipped 09/24/2021 3:37 PM Zoning Diane Lynch Zoning Director Review Skipped 09/24/2021 3:37 PM Growth Management Department Diane Lynch GMD Deputy Dept Head Skipped 09/24/2021 3:37 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 90 COUNTY JAIL & CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES CONTENTS • COUNTY JAIL & CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES − SUMMARY • TABLE • CHART • JAILS & CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES − EXISTING INVENTORY − LOCATION MAP • COUNTY JAIL POPULATION TRENDS Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR SUMMARY JAILS / CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES Facility Type: County Jail & Correctional Facilities (Category B) Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 2.79 beds per 1,000/population* Unit Cost: $93,084/floor space required/individual housed** Using the Countywide Peak Season population, the following is set forth: Units Value/Cost Available Inventory 9/30/21 1,304 $ 121,381,536 Required Inventory 9/30/26*** 1,447 $ 134,692,548 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 – FY 2025/26 0 $ 0 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) (143)**** $ (13,311,012) Expenditures Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 – FY 2025/26 Projects $ 0 Debt Service Payments on 2013 Bond $ 1,568,500 Debt Service Payments on 2010 & 2011 Bond $ 8,897,500 Total Expenditures $ 10,466,000 Revenues Impact Fees $ 8,277,700 Interest $ 40,000 Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $ 1,937,500 Loan from Countywide Capital Projects (Gen Fund) $ 210,800 Total Revenues $ 10,466,000 Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues for 5-year Capital Program $ 0 Revenues needed to maintain existing LOSS $ 0 Recommendation: That the BCC approve the proposed Jails / Correctional Facilities AUIR for FY 2021/22 – FY 2025/26 which contains no new projects over the five-year planning period. Notes: * The previous Level of Service Standard (LOSS) of 3.2 beds per 1,000/population was adjusted to the current 2.79 beds per 1,000/population by the BCC as part of their adoption of the 2009 AUIR. ** Unit cost value indexed per 2017 Impact Fee Update from previous value of $80,979 for the floor space required for each individual housed. *** The required inventory does not attempt to predict future possible increases or decreases in land, building and equipment costs. **** The Immokalee Jail Center (IJC) is a 192-bed adult detention center and booking facility. The IJC processes about 18% of all arrests in the County. The facility also processes, and registers convicted felons and sex offenders, maintains a video visitation link with Naples Jail Center, and conducts a Working Weekend Program. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Mental Health and Medical Facility- the Jail Master Plan Update completed in 2017 identified a deficit of appropriate housing for Medical/Mental Health inmates and projected a growth in the numbers of these inmates for the foreseeable near future. Additionally, the need to house and properly care for inmates who suffer from addiction has been identified as a need within the Naples Jail Center. At the current time, an old housing dorm has been repurposed as a Female Medical/Mental Health unit and does not comply with ADA standards, creating a need to house females who are disabled and infirmed in the Male Medical/Mental Health Unit which is also problematic. The Corrections Department is also in need of additional office space for the Community Corrections Programming. This includes the Pretrial Supervision Program which reduces the costs of housing for pretrial offenders who are assessed to not be a danger to the community. County staff recently engaged an outside firm, Stantec, to study options of either rebuilding current space, building new space, or a combination of both to relieve these problems. The updates to the Naples Jail Center for these purposes are needed now. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR Jail Facilities (Peak Season) LOSS: 2.79 Beds / 1,000 Population* SURPLUS OR POPULATION BEDS BEDS BEDS SURPLUS/ (DEFICIENCY) AT FISCAL CO-WIDE REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY) YEAR 0.00279 IN AUIR**93,084 2021-22 486,166 1,356 0 1,304 (52) ($4,877,928) 2022-23 494,918 1,381 0 1,304 (77) ($7,150,725) 2023-24 503,826 1,406 0 1,304 (102) ($9,464,322) 2024-25 511,731 1,428 0 1,304 (124) ($11,517,257) 2025-26 518,599 1,447 0 1,304 (143) ($13,300,892) 1st 5-Year Growth (2020-24) 32,433 90 0 2026-27 525,559 1,466 0 1,304 (162) ($15,108,465) 2027-28 532,613 1,486 64 1,368 (118) ($10,982,921) 2028-29 539,761 1,506 0 1,368 (138) ($12,839,496) 2029-30 546,296 1,524 0 1,368 (156) ($14,536,482) 2030-31 552,199 1,541 0 1,368 (173) ($16,103,532) 2nd 5-Year Growth (2024-28) 26,640 74 0 64 Total 10-Year Growth (2019-28) 59,073 165 0 64 (173) ($16,103,532) ** Due to budgetary constraints only the Immokalee Jail expansion is being proposed within the 10 year planning window. Inmate population will be analyzed on an annual basis to determine actual need prior to any expansion being programmed any earlier than year 7. * During the 2009 AUIR the BCC adjusted the current level of service standard from 3.2 beds per 1,000 population to 2.79 beds per 1,000 population. The motion passed 5 to 0. It should also be noted that not all available beds can be occupied at any given time, due to restrictions associated with the inability to house specific types of offenders within the general jail population. Please reference the Collier County Sheriff's Office, Jail Facilities "Average Daily Population" by Month, and by Year statistics sheet included herein. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1,255 1,305 1,355 1,405 1,455 1,505 450,000 460,000 470,000 480,000 490,000 500,000 510,000 520,000 530,000 540,000 550,000 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 BedsPopulation2021 AUIR Jail Facilities, LOSS: 2.79 Beds / 1,000 Population (Peak Season) Unit Cost: $93,084 Population & Beds Required Beds Available Immokalee Jail Bed Addition 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) / / SR 82 CR 833CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAMIAMI TRAIL OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858C R 8 6 9 CORKSCREW RD CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDESTERO BLVDSUMMERLIN RDGOLD EN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH RD BO NITA BEACH RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29 US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL G O L D E N G AT E P K W YAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD I-75 I-75 2 0 2 1 J A I L S - E X I S T I N G I N V E N T O R Y2021 J A I L S - E X I S T I N G I N V E N T O R Y NAPL ES MARCO ISLAND IMMOK ALEE EVERGLADES CITYGULFOFMEXICO§¨¦75 !(29 !(29 !(951 !(951 !(92 !(29 !(82 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LEE COUNTY HENDRYCOUNTY9 F l o r i d a G u l fFlorida G u l fCoast U n i v e r s i t yCoast U n i v e r s i t y Legend Major Roads A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t yand U n i v e r s i t y Existing Jail Naples Jail Immokalee Jail $+41 $+41 $+41 A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r i s t yand U n i v e r i s t y §¨¦75 §¨¦75 / Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) s Office - Page 2 of 3 JAIL POPULATION Average Daily Jail Population / Cost per Inmate 893 875 988 910 872 797 783 757 842 789 628 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Average Daily Jail Population, by Fiscal Year Month 2018 Change Day 2019 Change Day 2020 Change Day Oct 823 10.62% $146.48 858 4.25% $145.99 746 -13.05% $177.11 Nov 837 19.40% $144.03 808 -3.46% $155.03 709 -12.25% $186.35 Dec 840 23.71% $143.52 773 -7.98% $162.05 696 -9.96% $189.83 Jan 810 10.81% $148.83 803 -0.86% $155.99 701 -12.70% $188.48 Feb 823 8.72% $146.48 826 0.36% $151.65 697 -15.62% $189.56 Mar 829 9.80% $145.42 809 -2.41% $154.84 634 -21.63% $208.40 Apr 837 8.98% $144.03 791 -5.50% $158.36 538 -31.98% $245.58 May 865 10.47% $139.37 803 -7.17% $155.99 543 -32.38% $243.32 Jun 853 10.64% $141.33 760 -10.90% $164.82 556 -26.84% $237.63 Jul 859 8.87% $140.34 731 -14.90% $171.36 564 -22.85% $234.26 Aug 866 8.25% $139.21 742 -14.32% $168.82 562 -24.26% $235.10 Sep 861 7.22% $140.02 758 -11.96% $165.25 584 -22.96% $226.24 Avg 842 11.46%$143.19 789 -6.24%$158.86 628 -20.54%$210.56 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES CONTENTS • COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES − SUMMARY • TABLE • CHART • EXISTING AND LEASED LAW ENFORCEMENT BUILDINGS – MAP • COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE CALLS FOR SERVICE OVER LAST 5-YEAR PERIOD • COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE CRIMES AND CRIME RATES • COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES – MAP Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR SUMMARY LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITIES Facility Type: Law Enforcement (Category B) Current Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 1.84 Officers per 1,000/population1 Achieved Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 1.77 Officers per 1,000/population2 Proposed Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 0.9089 sq. ft. per capita3 Unit Cost: $362.00 per sq. ft.4 Using the Unincorporated Area Peak Season and the Everglades City populations, the following is set forth: Officers Available Sq. Ft. Value/Cost Available Inventory 9/30/21 662.5 296,651 $ 107,387,662 Required Inventory 9/30/26 ‒ 426,493 $ 154,390,466 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26 (+99,000 sq. ft.) 395,6515 $ 143,225,662 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) 30,842 $ (11,164,804) Expenditures Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 – FY 2025/26 Projects $ 35,838,000 Debt Service Payments for 2013 Bond $ 2,469,000 Debt Service Payments for 2010/2017 Bond $ 5,648,900 Debt Service Payments for 2011 Bond $ 1,777,200 Total Expenditures $ 45,733,100 Revenues Impact Fees anticipated $ 9,432,200 Voter Approved Infrastructure Sales Tax $ 33,000,000 Interest $ 50,000 Loans from Countywide Capital Projects (Gen Fund) $ 0 Available Cash for Future Projects/Payments of Debt Service $ 2,125,200 Total Revenues $ 44,607,400 Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues for 5-year Capital Program $ (1,125,700) Additional Revenues needed to achieve Proposed LOSS $ 1,125,700 Recommendation: That the BCC approves the proposed Law Enforcement AUIR for FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26. Footnotes: 1. The 2017 AUIR approved the Sheriff’s Office request to adopt a revised Level of Service Standard. 2. Achieved Impact Fee Level of Service will be reviewed as part of each Impact Fee Update Study and will reflect actual officer count. 3. Level of Service Standard reflects actual square footage available plus 5-year capital plan and move of the Evidence/Forensic Science Building into the 5-year capital plan. 4. Unit cost value is based upon cost estimate for the Orangetree permanent station. 5. These expansion/relocation projects reflect the Evidence/Forensic Science Building, in addition to that square footage above the square footage already inventoried in existing substations. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) CCSO comments: Forensic Science Building- This Facility is currently being designed as part of the Government Operations Business Park (GOBP). The $33 million dollar funding is from the surtax approved by the citizens of Collier County. CCSO elements planned for this facility are Crime Scene, Evidence, and Technical Services. The design has reached the 20% concept and the Construction Manager at Risk has been selected. Members of the BOCC and CCSO staff meet weekly to work toward the 60% design for this facility. Currently in design are a one-story concept to house those elements of the CCSO mentioned above, as well as a two-story concept to relocate Criminal Investigations, Victim Advocates, Patrol Administration, and Youth Relations. Should the additional funding become available, CCSO is in agreement with the BOCC staff that the two- story option is the best option as it will allow all elements of CCSO working at 2373 Horseshoe drive to relocate to a more secure and state of the art facility. Facility needs included in previous years AUIR submissions: District 1 Substation- As per the 2018, 2019, and 2020 AUIR submission, there is still an urgent need for a more centralized location for this substation within the Patrol District. In addition to crowded CCSO staff workspaces at this location, we continue to struggle with both inadequate parking and security issues at this site. CCSO has submitted the Property Evaluation forms to the BOCC Real Property staff in order to locate a suitable location for a new substation. The BOCC staff, CCSO, and North Collier Fire Department (NCFD) are in agreement that co-locating is in the best interest of both the CCSO and NCFD. We are ready and willing to continue the co- location discussions. District 5 Substation- As per our previous AUIR submissions, the D-5 substation has been relocated to a temporary leased spaced within this Patrol district in the Southeast Naples area. Finding a more suitable BOCC owned facility is still the goal. Property Evaluation Forms have been submitted to the BOCC Real Property staff. We have evaluated a property being offered to the BOCC, unfortunately the property was not suitable for mixed use Public Safety needs. At this time, we are still open to evaluating all opportunities to co-locate with other public safety entities. CCSO Training/Gun Range- Currently, the CCSO holds firearms training for its members at an outdoor range located in the Golden Gate Estates area. Firearms trainings occur daily, resulting in heavy traffic not only from the CCSO, but from other entities that train at our facility. In addition to the firearms training, many classes are held at the indoor training classrooms. We also hold outdoor obstacle and tactical training classes at this location. BOCC Facilities staff is currently working to make safety and substantial drainage improvements to accommodate CCSO’s short term needs at this facility. Due to the increased home construction taking place surrounding the current range, CCSO is requesting a training facility to be considered in the AUIR for our firearms and training needs. CCSO Facilities to begin discussions on: Fully functioning CCSO facilities to services the growth areas in the eastern portions of the Estates should be considered in the near (5-10 years) future. The facilities requirements in this area will not only include Law Enforcement functions, but also key Administrative functions necessary to support the mission of the CCSO. Based on the near term growth, a minimum of two (2) facilities will be required to support this short term need. Square footage needs, exact locations for each facility, and other specifics will need to be finalized as the growth occurs. As stated in previous sections CCSO is willing to co-locate with other Public Safety entities. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR Law Enforcement (Peak Season) 0.9089 sq. ft./capita POPULATION REQUIRED SQ. FT. SQ. FT. SURPLUS SURPLUS OR (DEFICIT) (UNINCORPORATED AREA + EVERGLADES CITY) SQUARE FOOTAGE PER CAPITA PLANNED AVAILABLE OR (DEFICIT) @ $362 IN AUIR 296,651 SQ. FT. PER SQ. FT.* 2021-22 438,632 398,673 0 296,651 (102,022) ($36,931,836) 2022-23 446,961 406,243 4,500 301,151 (105,092) ($38,043,162) 2023-24 455,447 413,955 4,500 305,651 (108,304) ($39,206,177) 2024-25 462,884 420,716 90,000 395,651 (25,065) ($9,073,386) 2025-26 469,241 426,493 0 395,651 (30,842) ($11,164,846) 1st 5-Year Growth (2021-25) 30,609 27,820 99,000 2026-27 475,690 432,354 0 395,651 (36,703) ($13,286,631) 2027-28 482,232 438,301 0 395,651 (42,650) ($15,439,149) 2028-29 488,869 444,333 0 395,651 (48,682) ($17,623,012) 2029-30 494,863 449,781 0 395,651 (54,130) ($19,595,174) 2030-31 500,197 454,629 0 395,651 (58,978) ($21,350,196) 2nd 5-Year Growth (2025-29) 30,956 28,136 0 Total 10-Year Growth (2020-29) 61,565 55,957 99,000 FISCAL YEARS 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Forensic Science Facility District 1 Substation District 5 Substation 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ ñ SR 82 CR 833CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAMIAMI TRAIL OIL WEL L R D LOOP RD.CR 858C R 8 6 9 CORKSCREW RD EVERGLADES BLVDESTERO BLVD SUMMERLIN RDGOLD EN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH RD BO NITA BEAC H RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29 US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL G O L D E N G AT E P K W YAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD 70th AVE. NE 2 0 2 1 L A W E N F O R C E M E N T B U I L D I N G S 2 0 2 1 L A W E N F O R C E M E N T B U I L D I N G S NAPL ES MARCO ISLAND IMMOK ALEE EVERGLADES CITYGULFOFMEXICO§¨¦75 !(29 !(29 !(951 !(92 !(29 !(82 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LEE COUNTY HENDRYCOUNTY9 F l o r i d a G u l fFlorida G u l fCoast U n i v e r s i t yCoast U n i v e r s i t y A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t yand U n i v e r s i t y Special Oper ationsNaples Airport Building J - CCSOHeadquarters GG Sheriff Substation Marco Sheriff Substation Im mokalee Substation Sheriff CID Building SO . Range Control Building N. Naples Substation §¨¦75 §¨¦75 $+41 $+41 $+41 ESC-E. Naples Substation Fleet Project - Phase IISheriff Fleet District 5 Substation Legend Major Roads ñ Leased Station Existing Station Facilities New GG Estates CCSO Substation Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division ñ 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Sheriff’s Office - Page 1 of 3 COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE - CALLS FOR SERVICE Calls for Service by Call Source Citizen-Generated Calls for Service Average Response Time (Min.) by District 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 D1 – North Naples 9.1 9.1 9.2 9.2 9.1 9.0 9.1 9.6 10.0 D2 – Golden Gate 8.7 9.7 9.9 9.7 10.1 9.3 9.7 9.6 9.4 D3 – East Naples 9.7 10.0 10.6 11.0 11.1 10.7 10.3 10.7 10.0 D4 – Estates 10.5 9.9 10.1 10.9 11.2 11.1 11.5 11.9 11.7 D5 - Everglades -- -- -- -- -- 8.2 8.9 9.2 9.6 D7 – Everglades 13.6 13.8 12.8 12.1 12.6 12.4 -- -- -- D8 – Immokalee 5.9 5.8 6.3 6.5 6.5 6.9 7.0 7.9 7.9 Response times represent average time in minutes from dispatch-to-arrival for citizen-generated calls for service (RT>60 removed). Districts 3 and 7 boundaries changed and created District 5 in November 2017; District 7 no longer exists. 9.0 9.3 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.5 9.5 9.9 9.8 1.0 3.0 5.0 7.0 9.0 11.0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Citizen-Generated Calls -Average Response Time Year Citizen Agency Total 2010 127,599 352,656 480,255 2011 133,315 305,869 439,184 2012 135,696 287,801 423,497 2013 137,447 283,799 421,246 2014 148,283 265,792 414,075 2015 152,894 262,546 415,440 2016 161,047 248,670 409,717 2017 174,080 246,099 420,179 2018 170,261 243,849 414,110 2019 172,232 269,578 441,810 2020 170,415 330,105 500,520 127,599133,315135,696137,447148,283152,894161,047174,080170,261172,232170,415352,656305,869287,801283,799265,792262,546248,670246,099243,849269,578330,1050 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Calls for Service, by Call Source Citizen-Generated Agency-Generated 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Sheriff’s Office - Page 3 of 3 COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE – CRIME RATE Crime rate is calculated per 100,000 residents and includes Part I UCR-reported crimes to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. 3028253723802207212921182014199821381875175717511658157415081413140312190 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Collier County Sheriff's Office Crime Rate per 100,000 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY LIBRARY BUILDINGS AND MATERIALS/ COLLECTIONS CONTENTS • COUNTY LIBRARY BUILDINGS − SUMMARY • TABLE • CHART • COUNTY LIBRARY MATERIALS/COLLECTIONS − SUMMARY • TABLE • CHART • LIBRARY BUILDING INVENTORY − LOCATION MAP • LIBRARY BUILDING AND COLLECTION INVENTORY • LIBRARY BUILDING USE OVER LAST 5 YEAR PERIOD • LIBRARY COLLECTION CIRCULATION OVER LAST 5 YEAR PERIOD Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR SUMMARY LIBRARY BUILDING FACILITIES Facility Type: Library Buildings (Category B) Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 0.33 sq.ft./capita Unit Cost: $263.41 per sq.ft. Using the Countywide Peak Season population, the following is set forth: Square Feet Value/Cost Available Inventory as of 9/30/21 174,082 * $ 45,854,939 Required Inventory as of 9/30/26 171,138 $ 45,079,460 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26 0 $ 0 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) 2,944 $ 775,479 Expenditures Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 ─ FY 2025/26 $ 0 2010/2017 & 2010B Bonds Debt Service Payments $ 3,522,800 Total Expenditures $ 3,522,800 Revenues Impact Fees $ 4,966,800 Interest/Misc. Income $ 20,000 Carry Forward (unspent cash as of 9/30/2021) $ 787,100 Loan from Countywide Capital Projects (General Fund) to assist with debt service payments $ 0 Total Revenues $ 5,773,900 Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues $ 2,251,100 Revenues needed to maintain existing LOSS none Recommendation: That the CCPC forward a recommendation of approval to the BCC for the proposed “Library Buildings AUIR for FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26”. Footnotes: * Total available square footage was reduced by 7,000 sq. ft. in the 2019 AUIR to reflect the re-purposing of the old Golden Gate Library building for use by Collier Senior Resources . 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Library Division Comments: Regional and Branch Facility Use – The Collier County Public Library (CCPL) Community Assessment completed in 2017 identified internet access and access to study/reading rooms key components of patrons’ utility infrastructure, or necessary function for education, employment, families, etc. Further as part of the assessment, library patrons stated regional and branch libraries should designed as “hub libraries” to reflect specific areas of concentration, expertise, and programming based on community need. Study rooms, reading rooms, and/or designated quiet areas should be a goal at all locations. The Library Division will be initiating a master plan study in FY 2022 to synthesize the recommendations from the 2017 Community Assessment, projected long range growth of Collier County, and on-going surveys of patron needs. Required Level of Service Standard (LOSS) – The 2021 AUIR identifies a square footage deficiency beginning in FY 2028. CCPL has partnered with Collier Senior Resources to submit a CDBG-MIT grant to remodel/expand the old Golden Gate Library including approximately 1,900 sq. ft. of meeting room space for the Library partially addressing the identified deficiency. CCPL is in possession of approximately 2.72 acres in the Fiddler’s Creek Development that is restricted for Library use. The future master plan study will also identify other areas in need of library space which will provide CCPL direction in addressing this future deficiency. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) POPULATION SQ FT SQ FT SQ FT SURPLUS/VALUE OR FISCAL CO-WIDE REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY)(COST) AT YEAR 0.33 IN AUIR $263.41 2021-22 486,166 160,435 0 174,082 13,647 $3,594,809 2022-23 494,918 163,323 0 174,082 10,759 $2,834,055 2023-24 503,826 166,263 0 174,082 7,819 $2,059,708 2024-25 511,731 168,871 0 174,082 5,211 $1,372,577 2025-26 518,599 171,138 0 174,082 2,944 $775,558 1st 5-Year Growth (2022-2026)32,433 10,703 2026-27 525,559 173,435 0 174,082 648 $170,558 2027-28 532,613 175,762 0 174,082 (1,680)($442,608) 2028-28 539,761 178,121 0 174,082 (4,039)($1,063,939) 2029-30 546,296 180,278 0 174,082 (6,196)($1,632,009) 2030-2031 552,199 182,226 0 174,082 (8,144)($2,145,132) 2nd 5-Year Growth (2027-2031)26,640 8,791 Total 10-Year Growth (2022-2031)59,073 19,494 2021 AUIR Library Buildings LOSS: .33 sq ft per capita 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 115,500 125,500 135,500 145,500 155,500 165,500 175,500 185,500 195,500 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-28 2029-30 2030-2031 Square FeetPopulation2021 AUIR Library Building LOSS: 0.33 SQ. FT. / Capita (Peak Season) Unit Cost: $263.41 per sq.ft. Population & SQ. FT. Required Square Feet Available 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR SUMMARY LIBRARY COLLECTIONS Facility Type: Library Materials/Collections (Category B) Current Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 1.87 items/capita1 Achieved Level of Service Standard (LOSS): 1.43 items/capita2 Unit Cost: $25.84 per volume3 Using the Countywide Peak Season population, the following is set forth: Items Value/Cost Available Inventory as of 9/30/214 680,586 $17,586,342 Required Inventory as of 9/30/26 969,780 $25,059,115 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26 289,194 $ 7,472,773 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) 0 $ 0 Expenditures Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26 $ 7,472,773 Total Expenditures $ 7,472,773 Revenues Impact Fees allocated to new materials5 $ 0 Grants and Donations6 $ 7,472,773 Total Revenues $ 7,472,773 Additional Revenues needed to maintain existing LOSS none Recommendation: That the CCPC forward a recommendation of approval to the BCC for the proposed “Library Collections AUIR for FY 2021/22 − FY 2025/26”. Footnotes: 1. Existing Level of Service Standard as adopted in the 2007 AUIR. The 2006 AUIR LOSS of 1.75 books/capita was increased with the adoption of a recognized LOSS for items in all formats, not just physical books. 2. Achieved Level of Service Standard reflects actual collection item inventory per capita. 3. Unit cost is based on an average cost of an item across all formats and is established as part of each Impact Fee Update Study. 4. Available inventory includes items in progress of being purchased. 5. All Impact Fee Revenue is used to pay down Library Debt Service on the construction of Headquarters, South Regional, and Golden Gate Libraries. 6. Due to the Library’s payment on Debt Services, new materials must be funded through other sources of revenue. Currently the Library allocates private donations, annual State Aid to Libraries Grant funds, and General Fund monies to acquire new materials. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Library Division Comments: Library Inventory Count - increased by 61,654 items, or 9.9%, during FY 2021. The 9.9% increase is a combination of growth and replacement books as a result of dedicating State Aid to Libraries Grant funds for an increased procurement of eBooks and a partial use of a substantial donation from the Shreve Trust to subsize 301 Capital Funds for print materials. However, these non-recurring funding sources are not sustainable and does not allow the Library Division to build, or increase, the collection to meet the AUIR LOSS of 1.87 items per capita. The Library Division can only maintain an actual LOSS of 1.43 items per capita with current funding restraints. The Library Division would have to spend approximately $7.5 million over the next five (5) years to acquire an additional 289,194 titles to meet the established AUIR LOSS of 1.87 items per capita. Current Library funding levels are insufficient for the Library Division to meet the AUIR LOSS of 1.87 items per capita and insufficient to cover the total annual cost of growth and replacement of materials by FY 2026 due to the fact all Library Impact Fee Revenue is diverted to pay debt services on the prior building of Headquarters, South Regional, and Golden Gate Libraries. An overall LOSS analysis was put on hold due to the pandemic and still needs to be completed as part of the next Library Impact Fee Update Study projected to occur in FY 2022 with possible recommendations to adjust the Library’s LOSS for materials/collections. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FISCAL POPULATION COLLECTION NEW ITEMS COLLECTION SURPLUS/ VALUE OR YEAR CO-WIDE REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY) (COST) AT 1.87 IN AUIR $25.84 Current 477,569 893,054 680,586 (212,468)($5,490,174) 2021-22 486,166 909,130 57,800 738,386 (170,744)($4,412,036) 2022-23 494,918 925,497 57,800 796,186 (129,311)($3,341,387) 2023-24 503,826 942,155 57,800 853,986 (88,169)($2,278,277) 2024-25 511,731 956,937 57,800 911,786 (45,151)($1,166,701) 2025-26 518,599 969,780 57,994 969,780 (0)($0) 1st 5-Year Growth (2022-2026)32,433 60,650 289,194 2026-27 525,559 982,795 13,015 982,795 0 $0 2027-28 532,613 995,986 13,191 995,986 0 $0 2028-29 539,761 1,009,353 13,367 1,009,353 0 $0 2029-30 546,296 1,021,574 12,220 1,021,574 0 $0 2030-31 552,199 1,032,612 11,039 1,032,612 0 $0 2nd 5-Year Growth (2027-2031)26,640 49,817 62,832 Total 10-Year Growth (2022-2031)59,073 110,467 352,026 2021 AUIR Library Collections LOSS: 1.87 Items per Capita 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 650,000 700,000 750,000 800,000 850,000 900,000 950,000 1,000,000 1,050,000 323,500 349,500 375,500 401,500 427,500 453,500 479,500 505,500 531,500 557,500 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 CollectionsPopulation2021 AUIR Library Collections LOSS: 1.87 Items / Capita (Peak Season) Unit Cost: $25.84 per item Population & Collections Required Collections Available 289,194 items to reach LOSS of 1.87 items/capita at a cost of $7.5 million 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Æc Estates Library Golden Gate Library South Regional LibraryEast Naples Library Naples Library SR 82 CR 833CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAMIAMI TRAIL OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858C R 8 6 9 CORKSCREW RD SR 951CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDESTERO BLVDSUMMERLIN RDGOLD EN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH RD BO NITA BEACH RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29 US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL AIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD 2 0 2 1 L I B R A R Y B U I L D I N G I N V E N T O R Y2021 L I B R A R Y B U I L D I N G I N V E N T O R Y NAPL ES MARCO ISLAND IMMOK ALEE EVERGLADES CITYGULFOFMEXICO§¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 !(29 !(29 !(951 !(951 !(92 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LEE COUNTY HENDRYCOUNTY9 F l o r i d a G u l fFlorida G u l fCoast U n i v e r s i t yCoast U n i v e r s i t y A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r i s t yand U n i v e r i s t y Headquarters Library Vanderbilt Beach Library Marco Island Library Everglades City Library Immokalee Library $+41 $+41 $+41 Legend Existing Library Major Roads Æc Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Commissioner District Library Address Type Square Footage 1 South Regional 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy Regional 30,000 1 Marco Island 210 S Heathwood Drive Branch 15,600 1 East Naples 8787 Tamiami Trail E Branch 6,600 2 Headquarters 2385 Orange Blossom Drive Regional 42,000 2 Vanderbilt Beach 788 Vanderbilt Beach Road Branch 7,000 3 Golden Gate 2432 Lucerne Road Branch 17,000 4 Naples Regional 650 Central Avenue Regional 35,800 5 Immokalee 417 N 1st Street Branch 8,000 5 Estates 1266 Golden Gate Blvd W Branch 11,182 5 Everglades City*102 Copeland Avenue N Branch 900 174,082 Collection Location Inventory System-wide**589,879 72,317 18,390 680,586 TOTAL Library Facility Sq. Ft. 2021 LIBRARY BUILDING INVENTORY * Everglades City Branch Library is housed within the Everglades City Courthouse. 2021 LIBRARY MATERIALS INVENTORY Type of Material Physical Materials (Books, DVDs, CDs, etc. ) eBooks / eAudio Streaming TOTAL Library Materials (all formats) ** Library Materials move throughout the system and can be returned to any library where they will reside until requested and/or checked-out. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY – FACILITY USAGE Foot Traffic, or door counts, record all patrons entering a Library facility. Additional metrics are gathered to show what Library services and resources patrons are using while inside the facility. The data gathered is then used to ensure the Library Division is meeting the 2018 -2022 Collier County Public Library Strategic Plan goals and objectives, the recommendations from the 2017 Community Assessment, and making optimum use of the AUIR LOSS of .33 sq. ft./capita. 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Regional 153,621 138,160 138,015 143,884 100,248 Marco Island 140,620 129,719 135,135 119,414 73,781 East Naples 82,385 76,115 68,466 70,132 36,320 Headquarters 385,059 341,683 301,132 321,634 208,552 Vanderbilt Beach 86,994 95,006 102,079 97,233 55,010 Golden Gate 181,701 159,837 121,174 105,517 61,347 Naples Regional 225,169 214,559 219,128 196,413 132,396 Immokalee 84,127 80,941 54,535 53,956 36,466 Estates 49,676 49,032 52,305 62,538 32,644 Everglades City*- - - - 3,336 TOTALS 1,389,352 1,285,052 1,191,969 1,170,721 740,100 Foot Traffic by Library * The Library Division is now able to capture foot traffic for library services at the Everglades City Branch. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) The gradual decline in Library foot traffic is slowing and is a result of the shift in how patrons access reading materials. Between 2018 and 2019, foot traffic decreased by 1.8%, yet circulation increased 8.9%. The increase in circulation is attributed to a 31.8% increase in eBook usage during the same time period. 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Regional 37,093 38,107 35,215 40,019 24,213 Marco Island 17,106 18,780 15,894 14,090 8,136 East Naples 15,929 13,526 11,762 12,082 5,508 Headquarters 85,604 85,638 69,443 80,389 47,284 Vanderbilt Beach 10,345 9,278 8,690 10,188 5,109 Golden Gate 26,966 25,289 24,216 28,834 15,780 Naples Regional 50,952 47,770 45,246 39,549 23,180 Immokalee 15,141 13,879 17,727 28,098 11,915 Estates 11,468 9,878 16,226 18,863 8,300 Everglades City**0 1,187 780 1,345 1,498 TOTALS 270,604 263,332 245,199 273,457 150,923 Technology Usage* in Buildings by Library * Technology Usage includes WiFi access, Internet computer usage, and printing. **FY 2017 was the first year technology advancements allowed the Division to capture usage at the Everglades City Branch. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) The Library Division also generates a small amount of revenue through the rental of meeting room space to for-profit and non-profit entities. 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Regional 23,808 20,654 24,196 21,317 10,186 Marco Island 3,588 4,538 2,276 3,200 2,868 East Naples 1,464 2,541 1,296 1,053 748 Headquarters 19,462 20,309 17,248 21,655 13,469 Vanderbilt Beach 2,438 4,634 3,982 8,109 3,325 Golden Gate 4,366 5,929 4,563 9,622 4,803 Naples Regional 12,200 9,741 10,212 13,323 13,074 Immokalee 3,262 6,567 5,342 15,227 5,844 Estates 4,665 7,326 6,874 8,334 3,694 TOTALS 75,253 82,239 75,989 101,840 58,011 > Program Attendance is the combined total of adult, young adult, and children's in- person programming. In-Person Program Attendance by Library > In-person programming is not possible due to the limited square footage at the Everlgades City Branch. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Regional 9,109 4,017 9,938 12,063 7,371 Marco Island 7,051 1,053 3,238 7,034 2,231 East Naples 3,321 2,238 806 1,503 797 Headquarters 2,138 844 1,909 2,246 1,028 Vanderbilt Beach 65 156 - - - Golden Gate 532 2,994 2,878 3,144 1,066 Naples Regional 3,809 4,764 5,859 4,294 2,618 Immokalee 876 989 1,443 1,355 1,500 Estates 1,030 758 1,163 1,132 715 TOTALS 27,931 17,813 27,234 32,771 17,326 Revenue 28,439$ 24,651$ 32,635$ 28,993$ 13,970$ Use through the rental of Library space by for-profit and non-profit entities, and free use of study rooms by the public. Meeting/Study Room Usage by Library 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY – MATERIAL CIRCULATION 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 South Regional 210,648 166,360 150,988 159,389 130,763 Marco Island 158,138 118,749 115,964 124,573 84,624 East Naples 102,634 82,002 72,968 77,684 38,580 Headquarters*683,788 822,227 833,592 815,419 611,664 Vanderbilt Beach 147,391 112,089 118,191 112,976 64,221 Golden Gate 152,637 122,566 112,931 114,331 67,564 Naples Regional 314,526 193,609 197,417 202,241 129,969 Immokalee 56,810 53,954 47,990 59,022 29,236 Estates 114,232 85,757 78,194 92,130 47,370 Everglades City 12,199 10,005 5,603 8,641 5,928 Jail (Naples & Immokalee)17,289 14,556 9,967 13,044 11,286 Electronic Materials 383,588 402,604 519,121 684,234 411,066 TOTALS 2,353,880 2,184,478 2,262,926 2,463,684 1,632,271 Circulation of Materials by Library (including eBooks, Mail-A-Book, and Jails) * Headquarters circulation includes all renewals, interlibrary loans, and Mail-A-Book. > FY 2020 All Libraries were closed to the public for 6 weeks (3/18 - 5/25, 2020) as part of the Library's Pandemic Response Plan. Libraries saw a phased reopening with reduced service hours for the remainder of the fiscal year. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES CONTENTS • COUNTY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) − SUMMARY • TABLE • CHART • EMS STATIONS − EXISTING, LEASED & PROPOSED INVENTORY − MAP • EMS STATIONS INVENTORY − TABLE • COLLIER EMS COST PER OWNED AND SHARED STATION TABLES, INCLUDING EQUIPMENT REPLACE- MENT COSTS • ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT (ALS) AGREEMENT & ZONES− MAP • EMS TRAVEL TIMES − CHARTS Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR SUMMARY EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FACILITIES Facility Type: Emergency Medical Services (Category B) Level of Service Standard (LOSS): Approximately 1 unit (vehicle, equipment, station space) per 16,400/population, or 0.000061/capita. (1) The Advanced Life Support (ALS) response time goal is 8 minutes travel time 90% of the time (urban) and 12 minutes travel time 90% of the time (rural). Unit Cost (Blended): The blended cost is based on owned and co-located units at a rate of two- thirds owned ($2,134,038 per station, vehicle & equipment), and one-third co-located ($625,352 per new co-located station, vehicle & equipment). (2) Using the Countywide Peak Season population, the following is set forth: Units Value/Cost Available Inventory 26.5 $ 43,753,011 (3) Required 9/30/2026 31.2 $ 53,410,876 Proposed AUIR FY 2022 - FY 2026 3.0 $ 7,206,470 (4) 5-Year Surplus or (Deficit) (2.1) $ (5,794,719) Expenditures Debt Service Payments for 2011 Bond $ 734,100 Debt Service Payments for 2013 Bond $ 1,019,800 Debt Service Payments for 2017 Bond $ 765,100 Proposed AUIR FY 2021 to FY 2026 $ 7,206,470 Total Expenditures $ 9,725,470 Revenues Impact Fees $ 2,328,000 Interest $ 41,000 Voter Approved Infrastructure Sales Tax $ 6,000,000 Available Cash $ 1,263,800 Total Revenues $ 9,632,800 Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues $ (92,670) Additional Revenues Required or LOSS Reduction $ 92,670 (5) Recommendation: That the CCPC forward a recommendation of approval to the BCC for the proposed “Emergency Medical Services AUIR for FY 2022 − FY 2026 capital improvement projects. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes: (1) The LOSS was changed from 1/15,000 population to 1/16,400 population along with the ALS response time goal of 8 minutes travel time countywide to 8 minutes travel time 90% of the time urban and 12 minutes travel time 90% of the time rural. These changes were approved by the BCC on 11/5/07 at the 2007 AUIR. The FY 20/2021 response time data reflected that this goal was accomplished 90% of the time urban and 90% of the time rural. A LOSS of .000029 units per capita or 1 unit/34,652 population is the Impact Fee Study level of service and the basis for the collection of impact fees, which is based on only the EMS stations owned by the County. (2) Emergency Medical Services Department Unit Values (1.0) Unit = 24-hour advance life support emergency ground transport apparatus with station/building. (0.5) Unit = 12-hour advanced life support emergency ground transport apparatus using existing ambulance, staffed with overtime personnel. (3) Calculated based 9 owned stations, 4 co-located stations and on 13.5 units equipment only. (4) Desoto Blvd. station assumes blended cost of $2,187,690 (excluding ambulance which was purchased in 2014 for EMS expansion and land which was donated by the Collier Land Trust), Immokalee/CR 951 and Old 41 stations assume blended cost less land at $2,509,390. (5) Sources of funding for revenue deficit includes Surtax funds and could also include a loan from the General Fund, additional user fee categories, reduction of service level, or other sources not yet identified. ALS Engine agreements and programs were instituted in 2013 in East Naples, in 2014 in the City of Naples and Golden Gate. There are numerous circumstances which may affect response times. For example: • Call location • Travel times to and from rural/remote locations • On-scene times • Call volume • Concurrent calls • Treatment times • Hospital “off load” times • Road construction • Traffic • Weather • Restocking supplies 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 ( Peak Season) EMS UNITS LOSS: 1 Unit / 16,400 Population (0.000061) LOSS of 1 Unit/16,400 Population reflects an 8 minute response time for Urban and 12 minute for Rural and factors in ALS Engine response. EMS UNITS EMS UNITS VALUE OR (COST) FISCAL POPULATION REQUIRED PLANNED EMS UNITS SURPLUS/SURPLUS(DEFICIENCY)* YEAR CO-WIDE 0.000061 AUIR AVAILABLE (DEFICIENCY)$2,759,390 2021 477,569 29.1 0 26.5 (2.6)($7,174,414) 2022 486,166 29.7 1 27.5 (2.2)($6,070,658) 2023 494,918 30.2 0 27.5 (2.7)($7,450,353) 2024 503,826 30.7 1 28.5 (2.2)($6,070,658) 2025 511,731 31.2 0 28.5 (2.7)($7,450,353) 2026 518,599 31.6 1 29.5 (2.1)($5,794,719) 1st 5-Year Growth (2021-2026)41,030 2.5 3 29.5 2027 525,559 32.1 0 29.5 (2.6)($7,174,414) 2028 532,613 32.5 1 30.5 (2.0)($5,518,780) 2029 539,761 32.9 0 30.5 (2.4)($6,622,536) 2030 546,296 33.3 0 30.5 (2.8)($7,726,292) 2031 552,199 33.7 1 31.5 (2.2)($6,070,658) 2nd 5-Year Growth (2027-2031)26,640 2.1 2 31.5 Total 10-Year Growth (2021-2031)74,630 4.6 5 31.5 * It has not yet been determined which future units will be owned and which will be co-located. Therefore, for purposes of this chart, the values above represent a blended cost of owned and co-located units at a rate of two-thirds owned (2,134,038) and one-third co-located (625,352), which equals $2,759,390 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 19.5 21.5 23.5 25.5 27.5 29.5 31.5 33.5 35.5 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 UnitsPopulation 2021-2022 AUIR Emergency Medical Services (Peak Season) LOSS: 0.000061 Units / Capita Population & Units Required Units Available Immokalee and Collier Locations = Units Added Old 41 Proposed timing of new units based on Peak Population and do not necessarily reflect existing response time deficiencies. A crew and ambulance are in a temporary facility currently being provided by the developer for Ave Maria. Construction of a new facility is underway. The ambulance for the station on Desoto Blvd is already in place in the system. The station still needs to be constructed. Fiddler's CreekDesoto Blvd TBD 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) $K 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s $1 $1 $1 89:s 89:s 89:s 89:s DESOTO BLVDSR 82 CR 833CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAMIAMI TRAIL OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858C R 8 6 9 CORKSCREW RD CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDESTERO BLVDSUMMERLIN RDGOLD EN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH RD BO NITA BEAC H RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29 US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL G O L D E N G AT E P K W YAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD 2 0 2 1 E M S S T A T I O N S - E X I S T I N G , L E A S E D , P L A N N E D 2 0 2 1 E M S S T A T I O N S - E X I S T I N G , L E A S E D , P L A N N E D A N D P R O P O S E D I N V E N T O R YAND P R O P O S E D I N V E N T O R Y MARCO ISLAND IMMOK ALEE EVERGLADES CITYGULFOFMEXICO§¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 £¤41 !(29 !(29!(951 !(951 !(92 !(29 !(82 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles LEE COUNTY HENDRYCOUNTY9 F l o r i d a G u l fFlorida G u l fCoast U n i v e r s i t yCoast U n i v e r s i t y A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t yand U n i v e r s i t y MEDIC 31 MEDIC 44 MEDIC 42 MEDIC 10 MEDIC 71 MEDIC 70 MEDIC 75 MEDIC 46 MEDIC 40 MEDIC 2 MEDIC 24 MEDIC 1 HOC MEDFLIGHTSTATION 3 MEDIC 22 MEDIC 21 & MEDIC 81 MEDIC 23 MEDIC RES 90 MEDIC RES 50 MEDIC RESCUE 60 MEDIC 30 $+41 $+41 MEDIC 49 MEDIC 32 GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPT. Legend 89:s EM S Owned Stations Major Roads 89:s EM S Leased Stations DESOTO BLVD STATION EM S Proposed Stations$1 MEDIC 76 MEDIC 411 HACIENDA LAKES STATION MEDIC 25 MEDIC 20 MEDIC 43 FIDDLERS CREEK STATION MEDIC 48 NAPL ES Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) NAME STATION NO.ADDRESS TYPE MEDIC 1 1 801 8th Ave South, Naples 34102 Leased EMS MEDIC 2 2 977 26th Ave North, Naples 34103 Leased EMS HOC Medflight 3 2375 Tower Drive, Naples 34104 Owned EMS MEDIC 10 10 14756 Immokalee Rd, Naples 34120 Owned EMS MEDIC 20 20 4798 Davis Blvd, Naples 34104 Leased*EMS MEDIC 21 21 11121 Tamiami Trail East, Naples 34113 Owned EMS MEDIC 22 22 4375 Bayshore Dr, Naples 34112 Owned EMS MEDIC 23 23 6055 Collier Blvd, Naples 34114 Leased *EMS MEDIC 24 24 2795 Airport Road North, Naples 34105 Owned EMS MEDIC 25 25 3675 The Lords Way, Naples 34113 Owned EMS MEDIC 30 30 112 South 1st St., Immokalee 34142 Owned EMS MEDIC 31 31 11067 Carson Road, Immokalee 34142 Leased*EMS MEDIC 32 (Temporary Facility)32 4819 Ave Maria Blvd, Ave Maria 34142 Leased *EMS MEDIC 40 40 1441 Pine Ridge Rd, Naples 34109 Leased *EMS MEDIC 42 42 7010 Immokalee Rd, Naples 34119 Owned EMS MEDIC 43 43 16325 Vanderbilt Dr, Naples 34134 Leased *EMS MEDIC 44 44 766 Vanderbilt Beach Rd, Naples 34108 Owned EMS MEDIC 46 46 3410 Pine Ridge Rd, Naples 34105 Leased EMS MEDIC 48 48 16280 Livingston Rd, Naples 34110 Leased *EMS MEDIC 50 50 1280 San Marco Rd, Marco Island 34145 Leased *EMS MEDIC RESCUE 60 60 201 Buckner Ave, Everglades City 34139 Leased *EMS MEDIC 70 70 4741 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples 34116 Owned EMS MEDIC 71 71 95 13th St SW, Naples 34117 Owned EMS MEDIC 75 75 4590 Santa Barbara Blvd Naples 34104 Owned EMS MEDIC 76 76 790 Logan Blvd N Naples 34119 Owned EMS MEDIC 81 81 11121 Tamiami Trail East, Naples 34113 Owned EMS MEDIC 90 90 175 Isle of Capri Blvd, Naples 34113 Leased *EMS PROPOSED THRU FY22-23 STATION NO.ADDRESS TYPE MEDIC TBD TBD DeSoto Blvd.EMS MEDIC 49 49 Immokalee Road/CR951 - Heritage Bay EMS OLD 41 411 Old 41 and Performance Way EMS PROPOSED THRU FY 20-24 STATION NO.ADDRESS TYPE MEDIC TBD TBD Fiddlers Creek EMS MEDIC TBD TBD TBD EMS * For these stations, no rent is paid but rather a shared monthly utility charge. Source: EMS 2021 EXISTING EMS STATIONS 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Description Cost Percent of Total Building Replacement Cost per Station * $2,400,000 75% Land Replacement Cost per Station **$250,000 8% Equipment & Vehicle Replacement Cost per Unit ***$551,057 17% Total Cost per Station $3,201,057 100% Description Cost Percent of Total Building Replacement Cost per Station *$1,200,000 64% Land Replacement Cost per Station **$125,000 7% Equipment & Vehicle Replacement Cost per Unit ***$551,057 29% Total Cost per Station $1,876,057 100% * Source: Facilities Management ** Source: Impact Fee Study *** Source: EMS Collier County EMS Cost Per Owned Station Collier County EMS Cost Per Shared Station 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) BCIFD IMM Fire Ochopee Fire MIFD ICFD NNFD ENFD GGFD City of Naples ALS 24 Hour ParticipationPendingNone 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) All ALS Resources (GPS)Travel Time- Time Enroute to Time Arrive on Scene Zone Under 4 Under 5 Under 6 Under 7 Under 8 Under 9 Under 10 Under 11 Under 12 Over 12 1 47 70 81 88 93 95 97 97 98 2 2 34 55 73 84 91 94 96 98 98 2 20 26 49 69 81 89 94 96 97 98 2 21 37 53 69 82 90 94 96 96 97 3 22 27 54 78 91 96 98 99 99 99 1 23 24 42 63 76 88 93 96 98 98 2 24 19 41 65 83 91 94 98 99 99 1 25 11 29 52 71 84 91 95 96 97 3 40 26 47 67 83 93 97 98 99 99 1 42 25 40 59 76 86 92 94 96 97 3 43 13 28 52 73 86 94 97 98 99 1 44 28 46 68 84 93 98 99 99 100 0 45 36 52 69 84 93 97 98 99 99 1 46 43 61 77 89 95 98 99 99 99 1 48 15 29 52 71 85 91 95 97 99 1 50 45 64 78 87 92 94 96 97 98 2 70 23 41 62 78 87 92 96 97 98 2 73 14 32 56 72 82 88 93 96 97 3 75 18 37 57 73 84 92 95 96 97 3 76 18 37 57 75 86 92 95 96 98 2 90 38 47 62 74 82 93 97 99 99 1 10 12 22 33 44 56 66 76 86 91 9 23 2 8 15 27 44 59 74 85 90 10 25 12 18 32 47 60 76 84 89 90 10 30 31 50 65 77 85 89 92 94 95 5 31 19 38 57 70 79 84 88 90 91 9 32 6 12 23 35 49 56 61 67 75 25 60 20 28 34 40 47 51 55 61 68 32 70 11 23 38 59 72 84 89 92 93 7 71 13 22 32 40 50 58 68 77 84 16 73 7 17 40 61 76 86 92 95 98 2 Criteria - Within Date Range-07/01/2020 - 06/30/2021 Emergency Calls Only. As defined and adopted from the consultant study. Fastest Arriving Unit Only. Responses from other arriving units are not considered. Must have an Enroute and Arrival Timestamp. Interval is the difference of Enroute to Arrival times by the second. 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Type: Government Buildings (Category B) Level of Service Standard: 1.7 sq. ft. per capita (peak season population)* Unit Cost:$470 ** Square Feet Value/Cost Available Inventory 9/30/2021 927,620 435,981,400$ Required Inventory 9/30/2026 881,618 414,360,460$ Proposed AUIR FY21/22 - FY25/26 89,000 37,520,500$ 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) 135,002 63,450,940$ Expenditures Proposed AUIR FY21/22 - FY25/26 37,520,500$ Debt Service Payments 30,840,300$ Total Expenditures 68,360,800$ Revenues (FY 21-26) Impact Fees 14,486,100$ Interest 75,000$ Available Cash for Future Projects/Debt Service 3,676,100$ Loan from General Fund (001) -$ Loan from Countywide Capital Projects (General Fund) 12,603,100$ Total Revenues 30,840,300$ Revenues Required to maintain existing LOSS 37,520,500$ Total Revenues 68,360,800$ Recommendation: That the CCPC forward a recommendation of approval to the BCC for the proposed Notes: * BCC adopted Level of Service Standard is 1.7sq. ft. per capita. LOSS identified within BCC approved Dec 20th 2011 Impact Fee Study is 1.52 sq. ft. per capita. The 1.7sf per capita only covers owned facilities and does not cover leased facilities which currently meet approximately 5% of the space required (available). ** The unit cost utilized is based upon actual project costs by square foot (updated August 2021) 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY FORM G:\AUIR\2021 AUIR prepared july 2021\2nd Draft 8-11-21\2021 DRAFT AUIR GOVT BLDGs 20 Percent Peak rev2 SF-EF 8-11-21 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.aPacket Pg. 134Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 0200,000400,000600,000800,0001,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,000FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 FY31 FY32 FY33 FY34 FY35 FY36Square Feet 2021 AUIR Government Buildings( Peak Season Population)SF Required at 1.7 sf / capitaSF AvailableMental Health FacilityNew Heritage Bay Govt. Serv Cntr.Medical Examiner ExpansionGMD, Pollution Control & Facilities Mgt. @ GOBP 9.A.1.aPacket Pg. 135Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.aPacket Pg. 136Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Name of Structure Address Square Feet CAT Operations (ex-Morande Dealership) 8300 Radio Road 32,144 Transportation Department (Arthrex) ** 2885 Horseshoe Drive South 34,236 Golden Gate Government Service Center 4829 Golden Gate Parkway 7,276 Marco Tax Collector 1040 Winterberry 2,699 Immokalee Courthouse & Gov't Center 106 S. 1st Street 10,495 Immokalee Health Department (CHSI) 419 N. 1st Street 14,778 Immokalee Barn (First Floor) 425 Sgt. Joe Jones Road 7,265 Immokalee Barn (Second Floor) 425 Sgt. Joe Jones Road 7,265 Immokalee Transportation Bldg. ** 550 Stockade Road 8,837 Immokalee Code Enforcement Bldg. 310 Alachua Street 1,994 Medical Examiners Office 3838 Domestic Avenue 13,238 Building "B" Human Resources 3303 E. Tamiami Trail 7,160 Building "C-1" Tax Collector 3291 E. Tamiami Trail 14,745 Building "C-1 Addition" Tax Collector 3291 E. Tamiami Trail 3,407 Building "C-2" Supervisor of Elections 3295 E. Tamiami Trail 10,190 Building "C-2 Addition" Supv. of Elections 3295 E. Tamiami Trail 2,411 Building "D" Risk / Jail Visit / AS Admin 3311 E. Tamiami Trail 8,388 Building "F" Admin. 1st Floor Security Lobby 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 2,138 Building "F" Administration 1st Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 2nd Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 3rd Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 4th Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 5th Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 6th Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 7th Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "F" Administration 8th Floor ** 3299 E. Tamiami Trail 10,859 Building "G" Wellness Center ** 3327 E. Tamiami Trail 5,511 Building "H" Health 1st Floor 3339 E. Tamiami Trail 24,385 Building "H" Health 2nd Floor 3339 E. Tamiami Trail 29,775 Building "H" Health 3rd Floor 3339 E. Tamiami Trail 0 Building "L" Courthouse 1st Floor ** 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 24,761 Building "L" Courthouse 2nd Floor ** 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 23,533 Building "L" Courthouse 3rd Floor ** 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 22,021 Building "L" Courthouse 4th Floor 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 22,211 Building "L" Courthouse 5th Floor 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 22,041 Building "L" Courthouse 6th Floor 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 22,041 Building "L" Courthouse Roof Penthouse 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 7,099 Building "L" Courthouse Mezz. ** 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 5,050 Building "W" General Services - 1st Floor 3335 E. Tamiami Trail 21,782 Building "W" General Services - 2nd Floor 3335 E. Tamiami Trail 9,272 New BCC Fleet Management ** 2901 County Barn Road 41,597 Animal Control Admin. 7610 Davis Boulevard 8,933 GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 2021 AUIR Inventory Owned Facilities G:\AUIR\2021 AUIR prepared july 2021\2nd Draft 8-11-21\2021 DRAFT AUIR GOVT BLDGs 20 Percent Peak rev2 SF-EF 8-11-21 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 2021 AUIR Inventory Name of Structure Address Square Feet Animal Crt'l Sally Port 7610 Davis Boulevard 6,727 Golden Gate Supv of Elections Bldg. 3300 Santa Barbara Boulevard 7,000 Agriculture Building 14700 Immokalee Road 13,361 Emergency Services Center 8075 Lely Cultural Parkway 57,274 Building "L-1" Courthouse Annex ** 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 134,780 New Property Appraiser ** 3950 Radio Road 27,591 North Collier Government Services Center ** 2335 Orange Blossom Dr. 13,923 New Supervisor of Elections Facility ** 3750 Enterprise Avenue 31,530 857,736 Name of Structure Address Square Feet Building "E" Snack Bar *3307 E. Tamiami Trail 713 GMD Extension *2800 N. Horseshoe Dr 21,935 GMD Main Building */**2800 N. Horseshoe Dr 41,028 Airport Place - Tax Collector * 725 Airport Rd. S 6,208 SubTotal Owned Facilities 69,884 SubTotal Owned Facilities - Space included in AUIR 927,620 Name of Structure Address Square Feet 800 MGHZ Generator Bldg. 312 Stockade Road 238 Imm. Animal Control Kennel 402 Stockade Road 1,572 Animal Crt'l Kennel 1 7610 Davis Boulevard 3,949 Animal Crt'l Kennel 2 7610 Davis Boulevard 3,949 Animal Crt'l Kennel 3 7610 Davis Boulevard 3,949 Animal Ctr'l Stable 7610 Davis Boulevard 3,159 Immokalee Radio Tower Shed 312 Stockade Road 16 Road & Bridge Shed 402 Stockade Road 102 Road & Bridge Fuel Island 402 Stockade Road 818 Building "K" Chiller Building 3323 E. Tamiami Trail 5,520 Electric Substation "A" 3315 E. Tamiami Trail 824 Electric Substation "B" 3339 E. Tamiami Trail 1,088 CDES Parking Garage * 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr 101,956 Courthouse Annex Parking Deck** 3355 E. Tamiami Trail 420,497 800 MGHZ Generator 2901 County Barn Road 368 800 MGHZ Repeater Building 2901 County Barn Road 64 Vehicle Wash Rack 2901 County Barn Road 1,950 Fuel Island/Canopy 2897 County Barn Road 3,600 Fuel Tanks & Slab 2897 County Barn Road 1,557 Generator / Fuel Tank 2897 County Barn Road 127 555,303 TOTAL Owned Facilities 1,482,923 SubTotal Owned Ancillary Facilities Owned Facilities - continued Owned Facilities - Not included in 2016 Impact Fee Study Owned Ancillary Facilities SubTotal Owned Facilities G:\AUIR\2021 AUIR prepared july 2021\2nd Draft 8-11-21\2021 DRAFT AUIR GOVT BLDGs 20 Percent Peak rev2 SF-EF 8-11-21 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 2021 AUIR Inventory Name of Structure Address Square Feet Transp. Dept - Davis Boulevard Maintenance Facility Davis Blvd. (former FDOT) 11,208 Tax Collector's Office - Eagle Creek 6654 Collier Blvd. 3,087 Tourism and Economic Development 2660 Horseshoe Drive, North 4,840 Horseshoe Square - Growth Management Department 2685 Horseshoe Drive South 7,203 Tax Collector's Office - Golden Gate Estates 50 South Wilson Boulevard 2,777 Human Resources - Health Dept. - Court Plaza III 2671 Airport Road South, Unit 202 2,500 Sub Total Leased Facilities 31,615 TOTAL Owned & Leased Facilities 1,514,538 The General Government Buildings Inventory includes those facilities not otherwise covered by an impact or user fee. * Removed from inventory per Impact Fee consultant's recommendation ** Square Footage has been updated LEASED FACILITIES (Subject to AUIR) G:\AUIR\2021 AUIR prepared july 2021\2nd Draft 8-11-21\2021 DRAFT AUIR GOVT BLDGs 20 Percent Peak rev2 SF-EF 8-11-21 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9 9 9 99 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 99 9 99 SR 82 CR 833 CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAM I A M I T R A I L OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858CR 869 CORKSCREW RD CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDES T E R O B L V DSUMMERLIN RDGOLDEN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIELS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH BONITA BEACH RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL GOLDEN GATE PKWYAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD B U I L D I N G S - E X I S T I N G I N V E N T O R Y B U I L D I N G S - E X I S T I N G I N V E N T O R Y GULFOFMEXI CO§¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 £¤41 !(29 !(29 !(951 !(951 !(92 GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTLEE COUNTY 9 Florida GulfCoast University Government Center Complex(Building B, C, D, E, F, G, H, K, L, Wand CAT Transfer Station) Growth Management Building Transportation Airport Tax Collector GG Government Services Center Animal Control Admin. Medical Examiner's office Marco Tax Collector Immokalee Barn Immokalee Animal Control Immokalee Government Center North Collier Government Services Center A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t y a n d U n i v e r s i t y HENDRY COUNTY Legend Existing Government Buildings Major Roads $+41 $+41 $+41 Emergency Services Center BCC Fleet Maintenance,Fuel Station and Wash Rack Courthouse Annex CAT Operations Property Appraiser Office Agricultural Building 9 Supervisor of Elections Immokalee Code Enforcement . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles NAPLES MARCO ISLAND IMMOKALEE EVERGLADES CITY 2021 G O V E R N M E N T 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) l l ll l l SR 82 CR 833 CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAM I A M I T R A I L OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858CR 869 CORKSCREW RD CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDES T E R O B L V DSUMMERLIN RDGOLDEN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH BONITA BEACH RDDEL PADRO PKWYSANTA BARBARA BL SR 29US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL GOLDEN GATE PK W YAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKETRAFFORD LAKE TRAFFORD RD 2 0 2 1 G O V E R N M E N T B U I L D I N G S - L E A S E D S P A C E I N V E N T O R Y GULFOFMEXIC O§¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 £¤41 !(29 !(29 !(951 !(951 !(92 !(29 !(82 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTLEE COUNTY 9 Florida GulfCoast University A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t y a n d U n i v e r s i t y HENDRY COUNTY Legend l Leased Government Buildings Major Roads $+41 $+41 $+41 FDOT Office Eagle Creek Tax Collector's Office Tourism and EconomicDevelopment Office Horseshoe Square - GMD Tax Collector's Office HR - Health Dept: Court Plaza III NAPLES MARCO ISLAND EVERGLADES CITY IMMOKALEE 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category B Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 1 Staff Report Presentation to the Collier County Planning Commission of the 2021 combined Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities and Schedule of Capital Improvements as provided for in Chapter 6.02.02 of the Collier County Land Development Code and Section 163.3177(3)(b), Florida Statutes OBJECTIVE: That the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) review the combined 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR)/Capital Improvement Element (CIE) on public facilities and provide recommendations to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) on specific projects and associated funding sources for inclusion in the Schedule of Capital Improvements within the CIE during the FY21/22 annual update (only “Category A” public facilities are included in the CIE). The AUIR identifies capital needs for new facilities to serve population growth projected for the five-year AUIR period. As with past AUIR, this year’s AUIR presents additional information related to individual Division/Department operational data. This additional data is provided to evaluate the year-to-year change in demand experienced by each AUIR component and to assist the CCPC in making recommendations upon the appropriateness of the County’s current Level of Service (LOS) Standards and timing/necessity of proposed projects. The AUIR constitutes the process of evaluating budgetary priorities, as well as determining appropriateness of the County’s currently adopted LOS Standards. BACKGROUND: Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, requires the County to adopt certain Land Development Regulations (LDR) to implement its Growth Management Plan adopted on January 10, 1989. Land Development Code (LDC) Section 6.02.00 requires the County to, “Provide that public facilities and services meet or exceed the standards established in the CIE required by Section 163.3177 and are available when needed for the development…” This Section of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes is commonly known as the concurrency requirement. Accordingly, on March 21, 1990, the Board adopted the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance No. 90-24. This Ordinance was subsequently codified in LDC Section 6.02.02. Statutory changes initiated by HB7207 in 2011 [which is now Chapter 2011-139, Laws of Florida] only require from each local government that they maintain concurrency management for its Stormwater Management System, Potable Water System, Wastewater Treatment Systems and Solid Waste Disposal services and facilities. During the 2011 AUIR/CIE process, the County decided to maintain concurrency for the optional facilities of Schools, Arterial and Collector Roads and Bridges, and Parks and Recreation facilities, based upon the perspective that maintaining concurrency management for the optional facilities is necessary to sustain the currently identified levels of service for the respective facilities and to ensure that the demands of new development are provided for by system expansion corresponding to those demands. As noted, LDC Section 6.02.02 establishes the management and monitoring program for public facilities, which provides for an annual determination of LOS Standard concurrency for “Category A” public facilities and identification of need for additional facilities. “Category A” facilities are arterial and collector roads, drainage system and stormwater management, potable water supply and distribution, wastewater treatment systems, solid waste disposal, public schools, and parks. The AUIR also provides analysis and recommendations on “Category B” facilities for which the County has adopted LOS Standards and collects impact fees. “Category B” facilities are jail and correctional facilities, law enforcement, library buildings and collections, emergency medical services, and government buildings. Adoption of LOS Standards for “Category B” facilities legally validate impact fees for these facilities. Coastal Zone beach re-nourishment and inlet management projects were added to the AUIR as a new “Category C” [County Manager direction: 2013]. This addition allows the Board to formally and predictably evaluate the condition of each project for their respective capital programming. “Category C” areas (coastal zone beaches and inlets) are not subject to concurrency management or coupled to impact fee funding. The quality and usability of 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 2 these features are sustained through periodic surveys, and maintenance and management programs, funded with tourist development taxes and other revenue sources. Where the AUIR identifies deficiencies or potential deficiencies, the Board’s action options, per LDC Section 6.02.02, include, but are not limited to: 1. Establishing Areas of Significant Influence (ASI) surrounding deficient road segments which are not in a Traffic Congestion Management Area (TCMA) or Traffic Congestion Exception Area (TCEA). 2. Adding public facility projects to the financially feasible Schedule of Capital Improvements in the CIE. Road projects must be in the first or second year of the next adopted Schedule to be factored as available capacity in the real-time Transportation Concurrency Management System database. 3. Deferring development order issuance for development not vested by statute in service areas affected by deficient public facilities. This applies to necessary improvements both pending and not financially feasible, or not in the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements, and could result in the following remedial actions: a. Modifying levels of service via Growth Management Plan amendment; b. Directing staff to include the necessary public facility projects in a future annual CIE update and amendment to be adopted by the Board; c. Approving new or increased revenue sources for needed public facility projects, by the Board, the State Legislature or the County voters; or d. Allowing developer constructed improvements guaranteed by an enforceable development agreement. The options identified above are crafted under the design of maintaining a fiscally feasible CIE based on the concurrency management system. The requirement for financial feasibility is a local requirement, no longer a statutory requirement. The Board, through Objective 2 of the CIE, provides direction to maintain an annual financially feasible Schedule of Capital Improvements. OBJECTIVE 2: (FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY) Provide public facilities, as described in Policy 1.1 above, to maintain adopted level of service standards that are within the ability of the County to fund… Policies 1.1 through 1.5 of the CIE establish the standards for levels of service for “Category A” public facilities. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Preparation and presentation of the AUIR to the CCPC and Board meets the requirements of LDC Section 6.02.02 for an annual determination of the status of public facilities. Board direction to include the projects identified in the AUIR in a financially feasible Schedule of Capital Improvements will establish and maintain concurrency for “Category A” public facilities, except roads, for the next twelve months. Road projects needed to maintain or restore adopted levels of service deficiencies must be scheduled in the first or second year of the Schedule of Capital Improvements. The CIE Schedule of Capital Improvements requires only a single public hearing before the Collier County Planning Commission (sitting in its official role as the County’s land planning agency) and a single public hearing before the governing board (Board) as an adoption hearing. This single hearing process allows for concurrent hearings of the AUIR and CIE. When adopted, both the AUIR and CIE processes are complete, as the updated CIE is not required to be sent to the State Land Planning agency. Level of Service Appropriateness: As indicated within the Objective section above, the AUIR provides the CCPC with a platform to make evaluations and recommendations regarding the appropriateness of the County’s current Levels of Service Standards. The process of capital improvement programming for the County is a linear equation for most components of the AUIR; (New Population x Level of Service Standard = Capital Improvement). This 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 3 equation is the only justification required of the proposed capital improvement. While Public Utilities, Stormwater Management and Transportation have developed a more complex formula and system for maintaining Level of Service Standards which dictates capital expansion, the basic premise of additional demand requiring new improvements remains the underlying fundamental of the equation. AUIR activities provide the opportunity on an annual basis for the CCPC to evaluate and provide recommendations on the appropriateness of currently adopted Level of Service Standards. Within each individual section, the year‒to‒year demand for service or demands upon the system are included to assist in this determination. Level of Service Standards and Impact Fees: Impact fee studies and methodologies in and of themselves do not establish Level of Service Standards. They serve at a minimum, to establish a base line where levels of service cannot fall below without invalidating the impact fee. A level of service that is established by an impact fee study represents the standard that has been achieved for a facility but does not dictate that a local government cannot adopt a Level of Service Standard that is higher than the achieved level of service. However, the difference between the achieved level of service and the adopted Level of Service Standard requires supplemental funding from a source other than impact fees to fund the cost of the improvement. EMS is an AUIR component in which the impact fee level of service is below the AUIR adopted Level of Service Standards. As indicated, this discrepancy is resulting in a higher level of necessary supplemental general governmental funding, which is being allocated from monies raised by the Local Infrastructure Sales Tax. The established Level of Service Standards for most AUIR components are currently satisfied based upon the levels of service and current population levels. But population growth and other factors, (e.g. access to new technology, in the example of Library materials, approval of development projects where public facility improvements do not appear in the AUIR or CIE, but must be introduced or expanded in accommodation, in the example of Growth Management) continue to reduce the available capacity of the respective infrastructure and service providers. Based upon this diminishing capacity, the due diligence process to bring about the next generation of system expansion has begun and will require continued revenue growth needed to maintain the Level of Service Standards for the system providers. Population: The population projections utilized with the 2021 AUIR are based upon prior Board policy direction and acceptance from the State of Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). The population method utilizes the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) medium range projections for the entire projection period with a twenty percent (20%) seasonal adjustment factor applied to permanent population projections. The table below presents a comparison of the past six years of projected permanent population growth figures. AUIR Year BEBR Estimate Permanent Population Following 5-Year BEBR Growth Projections 5 Year Growth Percent Growth Percent Annualized 2016 353,936 360,846 367,892 375,074 381,722 387,814 9.57% 1.91% 2017 360,825 368,073 375,467 382,465 389,053 395,753 9.68% 1.94% 2018 368,534 376,086 383,166 389,754 394,004 400,292 8.62% 1.72% 2019 374,994 382,800 389,669 396,661 403,779 411,024 9.61% 1.92% 2020 388,128 395,249 402,501 409,885 417,406 424,165 9.28% 1.86% 2021 397,975 405,138 412,431 419,855 426,443 432,166 8.59% 1.72% 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 4 The above table illustrates 2021 as another successive year in which the annualized growth rate is projected at under two percent of the total population. This outlook reinforces the contemporary growth reality of a steadily growing population for the County. The projected population increase totals 34,191 for the five-year period or, 6,838 per year. Utilizing the County’s 2.38 persons per household (PPH) rate, these projected 7,206 new people per year, translate to an average of 2,873 new dwelling units constructed each year (presuming new population is housed only by new units and not existing inventory). The recalibration of Collier County’s population through the 2010 Census had provided additional capacity to each of the AUIR/CIE population-based systems; and with the 2020 Census providing an estimate of 375,752 for the year 2020, where our AUIR had estimated 388,128 roughly a 13,000-person difference. As such, each of the AUIR providers will benefit from additional capacity due to this population recalibration. It should be noted that next year’s AUIR and the BEBR population numbers will have incorporated this recalibration into the five - and ten-year projections. The following table provides Certificate of Occupancy (CO) figures issued per year since 2010. Compilation Year * Single Family COs Multi-Family COs Single & Multi Family 2013-2014 806 454 1,260 2014-2015 1,436 286 1,722 2015-2016 2,065 1,010 3,075 2016-2017 2,548 777 3,325 2017-2018 2,776 980 3,756 2018-2019 2,424 442 2,866 2019-2020 2,652 1,156 3,808 2020-2021 2,722 826 3,548 * Based upon April 2013 through March 2021 CO data, compiled annually by the Growth Management Department. Approximately 2,722 single-family dwellings and 826 multi-family units were constructed (and certified for occupancy, in this compilation year *) – for a total of 3,548 units. These figures represent a decrease over the previous year’s residential construction, when 2,652 single-family dwellings and 1,156 multi-family units – for a total of 3,808 units, were constructed. These figures are provided to better evaluate the market’s response to fluctuations in demand for new housing units. In addition, the Board directed that population projections for Golden Gate City be prepared beginning with fiscal year 2017/18.** This direction is based on the County to serve all portions of the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) franchise utility service area east of Santa Barbara Blvd. within the 10-year AUIR planning window. The future service area is approximately four square miles in size, and can be more specifically described as all of Sections 21, 22, 23, and 28 and portions of Sections 15 and 16 in Township 49 S, Range 26 E, as bounded on the north by Green Blvd., on the east by Collier Blvd., on the south by Golden Gate Canal, and on the west by Santa Barbara Blvd. The population figures for this area – along with information regarding treatment capacity, acquisition and implementation planning are included herein. These are provided under the Level of Service 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 5 Standards (LOSS) Assessments, and illustrated in the LOSS charts, within the Potable Water System and Wastewater Treatment Systems’ reports in the AUIR/CIE booklet. ** Adopted by Resolution 2017-123, on June 27, 2017. Schools: The Schools section of the AUIR stands as a unique component. A summary of the School District Five- Year Capital Improvement Plan is provided for review by the CCPC. But when the AUIR is reviewed, the School District’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) will already have been approved by the School Board, as required by the Florida Department of Education. The proposed School CIP has been reviewed by County staff in conjunction with School District staff to ensure no inconsistencies exist with the timing of new facilities and required infrastructure. The District’s five-year CIP includes completing the Immokalee High School addition/renovations project (’21) and planning, engineering and construction for opening the new High School on Veteran’s Memorial Boulevard, west of Livingston Road in North Naples (’23). While the Schools component is included as part of the “Category A” facilities which dictate the concurrency management system for the County, concurrency management for schools is administered by the School District. Requirements changed for referencing School District documents when the County amended the CIE in 2017. Each year since, the County adopts, by reference, into its CIE, the School District’s annually updated financially feasible Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan and the District Facilities Work Program to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service standards for Public School Facilities. The School District Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan identifies the financially feasible school facility capacity projects necessary to address existing deficiencies and future needs based on achieving and maintaining adopted LOS standards for schools. The District Facilities Work Program, prepared by the School District pursuant to Section 1013.35(1)(b), F.S., is adopted as part of the data and analysis in support of the School District’s Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Adoption by the County, of the School District’s Capital Improvement Plan and the District Facilities Work Program now occurs, without requiring separate action, with approval of the annual update to the Schedule of Capital Improvements. The recommendation sought from the CCPC related to the School District’s proposed Capital Improvement Plan is to find that no inconsistencies are contained within the District’s Capital Improvement Plan compared to the other planned capital improvement projects within the County’s AUIR or CIE. FISCAL IMPACT: Revenues are required to fund the Capital Improvement projects proposed in the 2021 AUIR/CIE for the FY21/22 thru FY25/26 planning period to maintain financial feasibility of scheduled “Category A” facility improvements. These funds must be made available by the Board of County Commissioners or fall within the Board’s statutory general governmental taxing authority. Current and proposed revenues needed to fund public facility construction/expansion for the FY21/22 thru FY25/26 planning period are set forth in each respective capital facilities section of the 2021 AUIR/CIE update. Project expenditures more than estimated impact fee, gas tax, and user fee revenue receipts and funded bonds are reflected as being augmented by general governmental sources in the body of the AUIR document. General governmental sources are those existing sales tax revenues and other state shared revenues, or ad valorem allocations at the Board’s discretion. Note that all projects identified within the “Category A” facilities have identified funding for the improvement. When funding sources are not identified, CIE Policy 2.9 provides the Board five action options to address the situation by. 1. Removing facility improvements or new facilities that exceed the adopted level of service for the growth during the next five (5) fiscal years from the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements via Growth Management Plan amendment; 2. Removing facility improvements or new facilities that reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility but do not provide additional facility capacity from the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements via Growth Management Plan amendment; 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR/CIE STAFF REPORT ‒ pg. 6 3. Transferring funds, where feasible, from a funded non-CIE capital project to fund an identified deficient CIE public facility, and reflecting the resulting revisions in the annual CIE update; 4. Lowering the adopted level of service standard via Growth Management Plan amendment for the facility for which funding cannot be obtained; and, 5. Not issuing development orders that would continue to cause a deficiency based on the facility's adopted level of service standard. Most of “Category B” facility improvements require loans from general governmental sources to meet the necessary revenue (option 3 above). Additionally, to fund the proposed five-year improvements contained within this year’s CIE update may require the Board to utilize Debt Service. The informational tables detailing the revenue and debt service for the AUIR Divisions/Departments for the five-year capital improvement planning period, as well as the long-term debt financing schedules, are provided within Appendix I of the AUIR/CIE booklet. RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission in the form of recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners: 1. To accept and recommend approval of the attached document as the 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities. 2. To accept and recommend approval to the BCC the “Category A, B and C” facilities relative to projects and revenue sources, with “Category A” facilities set forth for inclusion in the Schedule of Capital Improvements of the annual CIE update and amendment. 3. To find that no inconsistencies are contained within the School District’s Capital Improvement Plan compared to the other planned capital improvements within the AUIR or CIE. 4. To consider alternative levels of service for individual components of the AUIR, where deemed appropriate. 5. To recommend adoption of the CIE Schedule of Capital Improvements update, and by reference, the School District’s Capital Improvement Plan and the District Facilities Work Program. 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Staff-Report-2021-AUIR-10-6-2021 (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT ON PUBLIC FACILITIES 2021 CATEGORY “C” FACILITIES 1. County Coastal Zone Areas Management ‒ Beaches − Inlets Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONTENTS • COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ‒ SUMMARY • TDC BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROPOSED 5-YEAR WORK PROGRAM • TDC BEACH RENOURISHMENT FUND PROJECTION − TABLE Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT Area Type: Coastal Zone (Category "C") Using the adopted Beaches and Waterways Master Plan, and the Standards established for Sustainability (see Attachment "A"--Coastal Zones), the following is set forth for FY 2021/22 to FY 2025/26. Expenditures Project & Program Costs $81,735,200 Reserves - Unrestricted $23,082,400 Reserve - Catastrophe (1)$10,000,000 SUB TOTAL $114,817,600 Revenues TDC Revenue - Category A $61,578,400 Interest & Misc. Sources $8,716,300 Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $45,129,700 Revenue Reserve ($606,800) TOTAL $114,817,600 Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues for 5-year Capital Program $0 Revenue needed to maintain Sustainability $0 Recommendation: That the BCC approve the proposed Coastal Zone Management AUIR for FY 2021/22-FY 2025/26. Notes: (1) Catastrophe funds are accumulated at a rate of $500,000/yr, up to a maximum of $10,000,000. 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) TDC Beach Renourishment Capital Fund (195) 2021 AUIR Description FY 2022 Adopted FY 2023 Adopted FY 2024 Proforma FY 2025 Proforma FY 2026 Proforma 5 Year FY 22 - FY 26 Expenditures Project & Program Costs 8,362,600 11,971,000 8,029,700 44,537,200 8,834,700 81,735,200 Reserves - Unrestricted 39,225,800 42,897,800 47,385,800 17,469,700 23,082,400 23,082,400 Reserve for Catastrophe (1)9,070,000 9,570,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 Total Expenditures/Uses 56,658,400 64,438,800 65,415,500 72,006,900 41,917,100 114,817,600 Revenue TDC Taxes 11,635,500 12,300,000 12,423,000 12,547,200 12,672,700 61,578,400 Interest & Misc.500,000 3,843,000 524,700 2,073,900 1,774,700 8,716,300 Carry Forward 45,129,700 48,295,800 52,467,800 57,385,800 27,469,700 45,129,700 Revenue Reserve (606,800) - - - - (606,800) Total Revenue/Sources 56,658,400 64,438,800 65,415,500 72,006,900 41,917,100 114,817,600 Notes: (1) Catastrophe Reserves are accumulated at a rate of $ 500,000 per year up to a maximum of $ 10 million. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) TDC Beach Renourishment Capital Fund (195) 2022 CZM 10 Year Projection Proposed Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected FY22 - FY26 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 FY31 5 Year Totals Sources Roll forward (sum of reserves)45,129,700 48,295,800 52,467,800 57,385,800 27,469,700 33,082,400 35,770,300 43,850,500 17,133,200 25,181,600 45,129,700 Carry Forward to Fund Project Roll - - - - - TDT (Fund 195) Revenue 11,635,500 12,300,000 12,423,000 12,547,200 12,672,700 12,799,400 12,927,400 13,056,700 13,187,300 13,319,200 61,578,400 Revenue Reserve (606,800) - - - - - - - - - (606,800) Reimbursements/Miscellaneous Revenue 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 900,000 3,000,000 FEMA/FDEP Reimbursements - 3,360,000 3,360,000 Interest 500,000 483,000 524,700 573,900 274,700 330,800 357,700 438,500 171,300 251,800 2,356,300 Total Funding 56,658,400 64,438,800 65,415,500 72,006,900 41,917,100 47,712,600 50,555,400 58,845,700 31,991,800 39,652,600 114,817,600 Map #Uses FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 FY29 FY30 FY31 5 Year Totals Proj. No. Beach Projects 50154 Hurricane Irma:- Proj. No. Collier Beach Renourishment - 80301 Collier Beach Renourishment - - - - - - - - - - - 1 90068 Naples Beach Engineering, NTP & Renourishment 2,600,000 - - - 1,750,000 3,250,000 - - - - 4,350,000 90067 Park Shore Beach Engineering, NTP & Renourishment - - 875,000 1,625,000 - - - 875,000 1,625,000 2,500,000 2 90066 Vanderbilt Beach Engineering, NTP & Renourishment 2,600,000 - - 1,750,000 3,250,000 - - - 4,350,000 90069 Clam Pass Beach Engineering, NTP & Renourishment - 525,000 975,000 - - 525,000 975,000 1,500,000 90070 Pelican Bay Beach Engineering, NTP & Renourishment - - - - - - - - 90062 Marco Central Bch Regrade - - - - - - - - - 90071 Marco Island South, NTP & Renourishment - - - 1,500,000 - - - 1,500,000 1,500,000 90074 North Park Shore Beach NTP & Renourishment (project coord w/Park Shore)- 80165 County Beach Analysis & Design - - - - - - - - - - 90065 Local Government Funding Request (LGFR)25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 125,000 - 80366 Beach Resiliency 50,000 35,000,000 50,000 35,000,000 35,050,000 USACE Feasibility Study Technical Support - Cost Share participation - 35% for BASE design/permitting/construction ($25M)9,000,000 9,000,000 Collier Perferred Scope over USACE Recommended (base/storm surge) Plan - Cost Share Resiliency Structural Solutions - Study, Modeling, Peer Review 500,000 500,000 Cost ShareResiliency Structural Solutions -Permitting, Engineering , Design 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 600,000 Cost Share Resiliency Structiral Solutions - Construction 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 7,500,000 - Proj No. Inlet Projects - 3 80288 Wiggins Pass Dredging 150,000 25,000 850,000 25,000 150,000 25,000 850,000 25,000 150,000 150,000 1,200,000 90549 Doctor's Pass Dredging 600,000 600,000 600,000 4 88032 Clam Pass Dredging (Pel Bay)20,000 250,000 20,000 250,000 20,000 250,000 20,000 250,000 20,000 20,000 560,000 - Proj No. Regulatory - 80171 Beach Tilling - County Wide 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 150,000 90033 Near Shore Hard Bottom Monitoring 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 925,000 90297 Shorebird Monitoring 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 125,000 90536 City/County Physical Beach and Pass Monitor 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 850,000 99999 Transfer to Fund 119 Beach Turtle Monitoring 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 171,700 858,500 - Proj No. Maintenance - 80378 Tractor Shelter - 90527 Beach Cleaning-Naples 203,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 197,000 991,000 90533 Beach Cleaning-County/Marco 268,100 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,068,100 80407 Jolly Bridge Maintenance - 90044 Vegetation Repairs-Exotic Removal (phase out)- - Proj No. Structures - 90096 Naples Pier 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,000,000 80268 Olesky Pier (phase out)- - - - - - - - - - - 80321 Lake Trafford Shore Line Ann Olesky Sea Wall Repair (phase out)- - Proj No. Administration - 90020 Fund 195 Admin Costs 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 375,000 Total Direct Project Cost 7,222,800 10,753,700 6,798,700 43,303,700 7,598,700 10,703,700 5,463,700 40,468,700 5,563,700 1,463,700 75,677,600 - - - - - - - - - - - 99195 Interest Redirection - - - - - - - - - - - 99195 Transfer to 185 Operating 883,700 978,800 978,800 978,800 978,800 978,800 978,800 978,800 978,800 4,798,900 99195 Transfer to Tax Collecter (Revenue Collection Exp)256,100 238,500 252,200 254,700 257,200 259,800 262,400 265,000 267,700 1,258,700 99195 Adv/Repay to 370 99195 Reserves General - - - - - - - - - - 99195 Reserve for Catastrophe (increase by 500K/yr up to 10M in reserves)9,070,000 9,570,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 99195 Reserve for Unrestricted Capital - 99195 Reserve - FDEP/FEMA Refuding/Deob - - - - - - - - - - - Total Programmed 17,432,600 21,541,000 18,029,700 54,537,200 18,834,700 21,942,300 16,704,900 51,712,500 16,810,200 1,463,700 91,735,200 Unencumbered Reserve Balance to Roll 39,225,800 42,897,800 47,385,800 17,469,700 23,082,400 25,770,300 33,850,500 7,133,200 15,181,600 38,188,900 23,082,400 C:\Users\ginosantabarbara\Desktop\AUIR File\AUIR 2021\Coastal 2021\CZM FY22 10 Year 6-24 page 2 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) APPENDIX I CONTENTS: • COUNTYWIDE PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PRO- JECTIONS • COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PROJEC- TIONS BY PLANNING COMMUNITY (APRIL 1 & OCTOBER 1) • COUNTYWIDE PEAK SEASON POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS • COUNTY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICTS POPULATION ESTI- MATES AND PROJECTIONS − FULL DISTRICTS & AREAS SERVED • MAPS −  COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMUNITIES  DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL CO’s BY PLANNING COMMUNITY  DISTRIBUTION OF RESIDENTIAL CO’s 2005 - 2021 ‒ SUMMARY • TABLES − IMPACT FEE FUND AND DEBT SERVICE EXPENSE Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Countywide COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS -- COUNTYWIDE October 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2044 FISCAL YEAR estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projection projection projection projection projection projection 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 COUNTYWIDE 257,926 322,653 326,817 331,756 335,223 340,293 347,002 353,836 362,409 372,027 382,078 390,937 397,975 405,138 412,431 419,855 426,443 432,166 projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 COUNTYWIDE 437,966 443,844 449,801 455,246 460,166 465,138 470,165 475,246 479,951 484,272 488,632 493,031 497,470 501,601 505,417 509,262 513,137 517,041 COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS -- COUNTYWIDE April 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2045 CENSUS YEAR (Decennial) estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projection projection projection projection projection projection 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 COUNTYWIDE 251,377 321,520 323,785 329,849 333,663 336,783 343,802 350,202 357,470 367,347 376,706 387,450 394,424 401,525 408,752 416,110 423,600 429,285 435,047 projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 COUNTYWIDE 440,885 446,802 452,800 457,693 462,639 467,638 472,691 477,800 482,102 486,442 490,821 495,240 499,700 503,502 507,332 511,192 515,081 519,000 notes: 1) Estimates and projections are derived from data obtained from: 2000 Census and 2010 Census; Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) population bulletins; Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff; and, Planning staff from Naples and Marco Island. 2) Based upon BEBR Medium Range growth rate projections. Prepared by Collier County Comprehensive Zoning Division, June 19, 2021. I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR Appendix I - Population, Countywide\2021 pop est. & proj. _FNL_PRINT_with W&WW by-dw/6-2019 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Planning Community April COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS April 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2035 By Planning Community and City estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections Planning Community 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 NN - North Naples 47,657 55,041 55,169 55,716 56,152 56,362 56,760 57,344 58,084 58,703 59,208 59,563 59,764 59,969 60,178 60,391 60,608 60,768 60,930 61,094 61,261 61,430 61,565 61,700 61,838 61,977 62,118 SN - South Naples 21,610 28,689 29,029 29,950 30,587 31,071 33,004 33,631 34,052 34,555 35,209 35,534 35,701 35,872 36,046 36,223 36,404 36,537 36,672 36,809 36,948 37,089 37,201 37,314 37,428 37,544 37,661 CN - Central Naples 18,323 18,845 18,867 18,967 19,022 19,096 19,195 19,310 19,535 19,626 19,642 19,708 20,334 20,972 21,623 22,285 22,960 23,457 23,962 24,474 24,993 25,520 25,938 26,360 26,788 27,221 27,659 EN - East Naples 24,385 22,320 22,323 22,358 22,382 22,399 22,682 22,954 23,197 23,526 23,872 25,555 26,012 26,477 26,951 27,434 27,926 28,288 28,656 29,029 29,407 29,791 30,095 30,404 30,715 31,031 31,350 GG - Golden Gate 35,325 44,925 45,000 45,283 45,418 45,490 45,506 45,539 45,575 45,674 46,030 46,365 46,739 47,120 47,509 47,905 48,308 48,605 48,906 49,212 49,522 49,837 50,086 50,339 50,595 50,853 51,115 UE - Urban Estates 16,713 38,658 38,830 39,484 40,084 40,876 42,313 43,804 45,134 46,740 48,276 49,691 50,378 51,079 51,793 52,520 53,261 53,807 54,361 54,923 55,493 56,072 56,531 56,995 57,464 57,940 58,421 RE - Rural Estates 18,815 34,739 34,780 34,941 35,089 35,193 35,481 36,025 37,348 39,784 42,312 45,478 47,640 49,843 52,087 54,374 56,703 58,420 60,161 61,928 63,720 65,538 66,980 68,440 69,916 71,411 72,923 M - Marco 1,350 1,219 1,222 1,224 1,227 1,299 1,340 1,612 1,938 2,175 2,280 2,431 2,436 2,442 2,447 2,453 2,458 2,462 2,467 2,471 2,475 2,480 2,483 2,487 2,490 2,494 2,498 RF - Royal Fakapalm 7,811 11,797 12,205 13,129 13,859 14,392 15,326 16,156 16,855 18,591 19,901 21,213 22,414 23,636 24,883 26,152 27,446 28,399 29,366 30,346 31,341 32,351 33,152 33,962 34,782 35,611 36,451 C - Corkscrew 1,019 4,550 5,375 7,369 8,239 8,989 10,369 11,486 12,675 14,414 15,319 16,547 17,156 17,776 18,409 19,053 19,709 20,193 20,684 21,181 21,686 22,199 22,605 23,016 23,432 23,853 24,279 I - Immokalee 21,845 24,154 24,453 24,685 24,805 24,832 24,905 25,003 25,163 25,471 25,716 26,035 26,145 26,257 26,371 26,487 26,606 26,693 26,782 26,872 26,963 27,055 27,129 27,203 27,278 27,354 27,431 BC - Big Cypress 190 233 233 237 239 240 241 241 242 244 245 246 246 247 248 249 249 250 251 251 252 253 253 254 254 255 255 Unincorporated SUM 215,043 285,170 287,485 293,343 297,103 300,237 307,120 313,104 319,796 329,501 338,008 348,362 354,982 361,727 368,599 375,602 382,737 387,993 393,326 398,735 404,224 409,792 414,208 418,676 423,198 427,774 432,406 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections Cities 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Everglades City 479 400 406 401 409 409 427 432 443 408 428 430 433 436 440 443 446 450 453 456 460 463 467 470 474 477 481 Marco Island 14,879 16,413 16,443 16,521 16,556 16,607 16,728 16,930 17,036 17,094 17,348 17,595 17,612 17,630 17,647 17,665 17,682 17,773 17,864 17,956 18,047 18,138 18,277 18,417 18,556 18,696 18,835 Naples 20,976 19,537 19,451 19,584 19,595 19,530 19,527 19,736 20,195 20,344 20,922 21,063 21,397 21,732 22,066 22,400 22,735 23,069 23,403 23,738 24,072 24,407 24,741 25,075 25,410 25,744 26,078 Incorporated SUM 36,334 36,350 36,300 36,506 36,560 36,546 36,682 37,098 37,674 37,846 38,698 39,088 39,443 39,798 40,153 40,508 40,863 41,292 41,721 42,150 42,579 43,008 43,485 43,962 44,440 44,917 45,394 COUNTYWIDE TOTAL 251,377 321,520 323,785 329,849 333,663 336,783 343,802 350,202 357,470 367,347 376,706 387,450 394,424 401,525 408,752 416,110 423,600 429,285 435,047 440,885 446,802 452,800 457,693 462,639 467,638 472,691 477,800 notes: 1) 2000 and 2010 Naples, Marco Island, Everglades City, Unincorporated County and County-wide totals are estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 and Census 2010 Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171). 2) 2000 and 2010 Planning Community estimates are based upon County Planning staff review of 2000 and 2010 Census maps and population data. 3) Marco Island projections were provided by the city's Planning staff in 2017, in 5-year increments. In-between years are projections prepared by County Planning staff. 4) Naples projections were prepared by County staff based upon 2030 projection provided by the city's Planning staff in 2004. 5) Everglades City projections were prepared by County Planning staff. 6) 2021 - 2035 County-wide totals are projections based upon BEBR Medium Range growth rates between 2020-2025, 2025-2030, and 2030-2035, per BEBR Bulletin #189, April 2021. 7) Planning Community projections were prepared by County Planning staff using Certificate of Occupancy data & persons per dwelling unit ratios derived from 2000 Census. 8) Planning Community projections do not reflect projected buildout population figures, as prepared in 1994 and 2005. 9) Some of the Totals may not equal the sum of the individual figures due to rounding. Prepared by Collier County Zoning Division, June 19, 2021 I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR Appendix I - Population, Countywide\2021 pop est. & proj. _FNL_PRINT_with W&WW by-dw/6-2019 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Planning Community October COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS October 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2034 By Planning Community and City estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections Planning Community 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 NN - North Naples 48,857 55,105 55,442 55,934 56,257 56,561 57,052 57,714 58,393 58,956 59,385 59,663 59,866 60,073 60,284 60,499 60,688 60,849 61,012 61,178 61,346 61,497 61,633 61,769 61,908 62,048 SN - South Naples 22,020 28,859 29,490 30,269 30,829 32,037 33,318 33,842 34,304 34,882 35,372 35,617 35,787 35,959 36,135 36,314 36,470 36,604 36,740 36,878 37,018 37,145 37,257 37,371 37,486 37,603 CN - Central Naples 18,604 18,856 18,917 18,994 19,059 19,146 19,253 19,422 19,580 19,634 19,675 20,021 20,653 21,298 21,954 22,623 23,209 23,710 24,218 24,733 25,256 25,729 26,149 26,574 27,005 27,440 EN - East Naples 24,472 22,322 22,340 22,370 22,390 22,540 22,818 23,076 23,361 23,699 24,714 25,784 26,244 26,714 27,192 27,680 28,107 28,472 28,842 29,218 29,599 29,943 30,250 30,559 30,873 31,191 GG - Golden Gate 36,590 44,963 45,142 45,351 45,454 45,498 45,523 45,557 45,624 45,852 46,198 46,552 46,930 47,315 47,707 48,106 48,456 48,756 49,059 49,367 49,680 49,962 50,213 50,467 50,724 50,984 UE - Urban Estates 17,854 38,744 39,157 39,784 40,480 41,594 43,058 44,469 45,937 47,508 48,983 50,034 50,729 51,436 52,157 52,891 53,534 54,084 54,642 55,208 55,783 56,301 56,763 57,230 57,702 58,180 RE - Rural Estates 19,917 34,760 34,861 35,015 35,141 35,337 35,753 36,686 38,566 41,048 43,895 46,559 48,741 50,965 53,230 55,539 57,562 59,291 61,045 62,824 64,629 66,259 67,710 69,178 70,663 72,167 M - Marco 1,358 1,221 1,223 1,226 1,263 1,319 1,476 1,775 2,057 2,228 2,356 2,434 2,439 2,444 2,450 2,455 2,460 2,465 2,469 2,473 2,477 2,481 2,485 2,489 2,492 2,496 RF - Royal Fakapalm 8,127 12,001 12,667 13,494 14,126 14,859 15,741 16,505 17,723 19,246 20,557 21,813 23,025 24,259 25,517 26,799 27,922 28,882 29,856 30,844 31,846 32,751 33,557 34,372 35,196 36,031 C - Corkscrew 1,114 4,962 6,372 7,804 8,614 9,679 10,927 12,080 13,545 14,866 15,933 16,851 17,466 18,092 18,731 19,381 19,951 20,438 20,932 21,434 21,942 22,402 22,810 23,224 23,643 24,066 I - Immokalee 22,032 24,303 24,569 24,745 24,819 24,868 24,954 25,083 25,317 25,593 25,875 26,090 26,201 26,314 26,429 26,546 26,649 26,737 26,827 26,917 27,009 27,092 27,166 27,240 27,316 27,393 BC - Big Cypress 194 233 235 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 247 248 249 250 250 251 252 252 253 253 254 254 255 Unincorporated SUM 221,139 286,328 290,414 295,223 298,670 303,679 310,112 316,450 324,649 333,755 343,185 351,672 358,354 365,163 372,101 379,170 385,365 390,659 396,031 401,480 407,008 412,000 416,442 420,937 425,486 430,090 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections Cities 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 Everglades City 484 403 404 405 409 418 430 438 426 418 429 432 435 438 441 445 448 451 455 458 462 465 469 472 476 479 Marco Island 14,973 16,428 16,482 16,539 16,582 16,668 16,829 16,983 17,065 17,221 17,472 17,604 17,621 17,639 17,656 17,673 17,728 17,819 17,910 18,001 18,092 18,208 18,347 18,487 18,626 18,765 Naples 21,332 19,494 19,518 19,590 19,563 19,529 19,632 19,966 20,270 20,633 20,993 21,230 21,565 21,899 22,233 22,568 22,902 23,236 23,571 23,905 24,239 24,574 24,908 25,242 25,577 25,911 Incorporated SUM 36,788 36,325 36,403 36,533 36,553 36,614 36,890 37,386 37,760 38,272 38,893 39,265 39,620 39,975 40,331 40,686 41,078 41,506 41,935 42,364 42,793 43,246 43,724 44,201 44,678 45,156 COUNTYWIDE TOTAL 257,926 322,653 326,817 331,756 335,223 340,293 347,002 353,836 362,409 372,027 382,078 390,937 397,975 405,138 412,431 419,855 426,443 432,166 437,966 443,844 449,801 455,246 460,166 465,138 470,165 475,246 notes: 1) These estimates and projections are based upon the spreadsheet of permanent population prepared for April 1, 2000 and 2010-2030. 2) Estimates and projections are derived from data obtained from: 2000 Census and 2010 Census; Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) population bulletins; Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff; and, Planning staff from Naples and Marco Island. 3) Some of the Totals may not equal the sum of the individual figures due to rounding. Prepared by Collier County Zoning Division, June 19, 2021. I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR Appendix I - Population, Countywide\2021 pop est. & proj. _FNL_PRINT_with W&WW by-dw/6-2019 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Countywide COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS -- COUNTYWIDE October 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2044 FISCAL YEAR estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projection projection projection projection projection projection 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 COUNTYWIDE 257,926 322,653 326,817 331,756 335,223 340,293 347,002 353,836 362,409 372,027 382,078 390,937 397,975 405,138 412,431 419,855 426,443 432,166 projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 COUNTYWIDE 437,966 443,844 449,801 455,246 460,166 465,138 470,165 475,246 479,951 484,272 488,632 493,031 497,470 501,601 505,417 509,262 513,137 517,041 COLLIER COUNTY PERMANENT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS -- COUNTYWIDE April 1st 2000 & 2010 - 2045 CENSUS YEAR (Decennial) estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimate estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projection projection projection projection projection projection 2000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 COUNTYWIDE 251,377 321,520 323,785 329,849 333,663 336,783 343,802 350,202 357,470 367,347 376,706 387,450 394,424 401,525 408,752 416,110 423,600 429,285 435,047 projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projection projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 COUNTYWIDE 440,885 446,802 452,800 457,693 462,639 467,638 472,691 477,800 482,102 486,442 490,821 495,240 499,700 503,502 507,332 511,192 515,081 519,000 notes: 1) Estimates and projections are derived from data obtained from: 2000 Census and 2010 Census; Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) population bulletins; Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff; and, Planning staff from Naples and Marco Island. 2) Based upon BEBR Medium Range growth rate projections. Prepared by Collier County Comprehensive Zoning Division, June 19, 2021. I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR Appendix I - Population, Countywide\2021 pop est. & proj. _FNL_PRINT_with W&WW by-dw/6-2019 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Water & Wastewater COLLIER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS October 1 Permanent & Peak Season 2015 - 2039 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections COUNTY WATER 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Permanent Population (Oct.1)179,284 183,805 188,202 194,127 201,342 206,962 211,415 215,953 220,576 225,287 229,416 232,944 236,524 240,155 243,840 247,167 250,127 253,123 256,155 259,223 262,043 264,611 267,204 269,823 272,470 Peak Season Population 215,141 220,566 225,842 232,953 241,610 248,354 253,698 259,143 264,692 270,345 275,299 279,533 283,829 288,187 292,608 296,600 300,153 303,748 307,386 311,067 314,452 317,533 320,645 323,788 326,964 COLLIER COUNTY SEWER DISTRICTS POPULATION ESTIMATES and PROJECTIONS October 1 Permanent & Peak Season 2015 - 2039 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections NORTH SEWER 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Permanent Population (Oct.1)100,242 103,186 105,914 108,908 112,102 114,079 115,319 116,583 117,870 119,182 120,332 121,315 122,312 123,323 124,349 125,276 126,100 126,934 127,779 128,633 129,419 130,134 130,856 131,585 132,322 Peak Season Population 120,290 123,823 127,097 130,690 134,523 136,894 138,383 139,899 141,444 143,019 144,398 145,578 146,774 147,988 149,219 150,331 151,320 152,321 153,334 154,360 155,302 156,160 157,027 157,902 158,787 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections SOUTH SEWER 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Permanent Population (Oct.1)92,784 94,622 96,459 99,239 102,874 106,088 108,837 111,638 114,491 117,399 119,947 122,125 124,334 126,576 128,850 130,903 132,730 134,579 136,450 138,344 140,085 141,669 143,270 144,887 146,520 Peak Season Population 111,340 113,546 115,751 119,086 123,448 127,306 130,604 133,965 137,390 140,879 143,937 146,550 149,201 151,891 154,620 157,084 159,276 161,495 163,740 166,013 168,102 170,003 171,924 173,864 175,824 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections ORANGETREE SEWER 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Permanent Population (Oct.1)4,150 4,202 4,293 4,523 4,978 5,416 5,765 6,121 6,483 6,852 7,176 7,452 7,733 8,017 8,306 8,567 8,798 9,033 9,271 9,511 9,732 9,933 10,137 10,342 10,549 Peak Season Population 4,980 5,043 5,152 5,428 5,974 6,499 6,918 7,345 7,780 8,222 8,611 8,942 9,279 9,621 9,967 10,280 10,558 10,840 11,125 11,413 11,679 11,920 12,164 12,410 12,659 estimates estimates estimates estimates estimates projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections projections GOLDEN GATE SEWER 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 Permanent Population (Oct.1)22,751 22,766 22,797 22,850 22,886 22,910 22,941 22,973 23,005 23,038 23,066 23,091 23,116 23,141 23,167 23,190 23,210 23,231 23,252 23,274 23,293 23,311 23,329 23,347 23,366 Peak Season Population 27,301 27,319 27,357 27,420 27,463 27,492 27,529 27,567 27,606 27,645 27,680 27,709 27,739 27,769 27,800 27,828 27,852 27,877 27,903 27,928 27,952 27,973 27,995 28,017 28,039 notes: 1) Estimates and projections are derived from data obtained/derived from: 2000 Census & 2010 Census; Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) population bulletins; Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff; and, Planning staff from Naples and Marco Island. 2) Peak Season population is derived by increasing each year's October 1 permanent population by 20% (.20). 3) Based upon BEBR Medium Range growth rate projections. Prepared by Collier County Zoning Division July 7, 2021. I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR Appendix I - Population, Countywide\2021 pop est. & proj. _FNL_PRINT_with W&WW 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.cPacket Pg. 159Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!.!. !.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!.!. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !.!.!. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !.!. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !.!.!.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !.!. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!.!. !.!.!.!. !. !.!. !. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !.!. !.!.!. !. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. I 75 SR 29US 41 CR 846 SR 92EVERGLADES BLVDCR 858CR 850IMMOKALEE RD E SR 82 LIVINGSTON RD SR 951SR 29 NIMMOKALEE RDGREEN BLVDVANDERBILT DRRADIO RDI 75US 41 2 0 2 1 R E S I D E N T I A L D W E L L I N G C E R T I F I C A T E O F O C C U P A N C Y F O R U N I N C O R P O R A T E D C O L L I E R C O U N T Y2021 R E S I D E N T I A L D W E L L I N G C E R T I F I C A T E O F O C C U P A N C Y F O R U N I N C O R P O R A T E D C O L L I E R C O U N T Y T o t a l R e s i d e n t i a l B u i l d i n g P e r m i t C .O : 2 ,7 9 3Total R e s i d e n t i a l B u i l d i n g P e r m i t C .O : 2 ,7 9 3 T o t a l D U s : 3 ,5 4 8 (S F D U s : 2 ,7 2 2 ; M F D U s : 8 2 6 )T o t a l D U s : 3 ,5 4 8 (S F D U s : 2 ,7 2 2 ; M F D U s : 8 2 6 ) CITY O FNAPLES CITY O FEVERGLADES Immokalee ¹ CITY O FMARCO ISLAND Corkscrew Rural Estates Royal Fakapalm Big Cypress UrbanEstates North Naples GoldenGateCentralNaples EastNaples SouthNaples Marco Marco 0 5 102.5 Miles LEGEN D PLANNING COMMUNITY: RESIDEN TIAL COs (04/01/20- 03/31/21)!. Central Naples North Naples Immokalee Big C ypress Urban Estates Golden Gate East Naples South N aples Marco Royal Fakapalm Rural Estates Corkscrew Incorporated Areas GIS Mapping: Beth Yang, AICPGrowth Management D epartment 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( ! ( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( SABAL BAY LELY RESORT HERITAGE BAY MARC.SHRS/FIDLR'S CRK MARC.SHRS/FIDLR'S CRK PELICAN BAY HACIENDA LAKES VINEYARDS WINDING CYPRESSMEDITERRA GREY OAKS WENTWORTH ESTATES QUAIL WEST TERAFINA ISLANDWALK PARKLANDS PELICAN MARSHWILLOW RUNFOXFIREESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLESCITY GATE WARREN BROTHERSPELICAN STRANDWYNDEMERE RIGASCOLLIER TRACT 22GREY OAKS GOLF CLUB OF THE EVERGLADES WINDSTARBERKSHIRE LAKES T USC A N Y RESERV E KINGS LAKELELY COUNTRY CLUBQUAIL IIGREY OAKS RETREAT EAGLE CREEKBRETONNE PARKLELY BAREFOOT BEACHKENSI NGTON PARKAUDUBON COUNTRY CLUBLONGSHORE LAKETWELVE LAKESMONTEREYCOLLIER TRACT 21 BRIARWOODCARLTON LAKESORANGE TREEMALIBU LAKECYPRESS WOODS G & C CLUBTHREE HUN.AC.GOODLETTE RDSILVER LAKESIBIS COVEHOMES OF ISLANDIA COLLIER BLVDI M M O K A L E E R D TAMIAMI TRL EINTERSTATE 75LIVINGSTON RDTAMIAMI TRL NSAN MARCO RDDAVIS BLVDGOODLETTE RD NPINE RIDGE RD RADIO RD GOLDEN GATE PKY LOGAN BLVD NSANTA BARBARA BLVDVANDERBILT BEACH RDVANDERBILT DRAIRPORT PULLING RD NGOLDEN GATE BLVD W 9TH ST NB A L D E A G L E D R N BARFIELD DR GREEN BLVDOLD US 41RATTLESNAKE HAMMO CK RD WILSON BLVD NN COLLIER BLVDS BARFIELD DRS COLLI ER BLVDCOUNTY BARN RDBONITA BEACH RD AIRPORT PULLING RD SVANDERBILT BEACH RD EXT WILSON BLVD SG O O D L A N D D R SEAGATE DR 9TH ST SBLUEBILL AVE CITY O FNAPLES LEE CO UN TY L IN E CITY O FMARCO ISLAND 2005-2021 RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DATA(Date: 04/01/2005-03/31/2021) · Legend Residential Single Family Planned Unit D evelopment (PUD ) Residential Multi Family YEAR*SF MF SF & MF2005-2006 2,572 2,144 4,7162006-2007 2,850 2,963 5,8132007-2008 1,403 2,732 4,1352008-2009 433 638 1,0712009-2010 563 459 1,0222010-2011 588 692 1,2802011-2012 747 480 1,2272012-2013 806 454 1,2602013-2014 1,436 286 1,7222014-2015 2,065 1,010 3,0752015-2016 2,548 777 3,3252016-2017 2,776 980 3,7562017-2018 2,440 444 2,8842018-2019 2,652 1,156 3,8082019-2020 3,216 1,016 4,2322020-2021 2,722 826 3,548TOTAL29,817 17,057 46,874 *YEAR =Ap ri l 1 - Ma rch 31 Dwe ll ing Uni ts CO'd Countywide 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Based on June 2022 Bud WorkshopPARKS:Parks Impact Fee District FundRegional Parks - Incorporated Areas (345)202120222023202420252026Naples & Marco Permanent Population39,620 39,975 40,331 40,686 41,078 41,506 Population Increase % 0.90% 0.89% 0.88% 0.96% 1.04%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees-Regional275,000275,000275,000277,400279,800282,500285,4001,400,100Interest/Misc.12,00082,00012,00012,00012,00012,00012,00060,000Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)384,7001,890,300688,3000000688,300Total Revenues:671,7002,247,300975,300289,400291,800294,500297,4002,148,400Project Expenses:Caxambas Community Center01,445,100000000Debt Service Expense (fund 345):Fd 298 - 2011 and 2013 bond (Sun-N-Fun)00300,000300,000300,000300,000300,0001,500,000Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.00300,000300,000300,000300,000300,0001,500,000Parks Impact Fee District FundCommunity and Regional Parks - Unincorporated Area (346)202120222023202420252026County Wide Peak Population - Regional Parks 477,569 486,166 494,918 503,826 511,731 518,599 Population Increase % 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.57% 1.34%Unincorporated Peak Population - Community Parks 430,025 438,196 446,521 455,003 462,438 468,791 Population Increase % 1.90% 1.90% 1.90% 1.63% 1.37%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees-Regional6,051,6007,232,4007,232,4007,362,6007,495,1007,612,7007,714,90037,417,700Impact Fees-Community2,148,4002,567,6002,567,6002,616,4002,666,1002,709,7002,746,90013,306,700Interest/Misc.500,000200,000200,000200,000200,000200,000200,0001,000,000Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)10,450,70037,958,5004,576,30000004,576,300Total:19,150,70047,958,50014,576,30010,179,000#########10,522,40010,661,80056,300,700Project Expenses:Big Corkscrew Pk Equipment2,445,000 3,167,100 0 0 0 0 0 0Big Corkscrew Park 9,893,200 35,836,300 5,824,400 0 0 0 0 5,824,400Park Master Plan & Other on-going projects 165,700 0 0 0 0 0 0Total Project expenses12,338,20039,169,1005,824,40000005,824,400Debt Service Expense (fund 346):2013 BondN Regional Pk123,471123,471123,471123,471123,471123,4713,059,5713,553,455 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment02011 bondN Regional Pk2,824,5292,824,5292,518,3292,520,4632,528,7992,557,877010,125,468 Final debt service payment on 10/1/202502019 LoanGG Golf Course*765,100765,100768,7002,919,0002,933,3002,856,6002,119,64616,613,917 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment5,016,671Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.3,713,1003,713,1003,410,5005,562,9005,585,6005,537,90010,195,90030,292,840 *The loan amt for GG Golf Course is the full annual debt service payment. Once the property is re-purposed, the debt will be allocated to the appropriate parties (funds).Page 16/23/20219.A.1.cPacket Pg. 162Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Based on June 2022 Bud WorkshopEmergency Medical ServicesEMS Impact Fee (350)202120222023202420252026County Wide Peak Population477,569 486,166 494,918 503,826 511,731 518,599 Population Increase % 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.57% 1.34%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees375,000450,000450,000458,100466,300473,600480,0002,328,000Interest/misc20,0008,2008,2008,2008,2008,2008,20041,000Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)1,140,4001,638,1001,263,80000001,263,800Total:1,535,4002,096,3001,722,000466,300474,500481,800488,2003,632,800Project Expenses:EMS Station - GG Estates037,700000000EMS Station - Hacienda Lakes0230,000000000Other Project30,00099,00050,000000050,00030,000366,70050,000000050,000Debt Service Expense (fund 350):helicopter2013 bondEm Serv Ctr109,000109,000109,000109,000109,000109,000310,2001,019,800 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment273,6002010/2017 bondambulances, Old US41 land & ESC153,100153,100153,000153,100153,000153,000153,000765,1002011 bondEm Serv Ctr180,800180,800182,500182,800183,400185,4000734,100 Final debt service payment on 10/1/2025Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.442,900442,900444,500444,900445,400447,400736,8002,519,000Collier County Library DepartmentLibrary Impact Fee Fund (355)202120222023202420252026County Wide Peak Population477,569 486,166 494,918 503,826 511,731 518,599 Population Increase % 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.57% 1.34%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees775,000960,000960,000977,300994,9001,010,5001,024,1004,966,800Interest/Misc.11,0004,0004,0004,0004,0004,0004,00020,000Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)769,7001,021,400787,100787,100Total:1,555,7001,985,4001,751,100981,300998,9001,014,5001,028,1015,773,901Debt Service Expense (fund 355):2010B bondN N Regional Lib444,800444,800442,1000000442,1002010/2017 bondSouth Regional/exp GG Libraries616,100616,100616,000616,300616,100616,100616,2003,080,700Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.1,060,9001,060,9001,058,100616,300616,100616,100616,2003,522,800Page 26/23/20219.A.1.cPacket Pg. 163Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Based on June 2022 Bud WorkshopGENERAL GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES:General Governmental Facilities Impact Fees (390)202120222023202420252026County Wide Peak Population477,569 486,166 494,918 503,826 511,731 518,599 Population Increase % 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.57% 1.34%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees2,500,0002,800,0002,800,0002,850,4002,901,7002,947,2002,986,80014,486,100Interest/Misc.35,00015,00015,00015,00015,00015,00015,00075,000Loan/Transfer from General Fund (001)00000000Loan/Transfer from County-Wide Capital Improv Fund (301)2,192,1002,192,1002,032,0002,526,4002,482,4002,461,4003,100,90012,603,100Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)3,878,1004,483,8003,676,1003,676,100Total:8,605,2009,490,9008,523,1005,391,8005,399,1005,423,6006,102,70030,840,300Debt Service Expense (fund 390):2013 bondCH annex, garage, ESC, Fleet1,358,4001,358,4001,358,4001,358,4001,358,4001,358,4003,864,90012,708,200 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment3,409,7002011 bond CH annex, garage, ESC, Fleet2,253,4002,253,4002,274,5002,277,4002,285,3002,309,80009,147,000 Final debt service payment on 10/1/202502010/2017 bondAnnex, Fleet, ESC1,755,2001,755,2001,755,0001,756,0001,755,4001,755,4001,755,7008,777,5002010B bondN N Satellite Offices208,800208,800207,6000000207,600Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.5,575,8005,575,8005,595,5005,391,8005,399,1005,423,6009,030,30030,840,300Page 36/23/20219.A.1.cPacket Pg. 164Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Based on June 2022 Bud Workshop-CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES:Correctional Facilities Impact Fees (381)202120222023202420252026County Wide Peak Population477,569 486,166 494,918 503,826 511,731 518,599 Population Increase % 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% 1.57% 1.34%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees1,350,0001,600,0001,600,0001,628,8001,658,1001,684,1001,706,7008,277,700Interest/Misc.12,0008,0008,0008,0008,0008,0008,00040,000Loan/Transfer from County-Wide Capital Improv Fund (301)000000210,800210,800Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)1,953,7002,370,0001,937,5001,937,500Total:3,315,7003,978,0003,545,5001,636,8001,666,1001,692,1001,925,50010,466,000Debt Service Expense (fund 381):2013 bondNaples Jail expansion285,500285,500285,500285,500285,500284,800284,8001,568,500 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment142,4002011 bond Naples Jail expansion1,536,5001,536,5001,504,4001,489,4001,463,9001,465,6001,527,9008,897,500 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment1,446,300Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.1,822,0001,822,0001,789,9001,774,9001,749,4001,750,4003,401,40010,466,000LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY:Law Enforcement Facilities Impact Fees (385)202120222023202420252026Unincorporated Area Peak Population 430,025 438,196 446,521 455,003 462,438 468,791Everglades City Population435 438 441 445 448 451total 430,460 438,634 446,962 455,448 462,886 469,243 Population Increase % 1.90% 1.90% 1.90% 1.63% 1.37%FY 21FY 21FY 22FY 23FY 24FY 25FY 26FY22 - FY26RevenuesAdoptedActual/ForecastTentativeProjectedProjectedProjectedProjectedTotalImpact Fees1,400,0001,820,0001,820,0001,854,6001,889,8001,920,7001,947,1009,432,200Interest/misc20,00010,00010,00010,00010,00010,00010,00050,000Loan/Transfer from County-Wide Capital Improv Fund (301)00000000Beginning Cash Balance (Carryfoward)1,639,6002,362,9002,125,2002,125,200Total:3,059,6004,192,9003,955,2001,864,6001,899,8001,930,7001,957,10011,607,400Debt Service Expense (fund 385):2013 bondEOC263,900263,900263,900263,900263,900263,900750,9002,469,000 Reserve for (10/1/26) debt service payment662,5002010/2017 bondSpec Ops, Fleet, EOC1,129,6001,129,6001,129,5001,130,1001,129,7001,129,7001,129,9005,648,9002011 bondEOC437,800437,800441,900442,500444,000448,80001,777,200 Final debt service payment on 10/1/20250Total Debt Service Payments to be made from Impact Fees.1,831,3001,831,3001,835,3001,836,5001,837,6001,842,4002,543,3009,895,100Page 46/23/20219.A.1.cPacket Pg. 165Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) APPENDIX II CONTENTS: •RECREATION FACILITY TYPE GUIDELINES •CONSERVATION COLLIER − TRAILS LIST •CURRENT COUNTY RECREATION FACILITIES ‒INVENTORY •PLANNED COUNTY RECREATION FACILITIES •PARKS AND RECREATIONAL DATA •PARKS BEACH AND WATER DATA Collier County 2020 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 477,569 511,731 Required Required Anticipated LOS Guideline Inventory Current Surplus/Inventory Inventory Surplus/ Facility Guideline per 1000 2021 Inventory Deficit 2025 2025 Deficit Water Access Points 1/10,000 0.1 48 99 51 51 100 49 Athletic Fields*1/6,000 0.167 80 110 30 85 141 56 Hard Courts 1/4,000 0.25 119 259 140 128 271 143 Indoor Recreation Facility (sq ft).45/capita 450 214,906 221,843 6,937 230,279 231,843 1,564 Pathways/Conservation Trails (miles) **1/10,000 0.1 48 62.8 15 51 64.8 14 Water Access Points Athletic Fields Hard Courts Indoor Recreation Facility Pathway / Conservation Trail Includes community centers, fitness centers, gymnasiums, and other public indoor recreation facilities Includes stand-alone recreational pathways, trails in conservation lands, and recreational pathways removed by a physical separation from vehicular right-of-way; does not include sidewalks and bike lanes. * Athletic Fields show a surplus county-wide but does not take into consideration the deficits experienced at some of our park sites. **951 Pathway along Golden Gate Canal is 100% designed but there is no funding budgeted for construction Recreation Facility Type Guidelines 2021 Population: 2025 Population: Includes public beach access points, boat ramp lanes, fishing access points, canoe/kayak launches, and any other fresh or saltwater access facilities Note: Inventory includes 45 City of Naples beach, water accesses fishing access points. LOSG was determined with projected build-out population taken into consideration. Acquisition and development of surplus water access is advisable in consideration of its dwindling availability Includes softball, baseball, Little League, football/soccer/field hockey/lacrosse fields, and any other grass-surfaced playing fields (Master Plan states that we need additional athletic fields due to location and demand). Includes basketball, racquetball, shuffleboard, bocce, tennis, pickleball, and any other hard-surfaced playing courts Note: Current LOSG is approximately 1/2,500. LOSG was lowered in response to a significant quantity of hard courts available in the private sector 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) District Location Type(R=Regional, C=Community,N=Neighborhood, S=School)AcreageBeach Acces PointsFishing Access PointsNonmotorized Vessel LaBoat Ramp LanesTOTAL Open WaterAccess PointsMultiuse FieldsSoccer/Football/LacrosseBaseball FieldsSoftball FieldsLittle League FieldsTOTAL Athletic FieldsTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickleball)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickleball)Basketball CourtsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/ Pickleball Courts (1 Racquetball = 1 Pickleball)Bocce CourtsShuffleboard CourtsPickelball CourtsTOTAL Hard CourtsIndoor RecreationFacility (sq ft)Multiuse Pathways/Trail milesCentral Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park R 25.16 1 1 0 0.72 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Park R 79.00 1 1 0 0.99 Central Naples Naples Zoo R 50.00 0 0 52,184 2.00 Central Naples Rock Harbour Parcel N 0.10 0 East Naples Bay Street Land Parcels R 1.34 0 East Naples Bayview R 6.27 1 3 4 0 East Naples Cindy Mysels C 5.00 2 2 East Naples Coconut Circle N 1.20 0 1 East Naples East Naples CP C 47.00 1 1 3 1 4 2 4 4 6 58 East Naples Naples Manor N 0.30 0 0 East Naples Sugden Regl Park R 120.00 1 1 1 3 1 1 Golden Gate Aaron Lutz N 3.20 1 1 2 2 2 6 Golden Gate Paradise Coast Sports Park R 195.95 5 6 5 16 Golden Gate GG Comm Ctr C 21.00 1 1 3 Golden Gate Golden Gate CP C 35.00 2 2 1 1 2 1 5 3 6 1 2 4 1 4 1.50 Golden Gate Golden Gate Golf Course R 167.00 0 0 9,695 1.00 Golden Gate Golden Gate Greenway C 3.00 0 1,725 0.40 Golden Gate Palm Springs N 6.70 1 1 0 Golden Gate Rita Eaton Park N 4.80 0 1.51 Immokalee Airport Park C 19.00 1 1 Immokalee Anne Olesky / Lake Trafford R 2.30 1 1 2 0 Immokalee Dreamland N 0.50 1 1 0 8,906 2.00 Immokalee Eden Park Elementary S 2.80 1 1 2,476 1.50 Immokalee Imm High School S 1.00 0 2 1 3 6,594 2.00 Immokalee Immokalee CP C 23.00 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 7 4,277 Immokalee Immokalee South Park C 3.45 1 1 1 1 15,715 Immokalee Immokalee Sports Cplx C 14.00 3 3 1 Immokalee Oil Well Park N 5.50 0 Immokalee Panther Park (lease)N 0.50 0 1 Immokalee Pepper Ranch R 50.00 0 Immokalee Tony Rosbaugh Pk C 7.00 3 3 Marco 951 Boat Ramp R 0.50 2 2 0 Marco Caxambas Park R 4.20 1 2 3 0 Marco Goodland R 5.00 1 2 3 0 1.40 Marco Isles Capri N 0.35 0 1 1 Marco Isles Capri Land Parcel N 0.11 0 0 Marco Isles of Capri Paddlecraft Park R 9.00 1 1 0 1 Marco MarGood R 2.50 1 1 2 0 0 11,798 Marco South Marco R 5.00 1 1 0 Marco Tigertail Beach R 31.60 1 1 0 1,998 North Naples Barefoot Access R 5.00 1 1 0 North Naples Barefoot Beach State Land R 186.00 0 North Naples Barefoot Preserve R 159.60 1 1 2 0 North Naples Clam Pass R 35.00 1 1 2 0 0.21 North Naples Cocohatchee River R 7.56 1 4 5 0 0 North Naples Conner Park R 5.00 1 1 0 North Naples Naples Pk Elem/Starcher Pettay S 5.00 1 1 2 North Naples NC Regional Park R 207.70 1 1 8 5 13 2 North Naples NN Neighbor Park/Best Friends (surpN 0.36 0 1.00 North Naples North Gulfshore Beach Access R 0.50 1 1 0 2.88 North Naples Oakes Park N 2.00 1 1 0 North Naples Osceola School S 3.20 2 2 0.20 North Naples Palm River N 3.00 0 North Naples Pelican Bay C 15.00 1 1 8 1 4 2.00 North Naples Poinciana N 0.30 0 1 1 7,400 2021 AUIR Collier County Recreation Current Facilities Inventory 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) District Location Type(R=Regional, C=Community,N=Neighborhood, S=School)AcreageBeach Acces PointsFishing Access PointsNonmotorized Vessel LaBoat Ramp LanesTOTAL Open WaterAccess PointsMultiuse FieldsSoccer/Football/LacrosseBaseball FieldsSoftball FieldsLittle League FieldsTOTAL Athletic FieldsTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickleball)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickleball)Basketball CourtsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/ Pickleball Courts (1 Racquetball = 1 Pickleball)Bocce CourtsShuffleboard CourtsPickelball CourtsTOTAL Hard CourtsIndoor RecreationFacility (sq ft)Multiuse Pathways/Trail milesNorth Naples Vanderbilt Beach R 5.00 1 1 0 North Naples Vanderbilt Beach Access R 0.45 7 7 0 North Naples Veterans Comm Park C 43.64 1 1 3 5 8 4 2 4 North Naples Veterans Memorial S 4.00 2 2 4 North Naples Vineyards CP C 35.50 4 2 6 4 2 4 4 8 22 6,573 North Naples Willoughby Park N 1.20 0 South Naples Eagle Lakes Park C 32.00 2 1 1 4 2 1 3 10,123 2.00 South Naples Manatee C 60.00 0 2,380 0.40 South Naples Port of the Islands R 5.55 1 1 0 Urban Estates BCIRP R 62.00 4 2 6 2 2 6 Urban Estates BCIRP Lake R 90.00 0 Urban Estates Corkscrew Elementary/Middle S 16.90 1 1 1 3 4 2 2 Urban Estates Livingston Woods (surplus)N 2.73 0 0.27 Urban Estates Max Hasse CP C 20.00 2 2 2 1 Urban Estates Palmetto Elementary S 2.00 1 1 0 Urban Estates Randall Curve C 47.00 0 Urban Estates Rich King Greenway - FPL R 37.50 0 Urban Estates Sabal Palm Elem S 9.50 2 2 4 2 2 Urban Estates Vanderbilt Extension C 120.00 0 Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park PreservP 11.60 1 1 0 0 24,376 0.49 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Preserve P 50.51 1 1 0 0 0.99 East Naples Shell Island Preserve P 111.88 0 Immokalee Caracara Prairie Preserve P 367.70 0 Immokalee Panther Walk Preserve P 10.69 0 0 0.31 Immokalee Pepper Ranch Preserve P 2,511.90 0 0 21.04 Marco McIlvane Marsh P 380.89 0 Marco Otter Mound Preserve P 2.45 0 0.20 North Naples Alligator Flag Preserve P 18.46 0 0.49 North Naples Cochatchee Creek Preserve P 3.64 0 2,040 0.21 North Naples Logan Woods Preserve P 6.78 0 0.27 North Naples Railhead Scrub Preserve P 135.36 0 North Naples Wet Woods Preserve P 26.77 0 0 9,083 Urban Estates Camp Keais Strand P 32.50 0 7.17 Urban Estates Dr Robert H. Gore III P 171.21 0 1.20 Urban Estates Nancy Payton Preserve P 71.00 0 2.88 East Naples Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve P 37.16 Urban Estates Red Maple Swamp Preserve P 216.38 0 Urban Estates Redroot Preserve P 9.26 0 0.63 Urban Estates Rivers Road Preserve P 76.74 0 1.79 Urban Estates Winchester Head Preserve P 93.56 0 Total Collier Units 6,535.96 15 13 7 17 52 20 30 11 27 9 97 42 8 5 35 24 0 3 16 72 205 177,343 61.65 City of Naples Anthony Park Neighbor 7.00 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 Beach Accesses R 0.50 42 42 Cambier Park C 12.84 1 1 12 1 2 5 20 12,000 Fleischmann Park C 25.26 2 2 2 6 2 4 4 10 7,000 Lowdermilk Park R 10.30 1 1 Naples Landings R 3.81 3 3 Naples Preserve R 9.78 0.40 Baker Park R 15.20 River Park CC C 1.61 1 1 11,000 Total Naples Units 86.30 43 1 0 3 47 3 0 3 1 2 9 13 0 0 5 4 0 2 5 4 33 30,000 0.40 City of Marco Island Frank Mackle C 30.00 1 1 2 6 8 7,000 0.50 Jane Hittler Neighbor 0.25 Leigh Plummer Neighbor 3.50 0.25 Racquet Center C 2.97 8 2 10 Veterans' Memorial Neighbor 0.25 2 2 Winterberry Neighbor 5.00 1 1 Total Marco Units 41.97 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 4 8 2 2 0 6 0 18 7,000 0.75 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) District Location Type(R=Regional, C=Community,N=Neighborhood, S=School)AcreageBeach Acces PointsFishing Access PointsNonmotorized Vessel LaBoat Ramp LanesTOTAL Open WaterAccess PointsMultiuse FieldsSoccer/Football/LacrosseBaseball FieldsSoftball FieldsLittle League FieldsTOTAL Athletic FieldsTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickleball)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickleball)Basketball CourtsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/ Pickleball Courts (1 Racquetball = 1 Pickleball)Bocce CourtsShuffleboard CourtsPickelball CourtsTOTAL Hard CourtsIndoor RecreationFacility (sq ft)Multiuse Pathways/Trail milesEverglades City Community Park C 0.86 7,500 McLeod Park C 1.04 2 1 3 Total Everglades Units 1.90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 7,500 0 COUNTYWIDE 99 110 259 221,843 62.80 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Anticipated Opening DateAquatic CenterBeach Parking SpacesBeach Acces PointsFishing Access PointsNonmotorized Vessel Launch / Canoe & KayakBoat Ramp LanesTOTAL Open Water Access PointsMultiuse Fields (Football/Soccer)Baseball FieldsSoftball FieldsLittle League FieldsTOTAL Athletic FieldsTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickleball)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickleball)Basketball CourtsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/ Pickleball Courts (1 Racquetball = 1 Pickleball)Bocce CourtsShuffleboard CourtsPickelball CourtsTOTAL Hard CourtsIndoor Recreation Facility (sq ft)Multiuse Pathways/Trails (miles)Location 2021/22-2025/26 Big Corkscrew Island RP-Facility Dev - PH 1 2020/2021 1 1 4 2 6 2 2 6 10 10,000 2 Big Corkscrew Island RP-Facility Dev - PH 2 2021/2022 4 4 2 2 Paradise Coast Sport Complex PH1 5 5 Paradise Coast Sport Complex PH2 5 6 5 16 2021/22-2025/26 1 31 12 10,000 2 Anticipated Opening DateAquatic CenterBeach Parking SpacesBeach Acces PointsFishing Access PointsNonmotorized Vessel Launch / Canoe & KayakBoat Ramp LanesTOTAL Open Water Access PointsMultiuse Fields (Football/Soccer)Baseball FieldsSoftball FieldsLittle League FieldsTOTAL Athletic FieldsTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickleball)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickleball)Basketball CourtsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/ Pickleball Courts (1 Racquetball = 1 Pickleball)Bocce CourtsShuffleboard CourtsPickelball CourtsTOTAL Hard CourtsIndoor Recreation Facility (sq ft)Multiuse Pathways/TrailsLocation 2027/28-2030/31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2027/28-2030/31 0 0 0 0 0 10 yr. Total 2021/22-2030/31 1 31 12 10,000 2 2021 AUIR Collier County Planned Recreation Facilities (2021/22 through 2025/26) 2021 AUIR Collier County Planned Recreation Facilities (2027/28 through 2030/31) 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Preserve Preserve Acreage Linear feet o Miles of Trails Acres of Trails and Amenities ("Usable acreage") Camp Keais Strand 32.50 Dr. Robert H. Gore III 171.21 McIlvane Marsh 380.89 Railhead Scrub 135.36 Red Maple Swamp 213.88 Shell Island 83.18 Wet Woods 26.77 Winchester Head 87.41 Alligator Flag 18.46 2,567 0.49 0.59 Caracara Prairie Preserve 367.70 37,855 7.17 10.43 Cocohatchee Creek Preserve 3.64 1,090 0.21 0.22 Freedom Park 12.50 3,805 0.72 0.94 Gordon River Greenway 50.51 5,213 0.99 1.35 Logan Woods 6.78 1,400 0.27 0.29 Nancy Payton Preserve 71.00 15,182 2.88 3.53 Otter Mound Preserve 2.45 1,060 0.20 0.20 Panther Walk Preserve 10.69 1,624 0.31 0.30 *Pepper Ranch Preserve 2,511.90 106,061 20.09 31.08 Redroot Preserve 9.26 3,319 0.63 0.76 Rivers Road Preserve 76.74 7,977 1.51 2.49 Total 4,272.83 187,153 35.45 52.18 Conservation Collier Trails 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Attribute Inventory 2018Facility Attribute Inventory 2021 District Location FUND Cost Center Type (R=Regional, C=Community, N=Neighborhood , S=School, P=Preserve) Acreage Preserve Acreage Active Acreage - Developed Active Acreage - Undeveloped Community Park Acres Regional Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres Amphitheater Archeological Site Baseball Fields Baseball Poles Baseball Lights Basketball Courts / Indoor and Outdoor Beach / Lakefront Operations Bike / Walk / Hike Trails BMX Tracks Boat Ramps Bocce Campgrounds Canoe / Kayak Launch Community / Recreation Center Concession Building/ Trailer Cricket Disc Golf Dog Parks Fishing / Catch and Release Fishing / Dock / Pier Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park 001 156366 R 25.16 8.41 16.75 25.16 1 1 Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park Preserve 174 178998 P 11.60 11.60 0.38 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Park 001 156338 R 79.00 79.00 79.00 1 1 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Preserve 174 178992 P 50.51 50.51 0.64 Central Naples Naples Zoo 001 R 50.00 50.00 50.00 Central Naples Rock Harbour Parcel 111 122255 N 0.10 0.10 0.10 East Naples Bay Street Land Parcels 001 156338 R 1.34 1.34 East Naples Bayview 001 156338 R 6.27 6.27 6.27 3 1 East Naples Cindy Mysels 111 156381 C 5.00 5.00 5.00 East Naples Coconut Circle 111 156332 N 1.20 1.20 1.20 1 East Naples East Naples CP 111 185381 C 47.00 22.05 24.95 47.00 4 2 1 1 1 East Naples Naples Manor 111 156332 N 0.30 0.30 0.30 East Naples Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve 174 178997 P 37.16 37.16 East Naples Shell Island Preserve 174 178998 P 111.88 111.88 East Naples Sugden Regional Park 001 156361 R 120.00 22.85 97.15 120.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 Golden Gate Aaron Lutz 111 156332 N 3.20 3.20 3.20 2 Golden Gate GG Comm Ctr 130 157710 C 21.00 21.00 21.00 1 3 1 1 1 Golden Gate Golden Gate CP 111 156313 C 35.00 35.00 35.00 1 8 98 2 2 2 1 1 1 Golden Gate Golden Gate Golf Course 001 156370 R 167.00 167.00 Golden Gate Golden Gate Greenway 111 156332 C 3.00 3.00 3.00 Golden Gate Palm Springs 111 156332 N 6.70 6.70 6.70 1 1 Golden Gate Paradise Coast Sports Complex Park 759 101551 R 195.95 195.95 195.95 1 1 2 Golden Gate Rita Eaton Park 111 156332 N 4.80 4.80 4.80 Golden Gate Serenity Walk Park 111 156332 N Immokalee Airport Park 111 156332 C 19.00 19.00 19.00 1 Immokalee Anne Olesky / Lake Trafford 001 156338 R 2.30 2.30 2.30 1 1 Immokalee Caracara Prairie Preserve 674 178988 P 367.70 367.70 2.8 Immokalee Dreamland 111 156332 N 0.50 0.50 0.50 Immokalee Eden Park Elementary 111 156332 S 2.80 2.80 2.80 Immokalee Imm High School 111 156332 S 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 Immokalee Immokalee CP 111 156343 C 23.00 23.00 23.00 1 8 60 3 1 1 1 Immokalee Immokalee South Park 111 156385 C 3.45 3.45 3.45 1 1 Immokalee Immokalee Sports Cplx 111 156349 C 14.00 14.00 14.00 1 Immokalee Oil Well Park 111 156332 N 5.50 5.50 5.50 Immokalee Panther Park (lease)111 156332 N 0.50 0.50 0.50 1 Immokalee Panther Walk Preserve 174 178998 P 10.69 10.69 0.3 Immokalee Pepper Ranch - (incl.Panther Mitigation acres) 174 178994 R 50.00 50.00 1 10 Immokalee Pepper Ranch - Panther Habitat Mitigation Fund 673 178998 P Immokalee Pepper Ranch Preserve 174 178994 P 2,511.90 2,511.90 16.63 Immokalee Small Cemetery 111 156332 Immokalee Tony Rosbaugh Pk 111 156349 C 7.00 7.00 7.00 1 Marco 951 Boat Ramp 001 156363 R 0.50 0.50 0.50 2 Marco Caxambas Park 001 156364 R 4.20 4.20 4.20 2 1 1 Marco Goodland 001 156364 R 5.00 5.00 5.00 0.5 2 1 1 Marco Isles Capri 111 156332 N 0.35 0.15 0.20 0.35 1 Marco Isles Capri Land Parcel 111 156332 N 0.11 0.11 0.11 Marco Isles of Capri Paddlecraft Park 001 156363 R 9.00 9.00 1 1 Marco MarGood 001 156338 R 2.50 2.50 2.50 1 1 1 Marco McIlvane Marsh 174 178998 P 380.89 380.89 Marco Otter Mound Preserve 174 178998 P 2.45 2.45 0.19 Marco South Marco 001 156363 R 5.00 5.00 5.00 1 Marco Tigertail Beach 001 156363 R 31.60 22.83 8.77 31.60 1 6 1 North Naples Alligator Flag Preserve 174 178998 P 18.46 18.46 0.49 North Naples Barefoot Access 001 156363 R 5.00 5.00 5.00 1 North Naples Barefoot Beach State Land 001 156363 R 186.00 186.00 North Naples Barefoot Preserve 001 156363 R 159.60 159.60 159.60 1 1 1 1 North Naples Clam Pass 001 156363 R 35.00 13.13 21.87 35.00 1 1 1 1 North Naples Cochatchee Creek Preserve 174 178998 P 3.64 3.64 0.23 North Naples Cocohatchee River 001 156363 R 7.56 7.20 0.36 7.56 4 1 1 North Naples Conner Park 001 156338 R 5.00 5.00 5.00 North Naples Logan Woods Preserve 174 178998 P 6.78 6.78 0.19 North Naples Naples Pk Elem/Starcher Pettay 111 156380 S 5.00 5.00 5.00 1 North Naples NC Regional Park 001 156312/156365/ 156344/156312 R 207.70 207.70 207.70 2 1 3 1 North Naples NN Neighbor Park/Best Friends (surplus)111 156332 N 0.36 0.36 North Naples North Gulfshore Beach Access 001 156338 R 0.50 0.50 0.50 1 North Naples Oakes Park 111 156332 N 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.5 1 North Naples Osceola School 111 156332 S 3.20 3.20 3.20 North Naples Palm River 111 156332 N 3.00 3.00 1 North Naples Pelican Bay 111 156380 C 15.00 15.00 15.00 1 1 1 North Naples Poinciana 111 156332 N 0.30 0.30 0.30 1 North Naples Railhead Scrub Preserve 174 178995 P 135.36 135.36 North Naples Vanderbilt Access 001 156363 R 0.45 0.45 7 North Naples Vanderbilt Beach 001 156363 R 5.00 5.00 5.00 1 1 North Naples Veterans Comm Park 111 156380 C 43.64 43.64 43.64 1 8 72 2 1 1 2 1 North Naples Veterans Memorial 111 156380 S 4.00 4.00 4.00 North Naples Vineyards CP 111 156390 C 35.50 35.50 35.50 2 1 1 1 North Naples Wet Woods Preserve 174 178998 P 26.77 26.77 North Naples Willoughby Park 111 156332 N 1.20 1.20 1.20 1 South Naples Eagle Lakes Park 111 156398 C 32.00 3.20 28.80 32.00 1 8 56 1 2 2 1 1 South Naples Manatee 111 156332 C 60.00 60.00 60.00 South Naples Port of the Islands 001 156364 R 5.55 5.55 5.55 2 1 Urban Estates BCIRP 001 156367 R 62.00 62.00 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 Urban Estates BCIRP Lake 001 156367 R 90.00 90.00 90.00 Urban Estates Camp Keais Strand 174 178998 P 32.50 32.50 Urban Estates Corkscrew Elementary/Middle 111 156332 S 16.90 16.90 16.90 1 8 58 2 Urban Estates Dr Robert H. Gore III 174 178977 P 171.21 171.21 Urban Estates Livingston Woods (surplus)174 178998 N 2.73 2.73 Urban Estates Max Hasse CP 111 156395 C 20.00 6.55 13.45 20.00 1 1 1 Urban Estates Nancy Payton Preserve 174 178993 P 71.00 71.00 1.89 Urban Estates Palmetto Elementary 111 156332 S 2.00 2.00 2.00 Urban Estates Randall Curve 111 156332 C 47.00 47.00 47.00 Urban Estates Red Maple Swamp Preserve 174 178997 P 216.38 216.38 0.63 Urban Estates Redroot Preserve 174 178998 P 9.26 9.26 Urban Estates Rich King Greenway - FPL 001 156338 R 37.50 37.50 1 Urban Estates Rivers Road Preserve 174 178996 P 76.74 76.74 Urban Estates Sabal Palm Elem 111 156332 S 9.50 9.50 9.50 2 Urban Estates Vanderbilt Extension 111 156332 C 120.00 120.00 120.00 Urban Estates Winchester Head Preserve 174 178998 P 93.56 93.56 Total 97 6,535.96 County-wide Total 6,535.96 4,495.56 972.51 548.51 594.99 1,561.68 32.85 4.00 2.00 7.00 40.00 344.00 35.00 17.00 50.37 1.00 18.00 3.00 10.00 6.00 11.00 28.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 6.00 Water Access Points 53 Athletic Fields 94 Hard Courts 205 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Attribute Inventory 2018Facility Attribute Inventory 2021 District Location FUND Cost Center Type (R=Regional, C=Community, N=Neighborhood , S=School, P=Preserve) Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park 001 156366 R Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park Preserve 174 178998 P Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Park 001 156338 R Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Preserve 174 178992 P Central Naples Naples Zoo 001 R Central Naples Rock Harbour Parcel 111 122255 N East Naples Bay Street Land Parcels 001 156338 R East Naples Bayview 001 156338 R East Naples Cindy Mysels 111 156381 C East Naples Coconut Circle 111 156332 N East Naples East Naples CP 111 185381 C East Naples Naples Manor 111 156332 N East Naples Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve 174 178997 P East Naples Shell Island Preserve 174 178998 P East Naples Sugden Regional Park 001 156361 R Golden Gate Aaron Lutz 111 156332 N Golden Gate GG Comm Ctr 130 157710 C Golden Gate Golden Gate CP 111 156313 C Golden Gate Golden Gate Golf Course 001 156370 R Golden Gate Golden Gate Greenway 111 156332 C Golden Gate Palm Springs 111 156332 N Golden Gate Paradise Coast Sports Complex Park 759 101551 R Golden Gate Rita Eaton Park 111 156332 N Golden Gate Serenity Walk Park 111 156332 N Immokalee Airport Park 111 156332 C Immokalee Anne Olesky / Lake Trafford 001 156338 R Immokalee Caracara Prairie Preserve 674 178988 P Immokalee Dreamland 111 156332 N Immokalee Eden Park Elementary 111 156332 S Immokalee Imm High School 111 156332 S Immokalee Immokalee CP 111 156343 C Immokalee Immokalee South Park 111 156385 C Immokalee Immokalee Sports Cplx 111 156349 C Immokalee Oil Well Park 111 156332 N Immokalee Panther Park (lease)111 156332 N Immokalee Panther Walk Preserve 174 178998 P Immokalee Pepper Ranch - (incl.Panther Mitigation acres) 174 178994 R Immokalee Pepper Ranch - Panther Habitat Mitigation Fund 673 178998 P Immokalee Pepper Ranch Preserve 174 178994 P Immokalee Small Cemetery 111 156332 Immokalee Tony Rosbaugh Pk 111 156349 C Marco 951 Boat Ramp 001 156363 R Marco Caxambas Park 001 156364 R Marco Goodland 001 156364 R Marco Isles Capri 111 156332 N Marco Isles Capri Land Parcel 111 156332 N Marco Isles of Capri Paddlecraft Park 001 156363 R Marco MarGood 001 156338 R Marco McIlvane Marsh 174 178998 P Marco Otter Mound Preserve 174 178998 P Marco South Marco 001 156363 R Marco Tigertail Beach 001 156363 R North Naples Alligator Flag Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Barefoot Access 001 156363 R North Naples Barefoot Beach State Land 001 156363 R North Naples Barefoot Preserve 001 156363 R North Naples Clam Pass 001 156363 R North Naples Cochatchee Creek Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Cocohatchee River 001 156363 R North Naples Conner Park 001 156338 R North Naples Logan Woods Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Naples Pk Elem/Starcher Pettay 111 156380 S North Naples NC Regional Park 001 156312/156365/ 156344/156312 R North Naples NN Neighbor Park/Best Friends (surplus)111 156332 N North Naples North Gulfshore Beach Access 001 156338 R North Naples Oakes Park 111 156332 N North Naples Osceola School 111 156332 S North Naples Palm River 111 156332 N North Naples Pelican Bay 111 156380 C North Naples Poinciana 111 156332 N North Naples Railhead Scrub Preserve 174 178995 P North Naples Vanderbilt Access 001 156363 R North Naples Vanderbilt Beach 001 156363 R North Naples Veterans Comm Park 111 156380 C North Naples Veterans Memorial 111 156380 S North Naples Vineyards CP 111 156390 C North Naples Wet Woods Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Willoughby Park 111 156332 N South Naples Eagle Lakes Park 111 156398 C South Naples Manatee 111 156332 C South Naples Port of the Islands 001 156364 R Urban Estates BCIRP 001 156367 R Urban Estates BCIRP Lake 001 156367 R Urban Estates Camp Keais Strand 174 178998 P Urban Estates Corkscrew Elementary/Middle 111 156332 S Urban Estates Dr Robert H. Gore III 174 178977 P Urban Estates Livingston Woods (surplus)174 178998 N Urban Estates Max Hasse CP 111 156395 C Urban Estates Nancy Payton Preserve 174 178993 P Urban Estates Palmetto Elementary 111 156332 S Urban Estates Randall Curve 111 156332 C Urban Estates Red Maple Swamp Preserve 174 178997 P Urban Estates Redroot Preserve 174 178998 P Urban Estates Rich King Greenway - FPL 001 156338 R Urban Estates Rivers Road Preserve 174 178996 P Urban Estates Sabal Palm Elem 111 156332 S Urban Estates Vanderbilt Extension 111 156332 C Urban Estates Winchester Head Preserve 174 178998 P Total 97 County-wide Total Water Access Points 53 Athletic Fields 94 Hard Courts 205 Fitness Centers Fitness Pavilion Fitness Outdoor NFC pad Food Truck Pavilion Gymnasium Horseshoes Little League Fields Little League Poles Little League Lights Market Building Marinas Multipurpose Facility Multiuse Fields Nature / Cultural / Historical Centers Pickleball Courts Picnic Pavilions Playgrounds Racquetball Courts Racquetball/Pickleball Courts (1 Raquet = 1 Pickle) Roller Hockey (Inline skate) Rinks Senior Centers Shuffleboard Skate Park Soccer / Football Fields Soccer Poles Soccer Lights Softball Fields Softball Poles Softball Lights 1 3 2 1 6 1 2 8 38 1 1 58 4 1 4 1 6 3 12 80 1 8 29 1 2 1 7 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 24 3 1 4 4 1 6 42 2 14 54 2 1 1 1 1 4 5 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 6 32 1 1 2 1 2 1 14 48 1 1 1 1 3 18 109 3 1 1 3 8 45 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 8 29 1 1 13 1 8 36 288 5 42 220 1 1 2 12 67 1 1 1 4 1 8 2 1 4 1 1 6 46 3 20 102 1 2 2 6 34 7 1 4 4 4 2 15 157 1 1 4 2 2 12 64 1 8 52 1 1 2 6 14 1 4 2 2 1 6 32 1 6 42 1 2 1 2 1 6 28 2 8 52 2 12 66 5.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 9.00 42.00 203.00 4.00 4.00 17.00 4.00 72.00 88.00 31.00 24.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 16.00 2.00 39.00 122.00 807.00 22.00 139.00 770.00 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Attribute Inventory 2018Facility Attribute Inventory 2021 District Location FUND Cost Center Type (R=Regional, C=Community, N=Neighborhood , S=School, P=Preserve) Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park 001 156366 R Central Naples Fred W Coyle Freedom Park Preserve 174 178998 P Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Park 001 156338 R Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Preserve 174 178992 P Central Naples Naples Zoo 001 R Central Naples Rock Harbour Parcel 111 122255 N East Naples Bay Street Land Parcels 001 156338 R East Naples Bayview 001 156338 R East Naples Cindy Mysels 111 156381 C East Naples Coconut Circle 111 156332 N East Naples East Naples CP 111 185381 C East Naples Naples Manor 111 156332 N East Naples Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve 174 178997 P East Naples Shell Island Preserve 174 178998 P East Naples Sugden Regional Park 001 156361 R Golden Gate Aaron Lutz 111 156332 N Golden Gate GG Comm Ctr 130 157710 C Golden Gate Golden Gate CP 111 156313 C Golden Gate Golden Gate Golf Course 001 156370 R Golden Gate Golden Gate Greenway 111 156332 C Golden Gate Palm Springs 111 156332 N Golden Gate Paradise Coast Sports Complex Park 759 101551 R Golden Gate Rita Eaton Park 111 156332 N Golden Gate Serenity Walk Park 111 156332 N Immokalee Airport Park 111 156332 C Immokalee Anne Olesky / Lake Trafford 001 156338 R Immokalee Caracara Prairie Preserve 674 178988 P Immokalee Dreamland 111 156332 N Immokalee Eden Park Elementary 111 156332 S Immokalee Imm High School 111 156332 S Immokalee Immokalee CP 111 156343 C Immokalee Immokalee South Park 111 156385 C Immokalee Immokalee Sports Cplx 111 156349 C Immokalee Oil Well Park 111 156332 N Immokalee Panther Park (lease)111 156332 N Immokalee Panther Walk Preserve 174 178998 P Immokalee Pepper Ranch - (incl.Panther Mitigation acres) 174 178994 R Immokalee Pepper Ranch - Panther Habitat Mitigation Fund 673 178998 P Immokalee Pepper Ranch Preserve 174 178994 P Immokalee Small Cemetery 111 156332 Immokalee Tony Rosbaugh Pk 111 156349 C Marco 951 Boat Ramp 001 156363 R Marco Caxambas Park 001 156364 R Marco Goodland 001 156364 R Marco Isles Capri 111 156332 N Marco Isles Capri Land Parcel 111 156332 N Marco Isles of Capri Paddlecraft Park 001 156363 R Marco MarGood 001 156338 R Marco McIlvane Marsh 174 178998 P Marco Otter Mound Preserve 174 178998 P Marco South Marco 001 156363 R Marco Tigertail Beach 001 156363 R North Naples Alligator Flag Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Barefoot Access 001 156363 R North Naples Barefoot Beach State Land 001 156363 R North Naples Barefoot Preserve 001 156363 R North Naples Clam Pass 001 156363 R North Naples Cochatchee Creek Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Cocohatchee River 001 156363 R North Naples Conner Park 001 156338 R North Naples Logan Woods Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Naples Pk Elem/Starcher Pettay 111 156380 S North Naples NC Regional Park 001 156312/156365/ 156344/156312 R North Naples NN Neighbor Park/Best Friends (surplus)111 156332 N North Naples North Gulfshore Beach Access 001 156338 R North Naples Oakes Park 111 156332 N North Naples Osceola School 111 156332 S North Naples Palm River 111 156332 N North Naples Pelican Bay 111 156380 C North Naples Poinciana 111 156332 N North Naples Railhead Scrub Preserve 174 178995 P North Naples Vanderbilt Access 001 156363 R North Naples Vanderbilt Beach 001 156363 R North Naples Veterans Comm Park 111 156380 C North Naples Veterans Memorial 111 156380 S North Naples Vineyards CP 111 156390 C North Naples Wet Woods Preserve 174 178998 P North Naples Willoughby Park 111 156332 N South Naples Eagle Lakes Park 111 156398 C South Naples Manatee 111 156332 C South Naples Port of the Islands 001 156364 R Urban Estates BCIRP 001 156367 R Urban Estates BCIRP Lake 001 156367 R Urban Estates Camp Keais Strand 174 178998 P Urban Estates Corkscrew Elementary/Middle 111 156332 S Urban Estates Dr Robert H. Gore III 174 178977 P Urban Estates Livingston Woods (surplus)174 178998 N Urban Estates Max Hasse CP 111 156395 C Urban Estates Nancy Payton Preserve 174 178993 P Urban Estates Palmetto Elementary 111 156332 S Urban Estates Randall Curve 111 156332 C Urban Estates Red Maple Swamp Preserve 174 178997 P Urban Estates Redroot Preserve 174 178998 P Urban Estates Rich King Greenway - FPL 001 156338 R Urban Estates Rivers Road Preserve 174 178996 P Urban Estates Sabal Palm Elem 111 156332 S Urban Estates Vanderbilt Extension 111 156332 C Urban Estates Winchester Head Preserve 174 178998 P Total 97 County-wide Total Water Access Points 53 Athletic Fields 94 Hard Courts 205 Splash Parks Stadium Stage Swimming / Aquatic Center Tennis Courts Tennis/ Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickle) Tennis/ Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickle) Ticket Booth Track / Running Volleyball Courts Water Park Welcome Center Car Parking Car Handicapped Parking Law Enforcement Parking Boat Trailer Parking Hanidcapped Trailer Parking Car Overflow Parking Trailer Overflow Parking Total Parking Spaces Beach Parking Spaces Parking Garage 37 3 40 46 3 49 31 4 35 12 2 1 46 2 9 72 40 2 42 2 1 204 6 42 252 1 183 16 199 2 1 14 1 15 268 14 282 1 3 6 1 391 17 10 418 1 1 2 1 1 6 2 7 15 2 2 1 142 8 150 1 1 521 7 528 67 2 69 10 72 2 84 14 2 29 2 47 13 2 1 73 2 91 51 6 4 61 18 2 20 64 3 67 67 210 6 10 226 216 90 6 96 96 229 13 160 402 402 191 7 198 198 84 4 54 1 143 150 6 156 156 2 40 40 1 1154 28 1182 36 2 38 38 8 1 57 3 60 1 349 12 361 361 1 8 4 1 331 8 339 1 4 279 10 289 1 2 120 8 200 328 22 2 21 50 95 1 2 4 1 2 204 9 213 1.00 4.00 42.00 8.00 5.00 1.00 8.00 1.00 5,678.00 226.00 12.00 316.00 9.00 402.00 59.00 6,702.00 1,534.00 1.00 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) District Location Anticipated Opening DateBaseball FieldsBasketball Courts / Indoor and OutdoorBch Parking SpacesBeach / Lakefront OperationsBike / Walk / Hike TrailsBMX TracksBoat RampsBocceCampgroundsCanoe / Kayak LaunchCommunity / Recreation CenterConcession BuildingDog ParksFishing / Catch and ReleaseFishing / Dock / PierFitness CentersFitness PavilionFitness- Outdoor NFC padFood Truck PavilionGymnasiumHorseshoesLittle League FieldsMarket BuildingMarinasMultipurpose FacilityMultiuse FieldsNature / Cultural / Historical CentersPickleball CourtsPicnic PavilionsPlaygroundsRacquetball CourtsRacquetball/Pickleball Courts (1 Raquet = 1 Pickle)Roller Hockey (Inline skate) RinksSenior CentersShuffleboard Skate ParkSoccer / Football FieldsSoftball FieldsSplash ParksStadiumStageSwimming / Aquatic CenterTennis CourtsTennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 3 Pickle)Tennis/Pickleball Courts (1 Tennis = 2 Pickle)Ticket BoothTrack / RunningVolleyball CourtsWater ParkWelcome CenterBig Corkscrew Island RP - PH 1 20/21 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 6 14 1 4 2 1 1 2 Big Corkscrew Island RP - PH 2 21/22 4 2 1 1 1 Paradise Coast Sports PH 1 1 2 1 1 1 5 1 1 2 1 1 Paradise Coast Sports PH 2 6 1 5 6 North Collier Regional Park 2022 1 County-wide Total 12 4 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 6 14 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 7 1 Water Access Points 2 Athletic Fields 31 Hard Courts 12 Future Attribute Inventory 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Fund 346 Additions FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 BCIRP 39,003,400$ 5,824,400$ -$ -$ -$ P&R Master Plan & Other Ongoing Projects 165,700$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total 39,169,100$ 5,824,400$ -$ -$ -$ Impact Fees 9,800,000$ 9,800,000$ 9,979,000$ 10,161,200$ 10,322,400$ Debt Service 3,713,100$ 3,410,500$ 5,562,900$ 5,585,600$ 5,537,900$ Expenses 39,169,100$ 5,824,400$ -$ -$ -$ Reserves 4,876,300$ 565,100$ 4,416,100$ 4,575,600$ 4,784,500$ 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Impact Fee 9,800,000$ 9,979,000$ 10,161,200$ 10,322,400$ 10,461,800$ 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY 19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE CENTRAL AVE LIBRARY 2,350 3,535 2,858 1,841 10,584 ELCP 1,456 1,979 1,149 799 5,383 ENCP 3,181 3,777 2,124 1,332 10,414 EVERGLADES CITY 25 78 53 36 192 FREEDOM PARK 236 599 692 343 1,870 GGCC 3,080 3,620 3,630 2,628 12,958 IMCP 113 159 198 136 606 MARCO LIBRARY 1,685 2,251 1,828 1,006 6,770 MHCP 573 974 1,221 913 3,681 NCRP 1,295 1,737 1,268 930 5,230 NORTH COLLIER SERVICE CENTER 5,595 7,852 8,233 6,531 28,211 TAX COLLECTOR 3,998 4,539 4,182 3,208 15,927 VTCP 5,530 5,781 4,600 2,731 18,642 VYCP 1,341 2,193 4,403 906 8,843 TOTAL 30,458 39,074 36,439 23,340 129,311 FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY 20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE CENTRAL AVE LIBRARY 2,276 2,670 1,685 2,428 9,059 ELCP 1,487 1,857 1,440 1,366 6,150 ENCP 2,619 3,598 980 609 7,806 EVERGLADES CITY 39 56 59 66 220 FREEDOM PARK 370 504 325 377 1,576 GGCC 3,052 3,502 2,427 1,306 10,287 IMCP 123 122 101 172 518 MARCO LIBRARY 1,683 2,422 408 1,111 5,624 MHCP 666 777 - 272 1,715 NCRP 1,180 1,686 4,020 5,332 12,218 NORTH COLLIER SERVICE CENTER 4,550 9,392 6,245 8,887 29,074 TAX COLLECTOR 4,211 4,902 3,719 4,854 17,686 VTCP 4,310 5,202 2,952 1 12,465 VYCP 1,445 1,840 - 269 3,554 TOTAL 28,011 38,530 24,361 27,050 117,952 FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY 21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE CENTRAL AVE LIBRARY 1,906 3,116 2,874 - 7,896 ELCP 663 2,667 1,685 - 5,015 ENCP 2,615 4,005 2,359 - 8,979 EVERGLADES CITY 49 73 57 - 179 FREEDOM PARK 281 528 481 - 1,290 GGCC 3,207 4,452 4,268 - 11,927 IMCP 150 193 225 - 568 MARCO LIBRARY 1,568 2,148 1,709 - 5,425 MHCP 713 1,084 2,361 - 4,158 NCRP 2,149 2,105 1,689 - 5,943 NORTH COLLIER SERVICE CENTER 7,532 8,982 8,962 - 25,476 TAX COLLECTOR 4,360 4,935 4,867 - 14,162 VTCP 3,892 6,202 7,952 - 18,046 VYCP 772 2,130 1,524 - 4,426 TOTAL 29,857 42,620 41,013 - 113,490 BEACH PARKING PERMITS RESIDENT ISSUED 2021 BEACH PARKING PERMITS RESIDENT ISSUED 2019 BEACH PARKING PERMITS RESIDENT ISSUED 2020 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY19 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 12,464 25,539 18,140 4,370 60,513 BAREFOOT PRESERVE 40,339 136,358 70,109 15,022 261,828 CLAM PASS 23,431 61,577 43,161 8,784 136,953 CONNER PARK 2,991 9,857 8,253 708 21,809 SO MARCO 18,352 23,686 24,323 8,229 74,590 N GULF SHORE 5,520 8,771 8,487 2,134 24,912 SUGDEN 7,010 17,278 12,328 3,101 39,717 TIGERTAIL 36,271 61,202 41,988 12,182 151,643 VANDERBILT 57,732 103,385 84,742 23,431 269,290 Walkers/Bike Visitors 10,265 30,505 11,090 1,749 53,609 TOTAL BEACH USERS 214,375 478,158 322,621 79,710 1,094,864 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY20 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 11,111 20,752 11,927 9,271 53,061 BAREFOOT PRESERVE 43,046 98,878 43,874 45,514 231,312 CLAM PASS 21,322 53,969 24,598 18,953 118,842 CONNER PARK 2,926 10,800 3,581 6,144 23,451 SO MARCO 18,600 21,242 14,257 19,773 73,872 N GULF SHORE 2,561 7,800 5,813 8,412 24,586 SUGDEN 4,030 9,754 5,081 7,982 26,847 TIGERTAIL 29,964 54,843 29,088 32,033 145,928 VANDERBILT 59,270 88,665 57,828 57,485 263,248 Walkers/Bike Visitors 8,193 22,865 7,629 5,491 44,178 TOTAL BEACH USERS 201,023 389,568 203,676 211,058 1,005,325 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY21 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 10,285 19,965 15,698 -45,948 BAREFOOT PRESERVE 49,853 84,129 46,335 -180,317 CLAM PASS 11,328 49,299 35,781 -96,408 CONNER PARK 4,788 9,663 9,372 -23,823 SO MARCO 18,418 29,163 16,639 -64,220 N GULF SHORE 6,661 9,550 40,990 -57,201 SUGDEN 6,564 18,113 14,700 -39,377 TIGERTAIL 30,610 59,666 40,152 -130,428 VANDERBILT 64,642 92,537 74,300 -231,479 Walkers/Bike Visitors 9,816 25,565 11,212 -46,593 TOTAL BEACH USERS 212,965 397,650 305,179 -915,794 Beach Users FY20 Beach Users FY19 Beach Users FY21 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY19 YE Ann Olesky/LAKE TRAFFORD 1,395 - 1,502 492 3,389 BAYVIEW 9,633 13,670 15,800 4,387 43,490 CAXAMBAS 11,592 22,524 17,640 4,766 56,522 COCO 8,645 11,783 14,966 6,991 42,385 GOODLAND BOAT PARK 5,859 9,480 7,705 1,963 25,007 SR 951 5,162 7,818 9,047 2,618 24,645 PORT OF THE ISLANDS 5,919 10,270 7,713 2,374 26,276 TOTAL BOAT LAUNCH 48,205 75,545 74,373 23,591 221,714 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY20 YE Ann Olesky/LAKE TRAFFORD 1,401 3,312 1,699 1,500 7,912 BAYVIEW 10,176 15,691 13,536 14,062 53,465 CAXAMBAS 13,809 19,166 11,854 16,697 61,526 COCO 14,609 14,174 10,181 14,181 53,145 GOODLAND BOAT PARK 6,654 11,517 9,129 7,990 35,290 SR 951 5,601 10,276 12,214 9,026 37,117 PORT OF THE ISLANDS 6,577 8,942 6,835 4,630 26,984 TOTAL BOAT LAUNCH 58,827 83,078 65,448 68,086 275,439 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY21 YE Ann Olesky/LAKE TRAFFORD 1,805 2,681 1,075 -5,561 BAYVIEW 11,633 20,724 16,888 -49,245 CAXAMBAS 14,543 25,755 13,757 -54,055 COCO 11,736 14,319 9,384 -35,439 GOODLAND BOAT PARK 5,434 11,724 6,264 -23,422 SR 951 7,308 9,176 8,688 -25,172 PORT OF THE ISLANDS 6,139 5,579 4,689 -16,407 TOTAL BOAT LAUNCH 58,598 89,958 60,745 -209,301 Boat Launch Users FY21 Boat Launch Users FY19 Boat Launch Users FY20 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY19 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 10 49 13 1 73 BAREFOOT PRESERVE 5 14 11 - 30 CLAM PASS 2 21 6 - 29 CONNER PARK 1 2 2 - 5 SO MARCO 29 71 64 47 211 N GULF SHORE 4 19 12 4 39 SUGDEN - - - - - TIGERTAIL 3 8 1 - 12 VANDERBILT 4 31 10 1 46 TOTAL DAYS AT CAPACITY 58 215 119 53 445 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY20 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 10 18 4 1 33 BAREFOOT PRESERVE 4 25 3 - 32 CLAM PASS 5 22 - 2 29 CONNER PARK - 1 1 - 2 SO MARCO 32 57 39 41 169 N GULF SHORE 5 22 18 17 62 SUGDEN - - - - - TIGERTAIL 5 7 3 5 20 VANDERBILT 5 24 5 2 36 TOTAL DAYS AT CAPACITY 66 176 73 68 383 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY21 YE BAREFOOT ACCESS 3 19 17 -39 BAREFOOT PRESERVE -17 14 -31 CLAM PASS -6 3 -9 CONNER PARK -1 5 -6 SO MARCO 33 61 43 -137 N GULF SHORE 17 28 13 -58 SUGDEN ----— TIGERTAIL 3 12 11 -26 VANDERBILT 3 11 12 -26 TOTAL DAYS AT CAPACITY 59 155 118 -332 Days at Capacity FY 19 Days at Capacity FY 20 Days at Capacity FY21 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY 19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE Aaron Lutz - - 1 - 1 Barefoot Beach 2 - 5 - 7 Bayview Park - - - - - Caxambas Park - - - - - Clam Pass 3 3 5 - 11 Cocohatchee River Park 2 16 12 79 109 Corkscrew Middle & Elem School 23 26 32 14 95 Cypress Palm Middle School - - - - - Eagle Lakes Community Park 171 190 260 223 844 East Naples Community Park 203 100 38 25 366 East Naples Middle School - - - - - Eden Park 5 22 23 13 63 Freedom Park 3 - - - 3 Golden Gate Aquatic and Fitness - - - - - Golden Gate Community Center 302 366 284 252 1,204 Golden Gate Communuity Park 350 426 500 263 1,539 Golden Gate Middle School - - - - - Goodland Boat Park - 12 - - 12 Gordon River Greenway 1 - Gulf Coast Community Park - - - - - Gulf Coast High School - - - - - Immokalee Airport Park 18 7 6 8 39 Immokalee Community Park 42 39 53 66 200 Immokalee High School - - - - - Immokalee South Park 19 15 26 16 76 Immokalee Sports Complex 7 8 11 12 38 Margood Harbor Park 1 - - - 1 Max Hasse Community Park 82 120 94 70 366 NCRP Admin - 1 56 1 58 NCRP Aquatic 11 - 12 6 29 NCRP Exhibit Hall 184 224 76 138 622 NCRP Pavilions 9 29 32 13 83 NCRP Rec Plex 32 44 48 67 191 NCRP Soccer 30 57 100 180 367 NCRP Soccer Pavilions 33 14 - - 47 NCRP Softball 135 37 91 41 304 North Gulf Shore Access - - - 1 1 Osceola Elementary School 74 13 2 19 108 Palmetto Elementary 8 18 12 11 49 Pelican Bay Community Park 9 11 6 2 28 Pepper Ranch 40 41 11 - 92 Sabal Palm Elementary - 56 63 25 144 South Marco Beach Access 2 4 5 4 15 Starcher Pettey - - - 3 3 Sugden Regional Park 124 51 37 43 255 Tigertail 1 3 1 2 7 Tony Rosbourgh - - - - - Vanderbilt Beach 1 - 1 2 4 Veterans Community Park 623 568 318 221 1,730 Veterans Memorial 68 - - - 68 Vineyards Community Park 1,905 871 986 389 4,151 Total Facility Rentals 4,522 3,393 3,207 2,209 13,331 FEE-BASED FACILITY RENTALS 2019 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY 20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE Aaron Lutz - - - - - Barefoot Beach 6 3 - 1 10 Bayview Park - - - - - Caxambas Park - - - - - Clam Pass 5 6 2 3 16 Cocohatchee River Park 35 12 - - 47 Corkscrew Middle & Elem School 28 88 46 38 200 Cypress Palm Middle School 1 - - - 1 Eagle Lakes Community Park 236 316 200 206 958 East Naples Community Park 271 127 13 44 455 East Naples Middle School - 2 1 - 3 Eden Park 21 24 - - 45 Freedom Park 2 4 - - 6 Golden Gate Aquatic and Fitness - - - - - Golden Gate Community Center 338 351 110 189 988 Golden Gate Communuity Park 413 398 209 328 1,348 Golden Gate Middle School - - - - - Goodland Boat Park - - - - - Gulf Coast Community Park - - - - - Gulf Coast High School - - - - - Immokalee Airport Park 13 5 - 1 19 Immokalee Community Park 45 41 3 32 121 Immokalee High School - - - - - Immokalee South Park 18 19 1 8 46 Immokalee Sports Complex 4 7 - 8 19 Margood Harbor Park 8 4 - - 12 Max Hasse Community Park 117 132 73 33 355 NCRP Admin - 1 - 2 3 NCRP Aquatic - - - - - NCRP Exhibit Hall 149 157 123 143 572 NCRP Pavilions 34 46 28 84 192 NCRP Rec Plex 33 45 1 3 82 NCRP Soccer 178 255 129 294 856 NCRP Soccer Pavilions 27 - - - 27 NCRP Softball 86 12 8 110 216 North Gulf Shore Access 2 1 - - 3 Osceola Elementary School 75 83 60 - 218 Palmetto Elementary 5 14 - 7 26 Pelican Bay Community Park 6 4 - - 10 Pepper Ranch 14 124 98 - 236 Sabal Palm Elementary 26 79 44 28 177 South Marco Beach Access 5 3 - 2 10 Starcher Pettey - - - - - Sugden Regional Park 184 70 89 2 345 Tigertail 1 3 - 1 5 Tony Rosbourgh - - - - - Vanderbilt Beach 1 - - - 1 Veterans Community Park 502 413 126 137 1,178 Veterans Memorial 57 53 40 35 185 Vineyards Community Park 1,671 552 399 532 3,154 Total Facility Rentals 4,617 3,454 1,803 2,271 12,145 FEE-BASED FACILITY RENTALS 2020 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY 21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE Aaron Lutz - 1 - - 1 Barefoot Beach 4 3 1 - 8 Bayview Park - - - - - Caxambas Park - - - - - Clam Pass 4 - 2 - 6 Cocohatchee River Park 6 7 7 - 20 Corkscrew Middle & Elem School 69 130 86 - 285 Cypress Palm Middle School - - - - - Eagle Lakes Community Park 289 295 216 - 800 East Naples Community Park 50 367 106 - 523 East Naples Middle School - - - - - Eden Park - - - - - Freedom Park 2 6 - - 8 Golden Gate Aquatic and Fitness - - - - - Golden Gate Community Center 281 273 174 - 728 Golden Gate Communuity Park 420 613 231 - 1,264 Golden Gate Middle School - - - - - Goodland Boat Park 1 - 1 - 2 Gulf Coast Community Park - - - - - Gulf Coast High School - - - - - Immokalee Airport Park 6 7 5 - 18 Immokalee Community Park 37 32 18 - 87 Immokalee High School - - - - - Immokalee South Park 10 11 7 - 28 Immokalee Sports Complex 31 6 13 - 50 Margood Harbor Park - 3 3 - 6 Max Hasse Community Park 155 148 115 - 418 NCRP Admin - - - - - NCRP Aquatic - - - - - NCRP Exhibit Hall 167 126 79 - 372 NCRP Pavilions 20 38 21 - 79 NCRP Rec Plex 3 67 22 - 92 NCRP Soccer 318 379 308 - 1,005 NCRP Soccer Pavilions 64 - - - 64 NCRP Softball 175 188 195 - 558 North Gulf Shore Access - 1 - - 1 Osceola Elementary School 56 26 - - 82 Palmetto Elementary 5 12 9 - 26 Pelican Bay Community Park 5 5 5 - 15 Pepper Ranch 17 42 3 - 62 Sabal Palm Elementary 65 68 60 - 193 South Marco Beach Access 5 1 3 - 9 Starcher Pettey - - - - - Sugden Regional Park 134 87 30 - 251 Tigertail 1 - - - 1 Tony Rosbourgh - - - - - Vanderbilt Beach - - - - - Veterans Community Park 425 517 265 - 1,207 Veterans Memorial 53 31 33 - 117 Vineyards Community Park 1,791 683 1,246 - 3,720 Total Facility Rentals 4,669 4,173 3,264 - 12,106 FEE-BASED FACILITY RENTALS 2021 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Site FY19 Q1 FY19 Q2 FY19 Q3 FY19 Q4 FY19 YE Corkscrew Elementary/Middle School 969 1,514 1,003 1,013 4,499 Eagle Lakes Community Park 130 842 644 509 2,125 East Naples Community Park 434 688 445 263 1,830 Eden Elementary School 270 325 230 260 1,085 Golden Gate Community Park 812 864 1,123 302 3,100 Gulf Coast 348 660 445 45 1,498 Immokalee Community Park 180 618 286 - 1,083 Immokalee Sports Complex 1,404 1,560 525 825 4,314 Max Hasse Community Park 322 194 509 520 1,545 Naples Park Field (Starcher Petty)300 370 180 6 856 North Collier Regional Park - Soccer 650 1,514 934 968 4,065 North Collier Regional Park - Softball 1,291 1,121 1,109 574 4,094 Osceola Elementary School 468 520 360 60 1,408 Palmetto Elementary School 390 200 193 280 1,062 Sabal Palm Elementary School 960 1,541 781 1,120 4,402 Tony Rosbough 160 360 200 - 720 Veterans CP 1,400 950 1,100 540 3,990 Veterans Memorial - 340 40 80 460 Vineyards CP 3,838 2,558 3,099 413 9,908 Totals 14,324 16,738 13,204 7,778 52,043 Field Usage Hours FY19 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Site FY20 Q1 FY20 Q2 FY20 Q3 FY20 Q4 FY20 YE Corkscrew Elementary/Middle School 1,336 1,177 - 533 3,046 Eagle Lakes Community Park 525 410 183 378 1,496 East Naples Community Park 408 374 - 198 980 Eden Elementary School 330 240 - 165 735 Golden Gate Community Park 820 778 123 247 1,968 Gulf Coast 200 434 - - 634 Immokalee Community Park 200 520 - - 720 Immokalee Sports Complex 1,560 1,560 765 1,245 5,130 Max Hasse Community Park 320 200 98 401 1,019 Naples Park Field (Starcher Petty)80 140 - - 220 North Collier Regional Park - Soccer 1,119 1,177 578 840 3,713 North Collier Regional Park - Softball 1,056 163 98 365 1,682 Osceola Elementary School 240 290 - - 530 Palmetto Elementary School 428 200 - - 628 Sabal Palm Elementary School 572 1,523 - 219 2,313 Tony Rosbough 180 300 - - 480 Veterans CP 1,290 975 47 372 2,684 Veterans Memorial 240 200 - 140 580 Vineyards CP 5,384 1,588 1,591 1,096 9,658 Totals 16,287 12,249 3,483 6,196 38,214 Site FY21 Q1 FY21 Q2 FY21 Q3 FY21 Q4 FY21 YE Corkscrew Elementary/Middle School 1,419 1,577 1,517 - 4,513 Eagle Lakes Community Park 652 744 629 - 2,025 East Naples Community Park 461 393 - - 854 Eden Elementary School 300 360 260 - 920 Golden Gate Community Park 919 1,040 909 - 2,868 Gulf Coast - 660 - - 660 Immokalee Community Park 135 850 430 - 1,415 Immokalee Sports Complex 1,556 1,560 555 - 3,671 Max Hasse Community Park 355 437 382 - 1,174 Naples Park Field (Starcher Petty)108 90 270 - 468 North Collier Regional Park - Soccer 926 1,577 1,530 - 4,033 North Collier Regional Park - Softball 992 1,269 941 - 3,202 Osceola Elementary School 220 231 291 - 742 Palmetto Elementary School 491 260 458 - 1,209 Sabal Palm Elementary School 1,823 1,960 1,858 - 5,641 Tony Rosbough 100 664 475 - 1,239 Veterans CP 554 1,079 1,003 - 2,636 Veterans Memorial 200 140 100 - 440 Vineyards CP 7,288 2,159 3,962 - 13,410 Totals 18,498 17,051 15,569 - 51,117 Field Usage Hours FY21 Field Usage Hours FY20 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY 19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE ELCP 240 511 206 170 1,127 ENCP (Pickleball)- - - - - GGCP (Aquatic and Fitness)576 766 414 284 2,040 GGCC (Wheels)45 94 106 98 343 Home Based - - - - - IMSC 886 1,074 962 923 3,845 MHCP 129 140 118 158 545 NCRP Aquatic (Sun-N-Fun)57 69 416 162 704 NCRP Rec Plex 498 994 498 591 2,581 Payroll Deduction 158 199 309 196 862 VTCP (Pickleball)179 - - - 179 Total Memberships Sold 2,768 3,847 3,029 2,582 12,226 FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY 20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE ELCP 287 385 18 53 743 ENCP (Pickleball)- - - - - GGCP (Aquatic and Fitness)353 417 57 175 1,002 GGCC (Wheels)85 117 106 208 516 Home Based - - - - - IMSC 852 812 62 476 2,202 MHCP 153 132 17 49 351 NCRP Aquatic (Sun-N-Fun)54 - (1) - 53 NCRP Rec Plex 593 764 110 359 1,826 Payroll Deduction 152 147 41 107 447 VTCP (Pickleball)- - - - - Total Memberships Sold 2,529 2,774 410 1,427 7,140 FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY 21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE ELCP 94 217 179 - 490 ENCP (Pickleball)- - - - - GGCP (Aquatic and Fitness)160 226 230 - 616 GGCC (Wheels)253 379 157 - 789 Home Based - - - - - IMSC 525 935 765 - 2,225 MHCP 54 88 146 - 288 NCRP Aquatic (Sun-N-Fun)- - - - - NCRP Rec Plex 369 516 676 - 1,561 Payroll Deduction 85 93 32 - 210 Total Memberships Sold 1,540 2,454 2,185 - 6,179 MEMBERSHIPS SOLD FY 2021 MEMBERSHIPS SOLD FY 2019 MEMBERSHIPS SOLD FY 2020 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY 19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE ELCP 23,282 28,887 11,299 24,288 87,756 ENCP 80,839 154,173 130,833 52,049 417,894 GGCC 41,288 36,010 29,746 29,688 136,732 GGCP 16,682 19,065 19,311 15,984 71,042 IMCP 20,658 23,442 22,366 16,665 83,131 IMSC 21,955 30,012 29,353 32,604 113,924 IMSP 6,267 5,830 8,387 4,590 25,074 MHCP 16,176 17,465 34,805 27,223 95,669 NCRP 133,736 131,029 123,770 105,440 493,975 VTCP 35,335 65,851 36,281 44,028 181,495 VYCP 37,151 33,536 31,946 24,746 127,379 TOTAL PARK VISITORS 433,369 545,300 478,097 377,305 1,834,071 FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY 20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE ELCP 29,184 30,259 3,994 11,033 74,470 ENCP 104,921 115,790 35,768 49,330 305,809 GGCC 28,390 26,163 13,272 36,317 104,142 GGCP 15,622 13,483 5,494 13,764 48,363 IMCP 34,360 40,541 24,189 19,229 118,319 IMSC 73,385 228,799 4,764 30,014 336,962 IMSP 14,261 14,856 2,177 3,523 34,817 MHCP 25,253 18,377 15,141 14,366 73,137 NCRP 92,351 140,492 35,722 66,690 335,255 VTCP 54,256 34,392 34,614 27,521 150,783 VYCP 31,676 22,114 26,580 123,577 203,947 TOTAL PARK VISITORS 503,658 685,267 201,715 395,364 1,786,003 FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY 21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE ELCP 9,902 17,059 16,219 -43,181 ENCP 89,294 180,922 210,790 -481,006 GGCC 50,491 55,606 42,998 -149,095 GGCP 15,886 18,749 16,814 -51,449 IMCP 13,613 29,323 30,562 -73,498 IMSC 22,405 19,986 35,289 -77,680 IMSP 3,012 5,306 6,881 -15,199 MHCP 15,396 16,147 21,427 -52,970 NCRP 107,078 124,563 57,874 -289,515 VTCP 32,801 32,681 78,756 -144,238 VYCP 39,562 33,545 47,057 -120,163 TOTAL PARK VISITORS 399,440 533,886 564,667 - 1,497,993 PARK VISITORS 2021 PARK VISITORS 2019 PARK VISITORS 2020 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY 19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE Adaptive Programming 22 26 - 54 102 Aquatic 42 216 688 192 1,138 Athletics 476 1,049 334 538 2,397 Camps 173 1,028 2,171 1,387 4,759 Childcare 476 550 321 486 1,833 Cultural Arts 52 32 15 21 120 Dance 185 198 144 122 649 Educational 64 122 232 5 423 Extreme Sports - 15 13 6 34 Fitness 2 65 20 6 93 Martial Arts 265 306 303 273 1,147 Nature/Science 8 6 10 16 40 Social 12 25 3 4 44 Special Events 524 467 380 316 1,687 Water Sports 19 52 7 20 98 Total by Type 2,320 4,157 4,641 3,446 14,564 FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY 20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE Adaptive Programming 52 38 - 20 110 Aquatic 81 120 34 32 267 Athletics 271 690 18 420 1,399 Camps 388 626 434 611 2,059 Childcare 470 564 32 261 1,327 Cultural Arts 40 10 - 6 56 Dance 161 184 7 4 356 Educational 11 39 6 5 61 Extreme Sports - 20 11 38 69 Fitness 10 1 - 1 12 Martial Arts 245 207 12 34 498 Nature/Science 7 16 7 10 40 Social 11 53 - - 64 Special Events 460 241 4 106 811 Water Sports 13 246 59 79 397 Total by Type 2,220 3,055 624 1,627 7,526 FEE-BASED PROGRAM REGISTRATIONS 2019 FEE-BASED PROGRAM REGISTRATIONS 2020 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY 21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE Adaptive Programming 44 75 28 - 147 Aquatic 15 209 470 - 694 Athletics 540 866 595 - 2,001 Camps 172 925 1,458 - 2,555 Childcare 385 520 362 - 1,267 Cultural Arts 10 29 40 - 79 Dance 7 16 4 - 27 Educational - 44 117 - 161 Extreme Sports 3 6 35 - 44 Fitness 4 61 27 - 92 Martial Arts 82 210 208 - 500 Nature/Science 6 10 12 - 28 Social 2 1 - - 3 Special Events 411 696 200 - 1,307 Water Sports 35 349 15 - 399 Total by Type 1,716 4,017 3,571 - 9,304 FEE-BASED PROGRAM REGISTRATIONS 2021 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY19 YE PARK SITES VISITED 6,818 7,381 6,534 2,253 22,986 PERSONAL CONTACTS 18,695 23,923 17,597 6,897 67,112 INTERPRETIVE PROJECTS 3 28 325 7 363 INTERPRETIVE PARTICIPANTS 359 479 1,067 255 2,160 VERBAL WARNINGS 1,709 2,133 1,827 1,460 7,129 WRITTEN WARNINGS 335 449 270 58 1,112 PARKING CITATIONS 297 414 245 62 1,018 ORIDNANCE CITATIONS 2 7 1 - 10 TRESPASS WARNINGS 7 - 1 1 9 COURT APPEARANCES 2 7 2 - 11 RANGER BIKE HOURS - - - - - EXOTIC REMOVAL 36 10 12 - 58 WILDLIFE RESCUES 3 4 7 - 14 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY20 YE PARK SITES VISITED 5,824 6,470 6,933 6,410 25,637 PERSONAL CONTACTS 14,067 21,771 11,437 15,157 62,432 INTERPRETIVE PROJECTS 6 21 - - 27 INTERPRETIVE PARTICIPANTS 119 232 - - 351 VERBAL WARNINGS 1,250 3,530 2,569 2,070 9,419 WRITTEN WARNINGS 153 438 118 190 899 PARKING CITATIONS 219 249 68 101 637 ORIDNANCE CITATIONS 1 2 - - 3 TRESPASS WARNINGS 2 3 1 1 7 COURT APPEARANCES 2 1 - - 3 RANGER BIKE HOURS - - 7 - 7 EXOTIC REMOVAL - 12 10 5 27 WILDLIFE RESCUES 4 4 1 5 14 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY21 YE PARK SITES VISITED 6,283 6,988 5,317 -18,588 PERSONAL CONTACTS 13,276 21,298 18,306 -52,880 INTERPRETIVE PROJECTS -17 6 -23 INTERPRETIVE PARTICIPANTS -115 42 -157 VERBAL WARNINGS 1,894 3,049 2,569 -7,512 WRITTEN WARNINGS 373 571 432 -1,376 PARKING CITATIONS 202 332 331 -865 ORIDNANCE CITATIONS ----- TRESPASS WARNINGS --1 -1 COURT APPEARANCES -5 3 -8 RANGER BIKE HOURS 1 9 9 -19 EXOTIC REMOVAL ----- WILDLIFE RESCUES -4 4 -8 Ranger Information FY21 Ranger Information FY19 Ranger Information FY20 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) SUN-N-FUN LAGOON ADMISSIONS 2019 FY 19 Q1 FY 19 Q2 FY19 Q3 FY 19 Q4 FY 19 YE Disabled Veterans Discount - - 131 119 250 SNF 3 Years and Under - 4 2,999 2,947 5,950 SNF CCSO Events - - - - - SNF Group Over 48 Inches 65 3,915 1,466 3,534 8,980 SNF Group Under 48 Inches 24 378 61 600 1,063 SNF Over 48 Inches - - 13,721 15,897 29,618 SNF Party Over 48 in - - - - - SNF Party Under 48 in - - - - - SNF Private Dive - - - 1 1 SNF Private Lessons - - - 5 5 SNF Promo Day Passes - 26 86 97 209 SNF Raincheck Redeem Over 48 Inches - 6 116 1,639 1,761 SNF Raincheck Redeem Under 48 Inches - 1,103 12 160 1,275 SNF Rentals - - 4,180 2,795 6,975 SNF Resident Over 48 Inches - - 10,055 10,751 20,806 SNF School Board Adult - - 106 172 278 SNF School Lunch Program - - - - - SNF Senior Admission - - 1,496 1,731 3,227 SNF Special Event Free - 12,571 4,659 - 17,230 SNF Swim Team - - - - - SNF Under 48 Inches - - 2,616 2,767 5,383 SNF Veterans Discount - - 1,246 228 1,474 Collier Camps - - 446 1,858 2,304 Drop Ins - 38 114 85 237 Memberships Scans 1,043 2,241 4,420 3,635 11,339 Total Admissions 1,132 20,282 47,930 49,021 118,365 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) SUN-N-FUN LAGOON ADMISSIONS 2020 FY 20 Q1 FY 20 Q2 FY20 Q3 FY 20 Q4 FY 20 YE Disabled Veterans Discount - - - - - SNF 3 Years and Under - 4 - - 4 SNF CCSO Events - - - - - SNF Group Over 48 Inches - 129 - - 129 SNF Group Under 48 Inches 214 107 - - 321 SNF Over 48 Inches - - - - - SNF Party Over 48 in - - - - - SNF Party Under 48 in - 150 - - 150 SNF Private Dive - - - - - SNF Private Lessons - 2 - - 2 SNF Promo Day Passes - 125 - - 125 SNF Raincheck Redeem Over 48 Inches - 3 - - 3 SNF Raincheck Redeem Under 48 Inches 1 1 - - 2 SNF Rentals - - - - - SNF Resident Over 48 Inches - - - - - SNF School Board Adult - - - - - SNF School Lunch Program - - - - - SNF Senior Admission - - - - - SNF Special Event Free 137 2,983 - - 3,120 SNF Swim Team - - - - - SNF Under 48 Inches - - - - - SNF Veterans Discount - - - - - Collier Camps - - - - - Drop Ins 25 283 - - 308 Memberships Scans 1,007 1,513 - - 2,520 Total Admissions 1,384 5,300 - - 6,684 SUN-N-FUN LAGOON ADMISSIONS 2021 FY 21 Q1 FY 21 Q2 FY21 Q3 FY 21 Q4 FY 21 YE Disabled Veterans Discount ----- SNF 3 Years and Under ----- SNF CCSO Events ----- SNF Group Over 48 Inches ----- SNF Group Under 48 Inches6 ----- SNF Over 48 Inches ----- SNF Party Over 48 in ----- SNF Party Under 48 in ----- SNF Private Dive ----- SNF Private Lessons ----- SNF Promo Day Passes ----- SNF Raincheck Redeem Over 48 Inches ----- SNF Raincheck Redeem Under 48 Inches ----- SNF Rentals ----- SNF Resident Over 48 Inches ----- SNF School Board ----- SNF School Lunch Program ----- SNF Senior Admission ----- SNF Special Event ----- SNF Swim Team ----- SNF Under 48 Inches ----- SNF Veterans Discount ----- Collier Camps ----- Drop Ins ----- Memberships Scans ----- Total Admissions ----- 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY19 YE BAREFOOT BCH PRESERVE 1,233 3,755 1,817 525 7,330 CLAM PASS PARK 729 2,473 1,337 257 4,796 TIGERTAIL BEACH 1,063 1,770 1,242 279 4,354 VANDERBILT BEACH 522 480 458 150 1,610 TOTAL TURNAROUNDS 3,547 8,478 4,854 1,211 18,090 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY20 YE BAREFOOT BCH PRESERVE 1,252 4,503 985 878 7,618 CLAM PASS PARK 667 2,298 840 499 4,304 TIGERTAIL BEACH 716 1,432 841 1,302 4,291 VANDERBILT BEACH 546 564 820 627 2,557 TOTAL TURNAROUNDS 3,181 8,797 3,486 3,306 18,770 Turnarounds FY21 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 FY21 YE BAREFOOT BCH PRESERVE 1335 1892 995 —4222 CLAM PASS PARK 315 1632 857 —2804 TIGERTAIL BEACH 1449 2200 1449 —5098 VANDERBILT BEACH 533 602 358 —1493 TOTAL TURNAROUNDS 3632 6326 3659 —13617 Turnarounds FY19 Turnarounds FY20 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category C Final (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 199Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 200Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 201Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 202Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 203Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 205Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 206Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 207Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 208Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 209Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 9.A.1.dPacket Pg. 210Attachment: Resolution - 090121(2) (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY ROADS & BRIDGE FACILITIES CONTENTS • COUNTY ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS & BRIDGES − SUMMARY • ATTACHMENT A: FIVE YEAR REVENUES ‒ PREVIOUS vs. CURRENT AUIR • ATTACHMENT B: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT • ATTACHMENT C: PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN PEAK HOUR DIRECTIONAL VOLUME FROM PREVIOUS YEAR ‒ MAP • ATTACHMENT D: PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION 5-YEAR WORK PROGRAM • ATTACHMENT E: ROAD FINANCING PLAN UPDATE • ATTACHMENT F: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING DATABASE TABLE • ATTACHMENT G: DEFICIENT ROADS REPORT UPDATE • ATTACHMENT H: PROJECTED DEFICIENT ROADS ‒ MAP • ATTACHMENT I: TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT AREA REPORT – EAST CENTRAL TCMA AND NORTHWEST TCMA • ATTACHMENT J: ACTIVITY REPORT ON CONTINUING PROJECTS UNDER CONTRACT Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 1 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Type: County Arterial and Collector Roads (Category A) Level of Service Standard: Variable - "D" or "E" Unit Cost: Variable (Average = $6,005,000/ lane mile) Per Current Approved Transportation Impact Fee Recommended Work Program FY 22-26 $571,155,000 Recommended Revenues FY22-26 $571,155,000 Five-Year Surplus or (Deficit) $0 1. Existing Revenue Sources: A. Current Revenues CIE FY 22-26 Sales Tax $140,525,000 Gas Taxes $117,000,000 Impact Fees / COA $78,000,000 General Fund 001/111 $59,085,000 Grants/Reimbursements/DCAs/Interest $40,199,000 Unfunded Needs $87,731,000 SUB TOTAL $522,540,000 Carry Forward $58,617,000 * Less 5% Required by Law ($10,002,000) TOTAL $571,155,000 2. Supplemental Revenue Sources: A. Alternative I None Required B. Alternative II None Required Recommended Action: \ 1. Design - 25 months 2. Right-of-Way - 4 years 3. Construction - 30-36 months 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY That the BCC direct the County Manager or his designee to include County road projects appearing on "Proposed Transportation Five-Year Work Program," (Attachment D), as detailed in the "Collier County Transportation Planning Database" (Attachment F), in the next Annual CIE Update and Amendment with the application of revenues outlined on the Road Financing Plan (Attachment E) to establish statutorily required financial feasibility of the CIE. * Carry Forward includes the budgeted FY22 Carry forward and does not include project funding encumbered in prior fiscal years. The actual Carry Forward number that includes the roll of encumbrances is not available until after October 1, 2021. Attachment J provides a snapshot of prior year FY21 project activity as of June 30, 2021 for continuing projects. Project costs are generally paid out over the following schedule for phases (average time for payout): Note: FY 2021 Revenues based on current adopted Impact Fee Schedule, projected gas tax revenues, budgeted general fund transfer, and approved grants and developer contribution agreements. Expenditures are based on current unit cost. 5 YEAR PROJECT DURATION AFTER 2 YEAR PLANNING CYCLE IS COMPLETE DESIGN RIGHT‐OF‐WAY CONSTRUCTION 12345 2 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "A"*Charts do not include a Carry Forward or negative Revenue Reserve.78,000,00015%140,525,00027%117,000,00022%59,085,00011%40,199,0008%87,731,00017%2022 ‐2026 (Total $592,712,000)Impact FeesSales TaxesGas TaxesGeneral FundGrants / Reimb /InterestUnfunded needs$0$50,000,000$100,000,000$150,000,000$200,000,000$250,000,000Impact Fees Sales Taxes Gas Taxes General Fund Grants / Reimb /InterestUnfunded needsFunding Source Trends: Five Year Projections2020‐20242021‐20252022‐202677,460,00013%190,843,00032%118,552,00020%61,623,00010%55,247,0009%100,137,00016%2021 ‐2025 (Total $503,816,000)Impact FeesSales TaxesGas TaxesGeneral FundGrants / Reimb /InterestUnfunded needs39.A.1.ePacket Pg. 213Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment B - 2021 Transportation Existing Conditions Report (061521.1).docx Attachment “B” TRANSPORTATION EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT – 2021 Objective To provide the Board of County Commissioners with an “existing conditions” analysis of the transportation system in Collier County. Purpose This analysis is provided to assist in the preparation of the Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), and more specifically to assist in the determination of adequate (transportation) public facilities and to guide budgeting and project programming in the CIE. Considerations:  The traffic counts are collected on an annual, seasonal, or quarterly basis, and are factored as needed to determine a peak hour peak directional volume. The factors used include a directional factor and a seasonal factor that varies depending on the week that the traffic count was conducted.  The Level of Service (LOS) threshold volumes are calculated using ARTPLAN and HIGHPLAN software. Measured volume is based on the 250th highest hour, which essentially equates to the 100th highest hour after omitting February and March data, consistent with the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code provisions. The remaining capacity is based on the difference between the LOS threshold volume and the calculated existing plus trip bank volume.  The LOS for each roadway segment is identified in Attachment “F” for the current year. Additionally, traffic volumes are forecasted for future years which yields an estimated “Year Expected Deficient” that is used in the planning and programming of future improvements. The Existing LOS and the forecasted LOS are expressions of operating conditions during the peak hours of the peak seasonal day, which corresponds to the same time period as the adopted minimum acceptable LOS Standards in the Growth Management Plan. While the adopted LOS standard and evaluated condition must be expressed for the peak period, it is important to recognize that the roadway’s LOS will be better during most other portions of the day, and especially during non-peak season periods.  The AUIR deals with system capacity and maintaining the established LOS through our Concurrency Management System. As the system expands, there is a growing need to focus our attention on the condition of existing facilities and the demand for Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funding. Our bridges and culverts are approaching or are at their 50-year life-cycle. Over 250 additional lane miles of urban and rural, arterial, and local roads have been added to the county system for maintenance since 2000. Historical funding for O&M has not addressed industry standards for anticipated life-cycles which are 6 to 8 years for urban roadways and 12 to 15 years for rural roadways. Gas taxes are already at the maximum allowed by statute. Complicating this issue is the reliance on impact fees as directed by our “growth pays for growth” policy which can only be used to add additional capacity or new lane miles to the system. The prior aggressive program to add capacity allowed existing system mileage to be rebuilt and the mileage to be maintained throughout the construction cycle by the contractor. Volatile impact fee rates and revenues alone cannot sustain a multi-year capital program that provides improvements concurrent with the impacts of development. Capacity expansion projects require a multi-year funding plan to meet the 7-year construction cycle that includes: planning, design, ROW acquisition, permitting and construction. LOS standards already set at the lowest acceptable levels of “D” or “E”. 4 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment B - 2021 Transportation Existing Conditions Report (061521.1).docx Observations Of the 129 stations (covering 142 unique AUIR Segment ID’s) collecting traffic counts in the 2020/2021 program for the 2021 AUIR, the average change in measured overall volume between the 2020 AUIR and the 2021 AUIR was -2.85% system-wide, reflecting the significant impact the pandemic had on travel during 2020 and 2021. By comparison, the average change between 2019 and 2020 reported in last year’s AUIR was an increase of 7.50%. When reviewing only higher capacity, multi-lane roadway segments in the County’s network (only those with capacity over 1,000 vehicles per hour in the peak direction during the peak period) an average change of -3.45% was experienced over 2020. For the 2020/2021 traffic counts used in the 2021 AUIR, 58 segments reflected a decrease over the previous year, 31 segments reflected an increase over the previous year, and 53 remained unchanged (+/-5%). Listed below are the numbers and corresponding percentages for the count stations, including the percentage changes between 2020 and 2021:  3.5% (5 segments) show an increase greater than 20% compared to 2020  10.6% (15 segments) show an increase of 10-20% compared to 2020  7.7% (11 segments) show an increase of up to 5-10% compared to 2020  37.3% (53 segments) show an insignificant change of -5% to 5% compared to 2020  17.6% (25 segments) show a decrease of 5-10% compared to 2020  15.5% (22 segment) show a decrease of 10-20% compared to 2020  7.7% (11 segments) show a decrease of greater than 20% compared to 2020 Note: Some count stations experienced significant year-to-year fluctuations due to construction avoidance. Several segments of State roads are predicted to be deficient when “trip bank” reserved capacity trips are added to existing volumes. Projected deficient segments on the East Tamiami Trail are located within the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), and development impacting these segments is subject to the TCEA’s mitigation strategies. Other potentially deficient State road segments are currently programmed in the FDOT Work Program with improvements intended to add capacity to resolve any potentially deficient conditions. Although traffic data collected by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) on the segments of I-75 between each interchange is not needed for the AUIR, because the change in mainline volumes correlates with changes in interchange ramp volumes, the mainline volumes are monitored/evaluated each year for informational purposes. A review of the most recent average annual growth rates for the last 3 and 5-year timeframes depicts an increase in traffic along all mainline segments of I-75 in the urban area as shown in Table 1. 5 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment B - 2021 Transportation Existing Conditions Report (061521.1).docx TABLE 1: I-75 Historical Annual Average Daily (AADT) Traffic Volumes (2-Way) Source: Florida Department of Transportation I-75 Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Volumes North of Immokalee Road North of Pine Ridge Road North of Golden Gate Pkwy West of Collier Blvd West of Everglades Blvd Site: 039950 Site: 030191 Site: 032003 Site: 032000 Site: 030351 2020 90,041 76,323 70,000 39,000 20,830 2019 105,903 89,215 79,000 45,000 26,404 2018 99,582 89,362 76,500 41,500 24,970 2017 97,387 82,348 79,000 43,500 24,968 2016 97,041 80,453 72,500 39,500 24,597 2015 92,399 76,809 70,000 40,500 23,127 2014 85,506 70,332 64,000 36,500 21,320 2013 79,834 65,423 58,000 34,500 20,221 2012 75,022 62,897 55,000 31,000 19,444 2011 74,500 61,224 55,000 31,500 19,204 2010 75,500 59,784 55,000 32,500 19,484 10-Yr Total % Increase 19.3%27.7%27.3%20.0%6.9% 10-Yr Avg Annual % Increase 1.8%2.5%2.4%1.8%0.7% 5-Yr Avg Annual % Increase -0.5%-0.1%0.0%-0.8%-2.1% 3-Yr Avg Annual % Increase -2.6%-2.5%-4.0%-3.6%-5.9% 6 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Randall Blvd Everglades BlvdDesoto BlvdRattlesnake Hammock Logan BLVDSanta Barbara BLVDCounty Barn Immokalee Rd Orange Blossom Thomasson Dr Wilson BlvdEverglades BlvdCamp Keais RdAve Ma r iaBlvdBonita Beach Rd Wiggins Pass SR 29Immokalee Rd Collier BlvdSan Marco RDLivingston RdTamiami Trail NDavis Blvd Pine Ridge Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd COUNTY LINE RDVanderbilt DrGolden Gate PKWYOld 41S 1st STAirport Pulling RdGoodlette-Frank RdRadio Rd Green Blvd Golden Gate Blvd W Bayshore DrCollier BlvdOil Well Rd ATTAC HMEN T C Percentage Change In Peak Hour Directional Volume From 2020 0 1 2 3 4 50.5 Miles µ Growth Management DepartmentTransportation Pla nning SR 82 S 1st StLake Trafford Rd N 15th STWe s t c l o x S t W Main StSR 29 INSET MAP §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 $+41 $+41 $+41 !(951 !(951 !(951 !(846 !(846 $+41 GIS Mapping: Beth Yang, AICP Growth Management Department Date: June, 2021GulfofMexico Lake Trafford !(29 !(29 LEE COUNTY -This map evaluates changes in measured background trips; not trip bank changes. Legend Percentage Change In Peak Hour Directional Volume From 2020 5%-10% Increase From 2020 10%-20% Increase From 2020 >20% Increase From 2020 < +/- 5% Change From 2020 5%-10% Decrease From 2020 10%-20% Decrease From 2020 >20% Decrease From 2020 7 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Project Name Project FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY 22-26 FY 21-26 # SUMMARY OF PROJECTS Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount 60168 Vanderbilt Beach Rd/Collier Blvd-16th 104,500 C 104,500 142,245 60201 Pine Ridge Rd (Livingston to I75) 4,086 DR 25,200 DCM 29,286 31,786 60147 Randall/Immokalee Road Intersection 3,000 R 4,200 CM 7,200 10,845 60190 Airport Rd Vanderbilt Bch Rd to Immokalee Rd 15,700 CM 15,700 18,863 60212 47th Ave NE Bridge 750 D 8,300 C 9,050 9,050 60212 Wilson Blvd South Bridge 450 DR 3,950 C 4,400 4,400 60212 13th St NW Bridge 350 D 3,700 C 4,050 4,050 60212 62nd Ave NE Bridge 400 DR 3,850 C 4,250 4,250 60212 10th Ave SE Bridge 550 D 5,550 C 6,100 6,100 60228 Sidewalks 745 D 1,251 D/C 4,895 C 6,891 10,000 60198 Veterans Memorial PH I - - - 13,152 60198 Veterans Memorial PH II 4,300 RD 14,831 CM 19,131 19,131 60199 Vanderbilt Beach Rd (US41 to E of Goodlette)13,500 DC 13,500 14,496 60129 Wilson Benfield Ext (Lord's Way to City Gate N) 1,500 RA 500 RA 1,000 RA 1,000 RA 1,000 RA 5,000 7,346 60144 Oil Well (Everglades to Oil Well Grade) 500 A 300 A 300 A 300 A 300 A 1,700 7,793 70167 Business Center (City Gate)9,500 C 9,500 20,692 68056 Collier Blvd (Green to South of GG Main Canal) 2,000 R 38,100 RDC 40,100 40,911 60065 Randall Blvd/8th to Everglades 3,000 D 3,000 3,254 60232 Belle Meade 30 M 30 54 TBD Goodlette Rd (VBR to Immokalee Rd) 2,750 D 634 A 9,366 A 2,643 A 15,393 15,393 TBD Green Blvd (Santa Barbara Blvd to Sunshine) 500 S 500 500 60229 Wilson Blvd (GG Blvd to Immokalee) 1,000 DR 1,000 DR 21,800 C 23,800 32,893 60249 Vanderbilt Bch Rd (16th to Everglades) 8,190 DRM 5,860 RA 11,800 C 25,850 25,850 TBD Golden Gate Parkway at Livingston 500 S 6,000 D 6,500 6,500 TBD Railhead Crossing 200 C 200 200 TBD Poinciana Professional Park 300 C 300 300 TBD Tree Farm PUD 450 C 450 450 TBD Immokalee Rd at Livingston 6,000 D 6,000 6,000 60016 Intersections Improvements Shoulder Widening 3,200 1,800 2,575 950 675 9,200 10,352 60227 Corkscrew Rd (Lee County Line) Shoulders 1,200 C 1,200 1,200 TBD Santa Barbara/Logan Turnlane 879 D 7,879 C 8,758 8,758 60245 Logan Blvd N of Immk 2,600 C 2,600 2,765 - - Contingency 6,019 6,019 6,019 Total 141,670 100,211 70,314 42,245 35,718 390,158 563,747 Operations Improvements/Programs - 0 66066 Bridge Repairs/Improvements 2,950 6,500 3,000 3,000 1,500 16,950 29,255 60130 Wall/Barrier Replacement 50 250 250 250 250 1,050 2,202 60131 Road Resurfacing 111/101 9,379 8,600 10,500 12,800 12,500 53,779 63,687 60077 Striping and Marking 800 800 800 800 800 4,000 5,408 60172 Traffic Ops Upgrades/Enhancements 1,429 1,120 1,210 2,195 433 6,387 7,891 60189 LED Replacement Program - 132 60118 Countywide Pathways/Sidewalks Non PIL /LAP 576 1,250 350 650 475 3,301 4,220 60037 Asset Mgmt 25 150 150 150 150 625 1,352 60197 RM Facility Fund 310 195 500 500 500 500 2,195 3,650 69331-339 District 1,2,3,4,5,6 Sidewalk PIL - 724 Subtotal Operations Improvements/Programs 15,404 19,170 16,760 20,345 16,608 88,287 118,521 - 60066 Congestion Mgmt Fare - 1,263 60240 Traffic Calming 50 DC 50 DC 50 DC 50 DC 50 DC 250 536 60085 TIS Review 250 S 250 S 250 S 250 S 250 S 1,250 1,852 60088 PUD Monitoring - 100 60109 Planning Consulting 400 S 500 S 500 S 500 S 500 S 2,400 3,574 60163 Traffic Studies 300 S 300 S 300 S 300 S 300 S 1,500 2,331 60171 Multi Project - 22 50233 Off-Rd Vehicles & Equip 100 100 100 Transfer to Fund 325 STO 11,318 11,318 11,318 Transfer to 712 0 4,783 Transfer to 370 7,943 7,943 7,943 Impact Fee Refunds 195 250 250 250 250 1,195 2,562 Debt Service Payments 13,200 13,261 13,671 13,622 13,000 66,754 80,119 00 Total Funding Request All Funds 190,830 133,992 102,095 77,562 66,676 571,155 798,771 REVENUES Sales Tax 81,831 27,565 6,495 9,250 15,384 140,525 191,000 Impact Fees Revenue 16,000 15,500 15,500 15,500 15,500 78,000 95,183 COA Revenue 00 Gas Tax Revenue 22,500 23,300 23,500 23,700 24,000 117,000 139,500 Grants/Reimbursements* 535 14,928 0 6,806 0 22,269 42,089 Transfer 001 to 310 8,817 8,817 8,817 8,817 8,817 44,085 52,902 Transfer 111 to 310 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 15,000 18,000 Interest Gas Tax-Impact Fees 1,430 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 9,430 10,855 Carry Forward 313-310-Impact Fees 58,617 58,617 221,630 Potential Debt Funding/Unfunded Needs 2 32,407 44,808 10,514 87,731 87,731 Expected FEMA Reimbursement 8,500 8,500 8,500 Revenue Reserve 5%-1,902 -2,025 -2,025 -2,025 -2,025 -10,002 -10,002 Total Revenues 190,830 133,992 102,095 77,562 66,676 571,155 857,388 Gross Surplus/Shortfall - - - - - - Cummulative Surplus/Shortfall - - - - - Key: A = Adv Construction / S = Study / D = Design M = Mitigation / C = Construction / R = ROW LS = Landscape / L = Litigation / I = Inspection AM = Access Mgmt / LP = SIB Loan Repayment @ = See separate supplemental maps **The 5-cent Local Option Fuel Tax is earmarked towards debt service, bridges, and intersection improvements. Project FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 16th St Bridge 11 Bridge Immk-CR846 2,592 Pine Ridge Livingston VBR US41 to E Goodlette 4,214 Collier Blvd GG to Green 1,600 Goodlette VBR to Imm 2,750 Pine Ridge Livingston 5,450 Airport VBR to Immk 4,928 0 14,728 0 6,806 0 Sales Tax Projects:FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY 22-26 FY 21-26 60168 Vanderbilt Beach Ext 74,000 74,000 74,000 60201 Pine Ridge Rd (Livingston to I75) 4,086 17,414 21,500 23,000 60147 Immk/Randall Rd Intersection 3,000 4,000 7,000 7,000 60190 Airport Rd VBR to Immk Rd 4,000 4,000 4,000 60212 New Golden Gate Bridges (11) 900 1,600 9,250 15,384 27,134 27,134 60228 Sidewalks 745 1,251 4,895 6,891 10,000 Total 81,831 27,565 6,495 9,250 15,384 140,525 191,000 Attachment D 2022 Year Work Program (Dollars shown in Thousands) 8 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 5 Year TotalProject/Program Commitments177,435,000 120,481,000 88,174,000 63,690,000 53,426,000 503,206,000 Existing Debt Service13,200,000 13,261,000 13,671,000 13,622,000 13,000,000 66,754,000 Impact Fee Refunds195,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,195,000 Total Expenses190,830,000 133,992,000 102,095,000 77,562,000 66,676,000 571,155,000 - Sales Tax Revenue81,831,000 27,565,000 6,495,000 9,250,000 15,384,000 140,525,000 Impact Fee Revenue / COA Revenue16,000,000 15,500,000 15,500,000 15,500,000 15,500,000 78,000,000 DCA- - - - - - Gas Tax Revenue22,500,000 23,300,000 23,500,000 23,700,000 24,000,000 117,000,000 Debt Svc General Fund Transfer8,817,000 8,817,000 8,817,000 8,817,000 8,817,000 44,085,000 Transfer in from Fund 1113,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 15,000,000 Interest Gas Tax/Impact Fee1,430,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 9,430,000 Grants/Reimbursements *535,000 23,428,000 - 6,806,000 - 30,769,000 Unfunded needs2,000 32,407,000 44,808,000 10,514,000 - 87,731,000 Revenue Reserve ( 5% Budgeted by Statue)(1,902,000) (2,025,000) (2,025,000) (2,025,000) (2,025,000) (10,002,000) Total Revenues132,213,000 133,992,000 102,095,000 77,562,000 66,676,000 512,538,000 Carry Forward (Surplus or Shortfall) **58,617,000 - - - - 58,617,000 Additional Roll Forward- Fiscal Year Balance (Surplus or Shortfall)- - - - - - Cumulative Fiscal Year Balance (Surplus or Shortfall)- - - - - * Includes programmed FDOT Grants and Naples Reserve DCAAttachment "E"Road Financing Plan Update** Carry Forward includes the budgeted FY22 Carry forward and does not include project funding encumbered (roll over) in prior fiscal years to be paid out over the following schedule for phases (average time for payout): This Carry Forward number that includes the roll of encumbrances will not be available until after October 1, 2021 but attachment J provides a listing of major projects previously budgeted with carry forward funding anticipated to complete the project/phases.Revenues based on current adopted Impact Fee Schedule, projected gas tax revenues, budgeted general fund transfer, and approved grants and developer contribution agreements.99.A.1.ePacket Pg. 219Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "F"56 57 58 61 63 64 65 66 Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) Based on Adopted LOS, Trip Bank and Traffic Counts Peak 2021 2020 Net Percent 2021 2021 Traffic Hour 1 Peak Peak Change Change 2021 2021 Counts + 2021 w/TB Counts Trip Bank Peak Dir Hour Hour In Volume In Volume 2021 1/7th Total Counts + Trip Bank Counts + L Year Year TCMA or Exist Cnt. Peak Service Peak Dir Peak Dir From From Trip Trip Trip Trip Bank Remaining Trip Bank O Expected Expected ID# TCEA Road# Link From To Road Sta. Std *Dir Volume Volume Volume 2020 2020 Bank Bank Bank Volume Capacity V/C S Deficient Deficient 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 # 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1.0 NW-TCMA CR31 Airport Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 4D 554 D N 2,200 1,540 1690 -150 -9.74%39 0 39 1579 621 71.8% C 2.1 NW-TCMA CR31 Airport Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Orange Blossom Drive 6D 599 E N 3,000 2,100 2330 -230 -10.95%43 0 43 2143 857 71.4% C 2.2 NW-TCMA CR31 Airport Road Orange Blossom Drive Pine Ridge Road 6D 503 E N 3,000 2,060 2230 -170 -8.25%75 0 75 2135 865 71.2% C 3.0 CR31 Airport Road Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Parkway 6D 502 E N 3,000 2,000 2230 -230 -11.50%14 0 14 2014 986 67.1% C 4.0 CR31 Airport Road Golden Gate Parkway Radio Road 6D 533 E N 2,800 2,210 2200 10 0.45% 3 0 3 2213 587 79.0% D 5.0 CR31 Airport Road Radio Road Davis Boulevard 6D 553 E N 2,800 2,130 2170 -40 -1.88%0 0 0 2130 670 76.1% D 6.0 TCEA CR31 Airport Road Davis Boulevard US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 6D 552 E S 2,700 1,560 1650 -90 -5.77%102 2 104 1664 1036 61.6% C 7.0 TCEA(pt) Bayshore Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Thomasson Drive 4D 521 D S 1,800 490 660 -170 -34.69%106 2 108 598 1202 33.2% B 8.0 CR 865 Bonita Beach Road West of Vanderbilt Drive Hickory Boulevard 4D 653 D E 1,900 1,070 1080 -10 -0.93%0 0 0 1070 830 56.3% C 9.0 Carson Road Lake Trafford Road Immokalee Drive 2U 610 D N 600 340 290 50 14.71% 6 0 6 346 254 57.7% C 10.0 County Barn Road Davis Boulevard Rattlesnake Hammock Road 2U 519 D S 900 330 480 -150 -45.45%111 1 112 442 458 49.1% B 11.0 CR29 CR 29 US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Everglades City 2U 582A D S 1,000 140 160 -20 -14.29%10 0 10 150 850 15.0% B 12.0 TCEA SR84 Davis Boulevard US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Airport Road 6D 558 E E 2,700 1,410 1440 -30 -2.13%46 0 46 1456 1244 53.9% C 13.0 SR84 Davis Boulevard Airport Road Lakewood Boulevard 4D 559 D E 2,000 1,460 1440 20 1.37% 2 0 2 1462 538 73.1% C 14.0 EC-TCMA SR84 Davis Boulevard Lakewood Boulevard County Barn Road 4D 658 D E 2,000 1,580 1500 80 5.06% 61 0 61 1641 359 82.1% D 15.0 EC-TCMA SR84 Davis Boulevard County Barn Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 4D 538 D E 2,200 1,360 1420 -60 -4.41%150 0 150 1510 690 68.6% C 16.1 EC-TCMA SR84 Davis Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard Radio Road 6D 560 E E 3,300 770 810 -40 -5.19%19 139 158 928 2372 28.1% B 16.2 EC-TCMA SR84 Davis Boulevard Radio Road Collier Boulevard 6D 601 E W 3,300 1,430 1290 140 9.79% 112 214 326 1756 1544 53.2% C 17.0 CR876 Golden Gate Boulevard Collier Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 4D 531 D E 2,300 1,990 1910 80 4.02% 15 0 15 2005 295 87.2% D 2028 18.0 CR886 Golden Gate Parkway US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 6D 530 E E 2,700 1,640 1560 80 4.88% 13 0 13 1653 1047 61.2% C 19.0 CR886 Golden Gate Parkway Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 6D 507 E E 3,550 2,720 2990 -270 -9.93%1 0 1 2721 829 76.6% D 20.1 CR886 Golden Gate Parkway Airport Road Livingston Road 6D 508 E E 3,550 3,030 2950 80 2.64% 17 0 17 3047 503 85.8% D 2027 20.2 EC-TCMA CR886 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Road I-75 6D 691 E E 3,550 3,210 3350 -140 -4.36%0 0 0 3210 340 90.4% D 2027 21.0 EC-TCMA CR886 Golden Gate Parkway I-75 Santa Barbara Boulevard 6D 509 E E 3,300 1,920 2240 -320 -16.67%14 0 14 1934 1366 58.6% C 22.0 EC-TCMA CR886 Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 4D 605 D * E 1,980 1,690 1730 -40 -2.37%52 8 60 1750 230 88.4% D 2028 23.0 NW-TCMA CR851 Goodlette-Frank Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 2U 594 D N 1,000 800 910 -110 -13.75%0 0 0 800 200 80.0% D 24.1 NW-TCMA CR851 Goodlette-Frank Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Orange Blossom Drive 4D 595 E N 2,400 1,290 1490 -200 -15.50%73 0 73 1363 1037 56.8% C 24.2 NW-TCMA CR851 Goodlette-Frank Road Orange Blossom Drive Pine Ridge Road 6D 581 E N 2,400 1,490 1650 -160 -10.74%8 0 8 1498 902 62.4% C 25.0 CR851 Goodlette-Frank Road Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Parkway 6D 505 E N 3,000 1,760 1970 -210 -11.93%16 0 16 1776 1224 59.2% C 26.0 CR851 Goodlette-Frank Road Golden Gate Parkway US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 6D 504 E S 2,700 2,510 2680 -170 -6.77%0 0 0 2510 190 93.0% D 2025 2025 27.0 EC-TCMA Green Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 2U 642 D E 900 700 750 -50 -7.14%10 0 10 710 190 78.9% C 29.0 NW-TCMA Gulfshore Drive 111th Avenue Vanderbilt Beach Road 2U 583a D N 800 220 310 -90 -40.91%0 0 0 220 580 27.5% B 30.1 CR951 Collier Boulevard Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 6D 655 E N 3,000 1,830 1880 -50 -2.73%579 36 615 2445 555 81.5% D 2030 30.2 CR951 Collier Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Golden Gate Boulevard 6D 584 E S 3,000 1,400 1360 40 2.86% 70 28 98 1498 1502 49.9% B 31.1 CR951 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Pine Ridge Road 6D 536 E N 3,000 2,340 1990 350 14.96% 95 29 124 2464 536 82.1% D 31.2 EC-TCMA CR951 Collier Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 6D 536 E N 3,000 2,340 1990 350 14.96% 129 22 151 2491 509 83.0% D 2031 32.1 EC-TCMA CR951 Collier Boulevard Green Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky 4D 525 D N 2,300 1,420 1730 -310 -21.83%49 0 49 1469 831 63.9% C 32.2 EC-TCMA CR951 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky Golden Gate Main Canal 4D 607 D N 2,300 1,800 1860 -60 -3.33%79 162 241 2041 259 88.7% D 2028 32.3 EC-TCMA CR951 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Main Canal I-75 8D 607 E N 3,600 1,800 1860 -60 -3.33%60 258 318 2118 1482 58.8% C 33.0 EC-TCMA SR951 Collier Boulevard I-75 Davis Boulevard 8D 573 E N 3,600 2,260 3560 -1,300 -57.52%36 277 313 2573 1027 71.5% C 34.0 CR951 Collier Boulevard Davis Boulevard Rattlesnake Hammock Road 6D 602 E N 3,000 2,130 2130 0 0.00% 156 297 453 2583 417 86.1% D 2031 35.0 CR951 Collier Boulevard Rattlesnake Hammock Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 6D 603 E N 3,200 2,050 2060 -10 -0.49%284 137 421 2471 729 77.2% D 36.1 SR951 Collier Boulevard US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Wal-Mart Driveway 6D 557 E N 2,500 2,230 2150 80 3.59% 134 67 201 2431 69 97.2% E 2023 36.2 SR951 Collier Boulevard Wal-Mart Driveway Manatee Road 4D 557 D N 2,000 2,230 1920 310 13.90% 125 33 158 2388 (388)119.4% F Existing Existing 37.0 SR951 Collier Boulevard Manatee Road Mainsail Drive 4D 627 D N 2,200 1,730 1690 40 2.31% 181 40 221 1951 249 88.7% D 2028 38.0 SR951 Collier Boulevard Mainsail Drive Marco Island Bridge 4D 627 D N 2,200 1,730 1690 40 2.31% 32 12 44 1774 426 80.6% D 39.0 NW-TCMA CR846 111th Avenue N. Gulfshore Drive Vanderbilt Drive 2U 585 D E 700 320 290 30 9.38% 0 0 0 320 380 45.7% B 40.0 NW-TCMA CR846 111th Avenue N. Vanderbilt Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 2U 613 D E 900 580 560 20 3.45% 0 0 0 580 320 64.4% C 41.1 NW-TCMA CR846 Immokalee Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 6D 566 E E 3,100 1,960 2220 -260 -13.27%3 0 3 1963 1137 63.3% C 41.2 NW-TCMA CR846 Immokalee Road Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 6D 625 E E 3,100 2,110 2760 -650 -30.81%9 0 9 2119 981 68.4% C 42.1 NW-TCMA CR846 Immokalee Road Airport Road Livingston Road 6D 567 E E 3,100 2,100 2360 -260 -12.38%11 0 11 2111 989 68.1% C 42.2 NW-TCMA CR846 Immokalee Road Livingston Road I-75 6D/8D 679 E E 3,500 3,110 3020 90 2.89% 30 0 30 3140 360 89.7% D 2027 43.1 CR846 Immokalee Road I-75 Logan Boulevard 6D/8D 701 E E 3,500 2,320 2620 -300 -12.93%457 78 535 2855 645 81.6% D 43.2 CR846 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard 6D 656 E E 3,200 2,280 2030 250 10.96% 828 91 919 3199 1 100.0% E 2022 44.0 CR846 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 6D 674 E E 3,300 2,710 2480 230 8.49% 935 58 993 3703 (403)112.2% F Existing 45.0 CR846 Immokalee Road Wilson Boulevard Oil Well Road 6D 675 E E 3,300 2,200 2310 -110 -5.00%409 89 498 2698 602 81.8% D 46.0 CR846 Immokalee Road Oil Well Road SR 29 2U 672 D E 900 510 480 30 5.88% 181 38 219 729 171 81.0% D 2031 Min MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 10 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "F"56 57 58 61 63 64 65 66 Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) Based on Adopted LOS, Trip Bank and Traffic Counts Peak 2021 2020 Net Percent 2021 2021 Traffic Hour 1 Peak Peak Change Change 2021 2021 Counts + 2021 w/TB Counts Trip Bank Peak Dir Hour Hour In Volume In Volume 2021 1/7th Total Counts + Trip Bank Counts + L Year Year TCMA or Exist Cnt. Peak Service Peak Dir Peak Dir From From Trip Trip Trip Trip Bank Remaining Trip Bank O Expected Expected ID# TCEA Road# Link From To Road Sta. Std *Dir Volume Volume Volume 2020 2020 Bank Bank Bank Volume Capacity V/C S Deficient Deficient 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 # 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Min 47.0 Lake Trafford Road Carson Rd SR 29 2U 609 D E 800 480 500 -20 -4.17%109 4 113 593 207 74.1% C 48.0 Logan Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Pine Ridge Road 2U 587 D N 1,000 590 620 -30 -5.08%68 19 87 677 323 67.7% C 49.0 EC-TCMA Logan Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 4D 588 D S 1,900 1,490 1530 -40 -2.68%50 0 50 1540 360 81.1% D 50.0 Logan Boulevard Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 2U 644 D N 1,000 650 670 -20 -3.08%4 30 34 684 316 68.4% C 51.0 NW-TCMA CR881 Livingston Road Imperial Street Immokalee Road 6/4D 673 D N 3,000 1,770 1410 360 20.34% 119 0 119 1889 1111 63.0% C 52.0 NW-TCMA CR881 Livingston Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 6D 576 E N 3,100 1,750 2220 -470 -26.86%22 0 22 1772 1328 57.2% C 53.0 NW-TCMA CR881 Livingston Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Pine Ridge Road 6D 575 E N 3,100 1,490 1560 -70 -4.70%0 0 0 1490 1610 48.1% B 54.0 EC-TCMA CR881 Livingston Road Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Parkway 6D 690 E N 3,100 1,330 1330 0 0.00% 56 0 56 1386 1714 44.7% B 55.0 EC-TCMA CR881 Livingston Road Golden Gate Parkway Radio Road 6D 687 E N 3,000 1,680 1820 -140 -8.33%32 0 32 1712 1288 57.1% C 58.0 N. 1st Street New Market Road SR-29 (Main Street) 2U 590 D N 900 620 650 -30 -4.84%17 7 24 644 256 71.6% C 59.0 New Market Road Broward Street SR 29 2U 612 D E 900 610 570 40 6.56% 24 4 28 638 262 70.9% C 61.0 Camp Keais Oil Well Road Immokalee Road 2U 626A D S 1,000 290 280 10 3.45% 144 67 211 501 499 50.1% B 62.0 NW-TCMA CR887 Old US 41 Lee County Line US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 2U 547 D N 1,000 1,060 1120 -60 -5.66%9 0 9 1069 (69)106.9% E Existing Existing 63.0 NW-TCMA CR896 Seagate Drive Crayton Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 4D 511 D E 1,700 840 990 -150 -17.86%0 0 0 840 860 49.4% B 64.0 NW-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 6D 512 E E 2,800 1,910 1950 -40 -2.09%17 0 17 1927 873 68.8% C 65.0 NW-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road Goodlette-Frank Road Shirley Street 6D 514 E E 2,800 2,160 2430 -270 -12.50%20 0 20 2180 620 77.9% D 66.0 NW-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road Shirley Street Airport Road 6D 515 E E 2,800 3,030 3230 -200 -6.60%23 0 23 3053 (253)109.0% F Existing Existing 67.1 NW-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road Airport Road Livingston Road 6D 526 E E 3,900 3,330 3540 -210 -6.31%17 0 17 3347 553 85.8% D 2029 67.2 EC-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road Livingston Road I-75 6D 628 E E 3,900 2,650 3130 -480 -18.11%84 0 84 2734 1166 70.1% C 68.0 EC-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road I-75 Logan Boulevard 6D 600 E E 2,800 2,480 2400 80 3.23% 126 0 126 2606 194 93.1% D 2025 69.0 CR856 Radio Road Airport Road Livingston Road 4D 544 D E 1,800 1,030 1160 -130 -12.62%58 0 58 1088 712 60.4% C 70.0 EC-TCMA CR856 Radio Road Livingston Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 4D 527 D E 1,800 1,490 1440 50 3.36% 30 0 30 1520 280 84.4% D 2030 71.0 EC-TCMA CR856 Radio Road Santa Barbara Boulevard Davis Boulevard 4D 685 D W 1,800 630 690 -60 -9.52%45 85 130 760 1040 42.2% B 72.0 CR864 Rattlesnake Hammock Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Charlemagne Boulevard 4D 516 D E 1,800 1,020 1080 -60 -5.88%114 11 125 1145 655 63.6% C 73.0 TCEA(pt) CR864 Rattlesnake Hammock Road Charlemagne Boulevard County Barn Road 4D 517 D E 1,800 900 840 60 6.67% 88 11 99 999 801 55.5% B 74.0 CR864 Rattlesnake Hammock Road County Barn Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 4D 534 D E 1,900 800 800 0 0.00% 67 18 85 885 1015 46.6% B 75.0 CR864 Rattlesnake Hammock Road Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 6D 518 E W 2,900 770 740 30 3.90% 106 75 181 951 1949 32.8% B 76.0 EC-TCMA Santa Barbara Boulevard Green Boulevard Golden Gate Parkway 4D 529 D N 2,100 1,540 1590 -50 -3.25%0 0 0 1540 560 73.3% C 77.0 EC-TCMA Santa Barbara Boulevard Golden Gate Parkway Radio Road 6D 528 E N 3,100 2,120 2240 -120 -5.66%54 0 54 2174 926 70.1% C 78.0 EC-TCMA Santa Barbara Boulevard Radio Road Davis Boulevard 6D 537 E N 3,100 1,430 1480 -50 -3.50%255 0 255 1685 1415 54.4% C 79.0 Santa Barbara Boulevard Davis Boulevard Rattlesnake-Hammock Road 6D 702 E S 3,100 890 940 -50 -5.62%262 0 262 1152 1948 37.2% B 80.0 SR29 SR 29 US 41 (Tamiami Trail) CR 837 (Janes Scenic Dr) 2U 615A D N 900 140 150 -10 -7.14%0 0 0 140 760 15.6% B 81.0 SR29 SR 29 CR 837 (Janes Scenic Dr) I-75 2U 615A D N 900 140 150 -10 -7.14%0 0 0 140 760 15.6% B 82.0 SR29 SR 29 I-75 Oil Well Road 2U 615A D N 900 140 150 -10 -7.14%48 19 67 207 693 23.0% B 83.0 SR29 SR 29 Oil Well Road CR 29A South 2U 665A D N 900 440 420 20 4.55% 54 25 79 519 381 57.7% C 84.0 SR29 SR 29 CR 29A South 9th Street 4D 664 D W 1,700 610 620 -10 -1.64%108 34 142 752 948 44.2% B 85.0 SR29 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 2U 663 D S 900 700 650 50 7.14% 71 21 92 792 108 88.0% D 2029 86.0 SR29 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 2U 663 D S 900 700 650 50 7.14% 46 22 68 768 132 85.3% D 2030 87.0 SR29 SR 29 Hendry County Line SR 82 2U 591A D S 800 300 390 -90 -30.00%7 3 10 310 490 38.8% B 88.0 SR82 SR 82 Lee County Line SR 29 2U 661A D S 800 790 790 0 0.00% 41 14 55 845 (45)105.6% E 2022 Existing 91.0 TCEA US41 Tamiami Trail East Davis Boulevard Airport Road 6D 545 E E 2,900 1,560 1610 -50 -3.21%180 2 182 1742 1158 60.1% C 92.0 TCEA US41 Tamiami Trail East Airport Road Rattlesnake Hammock Road 6D 604 E E 2,900 2,820 2780 40 1.42% 257 80 337 3157 (257)108.9% F 2023 Existing 93.0 US41 Tamiami Trail East Rattlesnake Hammock Road Triangle Boulevard 6D 572 E E 3,000 1,790 1980 -190 -10.61%447 135 582 2372 628 79.1% D 94.0 US41 Tamiami Trail East Triangle Boulevard Collier Boulevard 6D 571 E E 3,000 1,610 1690 -80 -4.97%266 91 357 1967 1033 65.6% C 95.1 US41 Tamiami Trail East Collier Boulevard Joseph Lane 6D 608 E E 3,100 850 900 -50 -5.88%528 30 558 1408 1692 45.4% B 95.2 US41 Tamiami Trail East Joseph Lane Greenway Road 4D 608 D E 2,000 850 900 -50 -5.88%234 79 313 1163 837 58.2% C 95.3 US41 Tamiami Trail East Greenway Road San Marco Drive 2U 608 D E 1,075 850 900 -50 -5.88%141 27 168 1018 57 94.7% D 2023 96.0 US41 Tamiami Trail East San Marco Drive SR 29 2U 617A D E 1,000 210 220 -10 -4.76%6 0 6 216 784 21.6% B 97.0 US41 Tamiami Trail East SR 29 Dade County Line 2U 616A D E 1,000 180 190 -10 -5.56%8 0 8 188 812 18.8% B 98.0 NW-TCMA US41 Tamiami Trail North Lee County Line Wiggins Pass Road 6D 546 E N 3,100 2,010 2150 -140 -6.97%49 8 57 2067 1033 66.7% C 99.0 NW-TCMA US41 Tamiami Trail North Wiggins Pass Road Immokalee Road 6D 564 E N 3,100 2,970 2920 50 1.68% 46 8 54 3024 76 97.5% E 2024 2023 100.0 NW-TCMA US41 Tamiami Trail North Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 6D 577 E * N 3,410 2,050 1950 100 4.88% 18 0 18 2068 1342 60.6% C 101.0 NW-TCMA US41 Tamiami Trail North Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulf Park Drive 6D 563 E N 3,100 2,430 2600 -170 -7.00%16 0 16 2446 654 78.9% D 102.0 NW-TCMA US41 Tamiami Trail North Gulf Park Drive Pine Ridge Road 6D 562 E * N 3,410 2,290 2340 -50 -2.18%0 0 0 2290 1120 67.2% C 108.0 TCEA(pt) Thomasson Drive Bayshore Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 2U 698 D E 800 520 590 -70 -13.46%66 4 70 590 210 73.8% C MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 11 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "F"56 57 58 61 63 64 65 66 Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) Based on Adopted LOS, Trip Bank and Traffic Counts Peak 2021 2020 Net Percent 2021 2021 Traffic Hour 1 Peak Peak Change Change 2021 2021 Counts + 2021 w/TB Counts Trip Bank Peak Dir Hour Hour In Volume In Volume 2021 1/7th Total Counts + Trip Bank Counts + L Year Year TCMA or Exist Cnt. Peak Service Peak Dir Peak Dir From From Trip Trip Trip Trip Bank Remaining Trip Bank O Expected Expected ID# TCEA Road# Link From To Road Sta. Std *Dir Volume Volume Volume 2020 2020 Bank Bank Bank Volume Capacity V/C S Deficient Deficient 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 # 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Min 109.0 NW-TCMA CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulfshore Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 2U/4D 524 E * E 1,540 870 1160 -290 -33.33%13 0 13 883 657 57.3% C 110.1 NW-TCMA CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 4D 646 D E 1,900 1,430 1600 -170 -11.89%14 0 14 1444 456 76.0% C 110.2 NW-TCMA CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 4D/6D 666 D E 2,500 1,590 1770 -180 -11.32%61 0 61 1651 849 66.0% C 111.1 NW-TCMA CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road Airport Road Livingston Road 6D 579 E E 3,000 2,040 2710 -670 -32.84%4 0 4 2044 956 68.1% C 111.2 NW-TCMA CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road Livingston Road Logan Blvd. 6D 668 E E 3,000 2,400 2420 -20 -0.83%126 0 126 2526 474 84.2% D 2026 112.0 CR862 Vanderbilt Beach Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard 6D 580 E E 3,000 1,680 1950 -270 -16.07%164 2 166 1846 1154 61.5% C 114.0 NW-TCMA CR901 Vanderbilt Drive Bonita Beach Road Wiggins Pass Road 2U 548 D N 1,000 500 390 110 22.00% 1 32 33 533 467 53.3% B 115.0 NW-TCMA CR901 Vanderbilt Drive Wiggins Pass Road 111th Avenue 2U 578 D N 1,000 980 400 580 59.18% 0 13 13 993 7 99.3% D 2022 2022 116.0 Westclox Road Carson Road SR 29 2U 611 D W 800 210 220 -10 -4.76%16 0 16 226 574 28.3% B 117.0 NW-TCMA CR888 Wiggins Pass Road Vanderbilt Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 2U 669 D E 1,000 400 420 -20 -5.00%14 13 27 427 573 42.7% B 118.0 Wilson Blvd Immokalee Road Golden Gate Boulevard 2U 650 D S 900 420 350 70 16.67% 77 0 77 497 403 55.2% B 119.0 CR858 Oil Well Road Immokalee Road Everglades Boulevard 4D 725 D E 2,000 1,070 950 120 11.21% 470 58 528 1598 402 79.9% D 120.0 CR858 Oil Well Road Everglades Boulevard Desoto Boulevard 2U 694 D E 1,100 430 370 60 13.95% 171 60 231 661 439 60.1% C 121.1 Oil Well Road DeSoto Boulevard Oil Well Grade 2U 694 D E 1,100 430 370 60 13.95% 138 50 188 618 482 56.2% C 121.2 Oil Well Road Oil Well Grade Ave Maria Blvd 4D 694 D E 2,000 430 370 60 13.95% 127 50 177 607 1393 30.4% B 122.0 Oil Well Road Ave Maria Blvd SR 29 2U 694 D E 800 430 370 60 13.95% 108 50 158 588 212 73.5% C 123.0 Golden Gate Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 18th Street NE/SE 4D 652 D E 2,300 1,480 1440 40 2.70% 54 5 59 1539 761 66.9% C 123.1 Golden Gate Boulevard 18th Street NE/SE Everglades Boulevard 4D 652 D E 2,300 1,480 1440 40 2.70% 0 5 5 1485 815 64.6% C 124.0 Golden Gate Boulevard Everglades Boulevard DeSoto Boulevard 2U 722A D E 1,010 280 237 43 15.36% 24 0 24 304 706 30.1% B 125.0 EC-TCMA CR896 Pine Ridge Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard 4D 535 D E 2,400 1,590 1610 -20 -1.26%5 7 12 1602 798 66.8% C 132.0 Randall Boulevard Immokalee Road Everglades Boulevard 2U 651 D E 900 810 870 -60 -7.41%9 16 25 835 65 92.8% D 2025 133.0 Randall Boulevard Everglades Boulevard DeSoto Boulevard 2U 721A D E 900 170 130 40 23.53% 31 0 31 201 699 22.3% B 134.0 Everglades Boulevard I-75 Golden Gate Blvd 2U 637S D S 800 420 541 -121 -28.81%16 0 16 436 364 54.5% B 135.0 Everglades Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Oil Well Road 2U 636S D N 800 370 418 -48 -12.97%138 9 147 517 283 64.6% C 136.0 Everglades Boulevard Oil Well Road Immokalee Road 2U 635S D N 800 610 560 50 8.20% 5 0 5 615 185 76.9% C 2031 137.0 DeSoto Boulevard I-75 Golden Gate Boulevard 2U 639A D S 800 180 160 20 11.11% 0 0 0 180 620 22.5% B 138.0 DeSoto Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Oil Well Road 2U 638A D S 800 150 140 10 6.67% 17 0 17 167 633 20.9% B 142.0 NW-TCMA Orange Blossom Drive Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 2D 647 D * W 1,320 490 410 80 16.33% 26 0 26 516 804 39.1% B 143.0 NW-TCMA Orange Blossom Drive Airport Road Livingston Road 2U 647 D W 1,000 490 410 80 16.33% 73 0 73 563 437 56.3% C 144.0 TCEA Shadowlawn Drive US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Davis Boulevard 2U 523 D N 800 450 250 200 44.44% 0 0 0 450 350 56.3% C * Segment designated as "Constrained" with SV increase +10% 1 Level of service calculations for road facilities means calculations for peak hour traffic on a roadway segment for maximum service volumes at the adopted LOS. Peak hour is calculated as the 100th highest hour based on a 10 month period (omitting February and March), which is generally equivalent to the 250th highest hour for a twelve (12) month period. For design of roadway capacity projects, the 30th highest hour for a 12-month period at LOS "D" will be utilized. (LDC Section 6.02.03 C.) MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 12 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) ID# Map Last Year Roadway From To Trip Bank (1/7th) Remaining Capacity V/C (Std) TCMA TCEA Year Expected Deficient Expected Def. Last Year Solutions 1.0 Airport Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 39 621 71.8% NW-TCMA 6-lane Improvement CST FY2023 23.0 Goodlette-Frank Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0 200 80.0% NW-TCMA 2025 Future 6-lane Improvement Design/ROW/AdvCST Programmed, CST FY2025 32.1 Collier Boulevard Green Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky 49 831 63.9% EC-TCMA 6-lane Improvement CST FY2023 32.2 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky Golden Gate Main Canal 241 259 88.7% EC-TCMA 2028 2025 6-lane Improvement D/B CST FY2023 33.0 Collier Boulevard I-75 Davis Boulevard 313 1027 71.5% EC-TCMA Existing Within the East Central TCMA - Funded for CST by FDOT FY25 36.2 Collier Boulevard Wal-Mart Driveway Manatee Road 158 -388 119.4% NO Existing Existing 6-lane Improvement FDOT Funding for R/W FY2021 and CST FY2024 67.2 Pine Ridge Road Livingston Road I-75 84 1166 70.1% EC-TCMA CFI/R-Cut/DDI Improvements CST Funded FY2023 110.1 Vanderbilt Beach Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 14 456 76.0% NW-TCMA 2029 6-lane Improvement CST FY2025 TBD Vanderbilt Beach Road Collier Blvd 16th Street NE #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New 4-lane Improvement from Collier Blvd to Wilson Blvd (2-lanes from Wilson Blvd to 16th St NE) FY2022 TBD Vanderbilt Beach Road 16th Street NE Everglades Blvd #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA Future 2-lane Improvement R/W & Adv. CST FY2022-2024 TBD Veterans Memorial Blvd. Phases I & II Livingston Rd US 41 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New 4-lane Improvement Phase I - CST FY2021 New 4-lane Improvement Phase II - Design/RW FY2024 & CST FY2025 TBD Whippoorwill Ln - Marbella Lake Dr Interconnection Whippoorwill Lane Marbella Lakes Dr #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New 2-lane Improvement CST FY2021 118.0 Wilson Blvd Immokalee Road Golden Gate Boulevard 77 403 55.2% NO 4-lane Improvement Design FY2021 & CST FY2024 132.0 Randall Boulevard Immokalee Road 8th Street NE 25 65 92.8% NO 2025 2021 4-lane Improvement CST FY2023 132.0 Randall Boulevard 8th Street NE Everglades Boulevard 25 65 92.8% NO 2025 2021 Future 4-lane Improvement Design FY2026 TBD Wilson-Benfield Ext..Lords Way City Gate Blvd N #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New roadway corridor; Adv. R/W & CST FY2022-2026 TBD 47th Ave. NE Bridge & Roadway Improvements Immokalee Rd. Everglades Boulevard #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2026 TBD Wilson Blvd. S. Bridge & Roadway Improvements Golden Gate Blvd. Frangipani/Tobias #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2026 TBD 13th St. Nw Bridge & Roadway Improvements Golden Gate Blvd. North of Canal #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2025 TBD 62nd Ave. NE Bridge & Roadway Improvements Everglades Blvd. 40th St. NE #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2026 TBD 10th Ave. SE Bridge & Roadway Improvements Everglades Blvd. Desoto Blvd. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2025 TBD 16th St. NE Bridge & Roadway Improvements Golden Gate Blvd. Randall Blvd. #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA New Bridge and Associated roadway and intersection improvements; CST FY2026 TBD Golden Gate Pkwy at Livingston Road #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA Future Intersection Imporvements - Design 2026 TBD Golden Gate Pkwy at Livingston Road #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NA NA Future Intersection Imporvements - Design 2026 Attachment "G" 2021 AUIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report Listed below are the roadway links that are currently deficient or are projected to be deficient under the concurrency system within the next five years and the programmed and proposed solutions to solve these deficiencies 2021 Programmed Improvements to Address Deficiencies Intersection Intersection MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 13 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "G" 2021 AUIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report Listed below are the roadway links that are currently deficient or are projected to be deficient under the concurrency system within the next five years and the programmed and proposed solutions to solve these deficiencies ID# Map Last Year Roadway From To Trip Bank (1/7th) for Info Only Remaining Capacity V/C (Std) TCMA TCEA Year Expected Deficient Expected Def. Last Year Solutions 36.2 Collier Boulevard Wal-Mart Driveway Manatee Road 158 -388 119.4% NO Existing Existing Widen to 6-Ln; FDOT Funded R/W FY2021 and CST FY2024 62.0 Old US 41 Lee County Line US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 9 -69 106.9% NW-TCMA Existing Existing Within the Northwest TCMA; Widen to 4-Lanes; PD&E Study Underway by FDOT; Pursue Federal Funding 66.0 Pine Ridge Road Shirley Street Airport Road 23 -253 109.0% NW-TCMA Existing Existing Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor; Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted ID# Map Last Year Roadway From To Trip Bank (1/7th) Remaining Capacity V/C (Std) TCMA TCEA Year Expected Deficient Expected Def. Last Year Solutions 26.0 Goodlette-Frank Road Golden Gate Parkway US 41 (Tamiami Trail) 0 190 93.0% NO 2025 2021 Continue to monitor; Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted 36.1 Collier Boulevard US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Wal-Mart Driveway 201 69 97.2% NO 2023 2024 Continue to monitor; Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted 43.2 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard 919 1 100.0% NO 2022 2027 Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis. Anticipate Future VBR Extension construction in 2022 to Reduce Volumes; 44.0 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 993 -403 112.2% NO Existing 2021 Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis. Anticipate Future VBR Extension construction in 2022 to Reduce Volumes; 68.0 Pine Ridge Road I-75 Logan Boulevard 126 194 93.1% EC-TCMA 2025 2026 Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 88.0 SR 82 Lee County Line SR 29 55 -45 105.6% NO Existing Existing Widen to 4-Ln; Gator Slough to SR29 FDOT Under CST; Remaining Funded for CST FY24 92.0 Tamiami Trail East Airport Road Rattlesnake Hammock Road 337 -257 108.9% TCEA Existing Existing Within the South US 41 TCEA; Continue to Monitor; Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted 95.3 Tamiami Trail East Greenway Road San Marco Drive 168 57 94.7% NO 2023 2021 Greenway Rd to 6-L Farms Rd is funded thru CST in the MPO CFP (2031-2040); East of 6-L Farms RD is not expected to be deficient within the same time frame; Continue to Monitor; 99.0 Tamiami Trail North Wiggins Pass Road Immokalee Road 54 76 97.5% NW-TCMA 2023 2023 Within the Northwest TCMA; Proposed Veterans Memorial Blvd. will provide a connection to Livingston North/South that should provide additional relief; Continue to Monitor 111.2 Vanderbilt Beach Road Livingston Road Logan Blvd. 126 474 84.2% NW-TCMA 2026 2025 Livingston to I-75 is in the Northwest TCMA 115.0 Vanderbilt Drive Wiggins Pass Road 111th Avenue 13 7 99.3% NW-TCMA 2022 Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor 132.0 Randall Boulevard Immokalee Road Everglades Boulevard 25 65 92.8% NO 2025 2021 Immokalee Rd @ Randall Blvd Intersection Improvement PD&E Underway; Immokalee Rd. to 8th Street Funded for Construction in FY22; Randall Blvd. Corridor Study Complete; Continue to Pursue Funding 2021 Existing Deficiencies Based on Traffic Counts Projected Deficiencies Existing - 2026 (Traffic Counts + Trip Bank & 1/7th Vested Trips) MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 14 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "G" 2021 AUIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report Listed below are the roadway links that are currently deficient or are projected to be deficient under the concurrency system within the next five years and the programmed and proposed solutions to solve these deficiencies ID# Map Last Year Roadway From To Trip Bank (1/7th) Remaining Capacity V/C (Std) TCMA TCEA Year Expected Deficient Expected Def. Last Year Solutions 17.0 Golden Gate Boulevard Collier Boulevard Wilson Boulevard 15 295 87.2% NO 2028 2030 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; Anticipate Future VBR Extension construction in 2022 to Reduce Volumes; 20.1 Golden Gate Parkway Airport Road Livingston Road 17 503 85.8% NO 2027 2027 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 20.2 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Road I-75 0 340 90.4% EC-TCMA 2027 2023 Within the East Central TCMA - Continue to Monitor and Review with Future I-75 Interchange Operation Analysis Report; 22.0 Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 60 230 88.4% EC-TCMA 2028 2026 Within the East Central TCMA - Operational Analysis Underway; Continue to Monitor and Review with Future I-75 Interchange Operation Analysis Report; Green Blvd. east of Logan being studied (FY2023) as a potential reliever. 30.1 Collier Boulevard Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 614.57 555 81.5% NO 2030 2030 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 4-laning of parallel reliever in 2022 (Wilson Blvd - Immokalee Rd. to GG Blvd CST FY2024) 31.2 Collier Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 151 509 83.0% EC-TCMA 2031 32.2 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky Golden Gate Main Canal 241 259 88.7% EC-TCMA 2028 2025 6-lane Improvement D/B CST FY2023 34.0 Collier Boulevard Davis Boulevard Rattlesnake Hammock Road 453 417 86.1% NO 2031 2030 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 37.0 Collier Boulevard Manatee Road Mainsail Drive 221 249 88.7% NO 2028 2029 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 42.2 Immokalee Road Livingston Road I-75 30 360 89.7% NW-TCMA 2027 2028 Within the Northwest TCMA - Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; Parallel Roadway Veteran's Memorial Blvd programmed for construction in 2022; Connection to US 41 FY2023 46.0 Immokalee Road Oil Well Road SR 29 219 171 81.0% NO 2031 67.1 Pine Ridge Road Airport Road Livingston Road 17 553 85.8% NW-TCMA 2029 2025 Within the Northwest TCMA - Congestion Corridor Study Completed for Pine Ridge Road @ Livingston programmed in CIE; PD&E Programmed in FY 19/20 for Interchange Area. Construction programmed in 2023; SV Increased in 2020 AUIR 70.0 Radio Road Livingston Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 30 280 84.4% EC-TCMA 2030 Within the East Central TCMA - Continue to Monitor and Review 85.0 SR 29 9th Street CR 29A North 92 108 88.0% NO 2029 86.0 SR 29 CR 29A North SR 82 68 132 85.3% NO 2030 136.0 Everglades Boulevard Oil Well Road Immokalee Road 5 185 76.9% NO 2031 Projected Deficiencies - 2027- 2031 (Traffic Counts + Trip Bank & 1/7th Vested Trips) MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 15 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment "G" 2021 AUIR Update Programmed Improvements and Deficiencies Report Listed below are the roadway links that are currently deficient or are projected to be deficient under the concurrency system within the next five years and the programmed and proposed solutions to solve these deficiencies ID# Map Last Year Roadway From To Trip Bank (1/7th) Remaining Capacity V/C (Std) TCMA TCEA Year Expected Deficient Expected Def. Last Year Solutions 19.0 Golden Gate Parkway Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 1 829 76.6% NO 2029 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 23.0 Goodlette-Frank Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0 200 80.0% NW-TCMA 2025 Within the Northwest TCMA - Design/ROW/AdvCST Programmed, CST FY2025 27.0 Green Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 10 190 78.9% EC-TCMA 2029 Within the East Central TCMA; 33.0 Collier Boulevard I-75 Davis Boulevard 313 1027 71.5% EC-TCMA Existing Within the East Central TCMA - Funded for CST by FDOT FY25 41.2 Immokalee Road Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 9 981 68.4% NW-TCMA 2024 Within the Northwest TCMA - Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; Pursue parallel Roadway; Veteran's Memorial Blvd to US 41 programmed for CST FY23 43.1 Immokalee Road I-75 Logan Boulevard 535 645 81.6% NO 2025 Continue to Monitor; Interchange Improvements Proposed in MPO Cost Feasible Plan 2021-2025, Anticipate Future VBR Extension to Reduce Volumes; Operational Analysis Underway; Study and Adv. CST FY2024 45.0 Immokalee Road Wilson Boulevard Oil Well Road 498 602 81.8% NO 2028 Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis. Anticipate Future VBR Extension construction in 2022 to Reduce Volumes; 49.0 Logan Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 50 360 81.1% EC-TCMA 2029 Within the East Central TCMA; Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 65.0 Pine Ridge Road Goodlette-Frank Road Shirley Street 20 620 77.9% NW-TCMA 2027 Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 101.0 Tamiami Trail North Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulf Park Drive 16 654 78.9% NW-TCMA 2029 Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; 110.1 Vanderbilt Beach Road US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Goodlette-Frank Road 14 456 76.0% NW-TCMA 2029 Within the Northwest TCMA; Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted; Design & CST programmed for FY 2025 111.1 Vanderbilt Beach Road Airport Road Livingston Road 4 956 68.1% NW-TCMA 2023 Within the Northwest TCMA; Dropped from Last Year's Lists MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 16 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) X X X X X X X !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(COUNTY BARN RDWiden to 6-Ln; PD&E On-Going FDOT Funding R/W: FY2021 CST: FY2024 Year Expected Deficient 2023 Northwest TCMA EVERGLADES BLVDYear Expected Deficient 2028 / East Central TCMA Operational Analysis Underway PD&E Underway (FY2019) Pursue State Funding IMMOKALEE ROAD Year Expected Deficient: 2029 East Central TCMA Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted Bridge at 8th St. NE (Completed) Year Expected Deficient: 2025 Corridor Study Completed Immokalee Rd to 8th Street CST in FY2023 8th Street to Everglades Blvd. CST: FY 2026 Northwest TCMA Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis if Warranted East Central TCMA; Congestion Corridor Study Complete, CST FY 2023 Logan Blvd N. (Completed)Immokalee/951 Intersection (Completed) Tree Farm/Woodcrest (Completed) Bridge at 47th Ave. NE Design & Mitigation: FY2024 Construction: FY2026 Wilson/Blackburn (By Others) City Gate Blvd. N (By Others) Existing Deficiency South US 41 TCEA Design/Build: Completed CST by FDOT FY2025 Year Expected Deficient 2022 Bridges at 16th St. NE Design & Mitigation: FY2021 Construction: FY2021 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Ext. New 3-Lane (of future 6-Lane) Roadway to Relieve Congestion on Immokalee Rd and Golden Gate Blvd. Design: FY2018-2019 ROW & Mitigation: FY2019-2020 Construction: FY2022 Northwest TCMA Widen to 6-Lanes ROW/Design: FY 2025 Construction: FY2025 Veterans Memorial Blvd New 2-Lane Roadway to Relieve Immokalee Rd. Congestion Phase I CST: FY 2021 Phase II CST: FY 2024 VETERA NS M EM ORI AL BLVD Year Expected Deficient: 2023 Continue to Monitor Intersection Improvements (Completed) Intersection Improvements Study & ROW: FY2019 Construction: 2022 Intersection Improvements Design: FY2020 ROW: FY2021 Construction: FY2023 Wilson Benfield Study/PE: FY2018 Adv. ROW: FY2021-2026I-75I-75I-75I-75 Intersection Improvements (FDOT) Design: FY2021 ROW: FY2018-2020 Construction: FY2021 Mitigation: FY2018, FY2020-2021 Whippoorwill Ln/Marbella Lakes Drive Interconnection Construction: 2020 Manatee Rd to Mainsail Dr. Year Expected Deficient 2029 Oil Well Road Adv.Construction: 2020-2024 Airport Rd Design: FY2020 ROW: FY2020 CST: FY2023 Year Expected Deficient: 2028 Collier BLVD - Widen to 6-lanes D/B CST: FY2023 Green Blvd. Widen to 4 lanes Study: FY2023 Existing Deficiency Immokalee Rd to Golden Gate Blvd Design: FY21 CST: FY2024 Year Expected Deficient 2027 Continue to Monitor & Pursue Detailed Capacity/Operational Analysis as warranted Vanderbilt Beach Rd Ext Rd 16th to Everglades Blvd Design: FY22 R/W & M: FY22 R/W & AdvCST: FY23 & FY24 Wilson Benfield City Gate Blvd to N. of I-75 CST: 2019 & 2020 East Central TCMA Continue to Monitor Review with Future I-75 Interchange Operations Report Year Expected Deficient: 2028 Relief Expected from VBR Ext.:FY2022 Continue to Monitor Year Expected Deficient: 2031 Continue to Monitor Year Expected Deficient: 2023 Monitor & Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis as Needed Year Expected Deficient: 2025 Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis Year Expected Deficient: 2030 Continue to Monitor Year Expected Deficient 2026 West of I-75 in NW TCMA Pursue Detailed Operational Analysis Year Expected Deficient: 2025 Continue to Monitor Year Expected Deficient: 2027 Continue to Monitor Connection to US 41 CST FY2023 Year Expected Deficient 2022 Northwest TCMA Year Expected Deficient: 2031 Year Expected Deficient: 2030 Year Expected Deficient: 2031 Year Expected Deficient: 2031 Bridges at Wilson Blvd. S Design: FY2024 CST: FY2026 Bridges at 10th St. SE Design: FY2023 CST: FY2025 Bridges at 13th St. NW Design: FY2023 CST: FY2025 Bridge at 62nd Ave NE Design: FY2024 Construction: FY2026 Immokalee Rd at Livingston Rd Major Intersection Improvement Design: FY2026 I-75 at Pine Ridge Road Major Intersection Improvement CST: FY2023 Golden Gate Pkwy at Livingston Rd Major Intersection Improvement Design: FY2026 Design: FY2023 Adv. CST: FY2025 SR 29COLLIER BLVDOI L WE LL R D TAMIAMI TRL NDAVIS BLVDGOODLETTE FRANK RDRA D I O R D IMMOKALEE R D E VANDERBILT DRVANDERBILT BEACH RD PINE RIDGE RD GREEN BLVD GOLDEN GATE BLVDOLD US 41T A M I A M I T R L E TA MIA MI TRL E OIL WELL RD GOLDEN GATE PKWY RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDAIRPORT PULLING RDLIVINGSTON RDWILSON BLVDCAMP KEAIS RDDESOTO BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVDVANDERBILT BEACH RD EXT. RANDALL BLVD COLLIER BLVDBONITA BEACH RD PROJECTED COLLIER COUNTY DEFICIENT ROADS 0 2 4 6 81Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTTRANSPORTATION PLANNINGFY 2021 - FY 2031 ATTACHMENT H-1 GULFOFMEXI COSan Marco RDBal d Eagl e DRN Collier BLVDCollier BLVDTamiami TRL E Bald Eagle DR INSET MAP Manatee Rd to Mainsail Dr. Year Expected Deficient 2028 ¯ Legend Capacity Enhancement Project Existing Deficiency Projected Deficiency < 5 Years Projected Deficiency 5 to 10 Years TCMA/TCEA Boundary 17 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FDOT Funded CST: FY 2024 FDOT Funded Under CST Year Expected Deficient: 2029 Year Expected Deficient: 2030 Year Expected Deficient: 2031 Future Widening by FDOT PD&E: On-Going ENV: FY2023 Future Widening by FDOT Design: FY2022 RW: FY2024 Future New Road by FDOT ENV: FY2024-2025 RW: FY2024-2025 Future Widening by FDOT PD&E: FY2022 Future Widening by FDOT Design: FY2024 PROJECTED COLLIER COUNTY DEFICIENT ROADSFY 2021 - FY 2031 Growth Management Department Transportation Planning ATTAC HMEN T H -2 0 1 2 30.5 Miles GIS Mapping: Beth Yang, AICPGrowth Management Department / LakeTrafford Hendr y County CampKeaisRD'­29 '­29 '­29 ")846 ")846 Legend Projected Deficiency < 5 Years Projected Deficiency 5 to10 Years Existing Deficiency Capacity Improvement Project 18 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) TCMA Report Collier County Transportation Concurrency Management System East Central TCMA AUIR ID Street Name From To PkHr-PkDir (1) V/C Ratio Length #Lanes Lane Miles Lane Miles @ V/C <= 1.00 14.0 Davis Boulevard Lakewood Boulevard County Barn Road 0.82 1.71 4 6.83 6.83 15.0 Davis Boulevard County Barn Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 0.69 0.75 4 3.02 3.02 16.1 Davis Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard Radio Rd. 0.28 2.62 6 15.71 15.71 16.2 Davis Boulevard Radio Rd. Collier Boulevard 0.53 2.32 6 13.93 13.93 20.2 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Rd. I-75 0.90 1.97 6 11.8 11.82 21.0 Golden Gate Parkway I-75 Santa Barbara Boulevard 0.59 1.01 6 6.07 6.07 22.0 Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 0.88 2.21 4 8.84 8.84 27.0 Green Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier Boulevard 0.79 1.99 2 3.99 3.99 31.2 Collier Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 0.83 0.88 6 5.28 5.28 32.1 Collier Boulevard Green Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky 0.64 1.06 4 4.24 4.24 32.2 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Pwky Golden Gate Main Canal 0.89 1.01 4 4.04 4.04 32.3 Collier Boulevard Golden Gate Main Canal I-75 0.59 0.65 8 5.20 5.20 33.0 Collier Boulevard I-75 Davis Boulevard 0.71 0.56 8 4.47 4.47 49.0 Logan Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Green Boulevard 0.81 0.88 4 3.53 3.53 54.0 Livingston Road Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Parkway 0.45 2.60 6 15.59 15.59 55.0 Livingston Road Golden Gate Parkway Radio Road 0.57 1.41 6 8.49 8.49 67.2 Pine Ridge Road Livingston Rd. I-75 0.70 2.20 6 13.20 13.20 68.0 Pine Ridge Road I-75 Logan Boulevard 0.93 0.99 6 5.97 5.97 70.0 Radio Road Livingston Road Santa Barbara Boulevard 0.84 2.00 4 7.98 7.98 71.0 Radio Road Santa Barbara Boulevard Davis Boulevard 0.42 1.34 4 5.36 5.36 76.0 Santa Barbara Boulevard Green Boulevard Golden Gate Parkway 0.73 1.70 4 6.81 6.81 77.0 Santa Barbara Boulevard Golden Gate Parkway Radio Road 0.70 1.40 6 8.43 8.43 78.0 Santa Barbara Boulevard Radio Road Davis Boulevard 0.54 1.05 6 6.32 6.32 125.0 Pine Ridge Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard 0.67 1.88 4 7.53 7.53 36.22 182.65 182.65 Total Lane Miles: 182.65 Lane Miles <=1.00 V/C: 182.65 (1) V/C Ratio based upon Total Traffic, including Traffic Counts + Total Trip Bank Percent Lane Miles Meeting Standard: 100.0% Attachment I MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 19 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment I TCMA Report Collier County Transportation Concurrency Management System Northwest TCMA AUIR ID Street Name From To PkHr-PkDir (1) V/C Ratio Length #Lanes Lane Miles Lane Miles @ V/C <= 1.00 1.0 Airport Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0.72 1.97 4 7.9 7.89 2.1 Airport Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Orange Blossom Dr. 0.71 1.53 6 9.2 9.18 2.2 Airport Road Orange Blossom Dr. Pine Ridge Rd. 0.71 2.92 6 17.5 17.51 23.0 Goodlette-Frank Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0.80 1.80 2 3.6 3.60 24.1 Goodlette-Frank Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Orange Blossom Dr. 0.57 0.88 4 3.5 3.52 24.2 Goodlette-Frank Road Orange Blossom Dr. Pine Ridge Road 0.62 1.53 6 9.2 9.18 29.0 Gulfshore Drive 111th Avenue Vanderbilt Beach Road 0.28 1.31 2 2.6 2.62 39.0 111th Avenue N. Gulfshore Drive Vanderbilt Drive 0.46 0.51 2 1.0 1.01 40.0 111th Avenue N. Vanderbilt Drive Tamiami Trail 0.64 1.00 2 2.0 2.01 41.1 Immokalee Road Tamiami Trail Goodlette-Frank Rd. 0.63 1.47 6 8.8 8.84 41.2 Immokalee Road Goodlette-Frank Rd. Airport Road 0.68 2.47 6 14.8 14.81 42.1 Immokalee Road Airport Road Livingston Rd. 0.68 1.96 6 11.8 11.79 42.2 Immokalee Road Livingston Rd. I-75 0.90 1.78 7 12.5 12.48 51.0 Livingston Road Imperial Street Immokalee Road 0.63 3.31 6 19.8 19.85 52.0 Livingston Road Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0.57 1.99 6 12.0 11.96 53.0 Livingston Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Pine Ridge Road 0.48 2.21 6 13.3 13.26 62.0 Old US 41 US 41 (Tamiami Trail) Lee County line 1.07 1.57 2 3.1 0.00 63.0 Seagate Drive Crayton Road Tamiami Trail 0.49 0.48 4 1.9 1.93 64.0 Pine Ridge Road Tamiami Trail Goodlette-Frank Road 0.69 0.50 6 3.0 3.02 65.0 Pine Ridge Road Goodlette-Frank Road Shirley Street 0.78 0.67 6 4.0 4.05 66.0 Pine Ridge Road Shirley Street Airport Road 1.09 0.81 6 4.9 0.00 67.1 Pine Ridge Road Airport Road Livingston Rd. 0.86 2.09 6 12.56 12.56 98.0 Tamiami Trail North Lee County Line Wiggins Pass Road 0.67 1.67 6 10.0 10.02 99.0 Tamiami Trail North Wiggins Pass Road Immokalee Road 0.98 1.52 6 9.1 9.11 100.0 Tamiami Trail North Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Beach Road 0.61 1.51 6 9.1 9.06 101.0 Tamiami Trail North Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulf Park Drive 0.79 1.26 6 7.6 7.58 102.0 Tamiami Trail North Gulf Park Drive Pine Ridge Road 0.67 1.44 6 8.6 8.64 109.0 Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulfshore Drive Tamiami Trail 0.57 1.34 2 2.7 2.68 110.1 Vanderbilt Beach Road Tamiami Trail Goodlette-Frank Road 0.76 1.87 4 7.5 7.50 110.2 Vanderbilt Beach Road Goodlette-Frank Rd. Airport Road 0.66 2.40 4 9.6 9.58 111.1 Vanderbilt Beach Road Airport Road Livingston Rd. 0.68 3.22 6 19.3 19.30 111.2 Vanderbilt Beach Road Livingston Rd. I-75 0.84 1.00 6 6.0 6.00 114.0 Vanderbilt Drive Lee County Line Wiggins Pass Road 0.53 2.52 2 5.0 5.03 115.0 Vanderbilt Drive Wiggins Pass Road 111th Avenue 0.99 1.49 2 3.0 2.99 117.0 Wiggins Pass Road Vanderbilt Drive Tamiami Trail 0.43 1.05 2 2.1 2.10 142.0 Orange Blossom Drive Goodlette-Frank Road Airport Road 0.39 1.35 2 2.70 2.70 143.0 Orange Blossom Drive Airport Road Livingston Road 0.56 1.01 2 2.02 2.02 59.44 283.39 275.37 Total Lane Miles: 283.4 Lane Miles <=1.0 V/C: 275.4 (1) V/C Ratio based upon Total Traffic, including Traffic Counts + Total Trip Bank Percent Lane Miles Meeting Standard: 97.2% MASTER Attachment F-2021 (071221.1).xlsm 20 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Project FY21 Number SUMMARY OF PROJECTS BY NAME Amount 60168 Vanderbilt Beach Rd Coller Blvd to 16th St 37,455 60198 Veterans Memorial PH 1 13,152 60129 Wilson Benfield 2,346 60199 Vanderbilt Beach Rd US41 to E of Goodlette 996 Total 53,949 **As of 6/30/21 Attachment J FY21 Activity Report on continuing Projects under Contract/DCA/Advanced Construction (Dollars shown in Thousands) 21 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONTENTS • COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ‒ SUMMARY • EXISTING CANAL SYSTEMS AND CONTROL STRUCTURES ‒ OVERVIEW • COUNTYWIDE STORMWATER CANAL SYSTEM ‒ MAP • COUNTYWIDE STORMWATER CONTROL STRUCTURES ‒ MAP • PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 5-YEAR WORK PROGRAM • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS • STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT LOCATION MAP • ATTACHMENT A: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS • ATTACHMENT B: SYSTEM INVENTORY AND GIS DATABASE REPORT • ATTACHMENT “C”: TABLES TABLE 2 ‒ CURRENT CANAL SYSTEM INVENTORY TABLE 3 ‒ CANAL AND DITCH CONDITION RATING SYSTEM TABLE 4 ‒ CURRENT CONTROL STRUCTURE INVENTORY TABLE 5 ‒ CONTROL STRUCTURE INSPECTION RATING SYSTEM • ATTACHMENT “D”: BASINS AND SUBBASINS REPORT: FIGURE 4– COLLIER COUNTY BASINS MAP FIGURE 5– COLLIER COUNTY DISCHARGE RATE MAP TABLE 5– COLLIER COUNTY BASINS Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 22 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 AUIR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES SUMMARY Facility Type: County Maintained System of Stormwater Management Canals & Structures (Category A) Level of Service (LOS) Standard: Varies by individual watershed Existing System within Collier County: Based on current Collier County GIS Database Existing Major Canals 408.1 Miles System Maintained by Collier County: Based on current Collier County GIS Database Existing Major Canals 148.1 Miles Proposed Reconstruction/Additions within 5-Year Planning Period 2.3 Miles Existing Major Water Control Structures 87 Proposed Replacement/Additional Structures within 5-Year Planning Period 3 Stormwater Program Summary FY 2022 thru FY 2026 Recommended Work Program $ 205,730,000 Recommended Revenues $ 86,855,000 Five-Year Surplus or (Deficit) $ (118,875,000) Based on projected funding availability and does not reflect the entirety of unmet stormwater needs. FY22 outlays actual proposed budget, subsequent years are proposed/estimated and are subject to change. 1. Revenue Sources FY22-26 Roll Forward $ (9,668,000) General Fund (001) $ 13,390,000 General Fund (111) $ 15,000,000 General Fund (310) $ 11,318,000 Anticipated Grants $ 4,125,000 Interest $ 235,000 Neg 5% Revenue Reserve $ (15,000) 325 Reserves $ 0 Debt Funding $ 52,470,000 Total $ 86,855,000 23 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2. Supplemental Revenue Sources None Required Recommended Action That the BCC direct the County Manager or his designee to include County stormwater projects appearing on the proposed “Stormwater Five - Year Work Program,” (Table 1) as detailed in the attached Project Descriptions and prioritized by the Stormwater Project Prioritization Process in the next Annual CIE Update and Amendment with the application of revenues as outlined in the Program Revenue section of Table 1; and that it approves the proposed 2021 Stormwater Management System AUIR and adopt the CIE Update for FY2021/22 – FY2025/26. EXISTING MAJOR CANAL SYSTEMS AND CONTROL STRUCTURES Currently, the County maintains 148.1 miles of canal (including ditches) and 87 stormwater control structures, which includes amil, crest, and slide gate weirs, flash board and fixed stage weirs, pump stations and tide valve. Figures 1 and 2 show the locations for all major canals (including ditches) and stormwater control structures maintained by the County, respectively. The County, working collaboratively with South Florida Water Management District, provides easements over the primary and secondary watercourses, in accordance with the Cooperative Agreement between Collier County and South Florida Water Management District. Table 3 identifies control structures maintained by Collier County. 24 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Figure 1: Collier County Major Stormwater Canal System 25 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Figure 2: Collier County Major Stormwater Control Structures 26 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 27 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY 22 – 26 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Countywide Programs, Planning & Maintenance Stormwater Feasibility and Preliminary Design (P/N 51144) This project includes funding for long range strategic planning for future program progression, capital improvement project identification and prioritization, specific basin issue evaluation and funding appropriation analysis. Individual Project Feasibility Studies will be funded from this Project and guided by the project ranking criteria established in the Planning process identified in Attachment A. Stormwater Maintenance (P/N 60194) This project includes funding of various maintenance activities associated with certain existing county stormwater management assets such as the Freedom Park water quality treatment system, Serenity Park’s surface water management area, and the Wiggins Pass Road area surface water flow way. NPDES MS4 Program (P/N 60121) Funding within this project covers continued development of and compliance with the federally mandated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program for the County operated Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). Stormwater Outfall Replacements (50209) Funding within this project covers replacement of stormwater outfalls within the Collier County Stormwater Management System. Stormwater Pipe Replacements (50210) Funding within this project covers replacement of stormwater pipe within the Collier County Stormwater Management System. Infrastructure & Capacity Projects 1. Stormwater Channel Dredging (P/N 50177) The proposed stormwater improvement project includes a survey and design of the dredge area to determine the silt removal quantity, develop spoil handling and disposal methodology, obtain all necessary permits, communicate/coordinate with all affected property owners, and dredging of the delineated areas of silt built up of identified areas within the Collier County Stormwater Management System. 2. Mangrove Street Seawall (P/N 50213) The project is for the removal of a collapsed dead-end canal vertical concrete seawall and replacement with a new vertical concrete seawall and cap with an 18-inch stormwater outfall. 3. Golden Gate City Outfall Replacements (P/N 51029) Project is to improve collection treatment and conveyance urban stormwater runoff by restoring an upgrading antiquated system installed in early 1960s within the four (4) square mile area known as Golden Gate City (GGC). The GGC canal system flows into Naples bay via the Main Golden Gate Canal. The project includes the replacement and improvements to existing aging infrastructure such as the removal of old catch basins replaced with ditch 28 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) bottom inlets with grates to catch debris, the addition of sumps at catch basins, re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion providing water quality improvement. Over a $50 million program. Individual projects to be delivered as time and budget allow. 4. Lely Golf Estate (P/N 60224) This is multiyear improvement project being developed in coordination with the Public Utilities Department to include stormwater management, water and wastewater improvements within the Lely neighborhood community. This joint effort will reduce construction costs by capitalizing on economy of scale and avoiding multiple disturbances in the neighborhood. 5. Pine Ridge Stormwater Management Improvements (P/N 60126) A feasibility study/master plan was completed in 2017 to serve as a guide for this area’s future projects. Improvements in the Pine Ridge Estates Area include replacement of existing aging infrastructure such as catch basins, culverts and re-grading and sodding of roadside swales. 6. Bayshore Gateway CRA (P/N 50169) A preliminary engineering study to identify design alternatives, constraints, and opportunities to improve the stormwater management system within the Bayshore Gateway CRA Area. The complete comprehensive preliminary engineering study will provide the basis upon which stormwater improvements will be designed. 7. Palm River Stormwater Improvement (P/N 60234) This is multiyear improvement project being developed in coordination with the Public Utilities Department to include stormwater management, water and wastewater improvements within the Palm River community. This joint effort will reduce construction costs by capitalizing on economy of scale and avoiding multiple disturbances in the neighborhood. 8. Flood Automation (P/N 50160) This is one of many future initiatives being programmed as resources and funding becomes available. Current projects involving work on several water flow and level control structures (weirs) are in various stages of implementation. “Work” includes planning and design of powered weir gate operations and remote operation capability. All new and rehabilitated weirs with manually adjustable control gates are being considered for this potential future automation upgrade. 9. Canal Easements (P/N 50180) Funding within this project covers necessary easement acquisitions and processes in order to properly maintain the existing stormwater management system and future stormwater management improvement projects. 10. Poinciana Village The stormwater improvement project will include stormwater management improvements within the Poinciana Village community, based on a preliminary engineering study that has identified design alternatives, constraints, and opportunities to improve the stormwater management system within Poinciana Village. 11. Plantation Island Canals/Ditches (P/N 60238) Dredging of the Plantation Island Area waterways as a joint effort with Collier County Stormwater Management and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 29 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 12. Immokalee Stormwater Improvements (P/N 60143) This project includes an update to the Immokalee Stormwater Master Plan, future stormwater treatment pond sighting feasibility analysis, coordination with the Lake Trafford Management Group, and the Immokalee Water and Sewer District. Future stormwater management improvement projects, as prioritized by the master plan update, will be fully coordinated and vetted with the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency. 13. Naples Park Area Stormwater Improvements (P/N 60139) In coordination with the Public Utilities Division, this project includes water main and sanitary sewer collection system replacements, as well as roadside stormwater management system improvements. Roadside stormwater improvements are occurring in conjunction with utility replacement work on all east-west streets in the Naples Park Subdivision. This is a multi- year, multi-phase project. 14. West Goodlette-Frank Road Area Stormwater Improvement (P/N 60142) Project planning and design has been completed, construction is currently underway, in coordination with the City of Naples Wastewater Collection System improvements to address stormwater (flooding) problems and existing septic system failures during periods of high rainfall on several streets between Goodlette-Frank Road and US-41. Stormwater runoff from the area flows east into the upper Gordon River then to Naples Bay. Work will include water quality improvements designed to decrease nutrient loading of stormwater runoff conveyed to the sensitive impaired receiving waters of Gordon River and Naples Bay. All phases north of the existing project will convert over 900 septic tanks to sewer conversions in addition to current project. 15. Harbor Lane Brookside (P/N 60195) Harbor Lane is a street in the Brookside neighborhood which needs surface and possibly base refurbishment. The street’s stormwater management system has reached the end of its life span and needs reconstruction as well. A new stormwater management system is currently under design. The design includes new culverts and catch basins as well as necessary water quality improvements. The Brookside neighborhood discharges stormwater into Naples Bay, an impaired waterbody. 16. RESTORE (P/N 33554) This is a new, large, comprehensive watershed improvement initiative currently in a conceptual planning stage. The initiative includes development of a suite of projects to be competed in phases, all with the goal of rehydrating and restoring historic, wet season surface water overland flow principally within the Belle Meade region of Collier County. Project concepts and a multiyear plan have been submitted to the state and the US Department of the Treasury to gain authorization for use of RESTORE Act funds to further the initiative. 17. Lake Park Flowway (P/N 60246) The project consist of creating a stormwater management overland flow way system to provide flood protection, attenuation and water quality treatment of stormwater flows from residential and agricultural areas north of this flow way prior to discharging into the Outstanding Florida Waters Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. 30 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 18. Gordon River Stormwater Improvements (P/N 60102) The Gordon River watershed consists of approximately 4,432 acres and is bounded by the Crossings to the north, the Conservancy of Southwest Florida to the south, Airport Pulling Rd to the east, and US 41 to the west. Various areas throughout the Gordon River Extension (GRE) basin experience high water inundation conditions during heavy rainfall events. These areas include the Country Club of Naples, Forest Lakes, Pine Ridge Industrial Park, Poinciana Village, Golden Gate Parkway, and the properties west of GF Rd, north of Golden Gate Parkway, and south of Pine Ridge Rd. A hydrologic/hydraulic modeling analysis was performed on the basin to determine various solutions to eliminate or effectively reduce the inundation conditions. The existing conditions model indicated a poorly maintained stormwater infrastructure serving the GRE basin. After the modeling and analysis of various proposed scenarios, it is recommended to implement the following eight improvements to relieve flooding scenarios throughout the basin; the Golden Gate Parkway AMIL Gate Weir Replacement, Goodlette-Frank Supplemental Outfall, Freedom Park Stormwater Pump Station, Freedom Park Bypass Ditch & Spreader Swale, Goodlette-Frank Ditch Improvements, Solana/Burning Tree Box Culvert Extension, Maintenance Access Road/ Seawall, and the Forest Lakes Rock Weir Replacement. The implementation of the proposed improvements provided a flood area reduction of approximately 400 acres within the basin. 19. Griffin Road Area Stormwater Improvements (P/N 60196) The Griffin Road Area Stormwater Improvement Project is located near the southwestern terminus of Griffin Road in the East Naples area of Collier County off of US41 (Tamiami Trail) and Barefoot Williams Road. The project includes construction of a water quality treatment area on Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve property. The focus of the project is to provide water quality treatment facilities and an adequate stormwater outfall for the area to reduce frequency of flooding. 31 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment “A” COLLIER COUNTY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS Objective: To adequately identify and prioritize stormwater management projects to include in the County’s AUIR/5-year Plan and Budgeting process. Purpose: To provide the Board County Commissioners with a general outline of the ongoing Project Planning and Prioritization Process. Considerations: The Stormwater Management Project Planning Process identifies and prioritizes potential projects for advancement into the AUIR/5-year Plan and annual Stormwater Management budget process. Typically, project feasibility studies are completed first. Studies are then being used to rank the projects for eventual funding and construction within the County’s AUIR/5-year Plan and annual budget process. The feasibility studies will also provide staff with better project cost estimates for preparing budget requests. Input from external stakeholders will also be used to recommend projects for the AUIR/5-year Plan. Plan Elements: ➢ Potential Project Database Staff has developed a Comprehensive Stormwater Needs database that contains all potential future stormwater improvement projects. Projects are provided from three main sources: customer complaint database, staff knowledge and Planning Studies. This database is periodically updated to reflect new information as projects are implemented and sources provide new potential projects. ➢ Project Profiles Staff selects potential projects from the database to gather detailed information to develop Project Profiles. Project Profiles are based by first determining the Objective of the Project, Benefit Area and Preliminary Conceptual Cost. Once those three basic components are defined, staff can provide information regarding affected acreage and population, per parcel cost, per acre cost, per capita cost, and per $1,000 of assessed value cost. A narrative explaining the objective, purpose and needs of the project is also provided in the Project Profile. ➢ Scoring Committee and Project Ranking Criteria A Stormwater Planning Process Committee has been established to review and score the Project Profiles. The seven (7) committee members, all county staff, come from different departments such as Stormwater, Comprehensive and Floodplain Management Planning, Engineering, Road Maintenance, and Pollution Control. Scoring is based on four major aspects: Health and Safety, Project Feasibility, Project Support, and Environmental Benefits. ➢ Feasibility Studies Top ranked Project Profiles are selected for Feasibility Studies which provide more detailed and secured information regarding the project’s cost, life, and stages. Project Profiles are updated with information from the feasibility studies. The Scoring Committee has ranked ten (10) projects; some current and ongoing, and some conceptual projects. The ranking and evaluation process and input from the committee has been deemed extremely useful and valid. As such, ranking information is considered and utilized in this current AUIR/5-year Plan. 32 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment “B” SYSTEM INVENTORY AND GIS DATABASE REPORT Objective: To maintain a complete and current inventory of all existing county-maintained stormwater and surface water management system assets. Purpose: To provide the Board of County Commissioners with an update on progress made to date with establishment of the Stormwater Management System Inventory GIS Database Considerations: For the past several years staff has been identifying existing stormwater management assets and sequentially building the stormwater management system geodatabase. The database currently includes the main canals and ditches, water level, and flow control structures and arterial roadway drainage infrastructure. Several hundred miles of collector and minor roadway swales, culverts and inlets are yet to be added to the dataset. They represent a majority of stormwater assets maintained on a day to day basis. All the water control structures are field verified and have conditional ratings. Field verification is ongoing for the arterial roadway stormwater management infrastructure. Current data collection is being coordinated with Operation and Maintenance staff (O&M) activities to the greatest extent possible. When data collection technicians log entries associated with geodatabase objects in advance of a scheduled O&M activity, subsequent O&M activity entries can then be connected to geodatabase objects. In this way, a work history for each asset is created that is now associated to geodatabase objects. Creating a work history for each asset can result in high level reporting such as required by the state for the County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (NPDES MS4) Permit, Permit # FLR04E037. Some examples are pesticide sprayers accounting for chemical usage including location and acreage and sediment removal tied to asset type (inlet, culvert, and swale). Other information being collected and added to the database includes information collected during the right-of-way permitting process, roadside assets in neighborhoods, roadside improvements completed as part of neighborhood stormwater improvements, remedial work or existing condition assessments (surveys), roadway outfalls to canals or tidal waters, secondary county roadway swales, culverts, inlets and manholes including all Golden Gate Estates roads and the urban county roads, and outfalls from private developments discharging into the County maintained system. The existing Stormwater Management System Inventory GIS Database is substantial, functioning, and has become an important tool used daily by O&M staff as well as Stormwater Planning staff. All the data, maps and asset tables produced for this AUIR were generated using the database. The database is being used to capture information that is essential for mandated reporting to the state as part of the County’s NPDES MS4 Permit requirements, as well as reporting for the County’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System (NFIP CRS). 33 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Table 3: Existing Collier County Stormwater Control Structures 34 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Attachment “D” BASINS AND SUB-BASIN REPORT Objective: To guide the County’s Stormwater Management Program by utilizing a watershed management approach. Purpose: To provide a general update on the basins/watersheds used for water resource management and planning within the County. Considerations: The Stormwater Management Program began a new approach to water resource management with the BCC’s acceptance of the County Watershed Management Plan on December 13, 2011. The Plan provides assessment and management information for geographically defined watersheds including: analysis, actions, participants, and resources related to developing and implementing the Plan. Understanding issues on a basin by basin level allows for better quantitative analysis and program planning. The Board directed staff to implement the Plan as funding and resources became available. Staff continues to follow that directive when initiating Plan recommendations. There are currently 51 basins in the Stormwater Management GIS database. Since 1990 (Ord. 90-10), the County has had a maximum allowable post-development stormwater runoff discharge rate of 0.15 cubic feet per second (cfs) per acre for all basins, with six (6) exception areas (basins) ranging from 0.04 to 0.13 cfs per acre. These more restrictive rates were established through modeling efforts that demonstrated the need to restrict flows from adjacent lands to the receiving canals. Stormwater discharge rates are limited so the rate at which runoff leaves a developed site will not cause adverse off-site (typically downstream) impacts. In the development of the Watershed Management Plan (WMP), computer modeling was used to determine the maximum flow that can be conveyed by the various water management canal segments. Results from that effort indicated that various segments of the primary and secondary water management systems do not have the capacity to handle large storm events. Expansion or enlargement of this system to create additional system capacity is not a viable strategy for managing stormwater flows. One means of addressing this limited capacity is to restrict the maximum flow in the associated basins that feed into the canals. The WMP included recommendations to reduce the maximum allowable post-development discharge rates in several basins. In addition to these recommendations in the WMP, two additional detailed stormwater management master plans, developed jointly by the South Florida Water Management District and the County for the Belle Meade and Immokalee areas, recommended further limiting the discharge rates for four (4) basins/sub-basins. Conditions may worsen in the future unless management actions are implemented to control the impact of subsequent changes to land use. In total, reducing maximum allowable post-development discharge rates in sixteen (16) basins/sub-basins will ensure adequate flood protection levels of service. A feasibility study and impact analysis was completed to examine the effects of implementation of the discharge rate restrictions. Staff fully vetted the new restricted discharge rates with the Development Services Advisory Committee, the Collier County Planning Commission and, the 35 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) South Florida Water Management District. The new rates were then approved by the Board of County Commissioners on June 13, 2017 and became effective on August 4, 2017. This report includes a listing of all basins with their respective acreage (Table 5); a map depicting all basins within the County (Figure 4); and, a map depicting the twenty-two (22) basins that have restricted stormwater discharge rates (Figure 5). Basins and Discharge Rates Specific Discharge Limitation Basins Rate 1 2 3. Airport Road North Canal Basin Airport Road South Canal Basin Cocohatchee Canal Basin 0.04 cfs/acre 0.06 cfs/acre 0.04 cfs/acre 4. Lely Canal Basin 0.06 cfs/acre 5. Harvey Canal Basin 0.06 cfs/acre 6. Wiggins Bay Outlet Basin 0.13 cfs/acre 7. Henderson Creek - Belle Meade Basin North 0.06 cfs/acre 8. Henderson Creek - Belle Meade Basin South 0.04 cfs/acre 9. Immokalee Master Basin East 0.05 cfs/acre 10. Immokalee Master Basin West 0.10 cfs/acre 11. 951 Canal North Basin 0.11 cfs/acre 12. C-4 Canal Basin 0.11 cfs/acre 13. Corkscrew Canal Basin 0.04 cfs/acre 14. Cypress Canal Basin 0.06 cfs/acre 15. Faka-Union Canal Basin-N 0.09 cfs/acre 16. Gordon River Extension Basin 0.09 cfs/acre 17. I-75 Canal Basin 0.06 cfs/acre 18. Imperial Drainage Outlet Basin 0.12 cfs/acre 19. Lely Manor Canal Basin 0.06 cfs/acre 20. Main Golden Gate Canal Basin 0.04 cfs/acre 21. Palm River Canal Basin 0.13 cfs/acre 22. Pine Ridge Canal Basin 0.13 cfs/acre 36 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Figure 4: Collier County Basins Map 37 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Figure 5: Collier County Basins with Restricted Allowable Discharge Rates Map 38 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Basin Initials Basin Name Area (Acres) 1 9CC 951 Canal Central Basin 834 2 9CN 951 Canal North Basin ** 826 3 ARN Airport Road North Canal Basin ** 1,717 4 ARS Airport Road South Canal Basin ** 3,124 5 BRC Barron River Basin 27,635 6 BRN Barron River Canal Basin (North) 16,873 7 C4C C-4 Canal Basin ** 3,581 8 CRB Cocohatchee River Canal Basin ** 90,396 9 CCB Corkscrew Canal Basin ** 6,466 10 CSB Corkscrew Slough Basin 28,016 11 CYC Cypress Canal Basin ** 10,880 12 EBC East Branch Cocohatchee 382 13 FSB Fakahatchee Strand Basin 146,611 14 FKC Faka-Union Canal Basin ** 35,581 15 GTB Gateway Triangle Basin 272 16 GHS Gator Hook Strand Basin 262,969 17 GRE Gordon River Extension Basin ** 5,060 18 GCB Green Canal Basin 5,082 19 HCB Haldeman Creek Basin 1,830 20 D1C Harvey Canal Basin ** 2,478 21 HBM-N Henderson Creek - Belle Meade Basin North ** 31,134 22 HBM-S Henderson Creek - Belle Meade Basin South ** 24,395 23 D2C I-75 Canal Basin ** 8,489 24 IDO Imperial Drainage Outlet Basin ** 2,528 25 ILB Imperial West Landmark FPL Basin 275 26 L28 L-28 Tieback Basin 118,960 27 LCB Lely Canal Basin ** 5,856 28 LMB Lely Manor Canal Basin ** 5,302 29 MGG Main Golden Gate Canal Basin ** 29,379 30 EMC Merritt Canal Basin 43,772 31 MJC Miller Canal Basin 16,086 32 MCB Miscellaneous Coastal Basins 189,058 33 NPN Naples Park North Basin 429 34 NPS Naples Park South Basin 352 35 NPW Naples Park West Basin 279 36 OSB Okaloacoochee Slough Basin 147,148 37 OTC Orange Tree Canal Basin 2,029 38 PLM Palm River Canal Basin ** 982 39 PSB Palm Street Basin 65 40 PRC Pine Ridge Canal Basin ** 2,664 41 QWP Quail West Phase II 319 42 RCB Rock Creek Basin 1,792 43 SPO Seminole Park Outlet Basin 10,752 44 TTC Tamiami Trail Canal Basin 4,611 45 TRB Turner River Canal Basin 316,480 46 UIB-E Urban Immokalee Basin East ** 1,690 47 UIB-W Urban Immokalee Basin West ** 2,459 48 WBC West Branch Cocohatchee River Basin 249 49 WBB Wiggins Bay Outlet Basin ** 2,308 50 WPO Winter Park Outlet Basin 173 39 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT − POTABLE WATER SYSTEM CONTENTS • POTABLE WATER SYSTEM 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY INTRODUCTION • LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOSS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA (TABLE, NOTES • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - CURRENT AND FUTURE POTABLE WATER SERVICE AREAS (MAP) • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - WATER SERVICE JURISDICTION (MAP) • FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN NORTHEAST COLLIER COUNTY (MAP) • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT (“CHECKBOOK”) • EXHIBIT ‘A’ - SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • APPPENDIX “H” - FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 40 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Type: Collier County Water-Sewer District – Potable Water System Facilities Level of Service Standard:130 gallons per capita day (gpcd)(1) Capacity: Total Permitted Treatment Capacity, FY 22 52.00 MGD Total Operational Treatment Capacity, FY 22 50.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY 22 38.43 MGD Total Permitted Treatment Capacity, FY 31 53.88 MGD Total Operational Treatment Capacity, FY 31 51.88 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY 31 46.22 MGD Expenditures FY22-FY26 (2) Debt Service $64,846,000 Expansion Related Projects - Other $47,207,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Other $176,910,000 Departmental Capital $2,861,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $16,253,000 (3) TOTAL $308,077,000 Existing Revenue Sources FY22-FY26 Water System Development Fees / Impact Fees $38,750,000 Bonds $54,707,000 Cares Act Funding $3,000,000 Water Capital Account $2,861,000 Rate Revenue $208,759,000 TOTAL $308,077,000 Surplus or (Deficit) for Five Year Program $0 Recommended Action: Conclusion: (1) (2) (3)As per Florida Statutes Section 129.01(c), contingency reserves are up to 10% of expenses. Per the latest master plan, which reduces the Level of Service (LOS) standard from 150 to 130 GPCD To ensure adequate treatment capacity for growth within the district boundary of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, expansion related projects commenced in FY 2019 based on the Level of Service Standard, population projections and capacity as shown in the AUIR. That the BCC find the Collier County Water-Sewer District Potable Water System in compliance with concurrency requirements found in FS Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code; and that it approve the proposed 2021 CCWSD Potable Water System Facilities AUIR and adopt the CIE update for FY22-FY26. 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY POTABLE WATER SYSTEM FACILITIES The CIE is consistent with the Board-approved FY22 budget. 41 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 42 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) A. B. C. D. Collier County Government POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) Public Utilities Department The Public Utilities Department’s proposed 2021 Potable Water System Treatment Facilities AUIR is based on permanent population estimates and projections for the potable water service area prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on using the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate through 2031. Concurrency is shown for 10 years for the current service area. This conforms with the State mandated CIE, concurrency regulations, and other Collier County Departments' AUIR submittals. The Public Utilities Department has completed draft master plans for water, wastewater, and irrigation quality water under Contract # 18-7370 with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. These master plans include recommendations for level of service (LOS) standards and the timing of capacity improvements as reported herein. In this section of the AUIR, the terminology "latest master plan" refers to AECOM's "Draft Potable Water Master Plan" dated July 2021. INTRODUCTION On September 11, 2018, as Agenda Item 17.F, the Board adopted a resolution expanding the CCWSD's service area to coincide with the unincorporated area permitted by Chapter 2003-353, Laws of Florida. This "jurisdictional boundary," as shown on the map entitled "Collier County Water-Sewer District Current and Future Potable Water Service Areas," encompasses the villages planned in the Northeast Service Area, including three villages in the Big Cypress Stewardship District (Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar), the adjacent SkySail subdivision (FKA Hyde Park Village), and Immokalee Road Rural Village, all depicted on the preceding service area map. Notes To support forecasted growth in the Northeast Service Area, an interim 0.875 MGD water treatment plant will be added followed by incremental 1 MGD expansions as dictated by demand. This facility will be sited on the 147-acre County- owned Northeast Utility Facilities (NEUF) property at the east end of 39th Ave NE. New regional plant construction is anticipated outside the AUIR planning horizon. The eventual addition of a third regional water treatment plant will provide the needed reliability to serve the expanded CCWSD. This will reduce the high and wide-ranging demands on the existing two plants and will allow for rehabilitation and replacement. 100% design documents were completed in 2010. The NEUF program has been reactivated, starting with updating the design criteria (FY 2018) and modifying the design plans to conform with current technologies (FY 2028). Project reactivation is in anticipation of the quantity of large developments going through different stages of the Growth Management Department review process. The need for readiness is also supported by the “Collier County Water- Sewer District System Utilization and Diminishing Capacity Report” (the “Checkbook”), which compares available treatment capacity to potential demand from undeveloped permitted uses in Board-approved planned unit developments (PUDs). The Checkbook uses the historical maximum 3-day average daily demand and monthly average daily demand from the last 10 years as baseline scenarios. Unbuilt future commitments are then multiplied by standard peaking factors and added to the baselines to arrive at worst-case scenarios for future operational requirements. Currently, the Checkbook reports that if all active Board-approved PUDs were built-out, the regional potable water system would have a 4% surplus in permitted treatment capacity. The BEBR population numbers are adjusted using data from the Collier Interactive Growth Model, as produced and maintained by Metro Forecasting Models, LLC, including estimates for the Golden Gate City Water Service Area, where only a portion of the population is served, and Marco Shores, where bulk water service was terminated in December 2019. 43 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) Public Utilities Department INTRODUCTION Recommendation The Public Utilities Department’s staff recommends that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approve the 2021 CCWSD Potable Water System Treatment Facilities AUIR. The 2021 Potable Water System AUIR is presented as a snapshot of concurrency conditions. The CCWSD is in compliance with concurrency requirements for FY 2022 and FY 2023, as required by FS Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan, and the Land Development Code. 44 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Permanent Required Total Total Retained Percent Fiscal Population Treatment New Permitted Operational Operational of Total Year Served Capacity Treatment Treatment Treatment Treatment Permitted on Oct. 1 at MDD Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 153,674 29.0 52.00 50.00 21.0 56% 2018 163,892 31.0 52.75 50.75 19.8 59% 2019 186,994 35.3 52.00 50.00 14.7 68% 2020 194,409 36.7 52.00 50.00 13.3 71% 2021 199,020 37.6 52.00 50.00 12.4 72% 2022 203,437 38.4 52.00 50.00 11.6 74% 2023 207,938 39.3 52.00 50.00 10.7 76% 2024 212,527 40.1 0.88 52.88 50.88 10.7 76% 2025 217,979 41.2 52.88 50.88 9.7 78% 2026 222,893 42.1 52.88 50.88 8.8 80% 2027 227,221 42.9 52.88 50.88 8.0 81% 2028 231,601 43.8 1.00 53.88 51.88 8.1 81% 2029 236,035 44.6 53.88 51.88 7.3 83% 2030 240,520 45.4 53.88 51.88 6.4 84% 2031 244,671 46.2 53.88 51.88 5.7 86% Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 45 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on previous page) 1. 2. 3. Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA The new villages proposed in the northeastern portion of the water service area will draw housing demand away from the urban area, which still has significant development potential. The population estimates and projections from Comprehensive Planning do not require adjustment since future development of the northeast villages is intrinsic to the system-wide projections. Required Treatment Capacity at MDD is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 130 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), by a maximum day demand (MDD) peaking factor of 1.3, and by a population adjustment factor of 1.12, and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). These values are the Level of Service (LOS) standards recommended in the latest master plan, with an adjustment factor to account for the 12% decrease in the service area population estimates since the 2020 AUIR, which formed the basis of the LOS recommendations. (Dividing historical MDD by a lower service area population would result in a higher LOS calculation.) Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Estimates and projections for the served area were prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate applied through 2031. Permanent population is used in accordance with the latest master plan. The population projections include the Golden Gate City service area (approximately 4 square miles) beginning in FY 2019 based on acquisition on March 1, 2018. The permanent population on the date of acquisition is estimated at 17,120, and population estimates and projections are included for the regional water service area in subsequent years. Following the implementation plan outlined in the Board adopted "Technical Feasibility Study for Acquisition of FGUA Water and Wastewater Assets in Golden Gate," Phase 1 water transmission mains will be completed in FY 2023, and using revised population figures from the Collier Interactive Growth Model, Phase 2 will increase the population served to 27,077 within 15 years after acquisition. Presently, additional water customers are being connected on an individual basis where existing infrastructure is available. Larger system expansion is anticipated through a coordinated effort with the Growth Management 9/21/2021 The population projections include the NE Utility (formerly Orangetree Utilities - OTU) WTP service area beginning in FY 2018 based on acquisition on March 1, 2017. The permanent population on the date of acquisition is estimated at 6,086, and population estimates and projections are included for the regional water service area in subsequent years. The City of Marco Island terminated bulk water service to the Marco Shores in December 2019. Therefore, population estimates from the CIGM for Marco Shores were added to population estimates for the overall service area for FY 2020 and earlier. Utility Planning Section and Comprehensive Planning Section staff have worked together to eliminate unserved enclaves within the overall service area from the population estimates and projections, resulting in a decrease in the numbers presented in the 2020 AUIR. The numbers are likely to change again once the 2020 Census data is incorporated into Comprehensive Planning's methodology, which presently utilizes 2000 Census data for calculating population figures withing given geographic boundaries. 46 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Percent of Total Permitted Capacity is the total maximum-day quantity of finished water produced by all treatment plants connected to the water system as a percentage of Total Permitted Treatment Capacity. Per FAC 62-555.348, source/treatment/storage capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once maximum-day demand exceeds 75% of Total Permitted Treatment Capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. In accordance with the July 2021 Draft Potable Water Master Plan, Total Operational Treatment Capacity must be sufficient for the maximum day demand. Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Total Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Required Treatment Capacity at MDD. Total Operational Treatment Capacity is the Total Permitted Treatment Capacity less 2 MGD, as plotted in the chart on the next page. 2 MGD is the treatment capacity of a lime softening reactor at the NCRWTP, which could be out of service during a period of peak demand. An additional 6-MGD lime softening reactor was constructed at the SCRWTP in FY 2021, ensuring full reliability of the permitted capacity of that plant. So, the reactor at the NCRWTP is the largest treatment process unit that could be offline without redundancy. Capacity in FY 2018 increased by 0.75 MGD (as currently sited) because Orangetree Utilities (OTU) was integrated into the CCWSD on March 1, 2017 (during FY 2017), but decreased the following fiscal year due to the water treatment plant being decommissioned on August 13, 2018. Customers previously served by the NE Utility (former OTU) WTP are now served by the regional potable water system. The former 2.1 MGD Golden Gate City water treatment plant was decommissioned immediately upon acquisition from the Florida Governmental Utility Authority on March 1, 2018, and customers in Golden Gate City are connected to the regional potable water system. 2028 1 MGD New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion. Timing and capacity are tentative and may be adjusted with updates in development forecasts and adoption of developer agreements: New Treatment Capacity Total Permitted Treatment Capacity is the total permitted finished water treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year in million gallons per day (MGD), including New Treatment Capacity. Fiscal Year Comments and Cost Estimates $2M 1 MGD expansion to the interim water treatment plant at the NEUF site to facilitate development in the Northeast Water Service Area, beginning in FY 2027 and online by FY 2028 $5M 0.875 MGD interim water treatment plant at the NEUF site, repurposing equipment from the decommissioned Golden Gate WTP, to facilitate development in the Northeast Water Service Area, beginning in FY 2023 and online by FY 2024 0.875 MGD2024 47 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR POTABLE WATER SERVICE AREA LOS: 130 GPCD 9/21/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Total Permitted Treatment Capacity Total Operational Treatment Capacity Required Treatment Capacity at MDD 75% of Total Permitted Treatment Capacity per FAC 62-555.348 Orangetree Utility Integration Golden Gate City Utility Acquisition 0.875 MGD Interim WTP at NEUF 1 MGD Interim WTP Expansion Orangetree WTP Decommissioned Commence capacity analysis reporting to FDEP 48 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 49 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES SUMMARY The wells in the Golden Gate Wellfield have an average production rate of 1.152 MGD. In order to produce the 26.5 MGD of raw water necessary to run the water treatment processes at maximum capacity, a minimum of 13 wells are required. The two treatment processes produce a combined total of 24 MGD of potable water with a combined efficiency of 91%. A total of 26.5 MGD of raw water is needed to operate the two processes at maximum capacity. The SCRWTP utilizes a lime softening water treatment process that produces a maximum of 12 MGD of potable water. The treatment process is 97% efficient. The NCRWTP utilizes a membrane filtration (MF) water treatment process that produces a maximum of 12 million gallons per day (MGD) of potable water. The treatment process is 85% efficient (i.e. produces 85 gallons of potable water for every 100 gallons raw water withdrawn from the aquifer). Raw fresh water is provided to both the North County Regional Water Treatment Plant (NCRWTP) and the South County Regional Water Treatment Plant (SCRWTP) from the Golden Gate Wellfield. The wellfield has a current inventory of 37 wells that terminate in the Lower Tamiami Aquifer. 9 additional wells are scheduled to be constructed in the next 10 years. 9/21/2021 A Minimum Reliability Standard (MRS) of 20% is used for fresh water wells (1 reliability well for every 5 production wells). A total of 16 wells are needed to meet the MRS at full treatment capacity. 9 additional wells are scheduled to be constructed in the next 10 years. There is one existing wellfield that supplies fresh water to the two regional plants and a small existing wellfield that supplies fresh water to the NE Utility WTP. Another small wellfield will be built to serve the future NERWTP. Each is discussed in more detail below. Golden Gate Wellfield FRESH WATER 50 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES SUMMARY 9/21/2021 The wells in the North RO Wellfield have an average production rate of 1.013 MGD. In order to produce the 10.7 MGD of raw water necessary to run the water treatment process at maximum capacity, a minimum of 11 wells are required. The NCRWTP utilizes a low-pressure reverse osmosis (RO) water treatment process that produces a maximum of 8 MGD of potable water. The treatment process is 75% efficient. 10.7 MGD of raw water is needed at full treatment capacity. The North RO Wellfield supplies brackish water to the NCRWTP from 20 wells that terminate in the mid- and lower- Hawthorn aquifers. There are two separate wellfields that independently provide brackish water to the two regional plants. Another wellfield may be built to serve the future NERWTP. Each is discussed in more detail below. Northeast Tamiami Wellfield North RO Wellfield BRACKISH WATER The interim WTP at the NEUF site will utilize an nanofiltration water treatment process that will produce a maximum of 3 MGD of potable water. The treatment process will be 0.85 efficient (i.e. will produce a minimum of 85 gallons of potable water for every 100 gallons raw water withdrawn from the aquifer). The wells in the Northeast IE Wellfield will have an average production rate of 0.518 MGD. In order to produce the 3.66 MGD of raw water necessary to run the Phase 3 interim water treatment process at maximum capacity, a minimum of 8 wells would be required. An MRS of 20% is used for fresh water wells (1 reliability well for every 5 production wells). A total of 10 wells are needed to meet the MRS at full treatment capacity. In addition to the 10 wells are scheduled to be constructed in the next 10 years. The existing Northeast Tamiami Wellfield has a current inventory of 3 wells that terminate in the Lower Tamiami Aquifer. The wells in the NESA Wellfield have an average production rate of 0.432 MGD. They will be repurposed for an interim WTP at the NEUF site, the first phase of which is to be online in FY 2024. The second and third phases of the interim WTP will add 6 wells, 1 in each subsequent year. These wells will begin sending raw fresh water to the permanent NERWTP, which will utilize an ion exchange treatment process, with completion of the first phase beyond the 10-year planning horizon for this AUIR. An MRS of 33% is used for brackish water wells (1 reliability well for every 3 production wells). A total of 15 wells are needed to meet the MRS at full treatment capacity. 4 additional wells are scheduled to be constructed in the next 10 years. 51 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES SUMMARY 9/21/2021 The South RO Wellfield supplies brackish water to the NCRWTP from 30 wells that terminate in the mid- and lower Hawthorn aquifers. South RO Wellfield The CCWSD's existing wellfields have capacities in excess of the minimum reliability standards based upon the population estimates and projections for the regional potable water system service area, and future wellfields of reliable capacities will be timely completed in support of the interim WTP at the NEUF site. The SCRWTP utilizes a low-pressure RO water treatment process that produces a maximum of 20 MGD of potable water. The treatment process is 75% efficient. 26.7 MGD of raw water is needed at full treatment capacity. The wells in the South RO Wellfield have an average production rate of 1.224 MGD. In order to produce the 26.7 MGD of raw water necessary to run the water treatment process at maximum capacity, a minimum of 37 wells are required. An MRS of 33% is used for brackish water wells (1 reliability well for every 3 production wells). A total of 50 wells are needed to meet the MRS at full treatment capacity. 4 additional wells are scheduled to be constructed in the next 10 years. CONCLUSION 52 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Golden North South Northeast Required Gate Hawthorn Hawthorn Tamiami Total Fiscal Finished Wellfield Wellfield Wellfield Wellfield Wellfield Year Water Reliable Reliable Reliable Reliable Reliable for MDD Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 29.0 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2018 31.0 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.75* 52.75 2019 35.3 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2020 36.7 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2021 37.6 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2022 38.4 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2023 39.3 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.00 52.00 2024 40.1 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.88* 52.88 2025 41.2 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.88* 52.88 2026 42.1 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.88* 52.88 2027 42.9 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 0.88* 52.88 2028 43.8 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 1.88* 53.88 2029 44.6 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 1.88* 53.88 2030 45.4 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 1.88* 53.88 2031 46.2 24.00* 8.00* 20.00* 1.88* 53.88 *Wellfield reliable capacity is limited by the capacity of the associated treatment process. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES 53 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on previous page) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES Required Finished Water for MDD - See note 3 in LOS standard assessment for treatment facilities. Golden Gate Wellfield Reliable Capacity is the pumping capacity of the Golden Gate Wellfield adjusted by an average plant efficiency (ratio of finished water to raw water) of 91% (97% for SCRWTP lime softening and 75% for NCRWTP Low Pressure Reverse Osmosis, each process at 12 MGD treatment capacity) and a reliability standard of 1 reliability well for every 5 production wells (i.e. 5/6 of the total number of wells operating). The current number of wells in the Golden Gate Wellfield is 37. Well 39 went online in April 2021 (i.e. online by the start of FY 2022), Well 40 will be online by the start of FY 2023, and 1 well will be constructed in each fiscal year beginning in FY 2024 to achieve and sustain the reliability standard. 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. South Hawthorn Wellfield Reliable Capacity is the pumping capacity of the South RO Wellfield adjusted by an average plant efficiency (ratio of finished water to raw water) of 0% and a reliability standard of 1 reliability well for every 3 production wells (i.e. 3/4 of the total number of wells operating). The current number of wells in the South RO Wellfield is 30. Wells 7, 14, 17, and 42 are used only during periods of high demand due to elevated salinity (total dissolved solids, TDS) in the aquifer. Wells 32, 43, 44, and 45 are permitted but have not been completed. Despite these inactie wells, the wellfield satisfies the reliability standard. An average of one RO well per year will be added in the north and south wellfields to sustain reliability. North Hawthorn Wellfield Reliable Capacity is the pumping capacity of the North RO Wellfield adjusted by an average plant efficiency (ratio of finished water to raw water) of 75% and a reliability standard of 1 reliability well for every 3 production wells (i.e. 3/4 of the total number of wells operating). The current number of wells in the North RO Wellfield is 20. Wells 1, 2, 3, and 4 are inactive due to elevated salinity (total dissolved solids, TDS) in the aquifer, and well 4 must be abandoned due to conflict with the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension project. Well 5 experienced high salinity, which stabilized after reducing usage. Well 6 is inactive due to a problem with sand production in addition to high salinity. Wells 117, 118, 119, and 120 are drilled but have not been equipped with pumps. Despite these inactie wells, the wellfield satisfies the reliability standard. An average of one RO well per year will be added in the north and south wellfields to sustain reliability. Northeast Tamiami Wellfield Reliable Capacity is the pumping capacity of the NESA Wellfield adjusted by an average plant efficiency (ratio of finished water to raw water) of 82% and a reliability standard of 1 reliability well for every 5 production wells (i.e. 5/6 of the total number of wells operating). 3 existing wells in the Northeast Tamiami Wellfield became inactive for potable water production when the former Orange Tree WTP was decommissioned on August 13, 2018, but will be utilized for water supply to the initial phase of the interim WTP at the NEUF site beginning in FY 2024. Per the Addendum to Integration Agreement, approved by the Board on July 13, 2021 (Agenda Item 16.C.20), Well #2 will revert to the previous landowner when the first phase of the Northeast County Water Reclamation Facility is able to receive and process flow from the existing Orange Tree WWTP, which is anticipated by 2031, at which time the Northeast Interim WTP will be fully operational. The well is presumed to be replaced in the same year it is relinquished. 54 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SERVICE AREA Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES 9/21/2021 7. WUP #11-00419-W GGa NROb SROb NETa Total Add Add Wells Wells Wells Wells Wells Fresh Brackish 2022 38 20 30 0 88 1 2023 39 20 30 0 89 4 2024 40 20 30 3 93 2 2025 41 20 30 4 95 2 2026 42 20 30 5 97 2 2027 43 20 30 6 99 2 5 2028 44 24 31 7 106 2 1 2029 45 24 32 8 109 2 1 2030 46 24 33 9 112 2 1 2031 47 24 34 10 115 Net Add'l 9 4 4 10 27 19 8 aFresh bBrackish Total Wellfield Reliable Capacity is the net reliable capacity of the six wellfields combined. The below table summarizes the total quantity of wells in each wellfield for each plan year: Fiscal Year 11-00249-W 55 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) POTABLE WATER SYSTEM - WELLFIELD FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR POTABLE WATER SERVICE AREA LOS: 130 GPCD 9/21/2021 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 MGDFiscal Year Golden Gate Wellfield Reliable Capacity North Hawthorn Wellfield Reliable Capacity South Hawthorn Wellfield Reliable Capacity Northeast Tamiami Wellfield Reliable Capacity Required Finished Water for MDD Total Wellfield Reliable Capacity Orangetree Utility Integration Golden Gate City Utility Acquisition Orangetree WTP Decommissioned Phase 1 Interim WTP at NEUF Phase 2 Interim WTP at NEUF 56 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WATER REGIONAL 1a. 52.000 1b. 48.000 2a. 34.073 2b. 31.981 3a. 13.927 3b. 16.019 4a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 3a / Line 1b)29% 4b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 3b / Line 1b)33% Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WATER REGIONAL 5. 12.134 6a. 1.793 6b. 3.885 7a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 6a / Line 1b)4% 7b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 6b / Line 1b)8% Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WATER REGIONAL 8a. 0.000 8b. 0.000 9a. 1.793 9b. 3.885 10a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 11a / Line 1b)4% 10b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 11b / Line 1b)8% [1] Mar-19 [2] Mar-20 [3] FOOTNOTES/QUALIFIERS: Line 2a: Mo-Yr of Max. 3-Day Since May 2011 => Line 2b: Mo-Yr of Max. Month Since May 2011 => Capacity requested by outstanding active BCC-approved PUD units, as documented in the most current GMD PUD Master List. Built-out, closed-out, inactive, and discontinued PUD's are not included in line 5; only active PUD's are included. The outstanding PUD units are assumed to be developed before PUD closeout. Level of service for future commitments is defined FUTURE AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH EXPANSIONS) Expansions Within Next 12 Months (MADD) Expansions Within Next 12-24 Months (MADD) Future Available Capacity (TDADD) (Line 6a + Line 8a + Line 8b) Future Available Capacity (MADD) (Line 6b + Line 8a + Line 8b) FUTURE AVAILABILITY WITH EXPANSIONS CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS Existing Permitted Plant Capacity (MADD) Existing Operational Plant Capacity per 2020 AUIR 10-Year Maximum TDADD [1] 10-Year Maximum MADD [2] Current Available Diminishing Capacity (TDADD) (Line 1b - Line 2a) Current Available Diminishing Capacity (MADD) (Line 1b - Line 2b) CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITHOUT FUTURE COMMITMENTS PROJECTED AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS) Total BCC-approved Active PUD commitments (Unbuilt per GMD PUD Master List) [3] Projected Available Capacity (TDADD) (Line 3a - Line 5) Projected Available Capacity (MADD) (Line 3b - Line 5) CURRENT AVAILABLE CAPACITY (BASED ON HISTORICAL EXTREME EVENT) COLLIER COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT ("CHECKBOOK") REGIONAL POTABLE WATER SYSTEM DATA: Current as of May 14, 2021 INTRODUCTION: The Checkbook uses the historical maximum 3-day average daily demand (TDADD) and monthly average daily demand (MADD) from the last 10 years as baseline scenarios. Unbuilt future commitments are then multiplied by standard peaking factors and added to the baselines to arrive at worst-case scenarios for future operational requirements. 17 of 19 57 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 PUD POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT CIE # PROJECT FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 TOTAL Debt Service $17,362,000 $11,808,000 $11,796,000 $11,906,000 $11,974,000 $64,846,000 Expansion Related Projects - Other $46,540,000 $0 $0 $0 $667,000 $47,207,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Other $40,600,000 $34,555,000 $34,585,000 $31,535,000 $35,635,000 $176,910,000 Departmental Capital $550,000 $561,000 $572,000 $583,000 $595,000 $2,861,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $2,620,000 $3,456,000 $3,459,000 $3,154,000 $3,564,000 $16,253,000 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $107,672,000 $50,380,000 $50,412,000 $47,178,000 $52,435,000 $308,077,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 TOTAL WIF - Water System Development Fees / Impact Fees $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $38,750,000 B1 - Bonds/ Loans $54,040,000 $0 $0 $0 $667,000 $54,707,000 Cares Act Funding $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 WCA - Water Capital Account $550,000 $561,000 $572,000 $583,000 $595,000 $2,861,000 REV - Rate Revenue $42,332,000 $42,069,000 $42,090,000 $38,845,000 $43,423,000 $208,759,000 REVENUE TOTAL $107,672,000 $50,380,000 $50,412,000 $47,178,000 $52,435,000 $308,077,000 CIE consistent with Board-approved FY22 budget Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement and Rehabilitation Projects: As per Florida Statues, reserve for contingencies is up to 10% of expenses. NOTE: Collier County has adopted a two-year Concurrency Management System. Figures provided for years three, four and five of this Schedule of Capital Improvements are not part of the Concurrency Management System but must be financially feasible with a dedicated revenue source or an alternative revenue source if the dedicated revenue source is not realized. Revenue sources are estimates only; both the mix of sources and amounts will change when a rate study is conducted. FY 2023 to FY 2026 are 2% increases over each fiscal year (pursuant to CPI adjustments per current Board policy). All years are obtained from the current Collier County Water-Sewer District Financial Statements and Other Reports including Summary of Debt Service requirements to maturity. Total Debt Service amount is split 50/50 between Water and Wastewater. DATA SOURCES: Expansion Related and Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects: FY 2022 is obtained from the 2022 Proposed Budget for R&R projects. Expansion projects require additional funding therefore not included in the budget. FY 2023 to FY 2026 are from the FY 2019 Impact Fee Rate Study. Department Capital: FY 2022 is obtained from the 2022 Proposed Budget, split 50/50 between Water and Wastewater. Debt Service: CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE NOTES 9/21/20216:12 PM 58 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 PUD POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT CIE #PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Debt Service $11,681,000 $11,413,000 $13,222,000 $11,360,000 $11,362,000 $59,038,000 Expansion Related Projects - Generally $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Generally $36,955,000 $36,585,000 $36,985,000 $36,985,000 $36,985,000 $184,495,000 Departmental Capital $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $3,696,000 $3,659,000 $3,699,000 $3,699,000 $3,699,000 $18,452,000 POTABLE WATER PROJECT TOTALS $52,939,000 $59,776,000 $54,537,000 $52,688,000 $52,703,000 $272,643,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL WIF - Water System Development Fees $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $38,750,000 B1 - Bonds/ Loans $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Cares Act Funding $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WCA - Water Capital Account $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 REV - Rate Revenue $44,582,000 $43,907,000 $46,156,000 $44,294,000 $44,296,000 $223,235,000 REVENUE TOTAL $52,939,000 $59,776,000 $54,537,000 $52,688,000 $52,703,000 $272,643,000 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE NOTES NOTE: Figures provided for years six through ten are estimates of revenues necessary to support project costs but do not constitute a long-term concurrency system. Revenue sources are estimates only; both the mix of sources and amounts will change when a rate study is conducted. 9/21/20216:12 PM 59 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT − WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS CONTENTS • 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY - WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES • INTRODUCTION • LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (SCWRF) SERVICE AREA (TABLE, NOTES & CHART) • LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) SERVICE AREA (TABLE, NOTES & CHART • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - CURRENT AND FUTURE WASTEWATER SERVICE AREAS MAP • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - WASTEWATER SERVICE JURISDICTION (MAP) • FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN NORTHEAST COLLIER COUNTY (MAP) • COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT - SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT (“CHECKBOOK”) • EXHIBIT “A” - SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS • APPENDIZ “H” - FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 60 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Facility Type: Collier County Water-Sewer District – Wastewater Treatment System Level of Service Standard:90 gallons per capita day (gpcd)(1) Capacity: South Service Area (SCWRF) Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY22 16.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY22 12.15 MGD Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY31 16.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY31 14.02 MGD Capacity: North Service Area (NCWRF) Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY22 24.10 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY22 17.20 MGD Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY31 24.10 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY31 18.42 MGD Capacity: Golden Gate City Central Service Area (GGWWTP/CCWRF) Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY22 1.50 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY22 1.15 MGD Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY31 5.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY31 1.33 MGD Capacity: Orange Tree Service Area (OTWWTP) Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY22 0.75 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY22 0.62 MGD Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY31 0.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY31 0.00 MGD Capacity: Northeast Service Area (Interim WWTP & NECWRF) Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY22 0.00 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY22 0.00 MGD Permitted/Operational Treatment Capacity, FY31 5.50 MGD Required Treatment Capacity, FY31 1.70 MGD 2021 AUIR FACILITY SUMMARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM FACILITIES 61 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Expenditures FY22-FY26 (2) Debt Service $63,559,000 Expansion Related Projects - Other $186,737,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Other $203,302,000 Departmental Capital $2,861,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $17,473,000 (3) TOTAL $473,932,000 Existing Revenue Sources FY22-FY26 Wastewater System Development Fees / Impact Fees $39,500,000 Bonds $202,987,000 Cares Act Funding $7,000,000 Wastewater Capital Account - Transfers $2,861,000 Rate Revenue $221,584,000 TOTAL $473,932,000 Surplus or (Deficit) for Five Year Program $0 Recommended Action: Conclusion: (1) (2) (3)As per Florida Statutes Section 129.01(c), contingency reserves are up to 10% of expenses Per the latest master plan, which reduces the Level of Service (LOS) standard from 100 to 90 GPCD The CIE is consistent with the Board-approved FY22 budget. That the BCC find the Collier County Water-Sewer District Wastewater Treatment System in compliance with concurrency requirements found in FS Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code; and that it approve the proposed 2021 CCWSD Wastewater Treatment Facilities AUIR and adopt the CIE Update for FY22-FY26. To ensure adequate treatment capacity for growth within the district boundary of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, expansion related projects commenced in FY 2019 based on the Level of Service Standard, population projections and capacity as shown in the AUIR. 62 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 63 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) A. B. C. D. E. The Public Utilities Department’s (PUD's) proposed 2021 CCWSD Wastewater System Treatment Facilities AUIR is based on permanent population estimates and projections for the CCWSD's wastewater service areas prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on using the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate through 2031. Notes The BEBR population numbers are adjusted using data from the Collier Interactive Growth Model, as produced and maintained by Metro Forecasting Models, LLC, including estimates for the Northeast and Golden Gate City Wastewater Service Areas, where growth rate has not been established or only a portion of the population is served. WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES Public Utilities Department Collier County Government INTRODUCTION 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) Concurrency is shown for 10 years for the current service area. This conforms with the State mandated CIE, concurrency regulations, and other Collier County Departments' AUIR submittals. To serve the Orangetree and Orange Blossom Ranch PUDs, a new master pump station and associated force main improvements were completed in FY 2019 that allow the diversion of peak flows from the Northeast Sub-Regional (former Orangetree) Wastewater Treatment Plant to the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF). (The Orangetree PUD includes Waterways of Naples, Orangetree, Valencia Lakes, Neighborhood Shoppes at Orangetree, and Valencia Golf & Country Club as well as the Corkscrew Elementary/Middle and Palmetto Ridge High campuses.) On September 11, 2018, as Agenda Item 17.F, the Board adopted a resolution expanding the CCWSD's service area to coincide with the unincorporated area permitted by Chapter 2003-353, Laws of Florida. This "District Boundary," as shown on the map entitled, "Collier County Water-Sewer District Current and Future Wastewater Service Areas," encompasses the villages planned in the Northeast Service Area, including three villages in the Big Cypress Stewardship District (Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar), the adjacent SkySail subdivision (FKA Hyde Park Village), and Immokalee Road Rural Village, all depicted on the preceding service area map. The new regional water reclamation facility at the Northeast Utility Facilities (NEUF) site will support forecasted growth in the northeast region of the county. The NEUF is sited on 147 acres of County owned land at the east end of 39th Ave NE. 100% design documents were completed in 2010. The NEUF program has been reactivated, starting with updating the design criteria (FY 2018) and modifying the design plans to conform with current technologies (FY 2018- 2019). Design-build construction of a 1.5 MGD interim WWTP and associated pipelines began in 2019, due to be complete in 2023. This will be followed by a 4 MGD initial phase of the Northeast County Water Reclamation Facility (NECWRF) to be online by FY 2030, depending on developer commitments. The addition of a third water reclamation facility provides the needed reliability to serve the expanded CCWSD. This will reduce the high and wide-ranging flows to the existing two plants and will allow for rehabilitation and replacement. The Golden Gate wastewater service area will expand when needed to accommodate flow from current and future development in Activity Center #9 and the surrounding area north of I-75. A force main was extended along Magnolia Pond Drive and Tropicana Boulevard, between the high school and the plant, in preparation for the future diversion, which will relieve capacity constraints at the South County Water Reclamation Facility (SCWRF) and in the force mains along Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. To facilitate this service area expansion as well as anticipated redevelopment of the Golden Gate Parkway corridor and the Golden Gate Country Club (acquired by the County in July 2019) and the conversion of existing septic system users within the existing service area, the Golden Gate City WWTP will undergo an expansion to 4 MGD, resulting in the Central County Water Reclamation Facility (CCWRF). 64 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES Public Utilities Department Collier County Government INTRODUCTION 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) F. G. Recommendation The Public Utilities Department’s staff recommends that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners approve the 2021 CCWSD Wastewater System Treatment Facilities AUIR. The 2021 Wastewater System AUIR is presented as a snapshot of concurrency conditions. The CCWSD is in compliance with concurrency requirements for FY 2022 and FY 2023, as required by FS Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan, and the Land Development Code. The Public Utilities Department has completed draft master plans for water, wastewater, and irrigation quality water under Contract # 18-7370 with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. These master plans include recommendations for level of service (LOS) standards and the timing of capacity improvements as reported herein. In this section of the AUIR, the terminology "latest master plan" refers to AECOM's "Draft Potable Water Master Plan" dated July 2021. #REF! The LOS standards presented herein represent normal operating conditions. The Public Utilities Department also evaluates the ability of the wastewater system to manage peak wet weather events in the draft 2021 Wastewater Master Plan. Improvements to the collections system and treatment plants, such as pipe replacement, flow diversion, and storage, are programmed to ensure that peak wet weather flows can be managed. 65 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Permanent Max. Month Permitted / Retained Max. Required Fiscal Population Average New Operational Operational MADF Treatment Percent of Year Served Daily Flow Treatment Treatment Treatment Diverted to Capacity Permitted on Oct. 1 (MADF)Capacity Capacity Capacity NCWRF at SCWRF Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 94,622 10.6 16.00 5.4 10.6 59% 2018 96,459 10.8 16.00 5.2 10.8 60% 2019 99,239 11.1 16.00 4.9 11.1 62% 2020 102,874 11.5 16.00 4.5 11.5 64% 2021 106,088 11.8 16.00 4.2 11.8 66% 2022 108,837 12.1 16.00 3.9 12.1 68% 2023 111,638 12.5 16.00 3.5 12.5 70% 2024 113,045 12.6 16.00 3.4 12.6 71% 2025 115,511 12.9 16.00 3.1 12.9 72% 2026 117,738 13.1 16.00 2.9 13.1 74% 2027 119,415 13.3 16.00 2.7 13.3 75% 2028 120,961 13.5 16.00 2.5 13.5 76% 2029 122,541 13.7 16.00 2.3 13.7 77% 2030 124,151 13.9 16.00 2.1 13.9 78% 2031 125,642 14.0 16.00 2.0 14.0 78% 9/21/2021 Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (SCWRF) SERVICE AREA WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR LOS: 90 gpcd 66 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on the previous page.) 1. 2. 3. 4. Fiscal Year NA 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (SCWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion, as follows: The new villages in the northeast wastewater service area will draw housing demand away from the existing wastewater service areas with significant remaining development potential. Therefore, their population projections are proportionally deducted from the projections for the north, south, and Orange Tree wastewater service areas. The portion taken from the south wastewater service area is 63 percent. Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 90 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) and by a maximum monthly average daily flow (MADF) peaking factor of 1.24 and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). These values are the Level of Service (LOS) standards recommended in the latest master plan. LOS: 90 gpcd Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES New Treatment Capacity Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Estimates and projections for the served area were prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate applied through 2031. Permanent population is used in accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan. Percent of Permitted Capacity is the maximum Three-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) as a percentage of Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity. TMADF is calculated using a peaking factor of 1.11 per the latest master plan. Per FAC 62- 600.405, capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once TMADF exceeds 50% of permitted capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. 0 MGD Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is the permitted treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year with no deduction for the largest unit being out of service given that the SCWRF is designed for Class I reliability. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is plotted in the chart on the next page. In accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan, Total Operational Treatment Capacity must be sufficient for the max. TDADF. Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF). Any deficit in operational treatment capacity is countered by diverting flow to the NCWRF. Max. MADF Diverted to NCWRF is the max. flow that must be diverted to the NCWRF to avoid exceeding the permitted capacity of the SCWRF. Required Treatment Capacity at SCWRF is equal to the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) less the Max. MADF Diverted to NCWRF and is plotted in the chart on the next page. Comments The SCWRF site is built-out given current treatment technology on-site. 67 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR SOUTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (SCWRF) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 9/21/2021 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Required Treatment Capacity at SCWRF Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity 68 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Permanent Max. Month Permitted / Retained Max. Required Fiscal Population Average New Operational Operational MADF Treatment Percent of Year Served Daily Flow Treatment Treatment Treatment Diverted to Capacity Permitted on Oct. 1 (MADF)Capacity Capacity Capacity NCWRF at NCWRF Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 103,186 15.3 24.10 8.8 15.3 59% 2018 105,914 15.7 24.10 8.4 15.7 60% 2019 108,908 16.1 24.10 8.0 16.1 62% 2020 112,879 16.7 24.10 7.4 16.7 64% 2021 114,908 17.0 24.10 7.1 17.0 65% 2022 116,197 17.2 24.10 6.9 17.2 66% 2023 117,511 17.4 24.10 6.7 17.4 67% 2024 118,808 17.6 24.10 6.5 17.6 68% 2025 120,086 17.8 24.10 6.3 17.8 68% 2026 121,113 17.9 24.10 6.2 17.9 69% 2027 121,842 18.0 24.10 6.1 18.0 69% 2028 122,512 18.1 24.10 6.0 18.1 70% 2029 123,198 18.2 24.10 5.9 18.2 70% 2030 123,898 18.3 24.10 5.8 18.3 70% 2031 124,495 18.4 24.10 5.7 18.4 71% 9/21/2021 Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 69 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on the previous page.) 1. 2. 3. 4. NA 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. LOS: 90 gpcd The new villages in the northeast wastewater service area will draw housing demand away from the existing wastewater service areas with significant remaining development potential. Therefore, their population projections are proportionally deducted from the projections for the north, south, and Orange Tree wastewater service areas. The portion taken from the north wastewater service area is 29 percent. Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Estimates and projections for the served area were prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate applied through 2031. Permanent population is used in accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan. Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. 0 MGD The NCWRF site is built-out given current treatment technology on-site. Percent of Permitted Capacity is the maximum Three-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) as a percentage of Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity. TMADF is calculated using a peaking factor of 1.12 per the latest master plan. Per FAC 62- 600.405, capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once TMADF exceeds 50% of permitted capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is the permitted treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year in million gallons per day (MGD) with no deduction for the largest unit being out of service given that the NCWRF is designed for Class I reliability. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is plotted in the chart on the next page. Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF). Required Treatment Capacity at NCWRF is equal to the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) plus the Max. MADF Diverted to NCWRF and is plotted in the chart on the next page. Max. MADF Diverted to NCWRF is the max. flow that must be diverted to the NCWRF to avoid exceeding the permitted capacity of the SCWRF. the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion. Timing and capacity are tentative and may be adjusted with updates in development forecasts and adoption of developer agreements: Fiscal Year New Treatment Capacity Comments and Cost Estimates Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 90 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), by a maximum monthly average daily flow (MADF) peaking factor of 1.21, and by a population adjustment factor of 1.36, and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). These values are the Level of Service (LOS) standards recommended in the latest master plan, with an adjustment factor to account for the 36% decrease in the service area population estimates since the 2020 AUIR, which formed the basis of the LOS recommendations. (Dividing historical MDD by a lower service area population would result in a higher LOS calculation.) New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by 70 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 9/21/2021 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Required Treatment Capacity at NCWRF Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity 71 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Permanent Required Permitted / Retained Fiscal Population Treatment New Operational Operational Percent of Year Served Capacity Treatment Treatment Treatment Permitted on Oct. 1 at AADF Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 2018 2019 12,768 1.1 1.50 0.35 89% 2020 12,790 1.2 1.50 0.35 89% 2021 12,802 1.2 1.50 0.35 89% 2022 12,812 1.2 1.50 0.35 89% 2023 12,821 1.2 1.50 0.35 89% 2024 14,186 1.3 3.50 5.00 3.72 30% 2025 14,446 1.3 5.00 3.70 30% 2026 14,547 1.3 5.00 3.69 30% 2027 14,595 1.3 5.00 3.69 30% 2028 14,642 1.3 5.00 3.68 31% 2029 14,691 1.3 5.00 3.68 31% 2030 14,739 1.3 5.00 3.67 31% 2031 14,786 1.3 5.00 3.67 31% Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR GOLDEN GATE WASTEWATER (GGWWTP/CCWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 72 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on the previous page.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department Required Treatment Capacity at AADF is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 90 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). This value is the Level of Service (LOS) standard recommended in the latest master plan. WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR GOLDEN GATE WASTEWATER (GGWWTP/CCWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Estimates and projections for the served area were prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate applied through 2031. Permanent population is used in accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan. The population projections include the Golden Gate wastewater service area beginning in FY 2019 based on acquisition during FY 2018. The Golden Gate wastewater service area (approximately 4 square miles) presently includes a population of approximately 12,404 residents in Golden Gate City. Based on the implementation plan outlined in the Board adopted "Technical Feasibility Study for Acquisition of FGUA Water and Wastewater Assets in Golden Gate," Phase 3 will increase the population served to 15,000 within 20 years. New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion. Timing and capacity are tentative and may be adjusted with updates in development forecasts and adoption of developer agreements: Fiscal Year New Treatment Capacity Comments and Cost Estimates Percent of Permitted Capacity is the maximum Three-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) as a percentage of Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity. TMADF is calculated using a peaking factor of 1.16 per the latest master plan. Per FAC 62- 600.405, capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once TMADF exceeds 50% of permitted capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. 2024 3.5 MGD 3.5 MGD expansion resulting in the 5 MGD Central County Water Reclamation Facility (CCWRF) to sustain sewer service to existing and future customers in the Golden Gate City and Activity Center #9 areas beginning in FY 2020 through FY 2024. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is the permitted treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year in million gallons per day (MGD) with no deduction for the largest unit being out of service given that the GGWWTP is designed for Class I reliability. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is plotted in the chart on the next page. Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Required Treatment Capacity at AADF. 73 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR GOLDEN GATE WASTEWATER (GGWWTP/CCWRF) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 9/21/2021 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Required Treatment Capacity at AADF Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity 5 MGD CCWRF Magnolia Pond Drive & City Gate PUD Diversion 74 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Max. Required Permanent 3-Month Permitted / Retained Max. Treatment Fiscal Population Average New Operational Operational TMADF Capacity Percent of Year Served Daily Flow Treatment Treatment Treatment Diverted to at OT Permitted on Oct. 1 (TMADF)Capacity Capacity Capacity NESA WWTP Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 2018 4,293 0.46 0.75 0.29 0.46 61% 2019 4,523 0.48 0.75 0.27 0.48 65% 2020 4,978 0.53 0.75 0.22 0.53 71% 2021 5,416 0.58 0.75 0.17 0.58 77% 2022 5,765 0.62 0.75 0.13 0.62 82% 2023 6,121 0.66 0.75 0.09 0.66 87% 2024 6,471 0.69 0.75 0.06 0.69 92% 2025 6,816 0.73 0.75 0.02 0.73 97% 2026 7,092 0.76 0.75 0.01 0.75 100% 2027 7,285 0.78 0.75 0.03 0.75 100% 2028 7,463 0.80 0.75 0.05 0.75 100% 2029 7,644 0.82 0.75 0.07 0.75 100% 2030 7,829 0.84 0.75 0.09 0.75 100% 2031 7,986 0.86 -0.75 0.86 Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LOS: 90 gpcd WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR ORANGE TREE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (OTWWTP) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 75 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on the previous page.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The OTWWTP site will be vacated one year (at the latest) after the initial phase of the NECWRF is completed.-0.75 MGD2031 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LOS: 90 gpcd Max. 3-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 90 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) and by a maximum 3-month average daily flow (TMADF) peaking factor of 1.19 and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). These values are the Level of Service (LOS) standards recommended in the latest master plan. WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR ORANGE TREE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (OTWWTP) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Estimates and projections for the served area were prepared by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section on July 7, 2021. Populations are based on the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Medium Range growth rate applied through 2031. Permanent population is used in accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan. The population projections include the Orangetree wastewater service area beginning in FY 2018 based on acquisition during FY 2017. Collier County Government Public Utilities Department The new villages in the northeast wastewater service area will draw housing demand away from the existing wastewater service areas. Therefore, their population projections are proportionally deducted from the projections for the north, south, and Orange Tree wastewater service areas. The portion taken from the Orange Tree wastewater service area is 8 percent. New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion. Timing and capacity are tentative and may be adjusted with updates in development forecasts and adoption of developer agreements: Fiscal Year New Treatment Capacity Comments and Cost Estimates Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is the permitted treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year in million gallons per day (MGD) with no deduction for the largest unit being out of service given that the OTWWTP is designed for Class I reliability. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is plotted in the chart on the next page. Orangetree Utilities (OTU) was integrated into the CCWSD during FY 2017. Therefore, capacity first appears in FY 2018. Integrated assets include a 0.75 MGD (as currently sited) wastewater treatment plant that will continue to operate until the NECWRF is in service and reliably operational (approximately 12 months after final completion of the initial phase) or until it is determined that flows from the WWTP can be adequately processed at the NECWRF, per the Addendum to Integration Agreement, approved by the Board on July 13, 2021 (Agenda Item 16.C.20). Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Max. 3-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF). Max. TMADF Diverted to NESA is the max. flow that must be diverted to the NEWRF to avoid exceeding the permitted capacity of the OTWWTP. Required Treatment Capacity at OT WWTP is equal to the Max. 3-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) plus the Max. TMADF Diverted to NESA and is plotted in the chart on the next page. 76 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LOS: 90 gpcd WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR ORANGE TREE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (OTWWTP) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 9.Percent of Permitted Capacity is the maximum TMADF as a percentage of Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity. Per FAC 62-600.405, capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once TMADF exceeds 50% of permitted capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. 77 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR ORANGE TREE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (OTWWTP) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 9/21/2021 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Max. 3-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF)Required Treatment Capacity at OT WWTP Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity Begin diversion to Interim WWTP Vacate OTWWTP site; direct flows to NECWRF 78 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Permanent Max. Month Permitted / Retained Max. Required Fiscal Population Average New Operational Operational MADF Treatment Percent of Year Served Daily Flow Treatment Treatment Treatment Diverted to Capacity Permitted on Oct. 1 (MADF)Capacity Capacity Capacity NESA at NESA Capacity MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD MGD 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 109 0.0 1.5 1.50 1.5 0.0 1% 2024 372 0.0 1.50 1.5 0.0 2% 2025 891 0.1 1.50 1.4 0.1 6% 2026 1,668 0.2 1.50 1.3 0.0 0.2 12% 2027 2,698 0.3 1.50 1.2 0.0 0.3 20% 2028 3,793 0.4 1.50 1.1 0.1 0.5 29% 2029 4,889 0.5 1.50 1.0 0.1 0.6 37% 2030 5,984 0.7 4 5.50 4.8 0.1 0.7 13% 2031 7,397 0.8 5.50 4.7 0.9 1.7 29% Collier County Government 9/21/2021 Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTHEAST WASTEWATER (INTERIM WWTP/NECWRF) SERVICE AREA 79 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Notes (References are to the column numbers on the previous page.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Max. MADF Diverted to NESA is the max. flow that must be diverted to the Northeast Service Area (Interim WWTP/NECWRF) to avoid exceeding the permitted capacity of the OTWWTP. Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) is obtained by multiplying the Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1 by 90 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) and by a maximum monthly average daily flow (MADF) peaking factor of 1.12, and is expressed in million gallons per day (MGD). These values are the Level of Service (LOS) standards recommended in the latest master plan. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is the permitted treatment capacity at the beginning of the fiscal year in million gallons per day (MGD) with no deduction for the largest unit being out of service given that the NECWRF is designed for Class I reliability. Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity is plotted in the chart on the next page. 2023 1.5 MGD $28M interim WWTP, storage tanks and associated pipelines at the NEUF site to facilitate development in the northeast region of the county, outside the Orangetree and Orange Blossom Ranch PUDs, beginning in FY 2019 through FY 2023 2030 4 MGD $108M Northeast County Water Reclamation Facility (NCEWRF) at the Northeast Utility Facilities (NEUF) site to sustain sewer service to customers in the new villages proposed in the Northeast Wastewater Service Area, beginning in FY 2026, to be online by FY 2030 Fiscal Year Comments and Cost Estimates Required Treatment Capacity at NESA is equal to the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF) plus the Max. MADF Diverted to NESA and is plotted in the chart on the next page. The new villages in the northeast wastewater service area will draw housing demand away from the existing wastewater service areas with significant remaining development potential. Therefore, their population projections are proportionally deducted from the projections for the north, south, and Orange Tree wastewater service areas (29, 63, and 8 percent respectively). New Treatment Capacity is the additional treatment capacity in million gallons per day (MGD) placed into service by the start of the fiscal year through plant construction/expansion. Timing and capacity are tentative and may be adjusted with updates in development forecasts and adoption of developer agreements: Retained Operational Treatment Capacity is the Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity minus the Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF). New Treatment Capacity Permanent Population Served on Oct. 1. Projections for the future northeast wastewater service area were obtained from the Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) for the zones comprising the four planned developments--SkySail (FKA Hyde Park Village, FKA Winchester Lakes, FKA Collier Lakes), Rivergrass Village (FKA Rural Lands West), Immokalee Road Rural Village (FKA SR 846 Land Trust), and Hogan Island Village. Permanent population is used in accordance with the Board adopted 2014 Water, Wastewater, Irrigation Quality Water and Bulk Potable Water Master/CIP Plan. Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTHEAST WASTEWATER (INTERIM WWTP/NECWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 Fiscal Year starts October 1 and ends September 30. 80 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER SYSTEM - TREATMENT FACILITIES LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTHEAST WASTEWATER (INTERIM WWTP/NECWRF) SERVICE AREA 9/21/2021 9. Percent of Permitted Capacity is the maximum Three-Month Average Daily Flow (TMADF) as a percentage of Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity. TMADF is calculated using a peaking factor of 1.12 per the latest master plan. Per FAC 62- 600.405, capacity analysis reporting to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is triggered once TMADF exceeds 50% of permitted capacity, as plotted in the chart on the next page. 81 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) STANDARD ASSESSMENT FOR NORTHEAST WASTEWATER (INTERIM WWTP/NECWRF) SERVICE AREA LOS: 90 gpcd 9/21/2021 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031MGD Fiscal Year Max. Month Average Daily Flow (MADF)Required Treatment Capacity at NESA Permitted / Operational Treatment Capacity 1.5 MGD Interim WWTP online 4 MGD NECWRF Phase 1 online OTWWTP decommissioned; begin full diversion Begin diversion from OTWWTP 82 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) City Gate PUD/Activity Center #9 Background: Status: Future Actions: Immokalee Road & Collier Blvd - COMPLETE Background: Status: Future Actions: Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER COLLECTION/TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS 9/21/2021 The original design of wastewater transmission facilities along Davis Boulevard did not anticipate service to the areas north of I-75. Proposed growth in Activity Center #9 and the surrounding area may require additional conveyance and treatment capacity. A new force main along Magnolia Pond Drive to the Golden Gate City Wastewater Treatment Plant (GGWTP) was completed in February 2021, and will provide additional transmission capacity when activated. The 4 MGD Central County Water Reclamation Facility (CCWRF) design is planned to be complete in August 2021, after which construction will be solictited. The CCWRF will replace the aging GGWTP and is anticipated to be on-line in 2024. Complete. Construction of the CCWRF is addressed in the Golden Gate Wastewater Service Area LOS section. The following four areas will have future constrained wastewater conveyance capacity based on current growth patterns. The plan to address each constraint is discussed below and shown on the following "Wastewater Collection/Transmission System Constraints Map" map. To make full use of the capacity of the North County Water Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) for wastewater service to the growing northeast region of Collier County, the 2014 Master Plan/CIP Plan recommended construction of a 24" force main from a new master pump station (MPS 167) at Heritage Bay west along Immokalee Road, then south along Logan Boulevard, then east a short distance along Vanderbilt Beach Road to MPS 104. Once completed, these improvements will relieve the burden on the 12" force main along Immokalee Road, which has become constrained due to extensive development of the corridor. MPS 167, located at the south end of Heritage Bay Commons Tract G, serves as a wastewater booster pump station for the Heritage Bay PUD and current and future developments along Collier Blvd and east of Collier Blvd along Immokalee Road. MPS 167 currently routes wastewater to the NCWRF but will ultimately provide the flexibility to route wastewater to the future NECWRF. Construction of the Immokalee Road/Logan Boulevard force main was completed in June 2021 and is in service, effectively relieving the wastewater transmission constraint. Complete. None required. 83 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County Government Public Utilities Department 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) WASTEWATER COLLECTION/TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CONSTRAINTS 9/21/2021 Western Interconnect Background: Status: Future Actions: New Master Pump Station 101.12 (Naples Park) Background: Status: Future Action: MPS 101.00 currently serves areas north and south of 111th Avenue N. The new MPS 101.12 will allow the area to be divided such that MPS 101.00 will serve north of 111th Avenue N., and MPS 101.12 will serve the area south, which includes Naples Park. A new 8th Street gravity main and Creekside Road force main connected to MPS 101.12 will allow greater wastewater flows to be conveyed from the constrained Naples Park area. Construct MPS 101.12 and the 8th Street Interceptor gravity main as funding is available. A western interconnect is needed to manage growth in the south wastewater service area and to facilitate maintenance of existing force mains. A series of force main extensions and improvements to Master Pump Station (MPS) 309 are needed to move wastewater flows from the south wastewater service area to the north wastewater service area, where there is available treatment capacity. The force main along Livingston Road is divided into twelve phases generally extending from Radio Road to Immokalee Road. Construct the remaining phases in FY 2022-2023 including pump station capacity increases. Five phases were previously constructed ahead of development activity. Phase 2 was completed in August 2020 and Phases 6B/6C were completed in June 2021. Phases 7A, 7B , 9, MPS 309 and a Booster Pump Station are planned for FY 2022- 2023, making the system fully operational. The final Phase 8 between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road will be completed if and when needed as dictated by flow projections. As part of the Basin 101 Program, the needed infrastructure has been designed. The project is being implemented in phases, by first constructing the Creekside Road Force Main Phase 2 in FY 2022, which will provide additional wastewater transmission capacity. 84 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Wastewater Collection/Transmission System Constraints 85 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) NORTH SOUTH 1. 24.100 16.000 2a. 16.734 18.985 2b. 12.105 11.000 3a.3.500 (3.500) 3b.0.000 0.000 4a.3.866 0.515 4b.11.995 5.001 5a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 4a / Line 1)16% 3% 5b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON PERMIT (MAX. MONTH) (Line 4b / Line 1)50% 31% NORTH SOUTH 6. #REF! #REF! 7a.#REF!(3.500) 7b.#REF!#REF! 8a.#REF!#REF! 8b.#REF!#REF! 9a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 8a / Line 1)#REF! #REF! 9b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON PERMIT (MAX. MONTH) (Line 8b / Line 1)#REF! #REF! NORTH SOUTH 10a. 0.000 0.000 10b. 0.000 0.000 11a. #REF! #REF! 11b. #REF! #REF! 12a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 11a / Line 1)#REF!#REF! 12b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON PERMIT (MAX. MONTH) (Line 11b / Line 1)#REF! #REF! Future Available Capacity (TDADF) (Line 8a + Line 10a + Line 10b) Future Available Capacity (MADF) (Line 8b + Line 10a + Line10b) Peak Flow Diversion (TDADF) [5] Peak Flow Diversion (MADF) [5] Projected Available Capacity (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 6 - Line 7a) Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WASTEWATER [1] Projected Available Capacity (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 6 - Line 7b) CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS FUTURE AVAILABILITY WITH EXPANSIONS FUTURE AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH EXPANSIONS) Expansions Within Next 12 Months (MADF) Expansions Within Next 12-24 Months (MADF) Peak Flow Diversion (MADF) [5] Current Available Diminishing Capacity (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 3a) Current Available Diminishing Capacity (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 3b) CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITHOUT FUTURE COMMITMENTS PROJECTED AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS) Total BCC-approved Active PUD commitments (Unbuilt per GMD PUD Master List) [4] INTRODUCTION: The Checkbook uses the historical maximum 3-day average daily flow (TDADF) and monthly average daily flow (MADF) from the last 10 years as baseline scenarios. Unbuilt future commitments are then multiplied by standard peaking factors and added to the baselines to arrive at worst-case scenarios for future operational requirements. WASTEWATER [1] WASTEWATER [1] CURRENT AVAILABLE CAPACITY (BASED ON HISTORICAL EXTREME EVENT) Existing Permitted/Operational Plant Capacity per 2020 AUIR (TMADF) 10-Year Maximum TDADF [2] 10-Year Maximum MADF [3] Peak Flow Diversion (TDADF) [5] Million Gallons per Day (MGD) Million Gallons per Day (MGD) COLLIER COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT ("CHECKBOOK") REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS DATA: Current as of May 14, 2021 26 of 31 86 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COLLIER COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT ("CHECKBOOK") REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS DATA: Current as of May 14, 2021 [1] Wastewater North and South shown separately because of the finite capacity of the interconnect. [2] Aug-17 Sep-20 [3] Feb-19 Sep-20 [4] [5]Wastewater flows can be diverted from the south service area to the NCWRF via the East and West Interconnects and associated pump station improvements. The East Interconnect is an existing 20" force main along Santa Barbara Blvd that can divert flows from MPSs 312.00 and 313.00 to MPS 104.00, which ultimately discharges to the NCWRF. The West Interconnect is a proposed 24" force main along Livingston Road that will divert flows from MPSs 305.00, 309.00, and 310.00 ultimately to the NCWRF. The West Interconnect is being constructed in phases and will become operational in FY 2022. Peak flows can be diverted to MPS 167.00 (Heritage Bay) by the 0.75 MGD OT master pump station and force mains along Oil Well Road and Immokalee Road. MPS 167.00 will have the capability of diverting wastewater flows from the north and/or south service areas to the future NEWRF. These interconnects provide the operational flexibility needed to manage the peak flows forecasted by the Checkbook. FOOTNOTES/QUALIFIERS: Line 2a: Mo-Yr of Max. 3-Day Since May 2011 => Line 2b: Mo-Yr of Max. Month Since May 2011 => Capacity requested by outstanding active BCC-approved PUD units, as documented in the most current GMD PUD Master List. Built-out, closed-out, inactive, and discontinued PUD's are not included in line 5; only active PUD's are included. The outstanding PUD units are assumed to be developed before PUD closeout. Level of service for future commitments is defined by the latest rate study. 27 of 31 87 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) NORTHEAST CENTRAL 1. 0.750 1.800 2a. 0.835 n/a 2b. 0.647 1.548 2c. 0.512 1.368 3a.(0.092)n/a 3b.(0.071)n/a 3c.(0.056)n/a 3d.0.000 n/a 3e.0.000 n/a 3f.0.000 n/a 4a.0.006 n/a 4b.0.174 0.252 4c.0.294 0.432 5a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 4a / Line 1)1%n/a 5b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 4b / Line 1)23%14% 5c.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-MONTH (Line 4c / Line 1)39%24% NORTHEAST CENTRAL 6. #REF! #REF! 7a.#REF!n/a 7b.#REF!n/a 7c.#REF!n/a 8a.#REF!n/a 8b.#REF!#REF! 8c.#REF!#REF! 9a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 8a / Line 1)#REF!n/a 9b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 8b / Line 1)#REF!#REF! 9c.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-MONTH (Line 8c / Line 1)#REF!#REF! NORTHEAST CENTRAL 10a. 0.000 0.000 10b. 1.500 0.000 11a.#REF!n/a 11b.#REF!#REF! 11c.#REF!#REF! 12a.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-DAY (Line 11a / Line 1)#REF!n/a 12b.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. MONTH (Line 11b / Line 1)#REF!#REF! 12c.SYSTEM AVAILABILITY BASED ON MAX. 3-MONTH (Line 11c / Line 1)#REF!#REF! FUTURE AVAILABILITY WITH EXPANSIONS Projected Available Capacity (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 3b - Line 6 - Line 7b) Projected Available Capacity (TMADF) (Line 1 - Line 2c - Line 3c - Line 6 - Line 7c) CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WASTEWATER FUTURE AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH EXPANSIONS) Expansions Within Next 12 Months (TMADF) Expansions Within Next 12-24 Months (TMADF) Future Available Capacity (TDADF) (Line 8a + Line 10a + Line 10b) Future Available Capacity (MADF) (Line 8b + Line 10a + Line10b) Future Available Capacity (TMADF) (Line 8c + Line 10a + Line 10b) Projected Available Capacity (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 3a - Line 6 - Line 7a) Current Available Diminishing Capacity (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 3a - Line 3d) Current Available Diminishing Capacity (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 3b - Line 3e) Current Available Diminishing Capacity (TMADF) (Line 1 - Line 2c - Line 3c - Line 3f) CURRENT AVAILABILITY WITHOUT FUTURE COMMITMENTS PROJECTED AVAILABLE CAPACITY (WITH FUTURE COMMITMENTS) Total BCC-Approved, Active PUD Commitments (Unbuilt per GMD PUD Master List) [5] Peak Flow Diversion (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 3a - Line 6) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] Peak Flow Diversion (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 3b - Line 6) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] Peak Flow Diversion (TMADF) (Line 1 - Line 2c - Line 3c - Line 6) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WASTEWATER Twin Eagles Diversion (TDADF) (-0.11(Line 2a)) [4] Twin Eagles Diversion (MADF) (-0.11(Line 2b)) [4] Twin Eagles Diversion (TMADF) (-0.11(Line 2c)) [4] Peak Flow Diversion (TDADF) (Line 1 - Line 2a - Line 3a) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] Peak Flow Diversion (MADF) (Line 1 - Line 2b - Line 3b) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] Peak Flow Diversion (TMADF) (Line 1 - Line 2c - Line 3c) (-0.75 min., 0 max.) [6] 10-Year Maximum TMADF [3] COLLIER COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT ("CHECKBOOK") SUB-REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS DATA: Current as of May 14, 2021 INTRODUCTION: The Checkbook uses the historical maximum 3-day average daily flow (TDADF), monthly average daily flow (MADF), and 3- month average daily flow (TMADF) from the last 10 years as baseline scenarios. Unbuilt future commitments are then multiplied by standard peaking factors and added to the baselines to arrive at worst-case scenarios for future operational requirements. Million Gallons per Day (MGD) WASTEWATER CURRENT AVAILABLE CAPACITY (BASED ON HISTORICAL EXTREME EVENT) Existing Permitted/Operational Plant Capacity per 2020 AUIR (TMADF) 10-Year Maximum TDADF [1] 10-Year Maximum MADF [2] 28 of 31 88 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COLLIER COUNTY WATER - SEWER DISTRICT SYSTEM UTILIZATION AND DIMINISHING CAPACITY REPORT ("CHECKBOOK") SUB-REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS DATA: Current as of May 14, 2021 [1] Sep-17 n/a [2] Sep-17 Aug-17 [3] Oct-17 Sep-16 [4] [5] [6] Capacity requested by outstanding active BCC-approved PUD units, as documented in the most current GMD PUD Master List. Built-out, closed- out, inactive, and discontinued PUD's are not included in line 5; only active PUD's are included. The outstanding PUD units are assumed to be developed before PUD closeout. Level of service for future commitments is defined by the latest rate study. Peak flows and effluent will be diverted to the NCWRF by the 0.75 MGD OT pump station and Oil Well Road force main; Heritage Bay master pump station; and new and existing force mains along Oil Well Rd, Immokalee Rd, Logan Blvd, Vanderbilt Beach Rd, and Goodlette-Frank Rd. FOOTNOTES/QUALIFIERS: Line 2a: Mo-Yr of Max. 3-Day per Available Data Since May 2011 => Line 2b: Mo-Yr of Max. Month per Available Data Since May 2011 => Line 2c: Mo-Yr of Max. 3-Month per Available Data Since May 2011 => The sub-regional Northeast Utility Facilities (former OTU) previously served all customers in the Orange Tree and Orange Blossom Ranch PUDs as well as the Twin Eagles subdivision, but flow from Twin Eagles was diverted to the NCWRF wastewater collection/transmission system in May 2019. Since the historical max. wastewater flows occurred prior to any services being transferred, values are reduced by eleven percent (11%) based on billing data from September 2017, the month in which the maximums occurred. 29 of 31 89 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 PUD WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT CIE #PROJECT FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 TOTAL Debt Service $11,681,000 $13,710,000 $13,716,000 $13,038,000 $11,414,000 $63,559,000 Expansion Related Projects - Other $80,800,000 $0 $0 $0 $105,937,000 $186,737,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Other $50,277,000 $37,035,000 $39,985,000 $37,875,000 $38,130,000 $203,302,000 Departmental Capital $550,000 $561,000 $572,000 $583,000 $595,000 $2,861,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $2,169,000 $3,704,000 $3,999,000 $3,788,000 $3,813,000 $17,473,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $145,477,000 $55,010,000 $58,272,000 $55,284,000 $159,889,000 $473,932,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025 FY 2026 TOTAL SIF - Wastewater System Development Fees / Impact Fees $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $39,500,000 B1 - Bonds/ Loans $97,050,000 $0 $0 $0 $105,937,000 $202,987,000 Cares Act Funding $7,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,000,000 SCA - Wastewater Capital Account - Transfers $550,000 $561,000 $572,000 $583,000 $595,000 $2,861,000 REV - Rate Revenue $32,977,000 $46,549,000 $49,800,000 $46,801,000 $45,457,000 $221,584,000 REVENUE TOTAL $145,477,000 $55,010,000 $58,272,000 $55,284,000 $159,889,000 $473,932,000 CIE consistent with Board-approved FY22 budget As per Florida Statues, reserve for contingencies is up to 10% of expenses. FY 2022 is obtained from the 2022 Proposed Budget, split 50/50 between Water and Wastewater. FY 2023 to FY 2026 are 2% increases over each fiscal year (pursuant to CPI adjustments per Board policy). Debt Service: All years are obtained from the current Collier County Water-Sewer District Financial Statements and Other Reports including Summary of Debt Service requirements to maturity. Total Debt Service amount is split 50/50 between Water and Wastewater. Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement and Rehabilitation Projects: NOTE: Collier County has adopted a two-year Concurrency Management System. Figures provided for years three, four and five of this Schedule of Capital Improvements are not part of the Concurrency Management System but must be financially feasible with a dedicated revenue source or an alternative revenue source if the dedicated revenue source is not realized. Revenue sources are estimates only; both the mix of sources and amounts will change when a rate study is conducted. DATA SOURCES: Expansion Related and Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects: FY 2022 is obtained from the 2022 Proposed Budget for R&R projects. Expansion projects require additional funding and therefore not included in the budget. FY 2023 to FY 2026 are estimated project costs. Department Capital: CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE NOTES 9/21/20215:46 PM 90 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027 - 2031 PUD WASTEWATER PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT CIE #PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Debt Service $10,075,000 $9,891,000 $10,256,000 $10,674,000 $10,670,000 $51,566,000 Expansion Related Projects - Other $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects - Other $33,140,000 $31,770,000 $32,770,000 $33,270,000 $31,770,000 $162,720,000 Departmental Capital $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $3,314,000 $3,177,000 $3,277,000 $3,327,000 $3,177,000 $16,272,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $47,136,000 $52,957,000 $46,934,000 $47,915,000 $46,274,000 $241,216,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 TOTAL SIF - Wastewater System Development Fees / Impact Fees $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $39,500,000 B1 - Bonds/ Loans $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Cares Act Funding $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SCA - Wastewater Capital Account - Transfers $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 REV - Rate Revenue $38,629,000 $36,938,000 $38,403,000 $39,371,000 $37,717,000 $191,058,000 REVENUE TOTAL $47,136,000 $52,957,000 $46,934,000 $47,915,000 $46,274,000 $241,216,000 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE NOTES NOTE: Figures provided for years six through ten are estimates of revenues versus project costs but do not constitute a long-term concurrency system. Revenue sources are estimates only; both the mix of sources and amounts will change when a rate study is conducted. 9/21/20215:46 PM 91 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES CONTENTS • SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES − 2021 SUMMARY • APPENDIX “A” - COLLIER COUNTY PEAK SEASON POPULATION ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS • APPENDIX “B” - TEN YEAR OF PERMITTED LANDFILL CAPACITY • APPENDIX “C” - TWO YEARS OF LINED CELL CAPACITY Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 92 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Annual Update and Inventory Report July 8, 2021 CONTENTS Solid Waste Disposal Facilities 2021 AUIR Report Appendix A: Municipal Service Benefit Map Appendix B: Schedule of Collier County Landfill Disposal Capacity Appendix C: Collier County Landfill Permitted Disposal Capacity 93 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities Solid Waste Disposal Facilities 2021 AUIR Report Facility Type: Solid Waste Disposal Facilities Level of Service (LOS) Standard1: Two (2) years of constructed lined cell capacity. Ten (10) years of permittable capacity. Collier County Landfill (CCLF) Capacity2: Two (2) years of constructed lined cell capacity requirement: 546,258 Tons Available lined cell capacity: 1,026,776 Tons Ten (10) years of permittable capacity requirement: 2,902,259 Tons Total remaining permitted capacity: 12,982,923 Tons Estimated date of exhausted capacity: 39 Years or 2060 Collier County maintains two Municipal Services Benefit Units for Solid Waste, which are presented in Appendix A: District I and District II. Only municipal solid waste (MSW) generated in District I is disposed at the CCLF. Appendix B presents a Schedule of Disposal Capacity at the CCLF and Appendix C presents calculations for lined, permitted and remaining landfill capacity at the CCLF. It should be noted that the estimated date of exhausted capacity at the CCLF in the 2021 AUIR Report remains consistent with the estimated date in the 2020 AUIR Report. Contracted Disposal Capacity On June 12, 2001, Collier County executed a Disposal Capacity Agreement with Okeechobee Landfill, Inc. for 930,000 tons of disposal capacity at the Okeechobee Landfill (located in Okeechobee County, FL). MSW collected in District II is transferred from the Immokalee Transfer Station to the Okeechobee Landfill. For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with the LOS Standard of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities, it is assumed Collier County will renew, amend or enter into a new agreement, as necessary, and continue to transfer MSW generated in District II to the Okeechobee Landfill. If no MSW is diverted from District I and MSW generation in District II assumptions remain consistent, the remaining capacity is estimated to last through Fiscal Year 2043. Remaining Contracted Capacity 620,903 Tons Estimated Remaining Capacity3 23 Years or 2043 Okeechobee Landfill Life4 47 Years or 2068 94 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities NOTES: 1 Capital Improvement Element as of Resolution 2018-208 adopted November 13, 2018. 2 Assumptions for calculations: District I projected per capita disposal rate derived from historical data as applied to projected population growth (from AUIR Appendix). Reference Appendix C for calculation methodology. 3 Based on historical data trends and population growth. 4 Source: Report submitted to FDEP, dated March 14, 2021, “Annual Estimate of Remaining Life” by CEC for Berman Road Landfill (aka Okeechobee Landfill). Landfill Airspace Preservation: Landfill Operating Agreement (LOA) In 1995, Collier County entered into a LOA, as amended with Waste Management Inc. of Florida (WMIF). The LOA is a life of site agreement that also includes post-closure care at the Immokalee Landfill and long-term the management of Collier County’s Immokalee Transfer Station. In accordance with the LOA, all landfill operating expenses incurred, including cell construction, permitting, closure and post-closure care are funded by WMIF. LOA expenses are paid from revenue generated from tipping fees. Under the LOA: • No debt is carried by Collier County • Design/build/operate provisions ensure proper cell capacity • WMIF maintains environmental liability • Allows for 900 tons per day of MSW transfer from the CCLF to the Okeechobee Landfill Integrated Solid Waste Management Strategy The Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Division continues to meet the current disposal needs of Collier County and plan for the long term solid and hazardous waste needs of Collier County with initiatives from the Integrated Solid Waste Management Strategy (approved by the BCC, 2006) based on the following components: • Source Reduction • Material Reuse and Recycling • Diversion • Optimizing Existing Assets and Resources Collier County continues its’ focus to achieve the BCC-approved Solid Waste Enduring Guiding Principles (e.g., Environmental and Growth Management Compliance, Airspace Preservation, Operational Excellence, Best Value Service), including efforts to reach the 2020 State mandated recycling goal of 75%. Notably, Collier County achieved a 74% recycling rate in Calendar Year 2020, as reported to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection; ranking 4th out of 67 counties in Florida. In addition, the Household Hazardous Waste Program collected approximately two (2) million pounds of household hazardous waste in Fiscal Year 2020. Lastly, the County’s Recycling Drop-off Centers served over 70,000 customers of Collier County in Fiscal Year 2020. 95 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities Recommended Action: The Public Utilities Department's staff recommends that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners find the 2021 AUIR in compliance with concurrency requirements in FS Section 163, the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code and continue to support the Division’s Integrated Solid Waste Management Strategy initiatives to increase recycling to reach the 75% State goal, to divert recyclables and hazardous waste from the CCLF and obtain appropriate means and methods of the various waste streams to support the needs of Collier County. 96 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 97 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) CompassData Inc., State of Florida, Maxar, County of Collier, Esri, HERE, iPCC:\Users\4974lva\OneDrive - SCS Engineers\projects_lisa\colliercounty\collierappendix\collierappendix\collierappendix.aprx BY 4974lvaEastern Preserve Area Wet Detention Area Western Preserve Area Dry Retention AreaFuture Cell, to be lined in 2023 (9.4 acres)Future Cell (5.2 acres) 305-Acre Property WMRE Facility County HHW Facility County Scalehouse Facility WM Office Facility APPENDIX B: Schedule of Collier County Landfill Disposal Capacity Cell Status Filled to elevation +/- 100' Lined, actively being filled Lined, not actively being filled Unlined 0 150 300 Feet Resource Recovery Business ParkSCS ENGINEERS Original Landfill Permit (+/- 100') Total Area (Acres)Remaining Capacity (Tons) Filled 132.7 acres - Lined 36.6 acres 1,026,776 Unlined 14.6 acres 5,872,500 Vertical Landfill Permit (+/- 200') All cells 184 acres 12,982,92398 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Appendix C: Collier County Landfill Permitted Disposal Capacity Level of Service Standard: Landfill Capacity at Projected Tons per Capita Disposal Rate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fiscal Year Peak Population Estimated Tons Per Capita Disposal Rate Estimated Annual Tons Disposed Collier County Landfill Permitted Capacity Balance (cy) Estimated Average Compaction Rate (tons/cy) Collier County Landfill Capacity Balance (tons) Next Ten Years Landfill Capacity Requirement (tons) Two Year Landfill Capacity Requirement (tons) Available Lined Landfill Capacity (tons) 2020 414,569 0.63 261,775 17,695,070 x 0.75 =13,271,303 2,812,413 559,038 1,136,305 2021 425,606 0.68 288,379 17,310,564 x 0.75 =12,982,923 2,902,259 546,258 1,026,776 2022 433,321 0.62 270,659 16,949,686 x 0.75 =12,712,264 2,942,511 556,103 756,118 2023 441,174 0.62 275,599 16,582,220 x 0.75 =12,436,665 2,981,197 565,451 Cell A4 2024 449,167 0.62 280,504 16,208,215 x 0.75 =12,156,161 3,018,387 573,815 scheduled for 2025 456,139 0.62 284,947 15,828,286 x 0.75 =11,871,215 3,054,260 581,582 liner constrution 2026 462,319 0.62 288,868 15,443,129 x 0.75 =11,582,347 3,089,080 589,325 2027 468,582 0.62 292,714 15,052,844 x 0.75 =11,289,633 3,122,947 597,170 2028 474,929 0.62 296,611 14,657,362 x 0.75 =10,993,022 3,155,838 604,784 2029 481,359 0.62 300,559 14,256,617 x 0.75 =10,692,463 3,187,726 611,798 2030 487,166 0.62 304,225 13,850,984 x 0.75 =10,388,238 3,218,690 618,485 2031 492,491 0.62 307,573 13,440,886 x 0.75 =10,080,664 3,248,838 625,196 2032 497,874 0.62 310,911 13,026,337 x 0.75 =9,769,753 3,278,200 631,979 2033 503,315 0.62 314,285 12,607,291 x 0.75 =9,455,468 3,306,760 638,513 2034 508,813 0.62 317,694 12,183,699 x 0.75 =9,137,774 3,334,502 644,507 2035 513,854 0.62 320,819 11,755,939 x 0.75 =8,816,955 3,361,729 650,269 2036 518,480 0.62 323,688 11,324,356 x 0.75 =8,493,267 3,388,717 656,083 2037 523,148 0.62 326,582 10,888,914 x 0.75 =8,166,685 3,415,462 661,949 2038 527,858 0.62 329,501 10,449,579 x 0.75 =7,837,184 3,441,957 667,636 2039 532,610 0.62 332,447 10,006,316 x 0.75 =7,504,737 3,468,196 672,911 2040 537,033 0.62 335,189 9,559,397 x 0.75 =7,169,548 3,494,404 677,995 2041 541,118 0.62 337,722 9,109,101 x 0.75 =6,831,826 3,520,812 683,119 2042 545,236 0.62 340,274 8,655,403 x 0.75 =6,491,552 3,547,419 688,281 2043 549,384 0.62 342,845 8,198,277 x 0.75 =6,148,707 3,574,228 693,482 2044 553,564 0.62 345,436 7,737,696 x 0.75 =5,803,272 3,601,239 698,722 2045 557,775 0.62 348,046 7,273,634 x 0.75 =5,455,226 3,628,456 704,002 2046 562,019 0.62 350,676 6,806,066 x 0.75 =5,104,550 3,655,879 709,322 2047 566,295 0.62 353,326 6,334,965 x 0.75 =4,751,224 3,683,510 714,683 2048 570,603 0.62 355,996 5,860,303 x 0.75 =4,395,227 3,711,350 720,084 2049 574,944 0.62 358,687 5,382,054 x 0.75 =4,036,541 3,739,402 725,526 2050 579,318 0.62 361,397 4,900,191 x 0.75 =3,675,143 3,767,666 731,010 2051 583,726 0.62 364,129 4,414,686 x 0.75 =3,311,014 3,796,144 736,534 2052 588,167 0.62 366,881 3,925,512 x 0.75 =2,944,134 3,824,838 742,101 2053 592,642 0.62 369,654 3,432,640 x 0.75 =2,574,480 3,853,750 747,710 2054 597,150 0.62 372,448 2,936,043 x 0.75 =2,202,032 3,882,881 753,362 2055 601,694 0.62 375,263 2,435,693 x 0.75 =1,826,770 3,912,233 759,056 2056 606,271 0.62 378,099 1,931,561 x 0.75 =1,448,671 3,941,807 764,794 2057 610,884 0.62 380,957 1,423,618 x 0.75 =1,067,714 3,971,606 770,575 2058 615,531 0.62 383,837 911,836 x 0.75 =683,877 4,001,630 776,400 2059 620,214 0.62 386,738 396,185 x 0.75 =297,139 4,031,882 782,269 2060 624,933 0.62 389,661 (123,363)x 0.75 =0 4,062,364 788,182 NOTES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Collier County Landfill Capacity Balance (tons) is the previous year's Total Landfill Capacity Balance (Column 7) minus the Estimated Annual Tons Disposed (Column 4). Next Ten Years Landfill Capacity Requirement (tons) is the sum of the next ten years of Estimated Annual Tons Disposed (Column 4). Two Year Landfill Capacity Requirement (tons) is the sum of the next two years of Estimated Annual Tons Disposed (Column 4). Available Lined Landfill Capacity (tons) is the previous year's Total Landfill Capacity Balance (Column 10) minus the Estimated Annual Tons Disposed (Column 4) at the Collier County Landfill and construction schedule for each new landfill cell. Reflects Collier County's Fiscal Year commencing on October 1 and ending on September 30. County provided BEBR peak population for Municipal Service District I population. Tons Per Capita Disposal Rate is the Estimated Annual Tons Disposed (Column 4) divided by the Peak Population (Column 2). Estimated Annual Tons Disposed is the estimated tons to be landfilled based on historical disposal rates and peak population projections (Fiscal Year 2020 reflects actual tons disposed). Fiscal Year 2021 is based on scale house records through June 2021 and forecasted through September 30. It should be noted that Fiscal Year 2020 and 2021 were impacted by COVID in terms of MSW tonnage as well as sources (e.g., residential, commercial). Total Landfill Capacity Balance (cy) for the Fiscal Year 2020 is derived from the 2021 Airspace Utilization Report performed by Carlson Environmental Consultants, PC for the approximate calendar year of 2020. Fiscal Year values for 2021 and beyond are estimated. Estimated Average Compaction Rate is the projected average tons disposed per cubic yard of landfill capacity The Compaction Rate of 0.75 tons/cy (1,500 lbs./cy) was determined by historical average. This value varies daily based upon waste composition, equipment and weather. 99 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 TOTAL LANDFILL CAPACITY (millions of tons)FISCAL YEAR 2021 ANNUAL UPDATE AND INVENTORY REPORT (AUIR) SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT Level of Service (LOS) Standard Assessment Collier County Landfill Capacity Balance (tons)Next Ten Years Landfill Capacity Requirement (tons) FY 60 Landfill Reaches Capacity FY 50 LOS 10 Years of Remaining Landfill Life 100 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COLLIER COUNTY SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CONTENTS • SUMMARY OF DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) FOR NEXT FIVE YEARS • COUNTYWIDE SCHOOLS INVENTORY − MAP Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 101 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement PlanFiscal Years 2022 through 2041May 18, 2021 1029.A.1.ePacket Pg. 312Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Chapter 1 Chapter 1 Summary of 5 Year Capital Budget 1039.A.1.ePacket Pg. 313Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 5 Year Capital Budget SummaryProject 20232022FY20242023FY20252024FY20262025FYFive YearTotal 20222021FYCapital Construction Program New Schools/Additions Future School Addition 19,000,00019,000,000High School GGG700,000700,0000 0 0 19,000,000Subtotal New Schools/Additions19,700,000700,000Capital Maintenance/Renovations (see Chapter 6) Electrical 5,615,000 4,239,000 2,897,000 4,330,00020,381,0003,300,000Emergency Maintenance Projects 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,00015,000,0003,000,000Facilities Renovation Other 3,250,000 1,264,000 255,000 10,0005,432,000653,000Facility Modifications/Special Needs 1,442,000 2,414,000 1,980,000 2,000,00010,214,0002,378,000HVAC 10,780,000 14,625,000 13,515,000 17,373,00068,281,00011,988,000Maintenance 2,656,000 2,686,000 2,656,000 2,656,00013,372,0002,718,000Roads and Bridge 34,000 17,000 29,000 22,000492,000390,000Roofing 6,450,000 4,875,000 5,325,000 7,990,00029,640,0005,000,000School Maintenance and Renovations 2,462,000 2,765,000 3,614,000 2,067,00016,304,0005,396,000Stage Curtain Replacements120,000120,000Storm Mitigation and Security Improvements 214,000383,000169,000Waste Water/Water Treatment Plant Maintenance and Repair 513,000 312,000 20,000 45,0001,271,000381,00036,416,000 36,197,000 33,291,000 39,493,000Subtotal Capital Maintenance/Renovations (see Chapter 6)180,890,00035,493,00036,416,000 36,197,000 33,291,000 58,493,000Subtotal Capital Construction Program200,590,00036,193,000Other Items Site Acquisition/Asset Management Property Management 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,00090,00010,000Site Acquisition450,000450,000 1-11049.A.1.ePacket Pg. 314Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Project 20232022FY20242023FY20252024FY20262025FYFive YearTotal 20222021FYTransportation Facilities 10,000,00010,000,00020,000 20,000 20,000 10,020,000Subtotal Site Acquisition/Asset Management10,540,000460,000Health and Safety Access Control Enhancements 1,144,440 1,167,329 1,250,000 1,250,0005,743,592931,823Fire Safety 559,000 559,000 559,000 559,0002,795,000559,000Radio System Upgrades 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,0001,000,000200,000Security Camera Installation/Repair 391,400 403,142 415,236 427,6932,017,471380,000Security Camera Replacements/Additions 329,130 335,713 345,784 356,1581,689,461322,6762,623,970 2,665,184 2,770,020 2,792,851Subtotal Health and Safety13,245,5242,393,499Portables Portable Leasing 788,000 788,000 788,000 788,0003,940,000788,000Portable Renovation 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000150,00030,000Portable Setup 200,000400,000200,0001,018,000 818,000 818,000 818,000Subtotal Portables4,490,0001,018,000Technology (*Transfer to General) Classroom Technology Equipment * 8,255,000 8,245,000 9,795,000 12,265,00046,170,0007,610,000Enterprise Software/Current Year 10,000 10,000 10,000 1,000,0001,040,00010,000Enterprise Software/Prior Year10,000,00010,000,000Technology Cabling 1,525,000 1,550,000 3,000,000 2,200,0009,975,0001,700,000Technology Infrastructure * 4,050,000 4,820,000 4,895,000 5,185,00023,020,0004,070,000Technology Retrofit * 1,418,000 1,604,000 1,764,000 1,839,0008,003,0001,378,00015,258,000 16,229,000 19,464,000 22,489,000Subtotal Technology (*Transfer to General)98,208,00024,768,000Equipment and Vehicles (*Transfer to General) District Capital Equipment 250,000 300,000 350,000 350,0001,450,000200,000Districtwide Equipment Transfer* 1,200,000 1,800,000 2,000,000 2,490,0008,690,0001,200,000Equipment/Portables * 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000125,00025,000School Buses 4,844,263 5,024,153 5,342,618 5,666,60725,085,9644,208,323Vehicles other than Buses 651,012 505,257 731,614 531,7302,969,249549,636 1-21059.A.1.ePacket Pg. 315Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Project 20232022FY20242023FY20252024FY20262025FYFive YearTotal 20222021FY6,970,275 7,654,410 8,449,232 9,063,337Subtotal Equipment and Vehicles (*Transfer to General)38,320,2136,182,959Planning and Staff Support Building & Equipment Maintenance Staff 12,200,000 13,500,000 14,100,000 15,250,00066,525,07211,475,072Facilities Staff 2,100,000 2,320,000 2,500,000 2,750,00011,632,7201,962,720Other Capital Staff 700,000 750,000 800,000 865,0003,755,210640,210Permitting Services 275,000 175,000 175,000 300,0001,200,000275,000Printing Services 50,000 25,000 25,000 50,000200,00050,000Professional Services Retainer-Engineer/Architect/Other 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000750,000150,000Site/Facility Testing 300,000 100,000 100,000 200,000900,000200,00015,775,000 17,020,000 17,850,000 19,565,000Subtotal Planning and Staff Support84,963,00214,753,002Carry Forward/Debt Service/Insurance/Transfer/Contingency Carry Forward for Subsequent Years 733,083 393,665 180,767 1,073,3443,430,8591,050,000Charter School Capital Flow Thru 1,531,309 1,531,309 1,531,309 1,531,3097,656,5451,531,309Debt Service 37,000,000 37,000,000 37,000,000 37,000,000185,000,00037,000,000Property Insurance 5,200,000 5,400,000 6,000,000 6,500,00028,100,0005,000,000Reserve for Future Schools/Current Year 15,600,000 15,580,000 15,580,000 15,580,00077,940,00015,600,000Reserve for Future Schools/Prior Years19,100,00019,100,000Reserve for Future Vehicles3,600,0003,600,000Self-Insured Retention/Current Year 3,650,000 6,800,000 10,620,000 19,120,00040,790,000600,000Self-Insured Retention/Prior Year32,000,00032,000,000Transfer to General Maintenance 4,349,175 4,479,650 4,614,040 4,752,46122,417,8264,222,500Transfer to Health and Safety Maintenance 666,392 695,891 703,909 737,8893,512,078707,99768,729,959 71,880,515 76,230,025 86,295,003Subtotal Carry Forward/Debt Service/Insurance/Transfer/Contingency423,547,308120,411,806110,395,204 116,287,109 125,601,277 151,043,191Subtotal Other Items673,314,047169,987,266146,811,204 152,484,109 158,892,277 209,536,191206,180,266Total Projects873,904,047 1-31069.A.1.ePacket Pg. 316Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Summary of Estimated RevenueEstimated Revenue20222021FY20232022FY20242023FY20252024FY20262025FYTotalFive Year Local Sources Impact Fees 15,600,000 15,600,000 15,580,000 15,580,000 15,580,00077,940,000Interest Income 750,000 600,000 500,000 450,000 350,0002,650,000Interest Income Impact Fees 100,000 100,000 80,000 80,000 80,000440,000Capital Improvement Tax 119,526,216 125,355,778 131,631,355 138,202,584 189,359,280704,075,213Beginning Balance 800,000 1,050,000 733,083 393,665 180,7673,157,515Other 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,00060,000School Reserve Use Impact Fees 700,000700,000Future Vehicle Reserve Usage 549,636 651,012 505,257 731,614 531,7302,969,249CFWD of Designated Reserves 64,700,00064,700,000202,737,852 143,368,790 149,041,695 155,449,863 206,093,777Subtotal Local Sources856,691,977State CO & DS 1,911,105 1,911,105 1,911,105 1,911,105 1,911,1059,555,525PECO Maint.Charter Capital Flow Thru 1,531,309 1,531,309 1,531,309 1,531,309 1,531,3097,656,5453,442,414 3,442,414 3,442,414 3,442,414 3,442,414Subtotal State17,212,070206,180,266 146,811,204 152,484,109 158,892,277 209,536,191Total873,904,047 1-41079.A.1.ePacket Pg. 317Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) VANDERBILTBEACHRD I-75I-75INTERSTATE 75 IMMO KALEE RD LA KE TR AFFO RD RD COLLIER BLVDImmokalee Community School Barron Collier HS Sea Gate ES Naples HS Lake Park ES BridgePrep Academy Palmetto Ridge HS SR 29IN TERSTATE 75 IMMO KAL EE RD OIL WE LL R D TAMIAMI TRL E CR 846 COLLIER BLVDSR 82 LIVINGSTON RDSR 29 NSAN MARCO RDTAMIAMI TRL NDAVIS BLVDGOODLETTE RD NPINE RIDGE RD EVERGLADES BLVD NRADIO RD GOLDEN GATE PKY DESOTO BLVD SLOGAN BLVD NDESOTO BLVD NGOLDEN GATE BLVD EVANDERBILT DRAIRPORT PULLING RD EVERGLADES BLVD SCORKSCREW RDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W S 1ST STB AL D E A G L E D R GREEN BLVDOLD US 41RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD WILSON BLVD NS COLLIER BLVDBONITA BE ACH RD Lely HS Lely ES Beacon HS Avalon ES Osceola ES Manatee MSManatee ES Estates ES Parkside ES Palmetto ES Oakridge MS Gulfview MS Vineyards ES Poinciana ES Pinecrest ES Immokalee MS Immokalee HS Highlands ES Eden Park ES Corkscrew MS Corkscrew ES Mason Academy Shadowlawn ES Sabal Palm ES Pine Ridge MS Mike Davis ES Laurel Oak ES Gulf Coast HSNaples Park ES Golden Gate MS Golden Gate HS Golden Gate ES East Naples MS Calusa Park ES Big Cypress ES Village Oaks ES North Naples MS Lavern Gaynor ES Pelican Marsh ES Lake Trafford ES Palmetto Ridge HS Gulf Coast Academy Tommie Barfield ES Herbert Cambridge ES Marco Island Academy Everglades City School Collier Charter Academy Naples Classical Academy New Beginnings Immokalee Naples Area Teenage Parenting Collier Juvenile Detention Center 5 1 3 2 4 GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICPGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 0 5 102.5 Miles ·GULFOFMEXICODISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER C OUNTY City ofNaples City ofMarco Island City of Everglades T46ST47ST48ST49ST50ST51ST52ST53ST46ST47ST48ST49ST50ST51ST52ST53SR 25 E R 26 E R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E R 25 E R 26 E R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E Legend District, Board Member:1 - Jory Westberry2 - Stephanie Lucarelli 5 - Roy M. Terry 3 - Jen Mitchell4 - Erick Carter LEE COUNTY HENDRY COUNTY 108 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES CONTENTS • COUNTY COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PARK LANDS − SUMMARY • LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD (LOSS) ASSESSMENT FOR COMMUNITY PARK LANDS • TABLE • CHART • ANTICIPATED CHANGES IN COMMUNITY PARK LAND INVENTORY OVER NEXT FIVE YEARS ‒ TABLE • LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD (LOSS) ASSESSMENT FOR REGIONAL PARK LANDS • TABLE • CHART • ANTICIPATED CHANGES IN REGIONAL PARK LAND INVENTORY OVER NEXT FIVE YEARS ‒ TABLE • COUNTY PARK LAND INVENTORY • COUNTY PARKS INVENTORY − MAP • FEDERAL AND STATE OWNED PARK LAND − MAP Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 109 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 1.2 acres per 1,000/population (Community) 2.7 acres per 1,000/population (Regional) $119,947 per acre*(Community) $504,450 per acre*(Regional) Acres Value 594.99 $71,367,266 562.55 **$67,476,185 0.00 $0 32.44 $3,891,081 1,561.68 $787,789,476 1,400.22 ***$706,340,979 0.00 ****$0 161.46 $81,448,497 Expenditures $0 $15,178,923 $16,613,917 $31,792,840 Revenues $52,124,500 $1,060,000 Grant/Reimbursement $0 $5,264,600 $0 $58,449,100 $26,656,260 none 2021 AUIR SUMMARY COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PARK LANDS Facility Type: Community and Regional Park Land (Category A) Level of Service Standards (LOSS): Interest/Misc Required Inventory as of 9/30/2026 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22-2025/26 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) Unit Costs: Community Parks: Using the Peak Season population for unincorporated area of the County, the following is set forth: Available Inventory as of 9/30/2021 Regional Parks: Using the Countywide Peak Season population, the following is set forth: Available Inventory as of 9/30/2021 Required Inventory as of 9/30/2026 Proposed AUIR FY 2021/22-2025/26 Debt Service Payments for 2011/2013 Bonds Proposed AUIR FY 21/22-25/26 (value of) Acquisitions Debt Service Payments for 2019 Loan**** 5-year Surplus or (Deficit) Recommendation: That the BCC approve the proposed Community and Regional Park Lands AUIR and adopt the CIE Update for FY 2021/22- FY 2025/26. Total Expenditures Total Revenues Surplus or (Deficit) Revenues***** Revenues needed to maintain existing LOSS Impact Fees anticipated Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service Proposed added value through commitments, leases and governmental transfers 110 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) * ** *** **** ***** Countywide Peak Season population of 518,599 x 0.0027 LOSS = 1,400.22 acres Reserved for future growth. 2019 Loan for GG Golf Course. The loan amount is the full annual debt service amount. The debt will be allocated once all or a portion of the property is re-purposed. Land purchase 1.75 acres Collier County Sports and Events Park FY21 = 562.55 acres Peak Season population for the unincorporated area of the County of 468,7913 x 0.0012 LOSS Notes: Community Park Land and Regional Park Land Unit Cost values are based on the 2017 Impact Fee Study Update 111 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FISCAL POPULATION PARK ACRES PARK ACRES PARK ACRES SURPLUS/REQUIRED TOTAL/VALUE YEAR UNINCORPORATED REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE *(DEFICIENCY)COST AT AVAILABLE 0.0012000 IN AUIR $119,947 $119,947 2020-21 430,025 516.03 0.00 594.99 78.96 $61,896,250 $71,367,266 2021-22 438,196 525.84 0.00 594.99 69.15 $63,072,930 $71,367,266 2022-23 446,521 535.83 0.00 594.99 59.16 $64,271,201 $71,367,266 2023-24 455,003 546.00 0.00 594.99 48.99 $65,491,062 $71,367,266 2024-25 462,438 554.93 0.00 594.99 40.06 $66,562,189 $71,367,266 2025-26 468,791 562.55 0.00 594.99 32.44 $67,476,185 $71,367,266 1st 5-Year Growth (2022-2026)38,766 46.52 0.00 2026-27 475,237 570.28 0.00 594.99 24.71 $68,403,375 $71,367,266 2027-28 481,775 578.13 0.00 594.99 16.86 $69,344,959 $71,367,266 2028-29 488,409 586.09 0.00 594.99 8.90 $70,299,737 $71,367,266 2029-30 494,400 593.28 0.00 594.99 1.71 $71,162,156 $71,367,266 2030-31 499,731 599.68 0.00 594.99 (4.69)$71,929,817 $71,367,266 2nd 5-Year Growth (2027-2031)30,940 37.13 0.00 Total 10-Year Growth (2022-2031)69,706 83.65 0.00 Note: 2021 AUIR Community Park Acres LOSS: 1.2 Acres/1000 Population 112 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 18065200 12090900 516 526 536 546 555 563 570 578 586 593 600 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 594.99 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Community Park Acreage Acres Required Acres Available 113 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY Action Acquisition Type Location Acres Value Cash Expenditure $119,947 2021/22 $0 0 $0 $0 2022/23 $0 0 $0 $0 2023/24 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 2024/25 $0 0 $0 $0 2025/26 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 2026/27 $0 0 $0 $0 2027/28 $0 0 $0 $0 2028/29 $0 0 $0 $0 2029/30 $0 0 $0 $0 2030/31 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 FY 29/30 TOTAL Anticipated Changes in Community Park Land Inventory FY 21/22 to FY 30/31 FY 21/22 TOTAL FY 22/23 TOTAL FY 23/24 TOTAL FY 24/25 TOTAL FY 25/26 TOTAL FY 21/22 TO FY 25/26 FIVE-YEAR SUBTOTAL FY 26/27 TOTAL FY 27/28 TOTAL FY 28/29 TOTAL FY 30/31 TOTAL FY 26/27 TO FY 30/31 FIVE-YEAR SUBTOTAL FY 21/22 TO FY 30/31 TEN-YEAR TOTAL 114 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) POPULATION FACILITIES FACILITIES PARK ACRES PARK ACRES REQUIRED TOTAL/VALUE FISCAL CO-WIDE REQUIRED PLANNED AVAILABLE*SURPLUS/COST AT AVAILABLE YEAR 0.0027000 IN AUIR (DEFICIENCY)$504,450 $504,450 2020-21 477,569 1,289.44 1.75 1,561.68 272.24 $650,458,008 $787,789,476 2021-22 486,166 1,312.65 0.00 1,561.68 249.03 $662,166,293 $787,789,476 2022-23 494,918 1,336.28 0.00 1,561.68 225.40 $674,086,446 $787,789,476 2023-24 503,826 1,360.33 0.00 1,561.68 201.35 $686,218,469 $787,789,476 2024-25 511,731 1,381.67 0.00 1,561.68 180.01 $696,983,432 $787,789,476 2025-26 518,599 1,400.22 0.00 1,561.68 161.46 $706,340,979 $787,789,476 1st 5-Year Growth (2022-2026)41,030 110.78 0.00 2026-27 525,559 1,419.01 0.00 1,561.68 142.67 $715,819,595 $787,789,476 2027-28 532,613 1,438.06 0.00 1,561.68 123.62 $725,429,367 $787,789,476 2028-29 539,761 1,457.35 0.00 1,561.68 104.33 $735,160,208 $787,789,476 2029-30 546,296 1,475.00 0.00 1,561.68 86.68 $744,063,750 $787,789,476 2030-31 552,199 1,490.94 0.00 1,561.68 70.74 $752,104,683 $787,789,476 2nd 5-Year Growth (2027-2031)33,600 90.72 0.00 Total 10-Year Growth (2022-2031)74,630 201.50 0.00 Note: Paradise Coast Sport Park land purchase 1.75 acres FY 21 2021 AUIR Regional Park Land Acres LOSS: 2.7 Acres / 1000 Population 115 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 18065200 12090900 1,289 1,313 1,336 1,360 1,382 1,400 1,419 1,438 1,457 1,475 1,491 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 1,561.68 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 Regional Park Acreage Acres Required Acres Available 116 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) FY Action Acquisition Type Location Acres Value Cash Expenditure $504,450 2021/22 0.00 $0 $0 2022/23 $0 0.00 $0 $0 2023/24 $0 0.00 $0 $0 2024/25 $0 0.00 $0 $0 2025/26 $0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 $0 $0 2026/27 ` 0 $0 $0 2027/28 $0 0 $0 $0 2028/29 $0 0 $0 $0 2029/30 $0 0 $0 $0 2030/31 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0 0.00 $0 $0 FY 29/30 TOTAL Anticipated Changes in Regional Park Land Inventory FY 21/22 to FY 30/31 FY 21/22 TOTAL FY 22/23 TOTAL FY 23/24 TOTAL FY 24/25 TOTAL FY 25/26 TOTAL FY 21/22 TO FY 25/26 FIVE-YEAR SUBTOTAL FY 26/27 TOTAL FY 27/28 TOTAL FY 28/29 TOTAL FY 30/31 TOTAL FY 26/27 TO FY 30/31 FIVE-YEAR SUBTOTAL FY 21/22 TO FY 30/31 TEN-YEAR TOTAL 117 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Summary of Changes in Parks and Recreation Inventory FY 20 to FY 21 Action Location Acres Explanation 0 Action Location Acres Explanation Add Paradise Coast Park Acres 1.75 1.75 Community Park Land Changes NET CHANGE TO COMMUNITY PARK ACREAGE Regional Park Land Changes NET CHANGE TO REGIONAL PARK ACREAGE 118 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Commissioner District District Location Type Acreage Community Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres Regional Park Acres Regional Park Pathway Acres Concervation Preserve Acres 1 Marco 951 Boat Ramp Regional 0.50 0.50 1 Marco Caxambas Park Regional 4.20 4.20 1 East Naples Cindy Mysels CP Community 5.00 5.00 1 South Naples Eagle Lakes CP Community 32.00 32.00 1 Marco Goodland Boating Park Regional 5.00 5.00 1 Marco Isle of Capri Land Parcel Neighborhood 0.11 0.11 1 Marco Isles of Capri NP Neighborhood 0.35 0.35 1 Marco Isles of Capri Paddlecraft Park Regional 9.00 9.00 1 South Naples Manatee CP Community 60.00 60.00 1 Marco Mar Good Harbor Park Regional 2.50 2.50 1 East Naples Naples Manor NP Neighborhood 0.30 0.30 1 South Naples Panther NP Neighborhood 0.50 0.50 1 South Naples Port of The Islands Regional 5.55 5.55 1 Urban Estates Rich King Greenway - (FPL)Regional 37.50 37.50 1 Central Naples Rock Harbor Parcels Neighborhood 0.10 0.10 1 Marco South Marco Beach Access Regional 5.00 5.00 1 Marco Tigertail Beach Park Regional 31.60 31.60 2 North Naples Barefoot Beach Access Regional 5.00 5.00 2 North Naples Barefoot Beach Preserve Regional 159.60 159.60 2 North Naples Barefoot Beach State Land Regional 186.00 186.00 2 North Naples Clam Pass Park Regional 35.00 35.00 2 North Naples Cocohatchee River Park Regional 7.56 7.56 2 North Naples Conner Park Regional 5.00 5.00 2 North Naples Naples Park Elementary Community 5.00 5.00 2 North Naples North Collier RP Regional 207.70 207.70 2 North Naples North Naples NP (Best Friends--surplus)Neighborhood 0.36 0.36 2 North Naples Osceola Elementary Community 3.20 3.20 2 North Naples Palm River NP Neighborhood 3.00 3.00 2 North Naples Pelican Bay CP Community 15.00 15.00 2 North Naples Vanderbilt Beach Regional 5.00 5.00 2 North Naples Vanderbilt Beach Access (7 locations)Regional 0.45 0.45 2 North Naples Veterans CP Community 43.64 43.64 2 North Naples Veterans Memorial Elementary Community 4.00 4.00 2 North Naples Willoughby Park Neighborhood 1.20 1.20 3 Golden Gate Aaron Lutz NP Neighborhood 3.20 3.20 3 Golden Gate Paradise Coast Sports Park Regional 195.95 195.95 3 Golden Gate Golden Gate Community Center Community 21.00 21.00 3 Golden Gate Golden Gate CP Community 35.00 35.00 3 Golden Gate Golden Gate Golf Course Regional 167.00 167.00 3 Golden Gate Golden Gate Greenway / Pathway Community 3.00 3.00 3 North Naples Oakes NP Neighborhood 2.00 2.00 3 Golden Gate Palm Springs NP Neighborhood 6.70 6.70 3 Golden Gate Rita Eaton NP Neighborhood 4.80 4.80 3 North Naples Vineyards CP Community 35.50 35.50 4 East Naples Bay Street Land Parcels Regional 1.34 1.34 4 East Naples Bayview Park Regional 6.27 6.27 4 Golden Gate Coconut Circle NP Neighborhood 1.20 1.20 4 East Naples East Naples CP Community 47.00 47.00 4 Central Naples Fred W. Coyle Freedom Park Regional 25.16 25.16 4 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Park Regional 79.00 79.00 4 Central Naples Naples Zoo Regional 50.00 50.00 4 North Naples North Gulfshore Beach Access Regional 0.50 0.50 2021 Collier County Park Land Inventory 119 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Commissioner District District Location Type Acreage Community Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres Regional Park Acres Regional Park Pathway Acres Concervation Preserve Acres 2021 Collier County Park Land Inventory 4 North Naples Poinciana NP Neighborhood 0.30 0.30 4 East Naples Sugden RP Regional 120.00 120.00 5 Immokalee Airport Park Community 19.00 19.00 5 Immokalee Ann Oleski Park Regional 2.30 2.30 5 Urban Estates Big Corkscrew Island RP Regional 62.00 62.00 5 Urban Estates Big Corkscrew Island RP - Lake Regional 90.00 90.00 5 Urban Estates Corkscrew Elementary/Middle Community 16.90 16.90 5 Immokalee Dreamland NP - *School fenced in area Neighborhood 0.50 0.50 5 Immokalee Eden Park Elementary Community 2.80 2.80 5 Immokalee Immokalee CP Community 23.00 23.00 5 Immokalee Immokalee High School Community 1.00 1.00 5 Immokalee Immokalee South Park Community 3.45 3.45 5 Immokalee Immokalee Sports Complex Community 14.00 14.00 5 Urban Estates Livingston Woods NP (surplus)Neighborhood 2.73 2.73 5 Urban Estates Max A Hasse CP Community 20.00 20.00 5 Immokalee Oil Well Park Neighborhood 5.50 5.50 5 Urban Estates Palmetto Elementary Community 2.00 2.00 5 Immokalee Pepper Ranch Regional 50.00 50.00 5 Urban Estates Randall Curve Community 47.00 47.00 5 Urban Estates Sabal Palm Elementary Community 9.50 9.50 5 Immokalee Tony Rosbough CP Community 7.00 7.00 5 Urban Estates Vanderbilt Extension CP Community 120.00 120.00 1 Marco McIlvane Marsh Preserve 380.89 380.89 1 Marco Otter Mound Preserve Preserve 2.45 2.45 1 East Naples Shell Island Preserve Preserve 111.88 111.88 2 North Naples Cochatchee Creek Preserve Preserve 3.64 3.64 2 North Naples Railhead Scrub Preserve Preserve 135.36 135.36 2 North Naples Wet Woods Preserve Preserve 26.77 26.77 3 North Naples Alligator Flag Preserve Preserve 18.46 18.46 3 North Naples Logan Woods Preserve Preserve 6.78 6.78 4 Central Naples Fred W. Coyle Freedom Park Preserve 11.60 11.60 4 Central Naples Gordon River Greenway Preserve 50.51 50.51 5 Urban Estates Camp Keais Strand Preserve 32.50 32.50 5 Immokalee Caracara Prairie Preserve Preserve 367.70 367.70 5 Urban Estates Dr Robert H. Gore III Preserve 171.21 171.21 5 Urban Estates Nancy Payton Preserve Preserve 71.00 71.00 5 Immokalee Panther Walk Preserve Preserve 10.69 10.69 5 Immokalee Pepper Ranch Preserve Preserve 2,511.90 2,511.90 5 Urban Estates Red Maple Swamp Preserve Preserve 216.38 216.38 5 Urban Estates Redroot Preserve Preserve 9.26 9.26 5 Urban Estates Rivers Road Preserve Preserve 76.74 76.74 5 Urban Estates Winchester Head Preserve Preserve 93.56 93.56 Total Collier Units 6,498.80 594.99 32.85 1,524.18 37.50 4,309.28 Regional Parks and Pathways Totals Community Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres Regional Park Acres Concervation Preserve Acres Value per Unit $119,947 $504,450 Total Value $71,367,266 $787,789,476 1,561.68 120 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 2021 Collier County Park Land Inventory District Location Type Acreage Community Park Acres Neighborhood Park Acres Regional Park Acres Regional Park Pathway Acres City of Naples Beach Accesses Regional 0.50 0.50 City of Naples Naples Landings Regional 3.81 3.81 City of Naples Fleischmann Park Community 25.26 25.26 City of Naples Cambier Park Community 12.84 12.84 City of Naples Baker Park Regional 15.20 15.20 City of Naples Lowdermilk Park Regional 10.30 10.30 City of Naples River Park CC Community 1.61 1.61 City of Naples Naples Preserve Regional 9.78 9.78 City of Naples Anthony Park Neighborhood 7.00 7.00 Total Naples Units 86.30 39.71 7.00 39.59 0.00 City of Marco Island Jane Hittler Neighborhood 0.25 0.25 City of Marco Island Veterans' Memorial Neighborhood 0.25 0.25 City of Marco Island Leigh Plummer Neighborhood 3.50 3.50 City of Marco Island Racquet Center Community 2.97 2.97 City of Marco Island Frank Mackle Community 30.00 30.00 City of Marco Island Winterberry Neighborhood 5.00 5.00 Total Marco Units 41.97 32.97 9.00 0.00 0.00 Everglades City Community Park Community 0.86 0.86 Everglades City McLeod Park Community 1.04 1.04 Total Everglades Units 1.90 1.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Municipality Units 17 130.17 74.58 16.00 39.59 0.00 Notes: Municipalities Acreage *Not included in the inventory are those community and regional parks associated with the City of Naples and City of Marco Island. Within the City of Marco Island, the County operates three regional parks, which are included within the Counties regional park acreage inventory. *Park land and amenities located in Private communities are taken into consideration when planning new parks and facilities but cannot be counted as inventory due to lack of public access 121 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(CR 833CR 846 IMMOKALEE RD TAMIAMI TRAIL OIL WELL RD LOOP RD.CR 858C R 8 6 9 CORKSCREW R D SR 951CR 951EVERGLADES BLVDE STE R O BLV DSUMMERLIN RDGOLD EN GATE BLVD DAVIS BLVD CR 29ALICO RD RADIO RD PINE RIDGE RD DANIALS PKWY VANDERBILT BEACH BONITA BEAC H RD SR 29 US 41 TAMIAMI TRAIL AIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RDGOODLETTE RDTAMIAMI TRAILLIVINGSTON RDSR 82 IMMOKALEE RD LAKE TRAFFORD 2 0 2 1 P A R K S I N V E N T O R Y2021 P A R K S I N V E N T O R Y NAPL ES MARCO ISLAND IMMOK ALEE EVERGLADES CITYGULFOFMEXICO§¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 !(29 !(951 !(951 !(92 !(29!(82 !(82 . 0 3 6 9 121.5 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LEE COUNTY 9 F l o r i d a G u l fFlorida G u l fCoast U n i v e r s i t yCoast U n i v e r s i t y A v e M a r i a T o w n A v e M a r i a T o w n a n d U n i v e r s i t yand U n i v e r s i t y 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 10 12 7 8 9 13 1415 16 17 20 1918 28 2122 23 24 2625 27 29 30 31 32 35 34 37 38 39 33 4636 45 40 4142 44 50 47 48 51 49 52 $+41 $+41 Map ID Num ber 55 43 53 55 56 54 57 58 59 60 61 Legend !(Neighborhood Parks !(Regional Parks !(Community Parks !(Undeveloped Parks !(School Site * (Interlocal agreements for recreation use) 62 HENDRY COUNTY NUMBER NAME 1 WILLOUGHBY ACRES NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 2 POINCIANA VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 3 RITA EATON NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 4 AARON LUTZ NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 5 PALM SPRINGS NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 6 COCONUT CIRCLE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 7 DREAMLAND NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 8 IMMOKALEE SOUTH PARK 9 OILWELL PARK 10 ISLES OF CAPRI NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 11 NAPLES MANOR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 12 PANTHER NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 13 BAREFOOT BEACH ACCESS 14 BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVE COUNTY PARK 15 COCOHATCHEE RIVER PARK 16 CONNER PARK 17 VANDERBILT BEACH PARK 18 NORTH GULF SHORE ACCESS 19 CLAM PASS PARK 20 NORTH COLLIER REGIONAL PARK 21 SUGDEN REGIONAL PARK 22 BAYVIEW PARK 23 COLLIER BLVD BOATING PARK 24 TIGERTAIL BEACH PARK 25 SOUTH MARCO BEACH ACCESS 26 CAXAMBAS PARK 27 ANN OLESKY PARK 28 NAPLES ZOO 29 NAPLES PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 30 VETERANS COMMUNITY PARK NUMBER NAME 31 PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY PARK 32 VINEYARDS COMMUNTIY PARK 33 MAX A HASSE JR COMMUNITY PARK 34 GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER 35 GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY PARK 36 CORKSCREW ELEMENTARY/MIDDLE SCHOOL * 37 EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY PARK 38 CINDY MYSELS COMMUNITY PARK 39 EAGLE LAKES COMMUNITY PARK 40 TONY ROSBOUGH COMMUNTY PARK 41 IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARK 42 IMMOKALEE SPORTS COMPLEX 43 OSCEOLA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 44 IMMOKALEE AIRPORT PARK 45 SABAL PALM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 46 BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND REGIONAL PARK 47 GOODLAND BOATING PARK 48 MARGOOD HARBOR PARK 49 GOLDEN GATE GREENWAY 50 MANATEE COMMUNITY PARK 51 GORDON RIVER GREENWAY PARK 52 VANDERBILT EXT COMMUNITY PARK 53 VETERANS MEMORIAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 54 IMMOKALEE HIGH SCHOOL * 55 PALMETTO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 56 EDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL * 57 FRED W. COYLE FREEDOM PARK 58 PORT OF THE ISLANDS PARK 59 OAKES NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 60 RICH KING GREENWAY REGIONAL PARK 61 ISLES OF CAPRI PADDLECRAFT PARK 62 PALM RIVER NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 63 COLLIER COUNTY SPORTS COMPLEX PARK 63 Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division 122 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75 §¨¦75SR 29INTERSTATE 75 IMMOKALEE RD OIL WE LL RD COLLIER BLVDTAMIAMI TRL E CR 846 SR 82 LIVINGSTON RDTAMIAMI TRL NSR 29 NSAN MARCO RDDAVIS BLVDGOODLETTE RD NPINE RIDGE RD EVERGLADES BLVD NRADIO RDAIRPORT PULLING RD NDESOTO BLVD SLOGAN BLVD NSANTA BARBARA BLVDDESOTO BLVD NVANDERBILT BEACH RD GOLDEN GATE BLV D E 9TH ST NVANDERBILT DREVERGLADES BLVD SC O R K S C R E W R D GOLDEN GATE BLVD W C OPELAND AVE SWILSON BLVD NS 1ST STBAL D EAGL E DRN B A R FIEL D D R N 15TH STOLD US 41N COLLIER BLVDS BARFIELD DRS COLLIER BLVDBONITA BEACH RD COLLIER AVE111TH AVE N AIRPORT PULLING RD SN E W M A R K E T R D W º FEDERAL AND STATE OWNED PARK LAND 0 4.5 92.25 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Big CypressNational Preserve Florida PantherNational Wildlife Preserve Fakahatchee StrandPreserve StateParkPicayune StrandState Forest Ten ThousandIslands NationalWildlife R efuge Everglades National Park Rookery BayNational EstuarineResearch Reserve CollierSeminoleState Park Delnor-WigginsPass State Park Corkscrew RegionalEcosystem Watershed Okaloacoochee SloughState ForestLake TraffordImpoundment Corkscrew RegionalEcosystem Watershed Lake Trafford Name: Big Cypress National Preserve Collier-Seminole State Park Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Park Everglades National Park Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge Lake Trafford Impoundment Okaloacocochee Slough State Forest Picayune Strand State Forest Rookery Bay National Reserve Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge Acres: Approx. 574,848 Approx. 7,271 Approx. 15,421 Approx. 166 Approx. 26,840 Approx. 75,000 Approx. 26,400 Approx. 634 Approx. 4,920 Approx. 78,909 Approx. 110,000 Approx. 35,000 TOTAL:Approx. 955,409 (Disclaimer: The information provided is to be used for general mapping purposes only. Ground surveying and records search must be used for absolute boundaries/acreages) Growth Man ageme nt De partme ntOperations & RegulatoryManagement Division 123 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT (CIE) AMENDMENT SUBMITTALS FOR CATEGORY “A” FACILITIES CONTENTS • EXHIBIT “A”, SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR NEXT 5 FISCAL YEARS • APPENDIX “H”, SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUTURE FISCAL YEARS 6 ‒ 10 Collier County 2021 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities 124 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS COST AND REVENUE SUMMARY TABLE FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 ARTERIAL & COLLECTOR ROADS AND BRIDGE PROJECTS Revenues:IF - Impact Fees / COA Revenue $78,000,000 Sales Tax $140,525,000 Gas Tax $117,000,000 GF - General Fund (001)$59,085,000 Grants/Reimbursements/DCAs/Interest $40,199,000 Unfunded Needs $87,731,000 $522,540,000 Carry Forward $58,617,000 RR - Revenue Reduction (less 5% required by law)-$10,002,000 $48,615,000 Less Expenditures:$571,155,000 $571,155,000 Balance $0 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues:WIF - Water System Development Fees/Impact Fees $38,750,000 B - Bond Proceeds $54,707,000 Cars Act Funding $3,000,000 WCA - Water Capital Account $2,861,000 REV - Rate Revenue $201,259,000 $300,577,000 Less Expenditures:$300,577,000 $300,577,000 Balance $0 WASTEWATER COLLECTION & TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues:SIF - Wastewater System Development Fees/Impact Fees $39,500,000 B - Bond Proceeds $202,987,000 Cares Act Funding $7,000,000 SCA - Wastewater Capital Account, Transfers $2,861,000 REV - Rate Revenue $214,084,000 $466,432,000 Less Expenditures:$466,432,000 $466,432,000 Balance $0 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROJECTS Revenues:LTF - Landfill Tipping Fees $0 $0 Less Expenditures:$0 $0 Balance $0 Revenues:IF - Impact Fees $50,724,400 DIF - Deferred Impact Fees $0 GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 IN - Interest $1,000,000 RR - Revenue Reduction (less 5% required by law)$0 $4,576,300 $0 GF - General Fund (001)$0 $56,300,700 Less Expenditures:$25,575,400 $56,300,700 Balance $30,725,300 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues: GR - Grants / Reimbursements $4,125,000 Transfer from 310 $11,318,000 Unmet Funding Needs $118,875,000 Debt Funding 327 $52,470,000 New Budget From 001 $13,390,000 -$9,668,000 RR - Revenue Reduction (less 5% required by law)-$15,000 IN - Interest Revenue $235,000 GF - New Budget from Fund (111)$15,000,000 $205,730,000 Less Expenditures:$205,730,000 $205,730,000 Balance $0 TOTAL PROJECTS $1,569,469,400 TOTAL REVENUE SOURCES $1,600,194,700 AC - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service TR - Added Value through Commitments, Leases & Transfers CF - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service The table below itemizes the types of public facilities and the sources of revenue. The "Revenue Amount" column contains the 5-Year amount of facility revenues. The right column is a calculation of expenses versus revenues for each type of public facility. All deficits are accumulated as a subtotal. The subtotal deficit is the source of additional revenue utilized by Collier County to fund the deficit in order to maintain the levels of service standards as referenced in the Capital Improvement Element. Revenue Amount PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES PROJECTS Projects Revenue Sources Expenditure Total 125 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 126 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 127 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 128 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 129 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 130 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) EXHIBIT "A" COLLIER COUNTY SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FISCAL YEARS 2022-2026 131 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY COST AND REVENUE SUMMARY TABLE FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 Projects Revenue Sources Expenditure Total ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROAD PROJECTS Revenues:IF - Impact Fees / COA Revenue $77,500,000 GA - Gas Tax Revenue $123,000,000 GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 AC - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $0 TR - Transfers $0 GF - General Fund (001) $59,085,000 $0 IN - Interest - Fund 313 (Gas Tax & Interest Impact Fees $5,000,000 TX - Gas Tax $0 $264,585,000 Less Expenditures:$264,585,000 $264,585,000 Balance $0 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues:WIF - Water System Development Fees $38,750,000 B - Bond Proceeds $7,500,000 Cares Act Funding $0 WCA - Water Capital Account $3,158,000 REV - Rate Revenue $223,235,000 $272,643,000 Less Expenditures:$272,643,000 $272,643,000 Balance $0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues:SIF - Wastewater System Development Fees $39,500,000 B - Bond Proceeds $7,500,000 SRF - State Revolving Fund Loans $0 Cares Act Funding $0 SCA - Wastewater Capital Account $3,158,000 REV - Rate Revenue $191,058,000 $241,216,000 Less Expenditures:$241,216,000 $241,216,000 Balance $0 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROJECTS Revenues:LTF - Landfill Tipping Fees $0 $0 Less Expenditures:$0 $0 Balance $0 Revenues:IF - Impact Fees $40,000,000 GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 GF - General Fund (001) $0 $40,000,000 Less Expenditures:$0 $0 Balance $40,000,000 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS Revenues: GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 AC - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $0 CRA - Community Redevelopment Area/Municipal Service Taxing $0 GF - General Fund (001) $127,000,000 $127,000,000 Less Expenditures:$127,000,000 $127,000,000 Balance $0 TOTAL PROJECTS $905,444,000 TOTAL REVENUE SOURCES $945,444,000 The table below itemizes the types of public facilities and the sources of revenue. The "Revenue Amount" column contains the 5-Year amount of facility revenues. The right column is a calculation of expenses versus revenues for each type of public facility. All deficits are accumulated as a subtotal. The subtotal deficit is the source of additional revenue utilized by Collier County to fund the deficit in order to maintain the levels of service standards as referenced in the Capital Improvement Element. DC - Developer Contribution Agreements / Advanced Revenue Amount PARKS & RECREATION FACILITIES PROJECTS 132 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROAD PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Contingency $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sbttl Operations Improvements/Programs $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $75,000,000 Sbttl Transfers to Other Funds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Impact Fee Refunds $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 Capacity Improvement Projects - All Phases $22,667,000 $22,867,000 $23,067,000 $23,267,000 $23,467,000 $115,335,000 Debt Service Payments $14,600,000 $14,600,000 $14,600,000 $14,600,000 $14,600,000 $73,000,000 ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROAD PROJECT TOTALS $52,517,000 $52,717,000 $52,917,000 $53,117,000 $53,317,000 $264,585,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL IF - Impact Fees / COA Revenue $15,500,000 $15,500,000 $15,500,000 $15,500,000 $15,500,000 $77,500,000 GA - Gas Tax Revenue $24,200,000 $24,400,000 $24,600,000 $24,800,000 $25,000,000 $123,000,000 GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 AC - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TR - Transfers $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 GF - General Fund (001) $11,817,000 $11,817,000 $11,817,000 $11,817,000 $11,817,000 $59,085,000DC - Developer Contribution Agreements / Advanced Reimbursements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 IN - Interest - Fund 313 (Gas Tax & Interest Impact Fees)$1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $5,000,000 RR - Revenue Reduction (less 5% required by law)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUE TOTAL $52,517,000 $52,717,000 $52,917,000 $53,117,000 $53,317,000 $264,585,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SCHEDULE NOTES I:\GMD\21 AUIR - CIE\2021 AUIR CIE Schedule Updates\CIE-Exhibit-H-Print-Material\trans-ex-h CIE Appendix - 1 133 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Expansion Related Projects $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $36,955,000 $36,585,000 $36,985,000 $36,985,000 $36,985,000 $184,495,000 Debt Service $11,681,000 $11,413,000 $13,222,000 $11,360,000 $11,362,000 $59,038,000 Departmental Capital $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $3,696,000 $3,659,000 $3,699,000 $3,699,000 $3,699,000 $18,452,000 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $52,939,000 $59,776,000 $54,537,000 $52,688,000 $52,703,000 $272,643,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL WIF - Water System Development Fees $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $7,750,000 $38,750,000 B - Bond Proceeds $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Cares Act Funding $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 WCA - Water Capital Account $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 REV - Rate Revenue $44,582,000 $43,907,000 $46,156,000 $44,294,000 $44,296,000 $223,235,000 REVENUE TOTAL $52,939,000 $59,776,000 $54,537,000 $52,688,000 $52,703,000 $272,643,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SCHEDULE NOTES NOTE: Collier County has adopted a two-year Concurrency Management System. Figures provided for years three, four and five of this Schedule of Capital Improvements are not part of the Concurrency Management System but must be financially feasible with a dedicated revenue source or an alternative revenue source if the dedicated revenue source is not realized. Figures provided for years six through ten of the Schedule of Capital Improvements are estimates of revenues versus project costs but do not constitute a long term concurrency system. 134 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Expansion Related Projects $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $33,140,000 $31,770,000 $32,770,000 $33,270,000 $31,770,000 $162,720,000 Departmental Capital $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 Debt Service $10,075,000 $9,891,000 $10,256,000 $10,674,000 $10,670,000 $51,566,000 Reserve for Contingencies - Replacement & Rehabilitation Projects $3,314,000 $3,177,000 $3,277,000 $3,327,000 $3,177,000 $16,272,000 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $47,136,000 $52,957,000 $46,934,000 $47,915,000 $46,274,000 $241,216,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $7,900,000 $39,500,000 $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $607,000 $619,000 $631,000 $644,000 $657,000 $3,158,000 $38,629,000 $36,938,000 $38,403,000 $39,371,000 $37,717,000 $191,058,000 REVENUE TOTAL $47,136,000 $52,957,000 $46,934,000 $47,915,000 $46,274,000 $241,216,000 SCA - Wastewater Capital Account - Transfers REV - Rate Revenue SIF - Wastewater System Development Fees / Impact Fees CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SCHEDULE NOTES B - Bond Proceeds Cares Act Funding NOTE: Figures provided for years six through ten of the Schedule of Capital Improvements are estimates of revenues versus project costs but do not constitute a long-term concurrency system. Revenue sources are estimates only; both the mix of sources and amounts will change when a rate study is conducted. 135 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL TBD County Landfill Cell Construction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL LTF - Landfill Tipping Fees $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUE TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROJECTS SCHEDULE NOTES SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROJECT TOTALS NOTE: Collier County has adopted a two-year Concurrency Management System. Figures provided for years three, four and five of this Schedule of Capital Improvements are not part of the Concurrency Management System but must be financially feasible with a dedicated revenue source or an alternative revenue source if the dedicated revenue source is not realized. Figures provided for years six through ten of the Schedule of Capital Improvements are estimates of revenues versus project costs but do not constitute a long term concurrency system. * Pursuant to the Landfill Operating Agreement (LOA) with Waste Management, Inc. of Florida (WMIF), landfill cell construction is scheduled and guaranteed by WMIF over the life of the Collier County Landfill. Collier County landfill expansion costs are paid for by WMIF through agreed upon Collier County landfill tipping fees. By contract under the LOA, WMIF will construct any future required cells. 136 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 $ VALUE $ VALUE $ VALUE $ VALUE $ VALUE $ VALUE PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL 35 Acres ‒ Collier Enterprises - Village SRA $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES PROJECT TOTALS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL IF - Impact Fees / COA Revenue $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $40,000,000 GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 GF - General Fund (001) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 REVENUE TOTAL $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $40,000,000 SCHEDULE NOTES PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES PROJECTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT NOTE: All Community Park Land and Regional Park Land transactions are being facilitated through interdepartmental transfers exchanging land holdings for park lands, or using other methods not involving expenditure of capital funds. These transactions represent changes to the value of land holdings only. 137 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) Capital Improvement Element - Appendix Table: 2021 Amendments APPENDIX H FUTURE COSTS AND REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY FISCAL YEARS 2027-2031 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECTS $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT $ AMOUNT PROJECT No.PROJECT FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL Stormwater Management System Projects $25,365,000 $25,365,000 $25,365,000 $25,365,000 $25,365,000 $126,825,000 Stormwater Management Operations & Reserves $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $175,000 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECT TOTALS $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $127,000,000 REVENUE KEY - REVENUE SOURCE FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 TOTAL GR - Grants / Reimbursements $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 AC - Available Cash for Future Projects/Payment of Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 CRA - Community Redevelopment Area / Municipal Service Taxing Unit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 GF - General Fund (001) $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $127,000,000 REVENUE TOTAL $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $25,400,000 $127,000,000 SCHEDULE NOTES Continuous CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 138 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: 2021 AUIR Category A Final-UPDATED (20187 : PL20210001270 2021 AUIR/CIE) 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.2 Item Summary: *** NOTE: This item has been continued from September 16, 2021 CCPC Meeting*** PL20190001333 GMPA Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel - An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map and Map Series; by amending the Estates- Mixed Use District to add the 8th Street NE-22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict to allow a 100-seat church as a conditional use. The subject property consists of 5.15± acres and is located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida; and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Companion Item PL20190001326 CU) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning Name: Sue Faulkner 09/28/2021 6:15 PM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/28/2021 6:15 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Sue Faulkner Review item Skipped 09/28/2021 6:14 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Sue Faulkner Review Item Skipped 09/28/2021 6:14 PM Zoning Sue Faulkner Additional Reviewer Skipped 09/28/2021 6:14 PM Zoning Sue Faulkner Zoning Director Review Skipped 09/28/2021 6:14 PM Growth Management Department Sue Faulkner GMD Deputy Dept Head Skipped 09/28/2021 6:14 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 349 Page | 1 of 13 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 16, 2021 RE: PETITION PL20190001333/CPSS-2019-11, SMALL-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDA- PL20190001326) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES SUB-ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (GGAMP) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agent: Ronny De Aza, PE, RDA Consulting Engineers, LLC 800 Harbour Drive, Suite #2C, Naples, FL 34103 Applicants: Iglesia Pentecostes Penial, Inc. 757 107th Ave North Naples, FL 34108 Owners: Iglesia Pentecostes Penial, Inc. 757 107th Ave North Naples, FL 34108 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises ±5.15-acres and is located in the northwest quadrant of 8th Street NE and 22nd Ave NE, approximately 0.51 miles south of Randall Blvd. in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East (Rural Estates Planning Community). 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 2 of 13 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requests to amend the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) and the Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map and Map Series to create the 8th Street NE- 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict, which consists of two parcels (37750560106 and 37750560009) totaling ±5.15 acres. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow a 100-seat church as a conditional use. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 3 of 13 The proposed amended Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub Element text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted, and is also reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A). GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES SUB-ELEMENT *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. Goals, Objectives and Policies 1 B. Land Use Designation Description Section 9 1. ESTATES DESIGNATION [Beginning page 9] A. Estates – Mixed Use District 1. Residential Estates Subdistrict 2. Neighborhood Center Subdistrict 3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict 4. Mission Subdistrict 5. Everglades – Randall Subdistrict 6. 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict 16 B. Estates - Commercial District [Beginning page 17] *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 2. AGRICULTURE/RURAL DESIGNATION 27 *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 3. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES 27 *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** C. List of Maps 28 Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers Wilson Boulevard/Golden Gate Boulevard Neighborhood Center Golden Gate Boulevard/Everglades Boulevard Neighborhood Center Immokalee Road/Everglades Boulevard Neighborhood Center Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict Mission Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict Conceptual Plan 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 4 of 13 Everglades – Randall Subdistrict Immokalee Road/Randall Boulevard Planning Study Area 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.1.4: 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. Mission Subdistrict 5. Everglades – Randall Subdistrict 6. 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict B. ESTATES – COMMERCIAL DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** B. LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 1. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates – Mixed Use District 1. Residential Estates Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 6. 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict [Beginning Page 16] The 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict is located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE, consists of 5.15 acres, and comprises Golden Gate Estates Unit 23 TR 133, less E 350 ft and Golden Gate Est Unit 23 E 350 ft of TR 133. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for churches and other places of worship and their related uses. The following use is permitted within the Subdistrict through the conditional use process: a. Churches and other places of worship The following church-related uses are prohibited within the Subdistrict: a. Day care centers 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 5 of 13 b. Private schools c. Soup kitchens d. Homeless shelters The maximum total floor area allowed in this Subdistrict is 5,000 square feet, including no more than 100 seats. The maximum height of buildings shall be 30 feet. Architectural features such as steeples may be a maximum height of 50 feet. The project will provide an enhanced landscape buffer in lieu of a masonry wall required between the adjacent residential properties and the subject property by Section 5.03.02.H.1.a. of the Land Development Code. To the north and the west, the enhanced landscape buffer will be provided with supplemental plantings within the 75’ native vegetation buffer. *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** C. List of Maps Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** Everglades – Randall Subdistrict Immokalee Road/Randall Boulevard Planning Study Area 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this small-scale Growth Management Plan Amendment is to create the 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict, which consists of ±5.15 acres in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 8th St. NE and 22nd Avenue NE. The subject site is currently undeveloped and uncleared. The purpose of this proposed Subdistrict is to allow a 100-seat church as a conditional use. The applicant also proposes to amend the “Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map” and create the “8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict” map. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The subject property is approximately ±5.15 acres and uncleared and undeveloped. The GGAMP designation is Estates, Estates - Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict as identified on the Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map. The subject site is approximately 0.5 miles south of Randall Blvd. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately abutting the north boundary of the subject property is a single family residential dwelling unit on a 2.5-acre parcel. The GGAMP designates the subject site: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. Further to the north are additional single-family residences that are also 2.5 acres or greater per each parcel that the GGAMP designated: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 6 of 13 East: Immediately adjacent to the east lies 8th Street NE. Across 8th Street NE are a couple of +/-2.5-acre lots with agricultural uses such as poultry, bees, tropical fish, and rabbits, etc. The area further to the east are residential properties – single family homes and vacant residential on small parcels of approximately 1 acre. The GGAMP designated properties to the east: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. South: Immediately to the south is 22nd Avenue NE. The land directly across 22nd Avenue NE from the subject site is an undeveloped residential property and the GGAMP designated: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. Further to the south residential parcels designated and zoned the same as to the north. West: Immediately adjacent to the west of the subject site is a 2.5-acre single family residential parcel that the GGAMP designated: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. Further to the west it is developed with single family residential and undeveloped properties. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations: The subject site is currently a heavily wooded, undeveloped 5.15 acres designated: Estates Designation, Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict; and zoned Estates Zoning District. The church purchased the proposed location at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE in March 2019. The applicant presented several reasons for wanting to locate the church at this spot: 1. Location is centrally located for the existing church congregation. See map “Adjacent Congressional Members within 2 Miles.” 2. Easily accessible location. 8th Street NE (listed as collector in Functional Classification) connects two east-west collectors from Randall Blvd. (TR3.2 in FLUE, FDOT Functional classification listed as other freeways and expressways) to Golden Gate Blvd. (TR3.2 in FLUE, FDOT Functional classification listed as major collector). 3. Property is in close proximity to the current church location at 13260 Immokalee Rd, Suite #7 – approximately 1.2 miles from proposed location. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 7 of 13 The Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element on page 13, #3. Conditional Uses Subdistrict, states, “Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estates zoning district within the Rural 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. Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Use Provisions c. Transitional Conditional Uses d. Special Exceptions to Conditional Use Locational Criteria 1. Temporary use permits for model homes 2. Conditional Use permits for excavation 3. Conditional Use for a church or place of worship is allowed on Tract 22, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 97 (see Special Exception to Conditional Use Location Criteria Map). 4. Conditional Use for a cellular tower be allowed in the Estates Zoning District only on parcels no smaller than 2.25 acres and adjacent to a roadway classified within the Transportation Element as a Collector or Arterial.” This project falls under the idea of the Special Exception to Conditional Use. The Special Exception to Conditional Use Locational Criteria Map currently shows two approved locations in the Urban Golden Gate Estates, not the Rural Golden Gate Estates: #3 mentions Tract 22, Unit 97, which is located on Immokalee Road just east of I-75 and the other location shown on the Special Exception to Conditional Use Location Criteria Map is Tract 107, Unit 30, which is located on the west side of Santa Barbara Blvd. just north of Painted Leaf Lane. Since neither of these locations are in the Rural Golden Gate Estates , the applicant is proposing to create a new subdistrict in the Rural Golden Gate Estates under the Estates Mixed Use District. Previously, the Mission Subdistrict was approved and handled very similarly with among other conditional uses a church use located at the intersection of Oil Well Road and Everglades Blvd. in the Rural Golden Gate Estates. Proposed location 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 8 of 13 The applicant, Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel Church (a non-denominational church) is proposing just one use with their Conditional Use application: Churches and other places of worship. Currently, the Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel Church with its approximately 60 members meets in a storefront that used to be a florist tucked in the strip shopping center located just south of the intersection of Randall Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. The strip Shopping Center near Randall Blvd. includes L’Appetito, a hair salon, Armando’s Supermarket, Amigo’s Truck Parts and Tire Repairs and more stores. The church currently meets in a small storefront within this group of shops. The Rural Golden Gate Estates SubElement states, “The Rural Golden Gate Estates is rural in character and is defined by large, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops, wildlife activity, environmental stewardship, low-density residential development, and limitations on commercial and conditional uses.” Keeping in mind the rural character of the Rural Golden Gate Estates, the Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel Church has proposed a conditional use for a very small church to be located on two parcels totaling approximately 5.15-acres on the Northwest quadrant at the intersection of 8th Street NE at 22nd Avenue NE. The application proposes to help keep the rural character of the Rural Golden Gate Estates by maintaining a preserve in the southeastern portion of the 2-parcel site along 8th Street NE (as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan). The Preserve is proposed to be 0.78 acres, which is a significant portion of the entire site (approx. 15%). The section of 22nd Avenue NE that runs east of 8th Street NE, is a two-lane rural road with no lane markings. This approximately 3,000 feet segment of 22nd Avenue NE is a very low traffic generation road, since it dead-ends at a canal. There are currently 30 dwelling units developed on this segment of roadway. Because this segment of 22nd Avenue NE is not a through road, there should be no reason for church members to drive east to the canal or cause any impact to 22nd Avenue NE residents. The proposed church is to be constructed with a maximum of 100 seats in a building that will measure no greater than 5,000 square feet with a maximum height of 30 feet. The proposed steeple will be no taller than 50 feet tall. The companion Conditional Uses zoning petition (PL20190001326) limits the days and times of operation (“The hours of operation for the church will be Wednesday and Sunday for a maximum of 6 hours per day”) among several other Proposed Conditions of Approval. The Conditions of Approval will help reduce the impact of the proposed church on the surrounding residential area. The size of this project has been significantly reduced since the application was first submitted. The applicant worked very cooperatively to meet all of the requests of County staff to reduce the impacts on the surrounding area. The applicant reduced the maximum seats from 250 to 100; reduced the square feet of the building from 9,000 to 5,000; reduced the maximum height of the building from 50 to 30 feet; and reduced architectural features such as steeples from 60 feet to 50 feet tall. The Rural Golden Gate Estates SubElement of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan states, “Projects directly abutting residential property (property zoned E-Estates and without an approved conditional use) shall provide, at a minimum, a seventy-five (75) feet wide buffer in which no parking uses are permitted. Twenty-five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer. A minimum of fifty (50) feet of the buffer width shall consist of retained native vegetation and must be consistent with subsection 3.05.07H. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC).” The applicant increased the buffer width of 20 feet from the original application submittal to meet the required buffer of 75 feet wide with no parking uses permitted within 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 9 of 13 the buffer. The applicant’s proposed GMPA text states, “The project will provide an enhanced landscape buffer in lieu of a masonry wall required between the adjacent residential properties and the subject property by Section 5.03.02.H.1.a. of the Land Development Code. To the north and west, the enhanced landscape buffer will be provided with supplemental plantings within that the 75-foot native vegetation buffer.” Potable water is not available from Collier County Water and Sewer services at the property and therefore will have to be provided through private onsite well and septic. The project will provide potable water and fire protection onsite via a private potable water well. Sanitary sewer will be provided via a private onsite septic sewer system. The applicant has stated there are no existing or anticipated deficiencies with the proposed potable water or sanitary sewer systems. Compatibility: The proposed church site is surrounded by residential and agricultural uses. Churches coexist within residential areas throughout the County. With the limited hours and days of operation and the fact that this is proposed for a small congregation, this church should create almost zero impact on the surrounding residential area. In staff’s opinion this proposed church is compatible, because this small church is expected to create almost no impact to the surrounding area and the fact that small churches co-exist well within the residential and agricultural uses in all other parts of Collier County. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: According to the applicant’s submitted information, a large percentage of the church membership lives within 2 miles of the proposed church site (see previous map). County Planning staff supports projects that reduce vehicle miles traveled. The proposed small-scale Growth Management Plan Amendment creates a new subdistrict in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element, Estates Mixed Use District. The 8th Street NE-22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict will allow this small church to operate at the proposed location. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendment. 1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 50 acres or fewer and: [The subject site comprises ±5.15 acres.] (b) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government’s comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 10 of 13 a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. [This amendment does include a text change to the Comprehensive Plan and those text changes are directly related to the proposed Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map amendment.] (c) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). [The subject property is not located within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (2) Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). [This project will be heard with only one public adoption hearing.] (3) If the small scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the acreage limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent. The local government approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. [This amendment does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity.] (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. [This amendment preserves the internal consistency of the plan and is not a correction, update, or modification of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan.] Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Jaime Cook, Principal Environmental Specialist, completed her review and approved this petition, without any conditions, on 04/17/2020. The subject property is 5.15 acres. The acreage of native vegetation on site has been field verified by staff during review of the Conditional Use for the project. The project is currently zoned Estates with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). The proposed GMP amendment will not affect the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Environmental Services staff recommends approval. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, stated his review is not applicable for this petition on November 18, 2019. This site has no public utilities and will instead be serviced by well and septic facilities. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 11 of 13 Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition, without any conditions, on April 16, 2020. Transportation Element: The project is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, which states, “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equ al to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” According to the TIS provided with this petition dated (revised) August 6, 2020, the proposed Iglesia Pentecostes Church will generate a projected total of +/- 8 PM weekday, peak hour, 2-way trips on the adjacent roadway 8th Street North East which is classified as a major collector by FDOT. The closest major road segments tracked in the current 2020 AUIR are Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Blvd to 8th St., segment ID 123.0, currently operating at a LOS “C” with a remaining capacity of 845 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 2,300 with a peak direction being East. The next road segment is Golden Gate Boulevard from 8th St. to Everglades Boulevard, segment ID 123.1, currently operating at a LOS “C” with a remaining capacity of 855 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 2,300 with a peak direction being East. The next road segment is Randal Boulevard from Immokalee Road to Everglades, segment ID 132, currently operating at a LOS “D” with a remaining capacity of 7 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 900 with a peak direction being East. Staff notes that there is an expected deficiency due to traffic counts in 2022 as well as a deficiency due to trip bank in 2021 for this segment. There is a funded road improvement project for Randall scheduled for completion within the 5-year planning window as well as an FDOT funded improvement for the intersection of Immokalee and Randall also within t he same 5-year planning window. Following state statute 169.3180 any facility determined to be transportation deficient with existing, committed and vested trips plus background trips, shall require the costs for said deficiency to be the responsibility of Collier County. For these reasons Transportation Planning staff find that the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the GMPA petition request, the Conditional Use document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues and recommends approval. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 12 of 13 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 Thursday, April 29, 2021, at 6:05 pm and located at 13260 Immokalee Rd, Suite 7, Naples, FL 34120. This is the location that the Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel Church currently meets. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Conditional Use (CU) petition. Approximately 75 people signed in that attended the NIM. The pastor had discussed how the church operated and what kind of church they were. The church services are in Spanish. The consultant stated that the church was to be a single-story structure – not 3 stories as the news had reported. A neighbor to the subject site asked for a hand-raising poll to see how many attendees lived near the project. The hand-raising showed the majority of the attendees at the NIM lived near the project. The consultant discussed the specifics for this project (number of seats, square footage, etc.) The pastor mentioned that their sister church located in a residential community in Naples Park has never experienced a noise complaint. Many attendees seem to reflect concern over increased traffic and environmental concerns and spoke of general opposition to locating a church in their neighborhood. The meeting ended at approximately 7:05 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY STAFF: Comprehensive Planning staff received a signed petition with approximately 59 signatures supporting this project and also a signed petition with approximately 260 signatures opposing this project. Staff also received an individual neighbor’s letter of support uploaded Nov. 11, 2020 and on August 26, 2021 a phone call to staff of strong opposition from one of the neighbors, Rick Randall, who had signed the oppositional petition, restating to staff that a church has no business being in a residential area. All of these correspondence items may be found in your agenda packet. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • The reason for this GMPA and companion CU zoning petition is to allow a church to operate in the Estates Designation, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict by creating a new subdistrict. • The Church has purchased the subject site. • The majority of the current church members live in the surrounding area. • There are only a few churches within Golden Gate Estates, most churches are located on arterial roadways along the perimeter of the Estates Mixed Use District. • 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 utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns for impacts upon other public infrastructure. 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page | 13 of 13 • There are no transportation concerns as a result of this petition. • The use is generally compatible with surrounding development based upon the high-level review conducted for a GMP amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on September 2, 2021. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2, Florida Statutes. The criteria for changes to the Future Land Use Map is in Section 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20190001333/CPSS-2019- 11 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Prepared by: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Staff Report CPSS-2019-11 IPP Church (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Ordinance - 081621(3) (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 1 APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATOIN NUMBER: ___________________ DATE RECEIVED: ______________________________ PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE: __________________________________________________ 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 applica tion, 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 ______________________________________________________________ Company _______________________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________________________ City ______________________________ State _____________________ Zip Code __________ Phone Number ______________________ Fax Number ________________________________ B. Name of Agent * _________________________________________________________________ • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company________________________________________________________________________ Address ___________________________________________________________________ City ___________________________ State ____________________ Zip Code ________ Phone Number ____________________ Fax Number ___________________________ C. Name of Owner (s) of Record ____________________________________________________ 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). 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 2 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ 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 __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 3 __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ Date of Contract: __________________ F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, li st all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ G. Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ):________Term of lease______yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option:______________ and date option terminates: ______________, or anticipated closing: _______________________. H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION ______________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ B. GENERAL LOCATION _____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ C. PLANNING COMMUNITY D. TAZ _____________________ E. SIZE IN ACRES F. ZONING _________________ G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN________________________________________________ H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S)____________________________________ IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: _______ Housing Element _______ Recreation/Open Space _______ Traffic Circulation Sub-Element _______ Mass Transit Sub-Element _______ Aviation Sub-Element _______ Potable Water Sub-Element _______ Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element _______ NGWAR Sub-Element _______ Solid Waste Sub-Element _______ Drainage Sub-Element 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 4 _______ Capital Improvement Element _______ CCME Element _______ Future Land Use Element _______ Golden Gate Master Plan _______ Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) _________________OF THE _______________________________ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike-through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM ______________________________ TO _______________________________________________________________________________ D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: ________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I”=400’. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE __________ Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. __________ Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. __________ 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 __________ 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 ___________ 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. ___________ Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) a nd 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 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 5 archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference F.A.C. Chapter 163-3177 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: ___________Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? IF so, identify area located in ACSC. ___________Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? ___________Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? 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. __________ Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? 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. 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: __________ Potable Water __________ Sanitary Sewer __________ Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ __________ Drainage __________ Solid Waste __________ 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. ________ 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. ________ Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 6 ______ Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). ______ Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) ______ Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable ______ Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable ______ High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ______ $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) ______ $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) ______ Proof of ownership (copy of deed) ______ Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) ______ 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. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 8 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 10 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) PROPOSED PRESERVE AREA AREA = 28,897 SF AREA = 0.66 AC PROPOSED CHURCH 22ND AVENUE NE (COUNTY ROW)8TH STREET NE(COUNTY ROW)WATER MANAGEMENT WATER MANAGEMENT75' WIDE NATIVE BUFFER (TYPE "B" SCREENING)10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER75' WIDE NATIVE BUFFER(TYPE "B" SCREENING)10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING 50' ROADWAY EASEMENT PRESERVE BOUNDARY EX. PROPERTY LINE PRESERVE BOUNDARY EDGE OF EX. ASPHALT PROPOSED SEPTIC FIELD LOCATION PROPOSED POTABLE WELL LOCATION EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK EXISTING 30' ROADWAY EASEMENT PROPOSED SIDEWALK CONNECTION PROPOSED DUMPSTER AND RECYCLING AREA GRASS PARKING AREA GRASS PARKING AREA WATER MANAGEMENTWATER MANAGEMENT 117' 25' PRESERVE SETBACK EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK 00 100'50' SCALE: 1" = 100' N IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:1 OF 2 DATE:08/24/2021 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:2 OF 2 DATE:08/24/2021 PARKING SUMMARY BUILDING USE # OF SEATS MINIMUM REQUIRED SPACES SPACES REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED CHURCH 100 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 3 SPACES FOR EACH 7 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 42.9 = 43 45 (2 HC SPACES) NOTE PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT PER SECTION 4.05.04.g. TABLE 17 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LDC. HANDICAP SPACES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BASED ON COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 4.05.07 TABLE 19. GENERAL NOTES: 1.VEGETATION WITHIN THE PRESERVE WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 3.05.07. 2.A SIDEWALK ALONG 22ND AVENUE NE WILL BE PROVIDED AND WILL CONNECT TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK ALONG 8TH STREET NE. 3.THESE PLANS ARE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTING AND ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. 4.PER SECTION 4.05.02.B.1.A.III. OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, “UP TO 70 PERCENT OF THE PARKING SPACES FOR HOUSES OF WORSHIP AND SCHOOLS MAY BE SURFACED WITH GRASS OR LAWN, WHEN THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE DETERMINES THAT THE PAVING OF SOME OR ALL PARKING SPACES FOR HOUSES OF WORSHIP AND SCHOOLS WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.”. THIS PROJECT WILL BE PROVIDING GRASS PARKING FOR A MINIMUM OF 25% OF THE PROPOSED PARKING SPACES. PRESERVE AREA CALCULATION TOTAL SITE AREA 224,270 SF = 5.15 AC NATIVE VEGETATION 4.32 AC PRESERVE REQUIREMENT 15% REQUIRED PRESERVE 28,314 SF = 0.65 AC PROVIDED PRESERVE 28,897 SF = 0.66 AC ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE ZONING LAND USE N ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL S ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL E ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL W ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL PLANNING NOTES CURRENT ZONING E PROPOSED ZONING E / CONDITIONAL USE CURRENT LAND USE UNDEVELOPED FUTURE LAND USE ESTATES DESIGNATION PROPOSED LAND USE CHURCH NUMBER OF SEATS 100 SEATS MAXIMUM CHURCH SQUARE FOOTAGE 5,000 SF MAXIMUM ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT MAXIMUM ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT UTILITY NOTE: POTABLE WATER WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE GROUND WATER WELL AND SANITARY SEWER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE SEPTIC TANK AND DRAIN FIELD. LOCATIONS OF POTABLE WATER WELL AND SEPTIC TANK WILL BE DETERMINED UPON FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ARE THEREFORE NOT SHOWN ON THIS CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN. REQUIRED SETBACKS SUMMARY REQUIRED BUILDING FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' SIDE SETBACK 30' REAR SETBACK 75' PRESERVE PRINCIPAL SETBACK 25' ACCESSORY SETBACK 10' LAND USE SUMMARY ACRES % OF SITE WATER MANAGEMENT +/- 0.25 4.8% PERIMETER BUFFERS +/- 1.55 30.1% PAVEMENT / SIDEWALK +/- 0.50 9.7% BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA +/- 0.12 2.3% PRESERVE AREA +/- 0.66 12.8% MISC. OPEN SPACE +/- 2.07 40.3% TOTAL SITE AREA +/- 5.15 100% 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 1 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Exhibit IVB – Proposed Language Revise the GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN *** *** *** *** *** Text Break *** *** *** *** *** RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES SUB-ELEMENT *** *** *** *** *** Text Break *** *** *** *** *** B. LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCTRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** Text Break *** *** *** *** *** 1. ESTATES DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** Text Break *** *** *** *** *** A. Estates – Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** Text Break *** *** *** *** *** 6. 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict [Beginning Page 16] The 8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict is located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE, consists of 5.15 acres, and comprises Golden Gate Estates Unit 23 TR 133, less E 350ft and Golden Gate Est Unit 23 E 350ft of TR 133. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for churches and other places of worship and their related uses. The following use is permitted within the Subdistrict through the conditional use process: (a) Churches and other places of worship The following church-related uses are prohibited within the Subdistrict: (a) Day care centers (b) Private schools (c) Soup kitchens (d) Homeless shelters The maximum total floor area allowed in this Subdistrict is 5,000 square feet, including no more than 100 seats. The maximum height of buildings shall be 30 feet. Architectural features such as steeples may be a maximum height of 50 feet. The project will provide an enhanced landscape buffer in lieu of a masonry wall required between the adjacent residential properties and the subject property by Section 5.03.02.H.1.a. of the Land 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 2 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Development Code. To the north and the west, the enhanced landscape buffer will be provided with supplemental plantings within the 75’ native vegetation buffer. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 384Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 385Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) BL (Blasting Permit) BD (Boat Dock Extension) Carnival/Circus Permit CU (Conditional Use) EXP (Excavation Permit) FP (Final Plat LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) PNC (Project Name Change) PPL (Plans & Plat Review) PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) PUD Rezone RZ (Standard Rezone) SDP (Site Development Plan) SDPA (SDP Amendment) SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP) SIP (Site Im provement Plan) SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP) SNR (Street Name Change) SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted) TDR (Transfer of Development Rights) VA (Variance) VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit) VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit) OTHER LEGAL DESCRIPT ION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only) LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable) SDP - or AR or PL # SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2 S26 T48 R27 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 Please Return Approved Checklist By: Email Personally picked up Applicant Name: Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED Fax Email/Fax:Phone: Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2 37750560009 37750560106 01/30/2020 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 3/29/2019 Print Map maps.collierappraiser.com/mapprint.aspx?pagetitle=Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel - Golden Gate&orient=LANDSCAPE&paper=LETTER&minX=461611.0…1/1 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel -Golden Gate Folio Number: 37750560009 Name: IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL INC Street# & Name: Build# / Unit#: 133 / 0 Legal Description: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 23 E 350FT OF TR 133 2004. Collier County Property Appraiser. While the Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-to-date information, no warranties expressed or implied are provided for the data herein, its use, or its interpretation. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 3/29/2019 Print Map maps.collierappraiser.com/mapprint.aspx?pagetitle=&orient=LANDSCAPE&paper=LETTER&minX=461611.019566768&minY=704155.930133706&m…1/1 Folio Number: 37750560106 Name: IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL INC Street# & Name: Build# / Unit#: 133 / 1 Legal Description: GOLEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 23 TR 133, LESS E 350FT 2004. Collier County Property Appraiser. While the Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-to-date information, no warranties expressed or implied are provided for the data herein, its use, or its interpretation. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 1 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Data & Needs Analysis To justify the need for a Future Land Use designation modification, a data and needs analysis review has been performed. This analysis identifies justifications to demonstrate the requested amendment is warranted. Criteria for this analysis include proximity of the local church’s parishioners, properties close to arterial and collector roadways, and existing availability of potential development sites between 5 and 7.5 acres from Interstate-75 (as the western boundary), to ten miles east (as the eastern boundary), to Golden Gate Parkway (as the southern boundary), to the Collier and Lee County border (as the northern boundary). The limiting criteria were selected based on vacancy, size, current market value of the land, and proximity to existing parishioners. The subject property, as well as any alternative sites, have been evaluated to ensure that the existing and future demographics will support the proposed land use based on the following: • Vicinity to existing local parishioners. • Property availability and compatibility with the proposed development. • Location of Alternative Facilities offering similar traditional worshiping opportunities. Vicinity to Existing Local Parishioners Demographic information is an indicator of demand for proposed services that currently do not exist. Data and statistics for the data analysis were obtained from the Church/applicant. Please refer to Exhibit H, the Adjacent Congressional Members Map. In this case, the parishioners are local to the area and as such, there will be li ttle to no impact to the expected population. Location of Alternative Facilities Offering Similar Traditional Worshiping Opportunities In defining a warranted use for the requested service, locations of existing facilities with identical or similar services provided were identified. Please refer to Exhibit I, Existing Adjacent Pentecostes Churches Map. The results are also listed below, along with the respective addresses and distance from the proposed church location. 1. Iglesia Christiana Pentecostes 6028 Radio Road, Naples, FL 34104 (12 mi) 2. Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel (Different Pastor) 757 107th Ave N, Naples, FL 34108 (13 mi) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 2 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Property Availability Due to the specific nature of the proposed church building, minimum criteria and constraints have been established in defining potential available sites. The key criteria for site development are shown below: • Minimum 5 acres in size • Maximum 7.5 acres in size • A maximum of 10 miles east of Interstate 75, north of Golden Gate Pkwy within Collier County • Located within 1 mile of an Arterial or Collector road • Sale Price of less than or equal to $40,000.00 per acre • Not located on a drainage canal In making the decision to proceed with the subject site (+/-5.15-acre property), all viable sites that are available were reviewed and discussed. Due to the limited amount of undeveloped properties meeting the criteria (including local PUD’s with the church use permitted), few options existed. Please reference the enclosed Available Properties Map, Exhibit F, for a location map. Available properties are as follows: s Option #1 Folio Number(s): 37541600000 Address/Legal Description: 680 16th Ave NW, Naples, FL 34120 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) Current Sale Price: $165,000 (as of 02/12/2020) The site is located on the south side of 16th Ave NW, generally 0.8 miles west of the intersection of Wilson Blvd N and 16th Ave N. Reference the location map provided within Exhibit F. Option #2 Folio Number(s): 37596440008 Address/Legal Description: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 20 TR 98 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) Current Sale Price: $199,000 (as of 02/12/2020) The site is located on the north side of 22nd Ave N, approximately 0.35 miles west of the intersection of Wilson Blvd N and 22nd Ave NW. Reference the location map provided within Exhibit F. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 3 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Option #3 Folio Number(s): 38501000005 Address/Legal Description: 3GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 36 TR 23 OR 1264 PG 1190 Parcel Size: 5.30 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) Current Sale Price: $280,000 (as of 02/12/2020) The site is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Wilson Blvd N and 33rd Ave NE. The site is located approximately 1.25 miles north of Immokalee Rd. Reference the location map provided within Exhibit F. Alternative Site Analysis To further identify a need for the Future Land Use Element and Map Designation amendment of the subject property, an alternative site analysis was completed. The analysis was based on the currently available properties, the locational and dimensional features of the subject properties, along with the required zoning designations required for future development of the proposed church use. The following criteria identify the unique features associated with the subject property to perform a data and analysis review required to support the Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA). Within the analysis, the subject property (+/- 5.15 acres) and the alternative options were evaluated by their consistency with the following criteria: • Minimum size of 5 acres • Maximum size of 7.5 acres • A maximum of 10 miles east of Interstate 75, north of Golden Gate Pkwy within Collier County • Located within 1 mile of an Arterial or Collector road • Sale Price of less than or equal to $40,000.00 per acre • Not located on a drainage canal These specific criteria were determined in order to identify alternative sites that may be similar to the proposed property to develop and operate the proposed church use. The property acreage and property dimensions have been chosen to ensure the proposed church will be able to provide the same, or better, net developable area the master concept plan illustrates for the proposed church building and associated infrastructure. Per the current Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy, a survey was conducted regarding the allowance of additional conditional uses in the Rural Estates. Most individuals polled that additional conditional uses should be allowed at more locations within the Rural Estates, and specifically near arterial intersections. Therefore, the locality of the site near an arterial or collector roadway specifically identifies a location that is compatible with the present Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy. Please refer to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy included in Exhibit G. Additionally, the location near an arterial and/or collector road will provide the proposed church with increased vehicular access by comparison to those sites without access to major roadways. By defining the area of development east of Interstate 75 and north of Golden Gate Parkway within Collier County, a site can be identified that will benefit the existing parishioners commute to the proposed church and defines an area that meets the requests of the church. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 4 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com An additional criterion of cost per acre was analyzed. It was determined to be a critical component to determining the available properties as the church operates as a non-for-profit business. Places of worship, specifically the Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel church, do not generate an income that provides the church with a profit. Therefore, affordability of available property to the church is essential. In making the decision to proceed with future development of the subject property, all viable sites that are currently available on the market were reviewed. It is assumed that all undeveloped and/or cleared properties adhere to the criteria of availability with the addition of a Multiple Listing Search (MLS) for properties meeting the identified requirements. Due to the limited amount of available properties, few alternative options exist. Proposed Site Location: Folios #’s: 37750560106 & 37750560009 Address/Legal: GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 23 TR 133, LESS E 350 FT. & GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 23 E 350 FT OF TR 133. Parcel Size: 5.15 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) The proposed site is owned by the applicant. It is currently zoned Estates. Currently, the site is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Upon the successful completion of this GMPA application, the proposed church land use will be found consistent and permitted within the Subdistrict and subsequent zoning. As noted above, in order to develop the property for a church use the applicant is required to file a GMPA and a companion Conditional Use application for the property. The GMPA’s intent is to justify and permit the proposed land use at this location based on a through data analysis. A Conditional Use application will be necessary to develop the site for the church’s facility. This site meets all of the stated criteria and is further justified by the data analysis. Alternate Site Locations: Alternate Site #1: Address: 680 16th Ave NW, Naples, FL 34120 Folio #: 37541600000 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) The property is currently zoned Estates with a lot width of approximately 330 linear feet and acreage of 5.0 acres available for development. This parcel is currently void of any development, is vegetated, and was identified through an MLS search as an available property. This location is located approximately 4,300 feet down 16th Ave NW, a dead-end road. Due to the location, this site would not provide the proposed church visibility as it is near the end of a dead-end residential road. It could be said that this location meets all of the identified criteria, based on the property acreage, the location of the site to an arterial or collector roadway, and the current sale price. However, to develop the site as proposed, the 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 5 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com property would also require a GMPA and Conditional Use Rezone. Additionally, the site appears be have wetlands that cover a majority of the property. The mitigation from the large wetland area would be costly to the church and they would not be able to absorb these costs. When compared to the proposed site location for compatibility and consistency with the determined criteria, the subject site provides more site accessibility and cost-efficiency to develop per the wants and needs of the church. In addition, the proposed site better fits the integrity of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in reference to conditional use properties within the Golden Gate area. Alternate Site #2: Legal Description: GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 20 TR 98 Folio #: 37596440008 Parcel Size: 5.00 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) The property is currently zoned Estates with a lot width of approximately 330 linear feet and acreage of 5.0 acres available for development. This parcel is currently void of any development, is heavily vegetated, and was identified through an MLS search as an available property. This location is located approximately 1,600 feet down 22nd Ave NW, a dead-end road. Due to the alternate site’s location, this site would not provide the proposed church visibility as it is on the north side of a end of a dead-end residential road. This location meets most of the identified criteria, but the sales price is at the maximum considered range for the church at $40,000.00 per acre. This alternate site will also have the additional costs of developing a property with large areas of wetlands. According to the US Fish and Wildlife service National Wetlands Inventory, this site may be approximately covered 85% with wetlands. When comparing this alternate site to the proposed site, it has been determined that the proposed property better fits the needs and wants of the church while also being a more cost-effective property. In addition, the proposed site better fits the integrity of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in reference to conditional use properties within the Golden Gate area. Alternate Site #3: Legal Description: 3GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 36 TR 23 OR 1264 PG 1190 Folio #: 38501000005 Parcel Size: 5.30 Acres Zoning: Estates (E) The property is currently zoned Estates with property frontage along both 33rd Ave NE and Wilson Blvd N. The alternate property is approximate 5.30 acres with 350 feet of frontage along 33rd Ave NE and 650 feet of frontage along Wilson Blvd N. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 6 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com This location is located approximately 4,000 feet down 33rd Ave NE and on the corner of 33rd Ave NE and Wilson Blvd N. 33rd Ave NE is a residential and low traffic volume road. Due to the alternate site’s location, this site would not provide the church visibility as it is away from a main intersection and on the north side on a low volume residential road. This location meets most of the identified criteria, but the sale price is over the maximum of $40,000.00 per acre at approximately $52,800 per acre. Due to this criterion alone, the church congregation has decided that this property would not be suitable for the proposed church location. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Page 7 of 7 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Alternative Site Analysis Table CRITERIA PROPOSED SITE LOCATION (FOLIO’S 37750560106 & 37750560009) ALT. SITE 1 (37541600000) ALT. SITE 2 (37596440008) ALT. SITE 3 (38501000005) PROPERTY SIZE OF 5- 7.5 ACRES +/- 5.15 ACRES +/- 5.00 ACRES +/- 5.00 ACRES +/- 5.30 ACRES SALE PRICE LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO $40,000 PER ACRE SALES PRICE - $31,000 PER ACRE SALES PRICE - $33,000 PER ACRE SALES PRICE - $40,000 PER ACRE SALES PRICE - $52,800 PER ACRE LOCATED WITHIN 1 MILE OF AN ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR ROAD YES YES YES YES MAXIMUM 10 MILES EAST OF I-75, NORTH OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY, AND WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY YES YES YES YES LOCATED ON A DRAINAGE CANAL/WATERFRONT NO NO NO NO 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page 1 of 1 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Exhibit A – Professional Consultants Planning/Project Management: Ronny De Aza, P.E. RDA Consulting Engineers 800 Harbour Drive, Suite #2C Naples, FL 34135 (O) 239-649-1551 (F) 239-649-7112 RonnyDeAza@RDAFL.com Transportation: James M. Banks, P.E. JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. 4711 7th Avenue SW Naples, FL 34119 239-919-2767 Jmbswte@msn.com Environmental: Jeremy Boone Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 (O) 239-304-0030 Jeremyb@eteflorida.com 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) © 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distrib 24TH AVENUE NE20TH AVENUE NE500 FOOTRADIUS22ND AVENUE NE(COUNTY ROW)8TH STREET NE (COUNTY ROW)SUBJECTPROPERTYZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALZONING: E USE: RESIDENTIAL ZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALPROJECT NO.:IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATESURROUNDING ZONING & USE MAPSHEET:RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE #2CNAPLES, FL 34103PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COM1RDA1908400400'200'SCALE: 1" = 400'NSUBJECT ZONING INFORMATIONSUBJECT PROPERTY = 5.15 ACRESEXISTING ZONING = ESTATES (E)EXISTING FLUE = GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLANEXISTING USE = VEGETATED / UNCLEAREDADJACENT PROPERTIES:NORTH ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIALSOUTH ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = VEGETATED / UNCLEAREDEAST ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIALWEST ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIAL9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 413Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Z:\PROJECTS\RDA-2019\RDA19084 - IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - SDP - JORGE MARTIN\01 - AUTOCAD\REV00\PROPOSED GGAMP MAP.DWG 10/4/2019 11:01 AMIGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATEEXHIBIT D - PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAPRDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 2CNAPLES, FLORIDA 34103PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COMPROJECT #:RDA19084PROJECT SITEAREA = 5.15 ACRES9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 414Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page 1 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Exhibit E – Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Potable Water: The property will be serviced by a private onsite potable water well. Fire suppression will also be provided via an onsite private well. Sanitary Sewer: The subject property will be serviced by a private onsite sanitary sewer septic tank and field. Arterial and Collector Roads: Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement prepared by JMB Transportation, Inc. for discussions of the project’s impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project’s radius of development influence. Drainage: The County has adopted a LOS standard for private developments which require development to occur consistent with water quantity and quality standards established in Ordinances 74-50, 90-10, 2001-27, and LDC Ordinance 2004-41, as may be amended. The proposed project will be designed to meet all Collier County and SFWMD design criteria. This project will be permitted through both Collier County and SFWMD (or FDEP 10/2, if possible). Solid Waste: Per Collier County LDC, the adopted LOS for solid waste is two years of lined cell capacity at the previous 3 year average tons per year disposal rate and 10 years of permittable landfill capacity of the disposal rate. The proposed project will adhere to the requirements outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code. The solid waste requirements will be outlined during the SDP application process. Parks, Community and Regional: The proposed church will pay park impact fees to mitigate for their impacts on this public facility. No adverse impacts to community or regional parks will result from the creation of the subdistrict. Schools: The proposed church will pay school impact fees, if necessary, to mitigate for their impacts. No adverse impacts to schools will result from the creation of this subdistrict. 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Page 2 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church GMPA (PL20190001333) Golden Gate Area Master Plan Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis Fire Control and EMS: The proposed church project lies with the North Collier Fire and Rescue District. No significant impacts to the fire control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for EMS and fire service will be determined at the time of SDP application based on the proposed building. Sheriff, Fire Protection, and EMS services location / address of the facilities intended to serve the project are as follows: North Collier Fire and Rescue District Station #10 13240 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34120 Collier County Sheriff Office 3319 Tamiami Trail E Naples, FL 34112 Collier County Sheriff Office District Four Substation 14750 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34120 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL CHURCH GMPA & CUEXHIBIT F - AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIESRDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COMPROJECT #:RDA19084PAGE:1DATE:03/2020IMMOKALEE RDVANDERBILT BEACHPINE RIDGE RDGOLDEN GATE PKWY385010000053759644000837541600000CR 951 GOLDEN GATE BLVDI-75 I-75 IMMOKALEE RD LEGENDDATA ANALYSIS AREADATA ANALYSIS AREADATA ANALYSIS AREADATA ANALYSIS AREASUBJECT PROPERTYAVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE PROPERTIESSUBJECTPROPERTY9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 417Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Ig l esia Pen tecostes Pen i el Adjacent Congres s ional Mem bers within 2 Miles 2 mi N➤➤N © 2018 Google © 2018 Google © 2018 Google 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Ig l esia Pen tecostes Pen i el Adjacent Congres s ional Mem bers within 5 Miles 4 mi N➤➤N © 2018 Google © 2018 Google © 2018 Google 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL CHURCH GMPA & CUEXHIBIT I - EXISTING ADJACENT PENTECOSTES CHURCHESNRDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COMPROJECT #:RDA19084PAGE:1DATE:03/2020IMMOKALEE RDVANDERBILT BEACHPINE RIDGE RDGOLDEN GATE PKWYCR 951 GOLDEN GATE BLVDI-75 I-75 IMMOKALEE RD LEGENDIGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL(UNDER DIFFERENT PASTOR)757 107TH AVE NNAPLES, FL 34108SUBJECT PROPERTYADJACENT PENTECOSTES CHURCHESSUBJECTPROPERTYIGLESIA CHRISTIANA PENTECOSTES6028 RADIO ROADNAPLES, FL 34104EXISTING CHURCH LOCATION(WILL BE RELOCATED TO THE PROPOSED SITE)13260 IMMOKALEE ROADNAPLES, FL 34120I-75RADIO RDIMMOKALEE RD9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 420Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) LAST REVISION: ZONING ___________________ OTHER ___________________SUBDIVISON INDEX ATTEST___________________________CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TWP 48S RNG 27E SEC(S) 27 & 28 MAP NUMBER: BY___________________________CHAIRMAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION 26 24 23 22 20 19 18 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 1 2 1 117 116IMMOKALEE R O A D (C .R . 8 4 6 ) 92 89 88 24TH AVENUE N.W. 22ND AVENUE N.W. 20TH AVENUE N.W. 18TH AVENUE N.W. 84 83 82 81 80 79 78 77 U20 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 6160 59 58 57 56 55 54 5352 51 50 49 48 47 46 4544 43 42 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 JUNG BOULEVARD 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 25 21 17 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 16141140 139 138 137 136 135 134 133 132 131 130 129 128 127 126 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 118115 114 113 112 111 110 109 WILSON BOULEVARD100 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 91 90 87 86 85 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 C A N A L 53 1273536 116 115 114 113 112 111 110 109 108 24TH AVENUE N.E. 22ND AV ENUE N.E . 20TH AVENUE N.E. 18TH AVENUE N.E. 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 99 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 8180 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 7271 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 6362 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 CANALU23 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 JUNG BOULEVARD 44 43 42 41 40 39 3734 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 38 8TH STREET N.E.E 125 124 123 122 121 120 119 118 117 143 142 141 140 139 138 137 136 135 134 133 132 131 130 129 1283,7,101PU PUDPU 2 RANDALL BLVD126 RANDALL BOULEVARD 28 4,10PUDMIR-MARCU5 CENTER(S)LOT 13 3CANAL28 28 28 27 27 27 27 26 3534 26 2 22 1 1 2 1 1 V 6 8,9CU ST/W-1 11 ST/W-4 11 ST/W-4 11 ST/W-4 11 ST/W-4 11 ST/W-2 11 ST/W-3 11 ST/W-3 11 ST/W-1 11 ST/W-2 11 ST/W-3 11 ST/W-3 114 4 23 5 5 5 5 LOT1LOT2LOT3LOT4 $NO. NAME P.B. Pg.1 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 20 7 79, 802 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 23 7 9, 103 UNIT 20, TR 25 REPLAT 20 64 TRACT 3, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 20 REPLAT 62 225 TRACT 4, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 20 REPLAT 64 80678910 GGE04B GGE04D872930 GGE04CGGE04A The Historic/Archaeological Probability Maps are the officialCounty source designating historic or archaeologic resources.ZONING NOTES1 12-23-86 PU-86-202 9-16-86 PU-86-12C3 6-17-86 R-86-3 86-254 9-8-98 PUD-98-4 98-725 3-13-01 CU-00-17 01-806 10-14-03 V-03-AR-4243 03-3507 3-15-04 SUNSETTED8 4-26-05 CU-04-AR-6090 05-1719 6-10-08 CUE-08-AR-12816 08-17210 4-14-09 ZLTRA-09-AR-14174 09-9911 9-25-12 LDC ORD. 12-38NO. NAME P.B. Pg.11121314151617181920 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A PAGE OF THEOFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS REFERRED TO AND ADOPTEDBY REFERENCE BY ORDINANCE NO. 04-41 OF THECOUNTY OF COLLIER, FLORIDA, ADOPTED JUNE 22, 2004,AS AMENDED BY THE ZONING NOTES AND SUBDIVISIONINDEX REFERENCED HEREON. INDICATES SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY 482728 GGE05C 482728GGE05B 0 800 SCALE9/6/189.A.2.c Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 1 inch = 100' ft. GRAPHIC SCALE 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 1 inch = 100' ft. GRAPHIC SCALE 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) IMMOKALEE PENIEL CHURCH Environmental Data for CU SECTIONS 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared For: Prepared By: September 16, 2019 Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com EXHIBITS Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Aerial FLUCCS Map Figure 3 Existing Native Vegetation Figure 4 Site Plan with Preserve Figure 5 Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands Figure 6 Florida Black Bear Map APPENDICES APPENDIX A Collier County CU Pre-App Notes APPENDIX B Protected Species Survey APPENDIX C Earth Tech Environmental Staff Qualifications 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00) for a Conditional Use (CU) to the Immokalee Peniel Church parcel (Subject Property). This information is in response to the items in the CU Pre-Application Notes as provided by Collier County (see Appendix A). PROPERTY LOCATION The Subject Property for this report consists of two (2) adjacent parcels (Folio #’s 37750560106 & 37750560009). The Subject Property is located on the north side of 22nd Ave NE and immediately west of 8th St NE in Collier County. According to the Collier County Property Appraiser’s website, the Subject Property’s combined acreage is approximately 5.15 acres. See Figure 1 below for a location map. Figure 1. Location Map 3 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST- CONDITIONAL USE See page 7 of Collier County Pre-App Notes 1. Is the project in compliance with the overlays, districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties? (CON, ST, PUD, RLSA, RFMU, etc.) (LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00) Not in CV Library The project will be a GMPA and will be in compliance with zoning. 2. Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser’s office) and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G. 1. Application Contents #24). FLUCCS Overlay -P627 See Figure 2, Aerial FLUCCS Map and vegetation descriptions below. Figure 2. Aerial FLUCCS Map 4 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. Existing Native Vegetation Based on the FLUCCS classification system, the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 411-E1 Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) 3.51 624- E2 Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) 0.81 814 Roadway 0.82 Site Total: 5.15 E1 = Exotics <25% of total cover E2 = Exotics 26-50% of total cover E3 = Exotics 51-75% of total cover E4 = Exotics >75% of total cover FLUCCS 411-E1, Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) This community comprises the majority of the property. Canopy vegetation consists mostly of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The mid-story is sparse, largely containing saw palmetto with lesser amounts of gallberry (Ilex glabra), rusty staggerbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). The groundcover is largely covered by a dense blanket of grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), lovevine (Cassytha filiformis), and a thick layer pine needles. Exotic coverage is relatively low with the ecotone displaying higher abundances of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). 5 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com FLUCCS 624-E2, Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) This community is found on the southeast portion of the property. It is dominated by large cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm, and sparse slash pine in the canopy. The mid-story is dominated by dense Brazilian pepper with lesser amounts of myrsine (Myrsine cubana) and cabbage palm. Groundcover contains minimal diversity and consists primarily of swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum). Exotic coverage is moderate consisting primarily of dense Brazilian pepper. FLUCCS 814, Roadways Both 8th St NE and 22nd Ave NE along with their associated right-of-way’s are found on the eastern and southern portion of the property. 3. Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as “Preserve” on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546 See Figure 4 below, Site Plan. Figure 4. Site Plan with Preserve 4. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations (LDC 6 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H 1.d-e). Preserve Calculation – P547. 15% of existing native vegetation to be preserved. The total existing native vegetation on the site is 4.33 acres. The preserve requirement is 15%. 0.15 * 4.33 = 0.65 acres. The proposed site plan currently depicts a 0.81-acre preserve, which exceeds the requirement (preserve setback was NOT included in preserve calculation). See Figures 3 & 4. 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.1.b. Preserve Width – P603 See engineer’s plan set. 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4). Preserve Selection- P550 The site is bordered by roads to the south and the east, and residential development to the north and west. The preserve placement was selected based on existing wetlands (the highest quality habitat) on site. See Figures 3 & 4. 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25’ from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10’ of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve (i.e. stem wall or berm around the wetland preserve). Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25’. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.). Preserve Setback – New See engineer’s plan set. 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where EIS in not required, when so warranted. (LDC 10.02.02.A.2.f) See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with GMPs, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high-water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required – P 522 See Appendix C, ETE Staff Qualifications for author credentials. 10. Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2) Master Plan Contents-P626. With Calculations. See engineer’s plan set. 7 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST – The environmental data requirements can be found in LDC section 3.08.00 See Pages 8-10 of Collier County Pre-App Notes 1. Provide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. Fee will be provided upon submittal. 2. WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT? Preparation of Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. See Appendix C, ETE Staff Qualifications for author credentials. 3. Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and include this information on the SOP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval. For sites in the RFMU district, provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff, consistent with State regulation. See Figure 5, Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands map and vegetation descriptions above. 8 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 5. Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands 7. Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. 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. Please include review for bonneted bat. See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. The Subject Property falls within the Florida Bonneted Bat (FBB) Consultation Area and FBB Focal Area. During the species survey, no potential bat cavities were observed. The 5.15-acre property is surrounded by development on all sides. Prior to any development or permitting activities, the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) may require acoustic surveys to further determine presence or absence of FBB roosts or foraging on the property. 8. Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3 .04.03 9 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. Common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) and butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis) were observed on the Subject Property. Typically, individual plants are relocated from proposed impact areas into onsite (or offsite) preserves prior to construction. 9. Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed species are utilizing the site or where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLU CFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Include review for black bear activity in and around the subject property and provide exhibit. A Panther Mitigation Analysis and Wood Stork Foraging Analysis will be provided during permitting, if warranted. The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black Bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 6 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC-approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. Figure 6. Florida Black Bear Information 10 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 10. 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 final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. See Figures 2 & 5 above. 14. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. N/A 16. Identify any Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones (WRM-ST) within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat construction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUs, provide a separate site plan or zoning map with the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified. Clearly provide info regarding which WRM-ST zone property is located. N/A 17. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed Stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management Regulations of 3.07.00. See engineer’s plan set. 20. The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project’s compliance with LDC and GMP requirements. (LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f) a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See this document. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See below. 11 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com c.Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirements in the CCME and LDC. See Figure 3, Site Plan and native vegetation/preserve narrative above. d.Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project’s design compensates for wetland impacts. Address each one. See Figure 5, Wetland Map above. The wetlands will be preserved; no wetland impacts are associated with the project. e.Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. The preserve is designed on the wetland to reduce impacts to listed species. See Appendix B - Protected Species Survey. CCME 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… Per Collier County, the native vegetation requirement is 15%. The project is proposing to preserve 0.81 acres. See Figure 4 above. The total existing native vegetation on the site is 4.33 acres. The preserve requirement is 15%. 0.15 * 4.33 = 0.65 acres. The proposed site plan currently depicts 0.81 acres preserve. See Figure 4. No wetland impacts are occurring onsite, so no mitigation is required. All onsite wetlands will be preserved. CCME GOAL 7: TO PROTECT AND CONSERVE THE COUNTY’S FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE. OBJECTIVE 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses are directed away from listed species and their habitats… No listed species have been identified on the Subject Property. See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. A Panther Mitigation Analysis and Wood Stork Foraging Analysis will be provided during permitting, if warranted. The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black Bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 5 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC-approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. 12 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX A Collier County CU Pre-App Notes 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX B Protected Species Survey 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) IMMOKALEE PENIEL CHURCH Protected Species Survey SECTIONS 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 34120 Prepared For: Prepared By: August 23, 2019 RDA Consulting Engineers c/o Richard Dubois 790 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C Naples, FL 34103 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................. 3 2.0 PROPERTY LOCATION ................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS ................................................................................... 3 4.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 4 5.0 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 15 EXHIBITS Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Aerial Map Figure 3 FLUCCS Map with Aerial Figure 4 FLUCCS Map Figure 5 Transect Map & Field Results Figure 6 Florida Bonneted Bat Consultation Area Figure 7 Wood Stork Information Figure 8 Florida Panther Information Figure 9 Black Bear Information 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 1.0 INTRODUCTION Earth Tech Environmental (ETE) conducted a search for listed species on the property referred to as the Immokalee Peniel Church parcel (Subject Property) prior to development. This assessment was conducted by ETE on July 24, 2019 to evaluate the Subject Property for the potential presence of listed species of concern based on the determined Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) vegetation. 2.0 PROPERTY LOCATION The Subject Property for this report consists of two (2) adjacent parcels (Folio #’s 37750560106 & 37750560009). The Subject Property is located on the north side of 22nd Ave NE and just west of 8th St NE in Collier County. According to the Collier County Property Appraiser’s website, the Subject Property’s combined acreage is approximately 5.15 acres. See Figure 1 below for a location map. Figure 1. Site Location Map 3.0 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 2019) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 3 & 3 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 4). 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”, December 2018. “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 3 of this report for the species list that applies to the FLUCCS communities associated with the Subject 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 (see Figure 5). 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, which are flagged in the field and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on the Subject Property (see Table 3), particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of listed plant species such as wild pine, twisted air plants, and butterfly orchids. The presence and absence of listed animal species such as Big Cypress fox squirrel, gopher tortoise, Florida bonneted bat, wood stork, and Florida panther were also considered. Approximately four and a half (4.5) man-hours were logged on the Subject Property during this species survey (see Table 1). 4.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the low 90’s. Cloud cover was absent. The Subject Property is vacant and vegetated, consisting of upland and wetland communities. Moderate exotic vegetation is present throughout the property. The property is surrounded by roads and residential development on all sides. See Figure 2 below for an aerial map. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: North Residential East 8th St NE/Residential South 22nd Ave NE/Vacant Residential West Residential TABLE 1. FIELD TIME SPENT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DATE START TIME END TIME NO. ECOLOGISTS MAN HOURS TASK July 24, 2019 1:00 pm 2:30 pm 3 4.5 Species Survey Fieldwork 4 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 2. Aerial Map Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS maps below (Figures 3 and 4). See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. The Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council’s (FLEPPC) list of invasive species contains Category 1 species that may be found on the Subject Property. Category 1 species are invasive exotics that are altering native plant communities by displacing native species, changing community structures or ecological functions, or hybridizing with natives (FLEPPC). A significant factor in mapping vegetative associations and local habitats is the invasion of these species such as Brazilian pepper, ear leaf acacia, melaleuca, Caesar weed, and air potato. Levels of exotic density were mapped by using field observations and photo interpretation as shown in Figure 3. Modifiers, or “E” designators, are appended to the FLUCCS codes to indicate the approximate density of exotics in the canopy and/or sub-canopy. 5 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 466 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 2. ACREAGE PER FLUCCS COMMUNITY FLUCCS CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 411-E1 Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) 3.51 624- E2 Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) 0.81 814 Roadway 0.82 Site Total: 5.15 E1 = Exotics <25% of total cover E2 = Exotics 26-50% of total cover E3 = Exotics 51-75% of total cover E4 = Exotics >75% of total cover Figure 3. FLUCCS Map with Aerial 6 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. FLUCCS Map FLUCCS 411-E1, Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) This community dominates the majority of the property. Canopy vegetation consists mostly of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The mid-story is sparse, largely containing saw palmetto with lesser amounts of gallberry (Ilex glabra), rusty staggerbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). The groundcover is largely covered by a dense blanket of grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), lovevine (Cassytha filiformis), and a thick layer of pine needles. Exotic coverage is relatively low with the ecotone displaying higher abundances of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). FLUCCS 624-E2, Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) This community is found on the southeast portion of the property. It is dominated by large cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm, and sparse slash pine, in the canopy. The mid-story is dominated by dense Brazilian pepper with lesser amounts of myrsine (Myrsine cubana) and cabbage palm. Groundcover contains minimal diversity and consists primarily of swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum). Exotic coverage is moderate consisting primarily of dense Brazilian pepper. FLUCCS 814, Roadways This community along the eastern and southern portions of the property and include 8th St NE and 22nd Ave NE along with their associated right-of-way’s. The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown below in Table 3. 7 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 3. PROTECTED SPECIES LIST ACCORDING TO FLUCCS CATEGORY FLUCCS POTENTIAL LISTED SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME DESIGNATED STATUS FWC OR FDACS FWS 411 Beautiful Pawpaw Deeringothamnus rugelii var. pulchellus E E Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia T - Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon corais couperi T T Fakahatchee Burmannia Burmannia flava E - Florida Coontie Zamia integrifolia CE - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Gopher Tortoise Gopherus polyphemus T - Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis E E Satinleaf Chrysophyllum oliviforme T - Southeastern American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus T - Twisted Air Plant Tillandsia flexuosa T - 624 American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis SSC T(S/A) Butterfly Orchid Encyclia tampensis CE - Common Wild Pine Tillandsia fasciculata E - Everglades Mink Mustela vison evergladensis T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor T - Wood Stork Mycteria americana T T 814 NONE - - - Abbreviations Agencies: Status: FDACS = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services CE = Commercially Exploited FWC = Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission E = Endangered FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service SSC = Species of Special Concern T = Threatened T(S/A) = Threatened/Similarity of Appearance 8 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 5.0 RESULTS All relevant species observed on the Subject Property are detailed in Table 4 and any protected species observed are specifically noted. See Figure 5 below for transect and field results. Figure 5. Transect Map & Field Results 9 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 470 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 4. SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME OBSERVATIONS LISTED SPECIES? STATUS Birds Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata DV N - Red-Bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus DV N - Mammals NONE - - - - Reptiles NONE - - - - Amphibians NONE - - - - Plants Butterfly Orchid Encyclia tampensis DV N CE Common Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciculata DV Y SE * = protected species Abbreviations Observations:Observations: Status: C = Cavity N = Nest CE = Commercially Exploited DB = Day Bed OH = Observed Hole/Burrow FE = Federally Endangered DV = Direct Visual OT = Observed Tracks FT = Federally Threatened HV = Heard Vocalization(s)R = Remains SE = State Endangered MT = Marked Tree S = Scat SSC = Species of Special Concern ST = State Threatened Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the Subject Property: Listed Plants Common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) and butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis) were observed on the Subject Property. Typically, individual plants are relocated from proposed impact areas into onsite (or offsite) preserves prior to construction. One nest was observed approximately 25 feet high in a living cypress tree in the wetland area near the southern property boundary. No species were observed utilizing the nest and it is inconclusive the species that built it. The groundcover below the nest is heavily invaded with Brazilian pepper. The site does have community types in which protected species could reside. During permitting, the following listed species concerns may be raised by the agencies: 10 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 471 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 6. Florida Bonneted Bat Consultation Area Florida Bonneted Bat (Eumops floridana) The Subject Property falls within the Florida Bonneted Bat (FBB) Consultation Area and FBB Focal Area (see Figure 6 above). During the species survey, no potential bat cavities were observed. The 5.15-acre property is surrounded by development on all sides. Prior to any development or permitting activities, the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) may require acoustic surveys to further determine presence or absence of FBB roosts or foraging on the property. 11 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 472 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 7. Wood Stork Information Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) The Subject Property falls within the core foraging area (estimated at 18.6 miles) of at least two (2) wood stork colonies in Collier County. See Figure 7 above for wood stork colony and foraging information as it relates to the property. The dense/overgrown nature of the wetland habitat on the property likely precludes wood stork foraging. Consultation with USFWS will likely not be necessary for wood stork and wood stork foraging. 12 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 473 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 8. Florida Panther Information Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) The property does fall within the USFWS Florida panther habitat zones and consultation areas. See Figure 8 for Florida panther information as it relates to the Subject Property. Consultation with the USFWS will likely be necessary for Florida panther. 13 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 474 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 9. Black Bear Information Florida Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black Bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 9 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC- approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. 14 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 6.0 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 December 2018. https://myfwc.com/media/1945/threatend-endangered-species.pdf http://myfwc.com/imperiledspecies/ 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 15 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX C Earth Tech Environmental Staff Qualifications 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com Mr. Boone joined Earth Tech Environmental, LLC (ETE) in 2014 as a GIS Specialist, and currently specializes in various Environmental Permitting Processes. As a Permitting Specialist, Jeremy fulfills duties in environmental consulting, residential and commercial ERP permitting, wetland & wildlife monitoring, and helps oversee general GIS operations. Relevant Experience Jeremy has an extensive background in the successful implementation of complex calculations, aerial mapping, digitization, drafting design and illustration, while ensuring production of the highest quality products for all clients. Mr. Boone is also experienced in the use of advanced GPS systems, while safeguarding the highest accuracy standards through the use of TerraSync software and Trimble GeoXH/7X equipment. Since 2006, he has also specialized in producing maps and exhibits in various environmental, engineering and architectural disciplines which include land development, water resources, surveying/mapping, drafting, environmental services and utilities. Mr. Boone also possesses broad-based customer service experience in both the private and public sectors, and he also serves as a certified Spanish interpreter. Jeremy’s work experience includes: Wetland Jurisdictional Determinations Project Management/Coordination Vegetation and Habitat Mapping Bonneted Bat Cavity Surveys GIS Mapping & Exhibits Gopher Tortoise Surveys & Permitting Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Listed Species Management Plans Digitizing Aerial Signatures Monitoring Well Installation Cross Section & Profile Mapping Wetland & Water Level Monitoring UMAM Mitigation Assessments Turbidity Sampling and Monitoring Protected Species Surveys Water Use Monitoring and Compliance On-Site Inspections Flow Meter Calibrations Post Permit Compliance Delineation for Site Clearing Due Diligence Reports Georeferencing Imagery (SID, TIF, JPG) Native Vegetation Restoration Planning Isometric & 3D Rendering Exotic Plant Removal & Treatment Ecological Assessments Native Vegetation Planting & Installation Drone Mapping and Photography Preserve Management Plans Wildfire Assessments GPS Collection & Processing Mangrove Monitoring Relevant Certifications/Credentials Wetland Delineation, Plant Identification & Hydric Soils, SWFAEP, 2017 Notary Public, State of Florida, 2015 Spanish Translator, Translation Professionals, 2011 Map 3D 2007 Essentials, CADD Centers of Florida, 2007 Custom Civil 3D, CADD CENTERS of Florida, 2007 JEREMY BOONE Environmental Permitting Specialist e: jeremyb@eteflorida.com t: 239.304.0030 m: 239.771.7325 Years’ Experience 13 years Education/Training B.S. Digital Entertainment Design Full Sail University (2016) Implementation of Geodatabases ESRI (2014) AutoCAD for Residential Architecture Edison State College (2009) High School Diploma Charter High School for Architecture + Design (2006) Professional Affiliations Florida Association of Environmental Professionals (FAEP) Software Experience ArcGIS ArcView ArcMap GeoDatabases AutoCAD CAD Raster Design Land Desktop Land Enabled Map Civil 3D Map3D GPS GeoXH/XT/7X ArcPAD Terrasync 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) AUSTON GERMANO Ecologist e: austong@eteflorida.com t: 239.304.0030 m: 214.755.7412 Years' Experience 6 years Education/Training B.A. Environmental Studies Florida Gulf Coast University Mr. Germano joined Earth Tech Environmental, LLC (ETE) in 2014. He has gained a vast array of experience in a broad range of ecological restoration and consulting work. This experience includes exotic species removals, littoral shelf plantings, vegetation and habitat mapping, protected species surveys, vegetation monitoring surveys, monitoring well installation/maintenance, water monitoring events, and GIS mapping. Relevant Experience Auston has worked for Florida Gulf Coast University Grounds Department where he was responsible for supervising and assisting a Department of Corrections work crew in the restoration and mitigation of the natural areas on the FGCU campus. This has provided Auston with valuable experience in crew leadership and the supervised management and restoration of South Florida’s natural areas. Auston's work experience includes: (2014) Professional Affiliations Florida Association of Environmental Professionals (FAEP) Project Management Exotic Species Removal Native Vegetation Restoration Planting Vegetation & Habitat Mapping Monitoring Well Installation Bald Eagle Monitoring Protected Species Surveys GIS Mapping Wetland Jurisdictional Delineations Gopher Tortoise Surveys/Permitting/ Relocation Landscaping Turbidity Monitoring Water Chloride Monitoring Relevant Certifications/Credentials Waste Management Mangrove Trimming Urban Areas Weed Control Recreation Field Maintenance Property Survey and Staking Limited Bathometric Mapping Irrigation Maintenance Shorebird Monitoring Seagrass Monitoring Mangrove/Vegetation Monitoring Flow Meter Accuracy Calibrations Limited Swale Construction Soil/ Sediment Testing Certified Environmental Scientist #11866017785190603, National Registry of Environmental Professionals, 2019 Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent #GTA-17-00025A, Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission, 2017 Commercial Applicator License #CM23746, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 2015 State of Florida Department of Corrections Training Certification, October 2014 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 480Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 481Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 482Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 483Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.cPacket Pg. 484Attachment: GMPA Application - Whole Package (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com April 29, 2021 at 6:00 PM Neighborhood Information Meeting Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 13260 Immokalee Road, Suite 7 Naples, FL 34120 Agenda for Neighborhood Information Meeting Meeting Purpose: This Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is being held to discuss the formal application that has been submitted to Collier County for approval of a request for a Conditional Use (CU) and a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a church, religious facility, or place of worship in the E, Estates Zoning District. (CU-PL20190001326 & GMPA-PL20190001333) The subject property is located on the northwest corner of 8th St NE and 22nd Ave NE at parcel numbers 37750560106 & 37750560009. An address has not yet been assigned for these two parcels. Facilitators: Ronny De Aza, P.E. RDA Consulting Engineering, LLC. 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: (239) 649-1551 Email: Info@rdafl.com & Pastor Jorge Martin Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel 757 107th Ave North Naples, FL 34108 Phone: (239) 596-2556 Email: pbendicion@yahoo.com Schedule: 6:00 PM – 6:15 PM Project Introduction and Overview of Proposed Church Site Plan 6:15 PM – 7:00 PM Discussion of Church Project with Community Members 7:00 PM Conclusions and Summary Business and property owners, residents, and visitors; thank you for your time attending this NIM and providing input on the proposed project. If you have any additional questions or comments, please reach out to the email address or phone number listed above. 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: NIM Agenda and Site Plan (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) WATER MANAGEMENT PROPOSED PRESERVE AREA AREA = 33,974 SF AREA = 0.78 AC PROPOSED CHURCH 15' TYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING 50' ROADWAY EASEMENT 22ND AVENUE NE (COUNTY ROW)8TH STREET NE(COUNTY ROW)30' SIDE SETBACK 75'REAR SETBACK122' EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK PRESERVE BOUNDARY EX. PROPERTY LINE PRESERVE BOUNDARY EDGE OF EX. ASPHALT PROPOSED DUMPSTER AND RECYCLING AREA PROPOSED SEPTIC FIELD LOCATION PROPOSED POTABLE WELL LOCATION EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK 10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER37.5' FRONT SETBACK15' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFEREXISTING 30' ROADWAY EASEMENT PROPOSED SIDEWALK CONNECTION 37.5' STREET FRONT SETBACK 25' PRESERVE SETBACK 10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER 00 100'50' SCALE: 1" = 100' N IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:1 OF 2 DATE:11/5/2020 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: NIM Agenda and Site Plan (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:2 OF 2 DATE:11/5/2020 PARKING SUMMARY BUILDING USE # OF SEATS MINIMUM REQUIRED SPACES SPACES REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED CHURCH 250 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 3 SPACES FOR EACH 7 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 107.1 = 108 108 (5 HC SPACES) NOTE PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT PER SECTION 4.05.04.g. TABLE 17 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LDC. HANDICAP SPACES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BASED ON COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 4.05.07 TABLE 19. GENERAL NOTES: 1.VEGETATION WITHIN THE PRESERVE WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 3.05.07. 2.A SIDEWALK ALONG 22ND AVENUE NE WILL BE PROVIDED AND WILL CONNECT TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK ALONG 8TH STREET NE. 3.THESE PLANS ARE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTING AND ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. PRESERVE AREA CALCULATION TOTAL SITE AREA 224,270 SF = 5.15 AC PRESERVE REQUIREMENT 15% REQUIRED PRESERVE 33,641 SF = 0.77 AC PROVIDED PRESERVE 33,974 SF = 0.78 AC ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE ZONING LAND USE N ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL S ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL E ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL W ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL LAND USE SUMMARY ACRES % OF SITE WATER MANAGEMENT +/- 0.28 5% PERIMETER BUFFERS +/- 0.43 8% PAVEMENT / SIDEWALK +/- 1.08 21% BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA +/- 0.19 4% PRESERVE AREA +/- 0.80 16% MISC. OPEN SPACE +/- 2.37 46% TOTAL SITE AREA +/- 5.15 100% PLANNING NOTES CURRENT ZONING E PROPOSED ZONING E / CONDITIONAL USE CURRENT LAND USE UNDEVELOPED FUTURE LAND USE ESTATES DESIGNATION PROPOSED LAND USE CHURCH NUMBER OF SEATS 250 SEATS MAXIMUM CHURCH SQUARE FOOTAGE 9,000 SF MAXIMUM ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT MAXIMUM ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT UTILITY NOTE: POTABLE WATER WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE GROUND WATER WELL AND SANITARY SEWER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE SEPTIC TANK AND DRAIN FIELD. LOCATIONS OF POTABLE WATER WELL AND SEPTIC TANK WILL BE DETERMINED UPON FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ARE THEREFORE NOT SHOWN ON THIS CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN. REQUIRED SETBACKS SUMMARY REQUIRED BUILDING FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' SIDE SETBACK 30' REAR SETBACK 75' PRESERVE PRINCIPAL SETBACK 25' ACCESSORY SETBACK 10' 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: NIM Agenda and Site Plan (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: NIM Sign-In Sheet (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: NIM Sign-In Sheet (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: NIM Sign-In Sheet (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: Annette Kniola Petitions of opposition - 250 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: 6. Letter of Project Support from Neighbor (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.h Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit - Signed (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.h Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit - Signed (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing Waiver Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04 Hearing of the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners For Petition Number(s): _________________________________________________________________ Regarding the above subject petition number(s), ________________________________ (Name of Applicant) elects to proceed during the declared emergency with hybrid virtual public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners, and waives the right to contest any procedural irregularity due to the hybrid virtual nature of the public hearing. Name: _________________________________ Date: ___________________________ Signature*: ______________________________฀ Applicant฀Legal Counsel to Applicant * This form must be signed by either the Applicant (if the applicant is a corporate entity, this must be an officer of the corporate entity) or the legal counsel to the Applicant. ✔ Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel, Inc Diogenes Marquina, President 8/31/2021 PL20190001326 & PL20190001333 9.A.2.i Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: CCPC-BCC Hybrid Meeting Waiver (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) ND-GCI0711612-01 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commis- sion (CCPC)at 9:00 A.M.,September 16,2021,in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room,Third Floor,Collier Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Trail,Naples,FL,to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.89-05,AS AMENDED,THE COL- LIER COUNTY GROW TH MANAG EMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTAT ES SUB-ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MAS- TER PLAN ELEMENT AND RU RAL GOLDEN GATE ESTAT ES FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES;BY AMENDING THE ESTAT ES-MIXED USE DISTRICT TO ADD THE 8TH STREET NE-22ND AV ENUE NE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW A 100-SEAT CHURCH AS A CONDITIONAL USE.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 5.15± AC RES AND IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 8TH STREET NE AND 22ND AV ENUE NE IN SECTION 27,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 27 EAST,COL- LIER COUNTY,FLORIDA;AND FURTHERMORE,DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY;PROV IDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROV IDING FOR AN EF- FECTIVE DATE.[PL20190001333] AND A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROV IDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW A 100-SEAT CHURCH WITHIN AN ESTAT ES (E)ZONING DISTRICT PURSU- ANT TO SECTION 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR A 5.15±AC RE PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 8TH STREET NE AND 22ND AV ENUE NE IN SECTION 27,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA.[PL20190001326]WilsonBLVDNIm mo ka le e RD RANDALL BLVD !I Project Location 8thSTNE22nd AV E NE All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard.Copies of the proposed ordinance and resolution will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk’s Office,Fo urth Floor, Collier County Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Trail,Suite 401,Naples,FL,one we ek prior to the scheduled hearing.Written comments must be filed with the Zoning Division,Zoning Services Section,prior to September 16,2021. As part of an ongoing initiative to promote social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic,the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely,as well as in person,during this proceeding.Individuals who wo uld like to participate remotely,should register any time after the agenda is posted on the County website which is 6 days before the meeting through the link pro- vided on the front page of the County website at www.colliercountyfl.gov.Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting.For additional information about the meeting,please call Thomas Clarke at (239) 252-2526 or email to CCPCRemoteParticipation@CollierCountyFL.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Collier County Planning Commission 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 accommoda- tion 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 Fa cilities Management Division,located at 3335 Ta miami 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. Collier County Planning Commission Edwin Fryer,Chairman 9.A.2.j Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: Ad Proof ND - GC10711612-01 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 523Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 524Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 525Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 526Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 527Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 528Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 529Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 530Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 531Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 532Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 533Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 534Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 535Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 536Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 537Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 538Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 539Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 540Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 541Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 542Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 543Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 544Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 545Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 546Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 547Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 548Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 549Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 550Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 551Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 552Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 553Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 554Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 555Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 556Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 557Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 558Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 559Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 560Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 561Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 562Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 563Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 564Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 9.A.2.kPacket Pg. 565Attachment: 15. Neighborhood Support Letters petition - 420 (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com April 29, 2021 at 6:00 PM Neighborhood Information Meeting Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 13260 Immokalee Road, Suite 7 Naples, FL 34120 Neighborhood Information Meeting – Summary Notes • Meeting was scheduled to start at 6:00PM on 4/29/2021 and was postponed to 6:05PM due to heavy traffic. Ronny called meeting to order at 6:05pm. • Meeting began with Ronny introducing the project location and scope. The Pastor, Jorge Martin, then discussed how the church operated and what kind of church they were. • Ronny corrected news report that stated the building would be 3 stories and stated the proposed building would be 1 story. • Attendee asked who Laura DeJohn was from Collier County. Laura introduced herself and explained the CU & GMPA process to all who attended the meeting. • One neighbor spoke up and asked how many people here live near the project. A majority of people in the NIM raised their hands and multiple people began talking. Laura DeJohn took control of the meeting and Ronny continued to explain the project. • The Pastor, Jorge Martin, explained when their congregation meets. Ronny continued to talk about the specifics for this project (number of seats, square footage, etc.). Pastor Jorge Martin then talked about what this church will bring to the community. • Laura mentioned some people were standing just outside the door, so people shifted in order to allow everyone inside the building for the NIM. • Pastor Jorge Martin then explained Randall Blvd extension that will help alleviate the traffic that is currently experienced in this area. He also explained that their sister church in Naples Park has never experienced a noise compliant even though they are in a residential community. • The meeting was then opened up to community discussion/questions. • Joseph Diaz then spoke about the existing churches on Immokalee Road and asked why this church was not going on Immokalee Road. Pastor explained that the church does not have enough money to build or purchase a building on Immokalee Road. • Two members of the meeting began discussing the traffic concerns loudly and Laura and Ronny had to bring the meeting back under control. • Heidi Sefferon (sp?) then spoke about a church encroaching into the residential area of the estates and how that is undesirable to her. She mentioned that a church go into a more commercial area. • Tony Reyas (sp?) then spoke about potential noise and dirt issues during construction phase of the project. Also mentioned issues with increased traffic. Does not want to see this project built on this property. • Another attendee brought up traffic concerns and Ronny discussed how transportation engineers determine if the project will have a significant impact on the traffic or not through a TIS report. • Dan Brett then asked multiple questions: 9.A.2.l Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: NIM Summary Notes (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com o 1st question. How much clearing will occur? Ronny explained that only the developed area for parking, building, stormwater management, etc. will be cleared. Nothing extra and preserve will be maintained. o 2nd question. Any future building planned? Ronny and Pastor explained no. o 3rd question. Any area in estates where a church has been approved , question directed to Laura DeJohn. She did not have an example offhand and explained we are here for this specific project. • Andy (sp?) Garcia, who is an adjacent property owner to the subject property, spoke up in full support of this church project and believes that this project is good for the street. • Miguel Cruz spoke in support of the church and how a church is beneficial for the community. How a church can help reduce crime in kids in a community. • Anthony Weaver spoke about agreeing that church can be a good thing for a community but is opposed to bringing a commercial project to this specific location. Mentioned that they already have a littering problem on this street. Ronny explained that in a typical estate zoning that a church would be allowed with a conditional use application, but this project is more complicated as this application includes a GMPA to allow for a church on this specific property. • Joseph Diaz then spoke about how the meeting needs to stick to facts, not necessarily an individual’s belief in god and if they attend church. Ronny agreed and continued the meeting. • Angus Weaver then spoke up in opposition of the church saying he wants is somewhere else and not in his community. • Teresa Ansbro @ 580 22nd Ave NE then spoke about not supporting the church in this location and she mentioned that she read every document submitted for this application to ensure she was informed about the project. Mentioned how it was better to build communities around a church instead of inserting a church into an existing community. Traffic concerns were also brought up. Environmental concerns were also brought up. • Danielle Krivda @ 1490 8th St NE mentioned how the church that she attends went through this same process in the estate went through a similar process and got approved/built. Mentioned neighbors complain about that church. Had concerns with putting a church in this residential area. Had question about what style of church it was and mentioned the band set. Pastor Jorge Martin explained that this church does not have large noise and invited everyone to attend a church service if they are interested in seeing what the church is about. • Some people started to leave the meeting and Ronny brought up the sign in sheet that was at the front of the room. The individuals leaving did come up to sign in. Eventually clip boards were used and the sign in sheet was passed around. Ronny also mentioned our information was on the agenda if anyone would like to contact with concerns. • Buddy Smith @ 2220 8th St NE asked if there was an agenda for upcoming meeting with Collier County staff. Ronny explained that these meeting dates have not yet been set and that everyone will be informed same as the NIM. The attendee suggested moving the church to a location that gets more traffic so they can get more members. • Another attendee, who was a member of the church, spoke in support of the project and mentioned that the growth in Collier County can not be changed/stopped. Mentioned noise restrictions that the church will be held to if they are too loud. 9.A.2.l Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: NIM Summary Notes (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com • Anthony Weaver asked how to have additional people added to notifications for the future meetings. Ronny asked him to send an email with his address and mentioned that he will be included in future notification letters. Mentioned how letters for the NIM were only sent to property owners within 1,000 ft. • Richard Nexti (sp?) @ 2145 8th St NE asked what development area was and mentioned he would be willing to swap/sell his property at 8th St and Randall Blvd to move church location. • There was no additional questions/comments at this time and Ronny then concluded the meeting at 7:05pm. Ronny reminded everyone to sign the sign-in sheet if they were interested. 9.A.2.l Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: NIM Summary Notes (20206 : PL20190001333 GMP Amendment - Iglesias Pentecostes) 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.3 Item Summary: *** NOTE: This item has been continued from the September 16, 2021 CCPC Meeting *** PL20190001326 CU Iglesias Pentecostes Peniel - A resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida providing for the establishment of a conditional use to allow a 100 - seat church within an Estates (E) zoning district pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a +/-5.15 acre property located on the northwest corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion Item PL20190001333 GMPA) [Coordinator: Ray Bellows, AICP, Zoning Manager] Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Laura DeJohn 09/28/2021 1:17 PM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 09/28/2021 1:17 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Completed 09/28/2021 8:02 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 09/30/2021 11:13 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Additional Reviewer Completed 09/30/2021 5:11 PM Zoning Mike Bosi Zoning Director Review Completed 10/01/2021 8:05 AM Growth Management Department James C French GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 10/06/2021 3:59 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 569 Page 1 of 1 SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO:COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM:ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE:OCTOBER 21, 2021 SUBJECT: PL20190001326; IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL CHURCH (CU) CONDITIONAL USE (COMPANION TO SMALL SCALE GMPA-PL20190001333) The subject Conditional Use petition was first before the Planning Commission on September 16, 2021. The item was continued to October 21, 2021 for the petitioner to assess and refine conditions to manage operation of the church in the context of the Rural Estates community. As shown in the attached list of conditions in strikethrough/underline format, the petitioner has refined conditions to: specify the limited days and times for conducting services, weddings, funerals and administrative functions; eliminate reference to quarterly special events; specify limits on parking; and prohibit outdoor activities. The maximum actual building height has been clarified as 50 feet including steeple on the Conceptual Site Plan. The attached Draft Resolution dated 10/5/21 includes the proposed refined Conceptual Site Plan (Exhibit B) and Conditions (Exhibit C). The staff recommendation remains for the CCPC to forward the petition to the BZA with a recommendation of approval. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT WITH COND v2 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 1 CU-PL20190001326 October 5, 2021 Conditions of Approval 1.Hours of Operation: The hours of operation for the cChurch operations are hurchlimited to worship services, bible studies, or business meetings will and shall be limited to Wednesday evenings between 6 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. Wednesday and Sunday mornings between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m., with the following exceptions: Sunday for a maximum of 6 hours per day. a. Church services may by conducted on recognized holidays limited to either morning services between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. or evening services between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m. on the day of the recognized holiday. b. Weddings and funerals may be conducted on an as needed basis, however no more than one may occur on a single day, and hours are limited to either a morning wedding or funeral between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. or an evening wedding or funeral between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m. c. Administrative functions may be conducted on an incidental or as needed basis (no more than five individuals at any one time) between the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. 2. Days of OperationUses: The days of normal church operation will be Wednesday and Sunday. The uses shall be limited as follows: a. Church operations are limited to worship services, bible studies, and business meetings, with exceptions of weddings and funerals and administrative functions. b. The Church shall not rent its site or facilities to outside groups, organizations or clubs. c. Outdoor services or activities are prohibited. d. Outdoor amplified sound is prohibited. e. Day care services, Private schools, Soup kitchens and Homeless shelters are prohibited. 3. Floor Area and Number of Seats (where applicable): The proposed church building is limited to a floor area of 5,000 square feet including no more than will have 100 seats. As shown on the site plan, a maximum of 45 parking spaces are allowed, of which at least 25% or 11 spaces shall be grassed parking spaces. No parking along or on the street is allowed. All services and activities shall be indoors. 4. Total number of members or users: The total number of church members has been estimated to be between 60 and 80 members. 5. Total number of groups using the site (different congregations, organizations, or clubs): The church building will not be used for any other type of group, organization, or club. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT WITH COND v2 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 2 CU-PL20190001326 October 5, 2021 6. Location, square footage, and proposed use for each structure: There is only one structure being proposed with this church project. The proposed church building will be a maximum of 5,000 square feet. 7. Number of meetings, (i.e. Bible Study/Worship/Business Meetings) and days and times: All church services and meetings will be held on Wednesdays and Sundays for a maximum of 6 hours. The church plans on having one (1) special event quarterly outside of regular church services. 8. Identify all principal and accessory uses to occur on site: Worship services within the main church building will be the only use to occur on site. 9. Any planned special events (fundraisers, holidays): The church plans on having one (1) special event quarterly outside of regular church services. Special event permitting is required for all special events. 10. 4. Complete Trip Generation information: The maximum total daily trip generation shall not exceed +/- 8 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. 11. 5. Additional Traffic Condition: For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing an at location(s) as directed determined by law enforcement or the Collier County Transportation AdministratorCounty Manager or his designee. 12. 6. The two parcels shall be combined for both parcels to be eligible for the 37.5-foot setback reduction that is afforded to corner lots per LDC Sec. 2.03.01.B.2. 13.7. Site lighting shall adhere to applicable LDC standards with the following conditions: a. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures. b. Site lighting will have a maximum height of 25-feet. c. Project site light poles, structures and fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines. d. Decorative or accent lighting of the building or steeple is prohibited. 15. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited, unless permitted under a Temporary Use Permit for a special event. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT WITH COND v2 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 3 CU-PL20190001326 October 5, 2021 16. Day care services, Private schools, Soup kitchens and Homeless shelters are not included in this conditional use approval and shall not be offered on site. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT WITH COND v2 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Resolution - 100521 (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 1 of 12 September 7, 2021 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 16, 2021 SUBJECT: PL20190001326; IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL CHURCH (CU) CONDITIONAL USE (COMPANION TO SMALL SCALE GMPA-PL20190001333) ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Inglesia Pentecostes Peniel, Inc. Agent: Ronny De Aza, P.E. 757 107th Ave North RDA Consulting Engineers, LLC Naples, FL 34108 800 Harbour Dr., Suite #2C Naples, FL 34135 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider establishment of a conditional use to allow a 100-seat church within an Estates (E) zoning district pursuant to Section 2.03.01.B.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) on 5.15± acres located on the northwest corner of 22nd Avenue NE and 8th Street NE in the Rural Golden Gate Estates. Per Policy 1.1.8 of the Rural Estates Sub Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan adopted in the Growth Management Plan, to obtain conditional use approval, a super majority vote (minimum of 4 votes) by the Board of Zoning Appeals shall be required. Companion small scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA-PL20190001333) is proposed to amend the Future Land Use Map designation for the site from Residential Estates Subdistrict of the Estates – Mixed Use District to a site specific designation of “8th Street NE – 22nd Ave NE Subdistrict” within the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject parcel is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of 22nd Avenue NE and 8th Street NE Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 2 of 12 September 7, 2021 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 3 of 12 September 7, 2021 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The requested conditional use approval for a church is a companion item to Growth Management Plan Amendment PL20190001333, which proposes creation of the “8th Street NE – 22nd Avenue NE Subdistrict” of the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. This proposed subdistrict provides for the development of a church through the conditional use process, with a restriction of a maximum total floor area of 5,000 square feet and maximum of 100 seats. The total site area is 224,270 square feet, or 5.15 acres. The conceptual site plan depicts a single building with a maximum 5,000 square feet and a maximum of 100 seats. The conceptual site plan shows 75-foot wide native vegetation buffers to the north and the west where the site adjoins single family developed properties, with supplemental plantings if needed to provide equivalent opacity of a Type B buffer. A private potable water well is proposed, which will also provide fire suppression. The church will be serviced by a private onsite sanitary sewer septic tank and drain field. One full access is proposed on 22nd Avenue NE, which is a two-lane local road. The segment of 22nd Avenue NE that will be accessed by the site is a dead-end street, which extends approximately three-fifths (3/5) a mile between the intersection with 8th Street NE and the western terminus with a north/south drainage canal. Approximately half of the site that is fronting on 8th Street NE is proposed to be undeveloped, including a 0.66-acre preserve area. The conceptual plan shows a front building setback of 37.5 feet along 22nd Avenue NE. Section 2.03.01.B.2 of the Land Development Code describes that conforming corner lots allow for a front setback along the longer lot line to be reduced to 37.5 feet so long as no right-of-way or easement is included within the reduced yard. The two parcels will ultimately need to be combined for both parcels to be eligible for this reduction that is afforded to corner lots. The applicant has agreed to a number of conditions to ensure compatible integration of the church use with the surrounding residential neighborhood. The restrictions include: • Limiting church services and meetings to only Wednesdays and Sundays for a maximum of 6 hours each day • Prohibiting use of the church facility by outside groups • Limiting special events to one per quarter (or four events annually) • Day care, Private schools, Soup kitchens and Homeless shelters shall not be offered on site • Maximum total daily trip generation shall not exceed +/- 8 two-way PM peak hour net trips See the Recommendation section of this staff report for condtitions of approval recommended in addition to those provided in Exhbit C of the draft Resolution (Attachment A). 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 4 of 12 September 7, 2021 Conceptual Site Plan 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 5 of 12 September 7, 2021 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property, which is undeveloped and zoned Estates with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). North: Single family home, Estates Zoning District with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). Note: The owner of this property submitted a letter of support for the petition, provided in Attachment B. East: 8th Street NE R-O-W, Single family home, Estates Zoning District with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). South: 22nd Avenue NE R-O-W, undeveloped, Estates Zoning District with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). West: Single family home, Estates Zoning District with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). Subject Site 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 6 of 12 September 7, 2021 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff reviewed this request and offered the following comments: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) in the in the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The present Estates, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict designation allows single-family residential development at a maximum density of one unit per 2.25 gross acres. Generally, the Estates Designation also accommodates future non-residential uses, including: a. Conditional uses and essential services as defined in the Land Development Code, except as prohibited in the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict per the Conditional Uses Subdistrict. Conditional Use Subdistrict Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the Estates zoning district within the Rural Golden Gate Estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of four criteria shall be met. The application does not meet any of the four criteria. The Conditional Use request is a companion to a small scale GMP Amendment (PL20190001333). This Conditional Use petition may only be deemed consistent with the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan, if the companion GMPA (PL2019001333) is approved and goes in effect. Then the Conditional Use petition will be consistent with the GMP. Policy 1.1.8 of Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element specifies the procedural requirement for conditional uses in Rural Golden Gate Estates: To obtain Conditional Use approval, a super majority vote (minimum of 4 votes) by the Board of Zoning Appeals shall be required. Based upon the above GMP Policy, the petition conforms with allowances in the Future Land Use Element and is required to be heard by the CCPC and the BZA, with a super majority vote required for approval. Transportation Element: The project is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, which states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 7 of 12 September 7, 2021 as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant im pacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” According to the TIS provided with this petition dated (revised) August 6, 2020, the proposed church will generate a projected total of +/- 8 PM weekday, peak hour, 2-way trips on the adjacent roadway 8th Street Northeast which is classified as a major collector by FDOT. The closest major road segments tracked in the current 2020 AUIR are Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson Blvd to 8th St., segment ID 123.0, currently operating at a LOS “C” with a remaining capacity of 845 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 2,300 with a peak direction being East. The next road segment is Golden Gate Boulevard from 8th St. to Everglades Boulevard, segment ID 123.1, currently operating at a LOS “C” with a remaining capacity of 855 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 2,300 with a peak direction being East. The next road segment is Randall Boulevard from Immokalee Road to Everglades, segment ID 132, currently operating at a LOS “D” with a remaining capacity of 7 trips and a peak capacity service volume of 900 with a peak direction being East. Staff notes that there is an expected deficiency due to traffic counts in 2022 as well as a deficiency due to trip bank in 2021 for this segment. There is a funded road improvement project for Randall scheduled for completion within the 5-year planning window as well as an FDOT funded improvement for the intersection of Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard also within the same 5-year planning window. Following state Statute 169.3180, any facility determined to be transportation deficient with existing, committed and vested trips plus background trips, shall require the costs for said deficiency to be the responsibility of Collier County. For these reasons Transportation Planning staff find that the Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): The acreage of native vegetation on site has been field verified by staff. The project is currently zoned Estates with a Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). The proposed Conditional Use will not affect the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Environmental Services staff recommends approval. 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 8 of 12 September 7, 2021 GMP Conclusion: This Conditional Use petition may only be deemed consistent with the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan, if the companion GMPA (PL2019001333) is approved and goes in effect. Then the Conditional Use petition will be consistent with the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based. This evaluation is completed as part of the Zoning and Land Development Review provided below. In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Environmental Services staff recommends approval. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition request, the Conditional Use document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues and recommends approval. Landscape Review: The buffers shown on the concept plan are consistent with the requirements of the LDC and GMP. In cases where proposed buffers do not meet LDC requirements, staff generally requires supplemental planting as a means to mitigate for the buffer deficiency and provide an alternative that is at least equivalent to the LDC required buffer. Since the buffers shown on the concept plan are consistent with the LDC, any supplemental planting provided at time of SDP would be above and beyond LDC requirements. Conditional Use Findings: Before any Conditional Use recommendation can be offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) must make findings that: 1) approval of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property of uses in the same district of neighborhood; and 2) all specific requirements for the individual Conditional Use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable: 1. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). With the approval of the companion small scale GMP Amendment, the request can be found consistent with the GMP. LDC Section 2.03.01.B.1.c. states: For Estates zoning within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in the GMP restricts the location of conditional uses. 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 9 of 12 September 7, 2021 Churches are listed as conditional uses in the Estates district (E), subject to the standards and procedures established in LDC section 10.08.00. The site associated with this Conditional Use request does not satisfy locational restrictions and therefore is dependent upon the approval of the companion Growth Management Plan Amendment to provide for the subject property to seek a conditional use for a church. With the conditions proposed by the petitioner and by staff, this project will be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC) related to development standards, access, landscaping, buffering, water management, required preservation, and parking. 2. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Ingress and egress to the subject property will be limited to a single access point as shown on the conceptual site plan. The TIS submitted by the applicant indicates that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5-year planning period as noted above and not adversely impact the surrounding roadway network. The property fronts on 8th Street NE, which is classified as a major collector by FDOT. The conceptual plan shows the majority of the corner of 8th Street NE and 22nd Avenue NE is occupied with preserve and natural buffer area, which will help retain a natural vegetated view along the 8th Street NE corridor in perpetuity. One full access is proposed along 22nd Avenue NE, which is a two lane local road. This proposed conceptual plan results in a single driveway where two would be expected and allowed to access each of the 2.5 acre parcels. The segment of 22nd Avenue NE will be accessed by the site is a dead-end street, which extends approximately three-fifths (3/5) a mile between the intersection with 8th Street NE and the western terminus with a north/south drainage canal. Access to the wider transportation system is provided via the collector roadway 8th Street NE which connects to Randall Boulevard to the north and Golden Gate Boulevard West to the south. 3. The effect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects. Per the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Rural Estates Sub-Element, this location is not eligible for a conditional use. Limitations on conditional use locations in the Rural Estates is designed to maintain rural character of the area. As noted, a companion GMP Amendment is proposed to establish a site-specific subdistrict that would allow for seeking a conditional use for a church at this location. While a church is generally not considered incompatible in proximity to residential areas, staff recognizes that preservation of bucolic character in the Rural Golden Gate Estates is a priority identified in the GMP and voiced by residents. 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 10 of 12 September 7, 2021 During staff’s review of this petition, staff put extra focus and attention on setbacks, buffers, days and hours of operations, limitation of onsite activities and functions, limitation on accessory uses, limitation on number of special events, traffic considerations, and control of noise and lighting impacts to ensure compatibility is addressed. The petitioner responded to address neighborhood compatibility with the following adjustments: • Maximum seating reduced from 250 seats to 100 seats • Building size reduced from 9,000 square feet to 5,000 square feet • Parking lot reduced from 108 parking spaces to 45 parking spaces (including at least 25% to be grass parking spaces as allowed by LDC) • Buffers to adjacent residential properties expanded from 15’ Type B buffer to the north and west to be five times wider with a 75-foot wide native buffer that meets Type B screening standards (80 percent opaque within one year at a height of at least six feet) These adjustments reduce the impacts of traffic by reducing intensity of use and expand the level of buffering to maintain natural vegetated conditions at the perimeters of the property. This context sensitive site design along with the number of conditions proposed by the petitioner and recommended by staff combine to provide a high degree of control on the physical and operational aspects of the proposed church and ensure compatibility with the surrounding rural residential area. 4. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. The petitioner and staff propose a number of conditions related to setbacks, buffers, amplified sound, days of operation, hours of operation per day, limited number of special events, a trip cap and prohibitions of uses and accessory uses including prohibition of leasing the facility to outside groups. A specific condition of approval recommended by staff and required by the companion GMP Amendment restricts the proposed church from offering Day care services, Private schools, Soup kitchens and Homeless shelters. The context sensitive site design along with the number of conditions proposed by the petitioner and recommended by staff combine to provide a high degree of control on the physical and operational aspects of the proposed church and ensure compatibility with the surrounding rural residential area. Based on the above findings, this conditional use should be recommended for approval with the conditions as outlined in this staff report. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not review this petition because the site is under the size threshold (10 acres) to require an Environmental Impact Statement. 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 11 of 12 September 7, 2021 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) & PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE: The NIM was held on April 29, 2021 at Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church at 13260 Immokalee Road, Suite 7. See the Applicant’s Backup Material (Attachment B) for the sign in sheet indicating roughly 73 attendees and the summary of the NIM. No commitments were made by the applicant during the NIM. The presentation included an explanation of the site plan and description of the building as a one-story building. Some comments were made in favor of the church as an asset to the community. Most comments raised by attendees were focused on preserving rural character and controlling introduction of uses such as churches in this location. Comprehensive Planning staff received a signed petition with approximately 59 signatures supporting this project, and also a signed petition with approximately 260 signatures opposing this project. Both petition letters may be found in the CCPC agenda packet for the companion GMPA- PL20190001333. The owner of the residential property abutting the site to the north at 2271 8th Street also submitted a letter of support for the petition, provided in Attachment B. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report on Sept. 2, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition CU- PL20190001326 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval subject to the two-page Conceptual Site Plan accompanying the draft Resolution and the additional conditions listed below. This petition is subject to approval of the companion small scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendment PL20190001333. In addition to the eleven Conditions of Approval incorporated in Exhibit C of the draft Resolution, the following conditions #12-16 are also recommended by staff for incorporation in the final Resolution: 12. The two parcels shall be combined for both parcels to be eligible for the 37.5-foot setback reduction that is afforded to corner lots per LDC Sec. 2.03.01.B.2. 13. Site lighting shall adhere to applicable LDC standards with the following conditions: a. Site lighting will be Dark Sky compliant with flat panel and full cut off fixtures. b. Site lighting will have a maximum height of 25-feet. c. Project site light poles, structures and fixtures will be shielded away from residential property lines. 14. Special events are limited to one (1) special event quarterly, not to exceed four (4) per calendar year, must be operated by the church, and are subject to a Temporary Use Permit as required, in accordance with the LDC. 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) CU-PL20190001326; Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Golden Gate Conditional Use Page 12 of 12 September 7, 2021 15. Outdoor amplified music or sounds are prohibited, unless permitted under a Temporary Use Permit for a special event. 16. Day care services, Private schools, Soup kitchens and Homeless shelters are not included in this conditional use approval and shall not be offered on site. Attachments: A. Resolution B. Applicant Back Up Material 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: 09-07-21 - Inglesia CU Staff Report (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Resolution - 090121(1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 1 of 12 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIONAL USE LDC Section 10.08.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code PETITION NO (PL) PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent(s): _____________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. To be completed by staff 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 2 of 12 ASSOCIATIONS Required: List all registered Home Owner Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ PROPERTY INFORMATION On separate page, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: •If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include separate legal description for property involved in each district; •The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre-application meeting; and •The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Plat Book: _______ Page #: _______ Section/Township/Range: _______ /_______ /_______ Subdivision: __________________________________________Lot: ________ Block: ________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ Size of Property: _____ft. X ______ ft. = _______ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _____________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 3 of 12 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property: (If space is inadequate, attach on a separate page) Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: __________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________________________________ CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST DETAIL Type of Conditional Use: This application is requesting a conditional use as allowed, pursuant to LDC section 2.03.00, of the _______________________ zoning district for _______________________ (type of use). Present Use of the Property: __________________________________________ 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 4 of 12 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC section 10.08.00 and Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code, staff’s recommendation to the reviewing body shall be based upon a finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and that the specific requirements governing the individual conditional use, if any, have been met. Further, satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable. On a separate page, provide a narrative statement describing a request for a conditional use and a detailed response to the criteria listed below. Specify how and why the request is consistent with each of the criteria. a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and o ther properties in the district. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? No Yes (If yes please provide copies.) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 5 of 12 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ___________________________________________ City: ________________ State: __________ ZIP: ___________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: _______________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: _________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a.County Utility System b.City Utility System c.Franchised Utility System Provide Name: ____________________ d.Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): ___________________ e.Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED a.County Utility System b.City Utility System c.Franchised Utility System PROVIDE NAME_______________ d.Private System (Well) Total Population to be served: ____________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A.Water-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ B.Sewer-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 6 of 12 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________ Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 7 of 12 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 8 of 12 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: A Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing Examiner Chapter 3 C.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 time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. Requirements for Review # Of Copies Required Not Required Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Cover letter briefly explaining the project 1 Pre-Application Notes 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Warranty Deed(s) 1 Boundary Survey 1 Conceptual Site Plan 24” X 36” plus (one 8 ½ X 11 copy) Plans showing proposed location for utilities, if required Plans for screening and buffering the use with reference as to type, dimensions, and character, if required Plans showing the proposed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations, if required Plans showing the proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions, and character, if required Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s), if applicable 1 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 1 Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments & sketches) 1 Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearing. Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 1 Traffic Impact Study (TIS) or waiver 1 Historical and Archeological Survey, or waiver 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans * Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 * If located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, include an additional set of each submittal requirement 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 9 of 12 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: •Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. •Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson GMD Graphics City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Other: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Communication Towers: Mosquito Control Collier County Airport Authority Naples Airport Authority Commercial Mining: Impact Fees 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 11 of 12 Public Participation Requirements LDC Section 10.03.06 B. or C. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code Notice for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: •Date, time, and location of the hearing; •Description of the proposed land uses; and •2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. Public Hearing for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Hearing Examiner: The Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Notice for Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 12 of 12 Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: •Date, time, and location of the hearing; •Description of the proposed land uses; and •2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. Public Hearing for Conditional Use Petitions Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC): The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC): The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA): The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Page 1 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Exhibit K – Conditional Use Application Narrative Statement a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. The proposed project has been designed to be within compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. The proposed project has also been designed in accordance with South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) standards. All parking has been designed to be in accordance with Collier County LDC Section 4.5.00 and has been designed within ADA compliance. All Stormwater management facilities have been designed to be in accordance with Collier County LDC Section 6.05.00. All other onsite improvements have been designed to be in accordance with the applicable sections of the Collier County LDC and SFWMD Handbook. Please note that the proposed design has protected all wetlands that were found onsite and will protect them in perpetuity. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. The planned means of ingress and egress to the property will be located on 22nd Ave NE. The ingress and egress point will be built to the current Collier County Land Development Code standards and adhere to all local jurisdictions. The site’s parking lot will be accessible to the local fire jurisdiction per the current NFPA standards and local fire department requirements. Please reference the Traffic Impact Statement prepared by JMB Transportation for additional information. c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. The proposed conditional use will have a positive effect on the properties neighboring the project. As the church will operate during limited hours, a maximum of 6 hours on Wednesday and Sunday, the site will largely remain vacant during the week. These limited hours will reduce the amount of noise and glare coming from the church site. The proposed church property will not have a negative economic impact to the neighboring properties. The proposed church property will not have a negative odor impact to the neighboring properties. In addition, please reference the enclosed letter of support from the adjacent property owner who supports the approval of this Conditional Use and GMPA application. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. The proposed conditional use to allow for the use of a religious facility is compatible with adjacent properties as the proposed church is a community church with a majority of the congregation living near the proposed site. The existing church congregation is currently meeting approximately 1.2 miles northwest of 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Page 2 of 2 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com the proposed site within an existing commercial plaza. The congregation has grown over the past few years and the church chose to find a property that was near their current location and close to their members. This site will provide positive support to the local community and will be an exceptional location for the existing church members. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Please reference the enclosed letter of support for the adjacent neighbor and the location map of adjacent congressional members for the church. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Ig l esia Pen tecostes Pen i el Adjacent Congres s ional Mem bers within 2 Miles 2 mi N➤➤N © 2018 Google © 2018 Google © 2018 Google 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Ig l esia Pen tecostes Pen i el Adjacent Congres s ional Mem bers within 5 Miles 4 mi N➤➤N © 2018 Google © 2018 Google © 2018 Google 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia © 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distrib 24TH AVENUE NE20TH AVENUE NE500 FOOTRADIUS22ND AVENUE NE(COUNTY ROW)8TH STREET NE (COUNTY ROW)SUBJECTPROPERTYZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALZONING: E USE: RESIDENTIAL ZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALZONING: EUSE: RESIDENTIALPROJECT NO.:IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATESURROUNDING ZONING & USE MAPSHEET:RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE #2CNAPLES, FL 34103PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COM1RDA1908400400'200'SCALE: 1" = 400'NSUBJECT ZONING INFORMATIONSUBJECT PROPERTY = 5.15 ACRESEXISTING ZONING = ESTATES (E)EXISTING FLUE = GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLANEXISTING USE = VEGETATED / UNCLEAREDADJACENT PROPERTIES:NORTH ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIALSOUTH ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = VEGETATED / UNCLEAREDEAST ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIALWEST ZONING = ESTATES (E) USE = RESIDENTIAL9.A.3.ePacket Pg. 616Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 618 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 619 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 620 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.ePacket Pg. 621Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.ePacket Pg. 622Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.ePacket Pg. 623Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com April 29, 2021 at 6:00 PM Neighborhood Information Meeting Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church 13260 Immokalee Road, Suite 7 Naples, FL 34120 Neighborhood Information Meeting – Summary Notes • Meeting was scheduled to start at 6:00PM on 4/29/2021 and was postponed to 6:05PM due to heavy traffic. Ronny called meeting to order at 6:05pm. • Meeting began with Ronny introducing the project location and scope. The Pastor, Jorge Martin, then discussed how the church operated and what kind of church they were. • Ronny corrected news report that stated the building would be 3 stories and stated the proposed building would be 1 story. • Attendee asked who Laura DeJohn was from Collier County. Laura introduced herself and explained the CU & GMPA process to all who attended the meeting. • One neighbor spoke up and asked how many people here live near the project. A majority of people in the NIM raised their hands and multiple people began talking. Laura DeJohn took control of the meeting and Ronny continued to explain the project. • The Pastor, Jorge Martin, explained when their congregation meets. Ronny continued to talk about the specifics for this project (number of seats, square footage, etc.). Pastor Jorge Martin then talked about what this church will bring to the community. • Laura mentioned some people were standing just outside the door, so people shifted in order to allow everyone inside the building for the NIM. • Pastor Jorge Martin then explained Randall Blvd extension that will help alleviate the traffic that is currently experienced in this area. He also explained that their sister church in Naples Park has never experienced a noise compliant even though they are in a residential community. • The meeting was then opened up to community discussion/questions. • Joseph Diaz then spoke about the existing churches on Immokalee Road and asked why this church was not going on Immokalee Road. Pastor explained that the church does not have enough money to build or purchase a building on Immokalee Road. • Two members of the meeting began discussing the traffic concerns loudly and Laura and Ronny had to bring the meeting back under control. • Heidi Sefferon (sp?) then spoke about a church encroaching into the residential area of the estates and how that is undesirable to her. She mentioned that a church go into a more commercial area. • Tony Reyas (sp?) then spoke about potential noise and dirt issues during construction phase of the project. Also mentioned issues with increased traffic. Does not want to see this project built on this property. • Another attendee brought up traffic concerns and Ronny discussed how transportation engineers determine if the project will have a significant impact on the traffic or not through a TIS report. • Dan Brett then asked multiple questions: 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com o 1st question. How much clearing will occur? Ronny explained that only the developed area for parking, building, stormwater management, etc. will be cleared. Nothing extra and preserve will be maintained. o 2nd question. Any future building planned? Ronny and Pastor explained no. o 3rd question. Any area in estates where a church has been approved , question directed to Laura DeJohn. She did not have an example offhand and explained we are here for this specific project. • Andy (sp?) Garcia, who is an adjacent property owner to the subject property, spoke up in full support of this church project and believes that this project is good for the street. • Miguel Cruz spoke in support of the church and how a church is beneficial for the community. How a church can help reduce crime in kids in a community. • Anthony Weaver spoke about agreeing that church can be a good thing for a community but is opposed to bringing a commercial project to this specific location. Mentioned that they already have a littering problem on this street. Ronny explained that in a typical estate zoning that a church would be allowed with a conditional use application, but this project is more complicated as this application includes a GMPA to allow for a church on this specific property. • Joseph Diaz then spoke about how the meeting needs to stick to facts, not necessarily an individual’s belief in god and if they attend church. Ronny agreed and continued the meeting. • Angus Weaver then spoke up in opposition of the church saying he wants is somewhere else and not in his community. • Teresa Ansbro @ 580 22nd Ave NE then spoke about not supporting the church in this location and she mentioned that she read every document submitted for this application to ensure she was informed about the project. Mentioned how it was better to build communities around a church instead of inserting a church into an existing community. Traffic concerns were also brought up. Environmental concerns were also brought up. • Danielle Krivda @ 1490 8th St NE mentioned how the church that she attends went through this same process in the estate went through a similar process and got approved/built. Mentioned neighbors complain about that church. Had concerns with putting a church in this residential area. Had question about what style of church it was and mentioned the band set. Pastor Jorge Martin explained that this church does not have large noise and invited everyone to attend a church service if they are interested in seeing what the church is about. • Some people started to leave the meeting and Ronny brought up the sign in sheet that was at the front of the room. The individuals leaving did come up to sign in. Eventually clip boards were used and the sign in sheet was passed around. Ronny also mentioned our information was on the agenda if anyone would like to contact with concerns. • Buddy Smith @ 2220 8th St NE asked if there was an agenda for upcoming meeting with Collier County staff. Ronny explained that these meeting dates have not yet been set and that everyone will be informed same as the NIM. The attendee suggested moving the church to a location that gets more traffic so they can get more members. • Another attendee, who was a member of the church, spoke in support of the project and mentioned that the growth in Collier County can not be changed/stopped. Mentioned noise restrictions that the church will be held to if they are too loud. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • 239-649-1551 • info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com • Anthony Weaver asked how to have additional people added to notifications for the future meetings. Ronny asked him to send an email with his address and mentioned that he will be included in future notification letters. Mentioned how letters for the NIM were only sent to property owners within 1,000 ft. • Richard Nexti (sp?) @ 2145 8th St NE asked what development area was and mentioned he would be willing to swap/sell his property at 8th St and Randall Blvd to move church location. • There was no additional questions/comments at this time and Ronny then concluded the meeting at 7:05pm. Ronny reminded everyone to sign the sign-in sheet if they were interested. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 630 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 631 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 632 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC28845579.A.3.ePacket Pg. 636Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 638 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC28845579.A.3.ePacket Pg. 641Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC2884557 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC28845579.A.3.ePacket Pg. 643Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia DocuSign Envelope ID: E2C07B7E-A635-4473-9D20-ACCAC28845579.A.3.ePacket Pg. 644Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia IMMOKALEE PENIEL CHURCH Environmental Data for CU SECTIONS 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared For: Prepared By: September 16, 2019 Updated: May 11, 2020 Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com EXHIBITS Figure 1 Location Map Figure 2 Aerial FLUCCS Map Figure 3 Existing Native Vegetation Figure 4 Site Plan with Preserve Figure 5 Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands Figure 6 Florida Black Bear Map APPENDICES APPENDIX A Collier County CU Pre-App Notes APPENDIX B Protected Species Survey APPENDIX C Earth Tech Environmental Staff Qualifications 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to satisfy the Environmental Data requirements (LDC Section 3.08.00) for a Conditional Use (CU) to the Immokalee Peniel Church parcel (Subject Property). This information is in response to the items in the CU Pre-Application Notes as provided by Collier County (see Appendix A). PROPERTY LOCATION The Subject Property for this report consists of two (2) adjacent parcels (Folio #’s 37750560106 & 37750560009). The Subject Property is located on the north side of 22nd Ave NE and immediately west of 8th St NE in Collier County. According to the boundary provided by the engineer, RDA Consulting Engineers, the Subject Property’s combined acreage is approximately 5.15 acres. See Figure 1 below for a location map. Figure 1. Location Map 3 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST- CONDITIONAL USE See page 7 of Collier County Pre-App Notes 1.Is the project in compliance with the overlays, districts and/or zoning on the subject site and/or the surrounding properties? (CON, ST, PUD, RLSA, RFMU, etc.) (LDC 2.03.05-2.03.08; 4.08.00) Not in CV Library The project will be a GMPA and will be in compliance with zoning. 2.Submit a current aerial photograph (available from the Property Appraiser’s office) and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCFCS overlay and vegetation inventory identifying upland, wetland and exotic vegetation (Admin. Code Ch. 3 G. 1. Application Contents #24). FLUCCS Overlay -P627 See Figure 2, Aerial FLUCCS Map and vegetation descriptions below. Figure 2. Aerial FLUCCS Map 4 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 3. Existing Native Vegetation Based on the FLUCCS classification system, the following communities are present on the property: FLUCCS CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 411-E1 Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) 3.51 624-E2 Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) 0.81 814 Roadway 0.83 Site Total: 5.15 E1 = Exotics <25% of total cover E2 = Exotics 26-50% of total cover E3 = Exotics 51-75% of total cover E4 = Exotics >75% of total cover FLUCCS 411-E1, Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) This community comprises the majority of the property. Canopy vegetation consists mostly of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The mid-story is sparse, largely containing saw palmetto with lesser amounts of gallberry (Ilex glabra), rusty staggerbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). The groundcover is largely covered by a dense blanket of grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), lovevine (Cassytha filiformis), and a thick layer of pine needles. Exotic coverage is relatively low with the ecotone displaying higher abundances of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). 5 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 649 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com FLUCCS 624-E2, Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) This community is found on the southeast portion of the property. It is dominated by large cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm, and sparse slash pine in the canopy. The mid-story is dominated by dense Brazilian pepper with lesser amounts of myrsine (Myrsine cubana) and cabbage palm. Groundcover contains minimal diversity and consists primarily of swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum). Exotic coverage is moderate consisting primarily of dense Brazilian pepper. FLUCCS 814, Roadways Both 8th St NE and 22nd Ave NE along with their associated right-of-way’s are found on the eastern and southern portion of the property. 3.Clearly identify the location of all preserves and label each as “Preserve” on all plans. (LDC 3.05.07.A.2). Preserve Label- P546 See Figure 4 below, Site Plan. Figure 4. Site Plan with Preserve 4.Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained, the max amount and ratios permitted to be created on-site or mitigated off-site. Exclude vegetation located within utility and drainage easements from the preserve calculations (LDC 6 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 3.05.07.B-D; 3.05.07.F; 3.05.07.H 1.d-e). Preserve Calculation – P547. 15% of existing native vegetation to be preserved. The total existing native vegetation on the site is 4.32 acres. The preserve requirement is 15%. 0.15 * 4.32 = 0.65 acres. The proposed site plan currently depicts a 0.80-acre preserve, which exceeds the requirement (preserve setback was NOT included in preserve calculation). See Figures 3 & 4. 5. Created and retained preserve areas shall meet the minimum width requirements per LDC 3.05.07.H.1.b. Preserve Width – P603 See engineer’s plan set. 6. Retained preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in LDC 3.05.07.A.3, include all 3 strata, be in the largest contiguous area possible and shall be interconnected within the site and adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (LDC 3.05.07.A.1-4). Preserve Selection- P550 The site is bordered by roads to the south and the east, and residential development to the north and west. The preserve placement was selected based on existing wetlands (the highest quality habitat) on site. See Figures 3 & 4. 7. Principle structures shall be located a minimum of 25’ from the boundary of the preserve boundary. No accessory structures and other site alterations, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within 10’ of the boundary unless it can be shown that it will not affect the integrity of the preserve (i.e. stem wall or berm around the wetland preserve). Provide cross-sections for each preserve boundary identifying all site alterations within 25’. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.C.). Preserve Setback – New See engineer’s plan set. 8. Wildlife survey required for sites where EIS in not required, when so warranted. (LDC 10.02.02.A.2.f) See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. 9. Provide Environmental Data identifying author credentials, consistency determination with GMPs, off-site preserves, seasonal and historic high-water levels, and analysis of water quality. For land previously used for farm fields or golf course, provide soil sampling/groundwater monitoring reports identifying any site contamination. (LDC 3.08.00) Environmental Data Required – P 522 See Appendix C, ETE Staff Qualifications for author credentials. 10. Master Plan shall state the minimum acreage required to be preserved. (LDC 10.02.13.A.2) Master Plan Contents-P626. With Calculations. See engineer’s plan set. 7 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA CHECKLIST – The environmental data requirements can be found in LDC section 3.08.00 See Pages 8-10 of Collier County Pre-App Notes 1.Provide the EIS fee if PUD or CU. Fee will be provided upon submittal. 2.WHO AND WHAT COMPANY PREPARED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT? Preparation of Environmental Data. Environmental Data Submittal Requirements shall be prepared by an individual with academic credentials and experience in the area of environmental sciences or natural resource management. Academic credentials and experience shall be a bachelor's or higher degree in one of the biological sciences with at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the State of Florida. See Appendix C, ETE Staff Qualifications for author credentials. 3.Identify on a current aerial, the location and acreage of all SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) and include this information on the SOP or final plat construction plans. Wetlands must be verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) or Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) prior to SDP or final plat construction plans approval. For sites in the RFMU district, provide an assessment in accordance with 3.05.07 F and identify on the FLUCFCS map the location of all high quality wetlands (wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7 UMAM) and their location within the proposed development plan. Sites with high quality wetlands must have their functionality scores have not been verified by either the SFWMD or DEP, scores must be reviewed and accepted by County staff, consistent with State regulation. See Figure 5, Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands map and vegetation descriptions above. 8 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 5. Anticipated SFWMD Jurisdictional Wetlands 7.Provide a wildlife survey for the nests of bald eagle and for listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site. 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. Please include review for bonneted bat. See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. The Subject Property falls within the Florida Bonneted Bat (FBB) Consultation Area. During the species survey, no potential bat cavities were observed. The 5.15- acre property is surrounded by development on all sides. Prior to any development or permitting activities, the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) may require acoustic surveys to further determine presence or absence of FBB roosts or foraging on the property. 8.Provide a survey for listed plants identified in 3 .04.03 9 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. Common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) and butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis) were observed on the Subject Property. Typically, individual plants are relocated from proposed impact areas into onsite (or offsite) preserves prior to construction. 9.Wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans in accordance with 3.04.00 shall be required where listed species are utilizing the site or where wildlife habitat management and monitoring plans are required by the FFWCC or USFWS. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Identify the location of listed species nests, burrows, dens, foraging areas, and the location of any bald eagle nests or nest protection zones on the native vegetation aerial with FLU CFCS overlay for the site. Wildlife habitat management plans shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Bald eagle management plans are required for sites containing bald eagle nests or nest protection zones, copies of which shall be included on the SDP or final plat construction plans. Include review for black bear activity in and around the subject property and provide exhibit. A Panther Mitigation Analysis and Wood Stork Foraging Analysis will be provided during permitting, if warranted. The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 6 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC-approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. Figure 6. Florida Black Bear Information 10 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 10. 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 final plat construction plans. In a separate report, demonstrate how the preserve selection criteria pursuant to 3.05.07 have been met. Where applicable, include in this report an aerial showing the project boundaries along with any undeveloped land, preserves, natural flowways or other natural land features, located on abutting properties. See Figures 2 & 5 above. 14. Provide justification for deviations from environmental LDC provisions pursuant to GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 (13), if requested. N/A 16. Identify any Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones (WRM-ST) within the project area and provide an analysis for how the project design avoids the most intensive land uses within the most sensitive WRM-STs and will comply with the WRM-ST pursuant to 3.06.00. Include the location of the Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones on the SDP or final plat construction plans. For land use applications such as standard and PUD rezones and CUs, provide a separate site plan or zoning map with the project boundary and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zones identified. Clearly provide info regarding which WRM-ST zone property is located. N/A 17. Demonstrate that the design of the proposed Stormwater management system and analysis of water quality and quantity impacts fully incorporate the requirements of the Watershed Management Regulations of 3.07.00. See engineer’s plan set. 20. The County Manager or designee may require additional data or information necessary to evaluate the project’s compliance with LDC and GMP requirements. (LDC 10.02.02.A.3 f) a. Provide overall description of project with respect to environmental and water management issues. See this document. b. Explain how project is consistent with each of the applicable objectives and policies in the CCME of the GMP. See below. 11 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com c.Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirements in the CCME and LDC. See Figure 3, Site Plan and native vegetation/preserve narrative above. d.Indicate wetlands to be impacted and the effects of the impact to their functions and how the project’s design compensates for wetland impacts. Address each one. See Figure 5, Wetland Map above. The wetlands will be preserved; no wetland impacts are associated with the project. e.Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to listed species. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. The preserve is designed to reduce impacts to listed species. See Appendix B - Protected Species Survey. CCME 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… Per Collier County, the native vegetation requirement is 15%. The project is proposing to preserve 0.80 acres of wetlands and uplands. See Figure 4 above. The total existing native vegetation on the site is 4.32 acres. The preserve requirement is 15%. 0.15 * 4.32 = 0.65 acres. The proposed site plan currently depicts 0.80-acre preserve. See Figure 4. No wetland impacts are occurring onsite, so no mitigation is required. All onsite wetlands will remain. CCME GOAL 7: TO PROTECT AND CONSERVE THE COUNTY’S FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE. OBJECTIVE 7.1: Direct incompatible land uses are directed away from listed species and their habitats… No listed species have been identified on the Subject Property. See Appendix B, Protected Species Survey. A Panther Mitigation Analysis and Wood Stork Foraging Analysis will be provided during permitting, if warranted. The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 6 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC-approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. 12 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX A Collier County CU Pre-App Notes 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.ePacket Pg. 674Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX B Protected Species Survey 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) IMMOKALEE PENIEL CHURCH Protected Species Survey SECTIONS 27, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 34120 Prepared For: Prepared By: August 23, 2019 RDA Consulting Engineers c/o Richard Dubois 790 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C Naples, FL 34103 Earth Tech Environmental, LLC 10600 Jolea Avenue Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.304.0030 www.eteflorida.com 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................. 3 2.0 PROPERTY LOCATION ................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 SPECIES SURVEY MATERIALS & METHODS ................................................................................... 3 4.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 4 5.0 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 15 EXHIBITS Figure 1 Site Location Map Figure 2 Aerial Map Figure 3 FLUCCS Map with Aerial Figure 4 FLUCCS Map Figure 5 Transect Map & Field Results Figure 6 Florida Bonneted Bat Consultation Area Figure 7 Wood Stork Information Figure 8 Florida Panther Information Figure 9 Black Bear Information 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 1.0 INTRODUCTION Earth Tech Environmental (ETE) conducted a search for listed species on the property referred to as the Immokalee Peniel Church parcel (Subject Property) prior to development. This assessment was conducted by ETE on July 24, 2019 to evaluate the Subject Property for the potential presence of listed species of concern based on the determined Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) vegetation. 2.0 PROPERTY LOCATION The Subject Property for this report consists of two (2) adjacent parcels (Folio #’s 37750560106 & 37750560009). The Subject Property is located on the north side of 22nd Ave NE and just west of 8th St NE in Collier County. According to the Collier County Property Appraiser’s website, the Subject Property’s combined acreage is approximately 5.15 acres. See Figure 1 below for a location map. Figure 1. Site Location Map 3.0 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 2019) using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). FLUCCS mapping for this property is detailed below in (Figures 3 & 3 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 4). 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”, December 2018. “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 3 of this report for the species list that applies to the FLUCCS communities associated with the Subject 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 (see Figure 5). 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, which are flagged in the field and marked by GPS. Based on the habitat types found on the Subject Property (see Table 3), particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of listed plant species such as wild pine, twisted air plants, and butterfly orchids. The presence and absence of listed animal species such as Big Cypress fox squirrel, gopher tortoise, Florida bonneted bat, wood stork, and Florida panther were also considered. Approximately four and a half (4.5) man-hours were logged on the Subject Property during this species survey (see Table 1). 4.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Temperatures during the fieldwork for this survey were in the low 90’s. Cloud cover was absent. The Subject Property is vacant and vegetated, consisting of upland and wetland communities. Moderate exotic vegetation is present throughout the property. The property is surrounded by roads and residential development on all sides. See Figure 2 below for an aerial map. The Subject Property has the following surrounding land uses: North Residential East 8th St NE/Residential South 22nd Ave NE/Vacant Residential West Residential TABLE 1. FIELD TIME SPENT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DATE START TIME END TIME NO. ECOLOGISTS MAN HOURS TASK July 24, 2019 1:00 pm 2:30 pm 3 4.5 Species Survey Fieldwork 4 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 2. Aerial Map Listed below are the FLUCCS communities identified on the site. The community descriptions correspond to the mappings on the FLUCCS maps below (Figures 3 and 4). See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation, Surveying & Mapping Geographic Mapping Section, 1999) for definitions. The Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council’s (FLEPPC) list of invasive species contains Category 1 species that may be found on the Subject Property. Category 1 species are invasive exotics that are altering native plant communities by displacing native species, changing community structures or ecological functions, or hybridizing with natives (FLEPPC). A significant factor in mapping vegetative associations and local habitats is the invasion of these species such as Brazilian pepper, ear leaf acacia, melaleuca, Caesar weed, and air potato. Levels of exotic density were mapped by using field observations and photo interpretation as shown in Figure 3. Modifiers, or “E” designators, are appended to the FLUCCS codes to indicate the approximate density of exotics in the canopy and/or sub-canopy. 5 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 2. ACREAGE PER FLUCCS COMMUNITY FLUCCS CODE DESCRIPTION ACREAGE 411-E1 Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) 3.51 624- E2 Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) 0.81 814 Roadway 0.82 Site Total: 5.15 E1 = Exotics <25% of total cover E2 = Exotics 26-50% of total cover E3 = Exotics 51-75% of total cover E4 = Exotics >75% of total cover Figure 3. FLUCCS Map with Aerial 6 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 4. FLUCCS Map FLUCCS 411-E1, Pine Flatwoods (<25% Exotics) This community dominates the majority of the property. Canopy vegetation consists mostly of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The mid-story is sparse, largely containing saw palmetto with lesser amounts of gallberry (Ilex glabra), rusty staggerbush (Lyonia fruticosa), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum). The groundcover is largely covered by a dense blanket of grapevine (Vitis rotundifolia), lovevine (Cassytha filiformis), and a thick layer of pine needles. Exotic coverage is relatively low with the ecotone displaying higher abundances of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). FLUCCS 624-E2, Cypress – Pine – Cabbage Palm (26-50% Exotics) This community is found on the southeast portion of the property. It is dominated by large cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm, and sparse slash pine, in the canopy. The mid-story is dominated by dense Brazilian pepper with lesser amounts of myrsine (Myrsine cubana) and cabbage palm. Groundcover contains minimal diversity and consists primarily of swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum). Exotic coverage is moderate consisting primarily of dense Brazilian pepper. FLUCCS 814, Roadways This community along the eastern and southern portions of the property and include 8th St NE and 22nd Ave NE along with their associated right-of-way’s. The various protected species which may occur in the corresponding FLUCCS communities are shown below in Table 3. 7 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 3. PROTECTED SPECIES LIST ACCORDING TO FLUCCS CATEGORY FLUCCS POTENTIAL LISTED SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME DESIGNATED STATUS FWC OR FDACS FWS 411 Beautiful Pawpaw Deeringothamnus rugelii var. pulchellus E E Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia T - Eastern Indigo Snake Drymarchon corais couperi T T Fakahatchee Burmannia Burmannia flava E - Florida Coontie Zamia integrifolia CE - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Gopher Tortoise Gopherus polyphemus T - Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis E E Satinleaf Chrysophyllum oliviforme T - Southeastern American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus T - Twisted Air Plant Tillandsia flexuosa T - 624 American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis SSC T(S/A) Butterfly Orchid Encyclia tampensis CE - Common Wild Pine Tillandsia fasciculata E - Everglades Mink Mustela vison evergladensis T - Florida Panther Felis concolor coryi E E Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea T - Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor T - Wood Stork Mycteria americana T T 814 NONE - - - Abbreviations Agencies: Status: FDACS = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services CE = Commercially Exploited FWC = Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission E = Endangered FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service SSC = Species of Special Concern T = Threatened T(S/A) = Threatened/Similarity of Appearance 8 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 5.0 RESULTS All relevant species observed on the Subject Property are detailed in Table 4 and any protected species observed are specifically noted. See Figure 5 below for transect and field results. Figure 5. Transect Map & Field Results 9 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com TABLE 4. SPECIES OBSERVED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME OBSERVATIONS LISTED SPECIES? STATUS Birds Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata DV N - Red-Bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus DV N - Mammals NONE - - - - Reptiles NONE - - - - Amphibians NONE - - - - Plants Butterfly Orchid Encyclia tampensis DV N CE Common Wild Pine* Tillandsia fasciculata DV Y SE * = protected species Abbreviations Observations:Observations: Status: C = Cavity N = Nest CE = Commercially Exploited DB = Day Bed OH = Observed Hole/Burrow FE = Federally Endangered DV = Direct Visual OT = Observed Tracks FT = Federally Threatened HV = Heard Vocalization(s)R = Remains SE = State Endangered MT = Marked Tree S = Scat SSC = Species of Special Concern ST = State Threatened Below are discussions of each listed species observed on the Subject Property: Listed Plants Common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) and butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis) were observed on the Subject Property. Typically, individual plants are relocated from proposed impact areas into onsite (or offsite) preserves prior to construction. One nest was observed approximately 25 feet high in a living cypress tree in the wetland area near the southern property boundary. No species were observed utilizing the nest and it is inconclusive the species that built it. The groundcover below the nest is heavily invaded with Brazilian pepper. The site does have community types in which protected species could reside. During permitting, the following listed species concerns may be raised by the agencies: 10 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 6. Florida Bonneted Bat Consultation Area Florida Bonneted Bat (Eumops floridana) The Subject Property falls within the Florida Bonneted Bat (FBB) Consultation Area and FBB Focal Area (see Figure 6 above). During the species survey, no potential bat cavities were observed. The 5.15-acre property is surrounded by development on all sides. Prior to any development or permitting activities, the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) may require acoustic surveys to further determine presence or absence of FBB roosts or foraging on the property. 11 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 7. Wood Stork Information Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) The Subject Property falls within the core foraging area (estimated at 18.6 miles) of at least two (2) wood stork colonies in Collier County. See Figure 7 above for wood stork colony and foraging information as it relates to the property. The dense/overgrown nature of the wetland habitat on the property likely precludes wood stork foraging. Consultation with USFWS will likely not be necessary for wood stork and wood stork foraging. 12 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 8. Florida Panther Information Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) The property does fall within the USFWS Florida panther habitat zones and consultation areas. See Figure 8 for Florida panther information as it relates to the Subject Property. Consultation with the USFWS will likely be necessary for Florida panther. 13 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com Figure 9. Black Bear Information Florida Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) The property falls within the FWC mapped range for Florida black Bear. Telemetry points from tagged bears have been documented on and in the vicinity of the Subject Property. See Figure 9 for black bear mappings as they relate to the Subject Property. The County may require the Client to implement FWC- approved bear-proof waste receptacles on the property. 14 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Protected Species Survey Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com 6.0 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 December 2018. https://myfwc.com/media/1945/threatend-endangered-species.pdf http://myfwc.com/imperiledspecies/ 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 15 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Environmental Data for CU Earth Tech Environmental, LLC www.eteflorida.com APPENDIX C Earth Tech Environmental Staff Qualifications 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 239.304.0030 | www.eteflorida.com Ms. Bobka joined Earth Tech Environmental, LLC (ETE) in 2016 as an Ecologist with more than 8 years of private and public sector experience in the environmental field. As an Ecologist, Jennifer fulfills duties in environmental consulting, wetland & wildlife monitoring, species surveys, GIS mapping, Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), and ERP permitting. 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 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 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. Jennifer’s work experience includes: Vegetation and Habitat Mapping Wetland Determinations Bald Eagle Monitoring Monitoring Well Installation Shorebird Surveys GIS Mapping Protected Species Surveys Phase I ESAs Species Management Plans Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) Submerged Resource Surveys Natural Resource Management Turbidity Monitoring Trail Maintenance Seagrass Surveys Mechanical and Manual Forest Fuel Reduction Preserve Monitoring Small Watercraft Operations Invasive and Exotic Species Mapping Ecological Restoration Wildfire Assessments Environmental Education & Outreach Relevant Certifications/Credentials Florida Master Naturalist, UF/IFAS, 2019 Nitrox Certified Diver, SCUBAdventures, 2018 Certified Interpretive Guide, National Association of Interpretation, 2016 PADI Open Water SCUBA Diver, SCUBA Outfitters of Naples, 2012 Wilderness First Responder, SOLO Schools, 2009 JENNIFER BOBKA Consulting Manager/Ecologist e: jenniferb@eteflorida.com t: 239.304.0030 m: 406.579.4616 Years’ Experience 8 years Education/Training B.A. Environmental Studies Montana State University (2009) Marine Biology & Coastal Ecology Study Abroad, Costa Rica (2007) Python Responder The Nature Conservancy (2015) Sawyer Training US Forest Service (2010) Professional Affiliations Florida Native Plant Society (FNPS) Florida Association of Environmental Professionals (FAEP) League of Environmental Educators of Florida (LEEF) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Page 1 of 1 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel Church (PL20190001326) Statement of Utility Provisions Potable Water: The property will be serviced by a private onsite potable water well. Fire suppression will also be provided via an onsite private well. Sanitary Sewer: The subject property will be serviced by a private onsite sanitary sewer septic tank and field. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 1 inch = 100' ft. GRAPHIC SCALE 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 1 inch = 100' ft. GRAPHIC SCALE 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) PROPOSED PRESERVE AREA AREA = 28,897 SF AREA = 0.66 AC PROPOSED CHURCH 22ND AVENUE NE (COUNTY ROW)8TH STREET NE(COUNTY ROW)WATER MANAGEMENT WATER MANAGEMENT75' WIDE NATIVE BUFFER (TYPE "B" SCREENING)10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER75' WIDE NATIVE BUFFER(TYPE "B" SCREENING)10' TYPE "D" LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING 50' ROADWAY EASEMENT PRESERVE BOUNDARY EX. PROPERTY LINE PRESERVE BOUNDARY EDGE OF EX. ASPHALT PROPOSED SEPTIC FIELD LOCATION PROPOSED POTABLE WELL LOCATION EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK EXISTING 30' ROADWAY EASEMENT PROPOSED SIDEWALK CONNECTION PROPOSED DUMPSTER AND RECYCLING AREA GRASS PARKING AREA GRASS PARKING AREA WATER MANAGEMENTWATER MANAGEMENT 117' 25' PRESERVE SETBACK EDGE OF PRESERVE SETBACK 00 100'50' SCALE: 1" = 100' N IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:1 OF 2 DATE:08/24/2021 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia IGLESIA PENTECOSTES PENIEL - GOLDEN GATE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS 800 HARBOUR DRIVE, SUITE 210 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34103 PHONE: (239) 649-1551 FAX: (239) 649-7112 WWW.RDAFL.COM PROJECT #:RDA19084 PAGE:2 OF 2 DATE:08/24/2021 PARKING SUMMARY BUILDING USE # OF SEATS MINIMUM REQUIRED SPACES SPACES REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED CHURCH 100 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 3 SPACES FOR EACH 7 SEATS IN THE CHAPEL AREA 42.9 = 43 45 (2 HC SPACES) NOTE PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENT PER SECTION 4.05.04.g. TABLE 17 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LDC. HANDICAP SPACES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BASED ON COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 4.05.07 TABLE 19. GENERAL NOTES: 1.VEGETATION WITHIN THE PRESERVE WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF COLLIER COUNTY LDC SECTION 3.05.07. 2.A SIDEWALK ALONG 22ND AVENUE NE WILL BE PROVIDED AND WILL CONNECT TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK ALONG 8TH STREET NE. 3.THESE PLANS ARE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTING AND ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. 4.PER SECTION 4.05.02.B.1.A.III. OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, “UP TO 70 PERCENT OF THE PARKING SPACES FOR HOUSES OF WORSHIP AND SCHOOLS MAY BE SURFACED WITH GRASS OR LAWN, WHEN THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE DETERMINES THAT THE PAVING OF SOME OR ALL PARKING SPACES FOR HOUSES OF WORSHIP AND SCHOOLS WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.”. THIS PROJECT WILL BE PROVIDING GRASS PARKING FOR A MINIMUM OF 25% OF THE PROPOSED PARKING SPACES. PRESERVE AREA CALCULATION TOTAL SITE AREA 224,270 SF = 5.15 AC NATIVE VEGETATION 4.32 AC PRESERVE REQUIREMENT 15% REQUIRED PRESERVE 28,314 SF = 0.65 AC PROVIDED PRESERVE 28,897 SF = 0.66 AC ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE ZONING LAND USE N ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL S ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL E ROW, THEN ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL W ESTATE, E RESIDENTIAL PLANNING NOTES CURRENT ZONING E PROPOSED ZONING E / CONDITIONAL USE CURRENT LAND USE UNDEVELOPED FUTURE LAND USE ESTATES DESIGNATION PROPOSED LAND USE CHURCH NUMBER OF SEATS 100 SEATS MAXIMUM CHURCH SQUARE FOOTAGE 5,000 SF MAXIMUM ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT MAXIMUM ACTUAL BUILDING HEIGHT 30 FT UTILITY NOTE: POTABLE WATER WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE GROUND WATER WELL AND SANITARY SEWER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED VIA A PRIVATE SEPTIC TANK AND DRAIN FIELD. LOCATIONS OF POTABLE WATER WELL AND SEPTIC TANK WILL BE DETERMINED UPON FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ARE THEREFORE NOT SHOWN ON THIS CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN. REQUIRED SETBACKS SUMMARY REQUIRED BUILDING FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' FRONT - CORNER STREET SETBACK 37.5' SIDE SETBACK 30' REAR SETBACK 75' PRESERVE PRINCIPAL SETBACK 25' ACCESSORY SETBACK 10' LAND USE SUMMARY ACRES % OF SITE WATER MANAGEMENT +/- 0.25 4.8% PERIMETER BUFFERS +/- 1.55 30.1% PAVEMENT / SIDEWALK +/- 0.50 9.7% BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA +/- 0.12 2.3% PRESERVE AREA +/- 0.66 12.8% MISC. OPEN SPACE +/- 2.07 40.3% TOTAL SITE AREA +/- 5.15 100% 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Page 1 of 1 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 210, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Conditions of Approval 1. Hours of Operation: The hours of operation for the church will be Wednesday and Sunday for a maximum of 6 hours per day. 2. Days of Operation: The days of normal church operation will be Wednesday and Sunday. 3. Number of Seats (where applicable): The proposed church building will have 100 seats. 4. Total number of members or users: The total number of church members has been estimated to be between 60 and 80 members. 5. Total number of groups using the site (different congregations, organizations, or clubs): The church building will not be used for any other type of group, organization, or club. 6. Location, square footage, and proposed use for each structure: There is only one structure being proposed with this church project. The proposed church building will be a maximum of 5,000 square feet. 7. Number of meetings, (i.e. Bible Study/Worship/Business Meetings) and days and times: All church services and meetings will be held on Wednesdays and Sundays for a maximum of 6 hours. The church plans on having one (1) special event quarterly outside of regular church services. 8. Identify all principal and accessory uses to occur on site: Worship services within the main church building will be the only use to occur on site. 9. Any planned special events (fundraisers, holidays): The church plans on having one (1) special event quarterly outside of regular church services. Special event permitting is required for all special events. 10. Complete Trip Generation information: The maximum total daily trip generation shall not exceed +/- 8 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. 11. Additional Traffic Condition: For services and other periods and events of significant traffic generation, as determined by Collier County staff, the property owner shall provide traffic control by law enforcement or a law enforcement approved service provider as directed by Collier County staff, with staffing an at location(s) as directed by the Collier County Transportation Administrator or his designee. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) Page 1 of 1 800 Harbour Drive, Suite 2C, Naples, FL 34103 • (O) 239-649-1551 • (F) 239-649-7112 info@rdafl.com • www.rdafl.com Exhibit A – Legal Description Folio Number: 37750560009 Legal Description: THE EAST 350’ OF TRACT 133, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO. 23, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGES 9 AND 10, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Folio Number: 37750560106 Legal Description: TRACT 133, LESS THE EAST 350’ THEREOF, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, UNIT NO 23, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 7, PAGES 9 AND 10, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) FUTURE HOUSE WORSHIP FOR IGLESIA PENTECOSTES ALBA DE PENIEL AT 22 AVE NE, NAPLES FL 34120 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Conditional Use - Full Submittal Package (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliercountyfl.gov (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing Waiver Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04 Hearing of the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners For Petition Number(s): _________________________________________________________________ Regarding the above subject petition number(s), ________________________________ (Name of Applicant) elects to proceed during the declared emergency with hybrid virtual public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners, and waives the right to contest any procedural irregularity due to the hybrid virtual nature of the public hearing. Name: _________________________________ Date: ___________________________ Signature*: ______________________________฀ Applicant฀Legal Counsel to Applicant * This form must be signed by either the Applicant (if the applicant is a corporate entity, this must be an officer of the corporate entity) or the legal counsel to the Applicant. ✔ Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel, Inc Diogenes Marquina, President 8/31/2021 PL20190001326 & PL20190001333 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: CCPC-BCC Hybrid Meeting Waiver (1) (20203 : PL20190001326 Iglesia Pentecostes Peniel CU) 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 11.A Item Summary: Election of Officers Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: Operations Analyst – Planning Commission Name: Diane Lynch 10/08/2021 1:41 PM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 10/08/2021 1:41 PM Approved By: Review: Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Skipped 10/08/2021 1:40 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Diane Lynch Review Item Skipped 10/08/2021 1:40 PM Zoning Diane Lynch Zoning Director Review Skipped 10/08/2021 1:40 PM Growth Management Department Diane Lynch GMD Deputy Dept Head Skipped 10/08/2021 1:40 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 11.A Packet Pg. 705 10/21/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 11.B Item Summary: Presentation of the Redistricting Process Meeting Date: 10/21/2021 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 10/06/2021 7:47 AM Submitted by: Title: – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 10/06/2021 7:47 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Mike Bosi Zoning Director Review Skipped 10/01/2021 4:04 PM Planning Commission Diane Lynch Review item Completed 10/08/2021 12:54 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 10/08/2021 2:16 PM Growth Management Department James C French GMD Deputy Dept Head Completed 10/09/2021 11:58 PM Planning Commission Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 10/21/2021 9:00 AM 11.B Packet Pg. 706 TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: October 21, 2021 RE: BCC REDISTRICTING NOTE: For this agenda item, a brief presentation will be made on the BCC Redistricting process for purpose of public awareness. (Including the CCPC, this presentation is being made to nine municipal and civic entities throughout October.) No action is required of the Planning Commission on this agenda item. The population in Collier County increased by more than 54,000 from the 2010 Census to the 2020 Census (321,520 to 375,752) and this growth has not occurred evenly among the five County Commission Districts. The population disparity is so great that Redistricting – redrawing of County Commission District boundaries – is required to bring the population of the five Districts into closer alignment (reference the Florida Constitution, Article VIII, Section 1.(e), and Chapter 124, Florida Statutes). The Collier County School Board has agreed to have coterminous boundaries with the Board of County Commissioners. The BCC approved criteria on June 22, 2021, to be used when drawing proposed map alternatives and directed that a minimum of three maps be drawn for consideration. A total of five public information meetings are scheduled in November, one in each Commission District, at which the proposed maps may be viewed, questions asked, and comments made. The proposed map alternatives may also be viewed on the BCC Redistricting website: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier- county-bcc-redistricting-information . Both the BCC and Collier County School Board are scheduled to adopt a map of new Districts on December 14, 2021. Prepared by: David Weeks, AICP, BCC Redistricting Project Manager Senior Project Manager, Nova Engineering & Environmental LLC Collier County Growth Management Department contract employee Redistricting memo to CCPC G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Redistricting BCC 2021 dw/10-5-21 11.B.a Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Redistricting memo to CCPC (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) COLLIER COUNT Y REDISTRICTING October 2021 1 11.B.b Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) What is Redistricting? •Redistricting is the redrawing of congressional and state legislative districts to adjust for uneven growth rates in diffe rent parts of the state. Districts determine which voters participate in which elections. •This term also applies to County Commission Districts and for the same reason -to address population inequity. 2 11.B.b Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Why does Collier County need to Redistrict? 75,451 67,519 79,882 66,037 86,863 75,150 75,150 75,150 75,150 75,150 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Population Distribution by BCC District 2020 Population Ideal Population 11.B.b Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Why does Collier County need to Redistrict? BCC District 2020 Population Ideal Population % Deviation from Ideal Population Adjustment Needed to Achieve Ideal Population I 75,451 75,150 0.4% over -301 II 67,519 75,150 10 .2% under +7631 III 79,882 75,150 6.3% over -47 32 IV 66,037 75,150 12.1% under +9113 V 86,863 75,150 15.6% over -1171 3 To tal 37 5,752 37 5,750 source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2020 Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) 11.B.b Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) 5 11.B.b Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Collier County Approved Criteria •(1)the population of each district should be as similar as possible; •(2)all districts should be as compact and regularly shaped as fe asible; •(3)the incumbent Commissioner ‘s residence (and same fo r School Board members)must remain in his or her current district;and •(4)consider racial and ethnic populations in accordance with the law. 6 11.B.b Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Additional Criteria •(1)any plan that has a retrogressive effect on minority voting strength would be eliminated from further consideration; •(2)well-defined,easily recognizable and major boundaries,such as rivers,arterials and major ro ads,should be utilized when not in conflict with other criteria; •(3)fo rmer district boundaries should generally be maintained when not in conflict with other criteria;and •(4)communities of interest,such as Golden Gate Estates,and neighborhood integrity should be preserved when not in conflict with other criteria.7 11.B.b Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Vo ting Rights Act The Vo ting Rights Act requires the creation of a district that performs for ra cial and language minorities where: (1)a minority population is geographically compact and sufficiently numerous to be a majority in a single district; (2)the minority population is politically cohesive; (3)the majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it usually to defeat the minority- preferred candidate;and (4)under all of the circumstances,the minority population has less opportunity than others to participate in the political process and elect representatives of its choice. The Vo ting Rights Act also prohibits purposeful discrimination and protects against retrogression –or backsliding –in the ability of racial and language minorities to elect representatives of their choice. 8 11.B.b Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Timeline Ta sk Timeframe Receive population data from U.S. Census Bureau.August 2021 Draf t proposed maps with corresponding population data.September 2021 Notification of Public Information Meetings through Civic- Municipality presentations and newspaper adver tisements. October 2021 Hold Public Information Meetings throughout the community. November 2021 Hold BCC public hearing to adopt final map.December 14, 2021 9 11.B.b Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Public Information Meeting Schedule Location Date District 1 Collier County Government Center Administrative Building (Bldg. F, 3rd Floor) BCC Chambers 3299 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Monday NOVEMBER 1 @6:00 District 2 Nor th Collier Regional Park (Exhibit Hall) 15000 Livingston Road Naples, FL 34109 We dnesday NOVEMBER 10 @6:00 District 3 Golden Gate Community Center (Auditorium) 47 01 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116 Tu esday NOVEMBER 16 @6:00 District 4 Growth Management Depar tment (Conference Rooms 609/610 ) 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Tu esday NOVEMBER 2 @6:00 District 5 Immokalee Community Park (Conference Room) 321 N. 1st Street Immokalee, FL 34142 Monday NOVEMBER 15 @6:00 10 All meetings are open to the public, regardless of the District in which you reside. We aring of facemasks is encouraged but not required. 11.B.b Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Contact Information DAVID WEEKS BCC Redistricting Project Manager Collier County Growth Management Department Contract Employee Email: david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov Phone: 239-252-2305 We bsite: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your- government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier- county-bcc-redistricting-information 11 11.B.b Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: 09-20-21 - Collier County Redistricting (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) COLLIER COUNTY REDISTRICTINGOctober 2021111.B.cPacket Pg. 719Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) What is Redistricting?■Redistrictingis the redrawing of congressional and state legislative districts to adjust for uneven growth rates in different parts of the state. Districts determine which voters participate in which elections.■This term also applies to County Commission Districts and for the same reason ‐to address population inequity.211.B.cPacket Pg. 720Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Why does Collier County need to Redistrict?75,451 67,519 79,882 66,037 86,863 75,150 75,150 75,150 75,150 75,150 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5Population Distribution by BCC District2020 PopulationIdeal Population11.B.cPacket Pg. 721Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Why does Collier County need to Redistrict?BCC District2020 PopulationIdeal Population% Deviation from Ideal PopulationAdjustment Needed to Achieve Ideal PopulationI75,451 75,1500.4% over -301II67,519 75,15010.2% under +7631III79,882 75,1506.3% over -4732IV66,037 75,15012.1% under +9113V86,863 75,15015.6% over -11713Total375,752 375,750 source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2020 Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) 11.B.cPacket Pg. 722Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) 511.B.cPacket Pg. 723Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Collier County Approved Criteria■(1) the population of each district should be as similar as possible;■(2) all districts should be as compact and regularly shaped as feasible;■(3) the incumbent Commissioner‘s residence (and same for SchoolBoard members) must remain in his or her current district; and■(4) consider racial and ethnic populations in accordance with the law.611.B.cPacket Pg. 724Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Additional Criteria■(1) any plan that has a retrogressive effect on minority voting strengthwould be eliminated from further consideration;■(2) well‐defined, easily recognizable and major boundaries, such asrivers, arterials and major roads, should be utilized when not in conflictwith other criteria;■(3) former district boundaries should generally be maintained when notin conflict with other criteria; and■(4) communities of interest, such as Golden Gate Estates, andneighborhood integrity should be preserved when not in conflict with othercriteria.711.B.cPacket Pg. 725Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Voting Rights ActThe Voting Rights Act requires the creation of a district that performs for racial andlanguage minorities where:(1) a minority population is geographically compact and sufficiently numerous to be amajority in a single district;(2) the minority population is politically cohesive;(3) the majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it usually to defeat the minority‐preferred candidate; and(4) under all of the circumstances, the minority population has less opportunity thanothers to participate in the political process and elect representatives of its choice.The Voting Rights Act also prohibits purposeful discrimination and protects againstretrogression – or backsliding – in the ability of racial and language minorities to electrepresentatives of their choice.811.B.cPacket Pg. 726Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) TimelineTaskTimeframeReceive population data from U.S. Census Bureau.August 2021Draft proposed maps with corresponding population data. September 2021Notification of Public Information Meetings through Civic-Municipality presentations and newspaper advertisements. October 2021Hold Public Information Meetings throughout the community. November 2021Hold BCC public hearing to adopt final map.December 14, 2021911.B.cPacket Pg. 727Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Public Information Meeting ScheduleLocationDateDistrict 1Collier County Government Center Administrative Building (Bldg. F, 3rdFloor) BCC Chambers3299 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112MondayNOVEMBER 1@6:00District 2North Collier Regional Park (Exhibit Hall)15000 Livingston RoadNaples, FL 34109WednesdayNOVEMBER 10@6:00District 3Golden Gate Community Center (Auditorium) 4701 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116TuesdayNOVEMBER 16@6:00District 4Growth Management Department (Conference Rooms 609/610)2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104TuesdayNOVEMBER 2@6:00 District 5Immokalee Community Park (Conference Room) 321 N. 1st Street Immokalee, FL 34142MondayNOVEMBER 15@6:0010All meetings are open to the public, regardless of the District in which you reside. Wearing of facemasks is encouraged but not required.11.B.cPacket Pg. 728Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Contact InformationDAVID WEEKSBCC Redistricting Project ManagerCollier County Growth Management Department Contract EmployeeEmail: david.weeks@colliercountyfl.govPhone: 239‐252‐2305Website: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your‐government/divisions‐s‐z/zoning‐division/2021‐collier‐county‐bcc‐redistricting‐information1111.B.cPacket Pg. 729Attachment: Collier County Redistricting (October Meetings) rfs (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) 2021 REDISTRICTING: COLLIER COUNTY BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BCC) & District School Board of Collier County (School Board) Public Meeting Schedule In District 1: Monday, Nov. 1, 2021, 6 p.m., in BCC Meeting Room on 3rd floor of Building F, Collier County Government Center Administration Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. [Administration Building is the eight- story building closest to U.S. 41 and Airport Road] In District 4: Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2021, 6 p.m., in Conference Room 609/610, Growth Management Department / Development Services building, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 [Building entrance fronts on N. Horseshoe Drive, in center of building] In District 2: Wednesday, Nov. 10, 2021, 6 p.m.,, in Exhibit Hall, North Collier Regional Park, 15000 Livingston Road, Naples, FL 34109 [Park is located south of Immokalee Road, east of Livingston Road; building with Exhibit Hall is located east of the water park and west of the soccer fields] In District 5: Monday, Nov. 15, 2021, 6 p.m., in Conference Room, Immokalee Community Park, 321 N. 1st Street, Immokalee, FL 34142 In District 3: Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2021, 6 p.m., in Auditorium, Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34116 [Park is located at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Sunshine Boulevard] BCC meeting to include consideration/adoption of new BCC district boundaries: Dec. 14, 2021, 9 a.m., in BCC Meeting Room on 3rd floor of Building F, Collier County Government Center Administration Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. School Board meeting to include consideration/adoption of new School Board district boundaries: Dec. 14, 2021. The School Board is not expected to adopt their redistricting map until after BCC adoption. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the five evening public meetings (Nov.1, 2, 10, 15 and 16), attendees will have an opportunity to review the proposed maps and ask questions. A brief presentation will be made at the beginning of each of those meetings. Every effort will be made to have a Spanish and Haitian Creole interpreter at those five meetings. All meetings are open to the public, regardless of the district in which you reside. Wearing of facemasks is encouraged but not required. For more information, please visit our website: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your- government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier-county-bcc-redistricting-information or contact: David Weeks, BCC Redistricting Project Manager Collier County Growth Management Department Contract Employee 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-2305 david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov 11.B.d Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Municipal-Civic AND District Mtg Handout - Public Meeting Schedule (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) REDISTRITAJE 2021: JUNTA DE COMISIONADOS DE CONDADO del CONDADO DE COLLIER (BCC) y Junta Escolar del Distrito del Condado de Collier (Junta Escolar) Calendario de reuniones públicas En el Distrito 1: Lunes, 1 de noviembre de 2021, 6 pm, en la sala de reuniones de BCC, 3er piso del Edificio F, Edificio Administrativo del Centro Gubernamental del Condado de Collier, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. [El edificio administrativo es el edificio de 8 pisos más cercano a la US 41 y Airport-Pulling Road] En el Distrito 4: Martes, 2 de noviembre de 2021, 6 pm, en la sala de conferencias 609/610, edificio del Departamento de Gestión de Servicios de Crecimiento/Desarrollo, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 [Fachadas de entrada del edificio en N. Horseshoe Drive, en el centro del edificio] En el Distrito 2: Miércoles, 10 de noviembre de 2021, 6 pm, en Exhibit Hall, North Collier Regional Park, 15000 Livingston Road, Naples, FL 34109 [El parque está ubicado al sur de Immokalee Road, al este de Livingston Road; el edificio con sala de exposiciones está ubicado al este del parque acuático y al oeste de las canchas de fútbol] En el Distrito 5: Lunes, 15 de noviembre de 2021, 6 pm, en la sala de conferencias, Immokalee Community Park, 321 N. 1st Street, Immokalee, FL 34142 En el Distrito 3: Martes, 16 de noviembre de 2021, 6 pm, en Auditorio del Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34116 [El parque está ubicado en la esquina noroeste de Golden Gate Parkway y Sunshine Boulevard] Reunión de BCC para incluir la consideración/adopción de los nuevos límites del distrito de BCC: 14 de diciembre de 2021, 6 pm, en la sala de reuniones de BCC, 3er piso del Edificio F, Edificio Administrativo del Centro Gubernamental del Condado de Collier, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. Reunión de la Junta Escolar para incluir la consideración/adopción de los nuevos límites del distrito de la Junta Escolar: 14 de diciembre de 2021. No se espera que la Junta Escolar adopte su mapa de redistritaje hasta después de la adopción de BCC. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- En las cinco reuniones públicas de la tarde (noviembre 1, 2, 10, 15 y 16), los asistentes tendrán la oportunidad de revisar los mapas propuestos y hacer preguntas. Se hará una breve presentación al comienzo de cada una de esas reuniones. Se hará todo lo posible para tener un intérprete de español y criollo haitiano en esas cinco reuniones. Todas las reuniones están abiertas al público, independientemente del distrito en el que resida. Se recomienda el uso de mascarillas, pero no es obligatorio. Para obtener más información, por favor visite nuestro sitio web: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your- government/divisions-sz/zoning-division/2021-collier-county-bcc-redistricting-information o contacte a: David Weeks, Gerente de Proyecto de Redistritaje de BCC Empleado contratado del Departamento de Gestión del Crecimiento del Condado de Collier 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-2305 david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov 11.B.d Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Municipal-Civic AND District Mtg Handout - Public Meeting Schedule (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) REDEKOUPAJ 2021: KONSÈY KOMISÈ KONTE (BCC) NAN KONTE COLLIER & Konsèy Lekòl Distri Konte Collier (Konsèy Lekòl) Kalandriye Reyinyon Piblik Nan Distri 1: Lendi 1er novanm 2021, 6 p.m., nan Sal Reyinyon BCC nan 3èm etaj Bilding F, Collier County Government Center Administration Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. [Bilding Administratif la se bilding 8 etaj ki toupre U.S. 41 ak Airport- Pulling Road] Nan Distri 4: Madi 2 novanm 2021, 6 p.m., nan Sal Konferans 609/610, bilding Growth Management Department / Development Services, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 [Fasad antre bilding nan N. Horseshoe Drive, nan sant bilding lan] Nan Distri 2: Mèkredi 10 novanm 2021, 6 p.m., nan Sal Ekspozisyon, North Collier Regional Park, 15000 Livingston Road, Naples, FL 34109 [Pak la sitiye nan sid Immokalee Road, lès Livingston Road; bilding avèk Sal Ekspozisyon an sitiye nan lès pak dlo a ak lwès teren foutbòl la] Nan Distri 5: Lendi 15 novanm 2021, 6 p.m., nan Sal Konferans, Immokalee Community Park, 321 N. 1st Street, Immokalee, FL 34142 Nan Distri 3: Madi 16 novanm 2021, 6 p.m., nan oditoryòm, Goldern Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34116 [Pak la sitiye nan kwen nòdwès Golden Gate Parkway ak Sunshine Boulevard] Reyinyon BCC a gen ladan konsiderasyon/adopsyon nouvo limit distri BCC yo: 14 desanm 2021, 9 a.m., nan Sal Reyinyon BCC nan 3èm etaj Bilding F, Collier County Government Center Administration Building, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. Reyinyon Konsèy Lekòl la gen ladan konsiderasyon/adopsyon nouvo limit distri Konsèy Lekòl la: 14 desanm 2021 Nou pa espere ke Konsèy Lekòl la ap adopte kat redekoupaj yo a jiska apre adopsyon BCC a. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nan senk Reyinyon Piblik nan aswè yo (1, 2, 10, 15 ak 16 novanm), patisipan yo ap gen opòtinite pou revize kat ki pwopoze yo ak poze kesyon. Yon prezantasyon kout ap fèt nan kòmansman chak reyinyon sa yo. Ap gen efò k ap fèt pou genyen entèprèt nan lang Panyòl ak Kreyòl Ayisyen nan senk reyinyon sa yo. Tout reyinyon yo ouvri pou piblik la, kèlkeswa Distri yo rete a. Nou ankouraje nou mete mask figi men se pa yon obligasyon. Pou plis enfòmasyon, ale sou sitwèb nou an: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your- government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier-county-bcc-redistricting-information oswa kontakte: David Weeks, Manadjè Pwojè pou Redekoupaj BCC Anplwaye Kontraktyèl Depatman Jesyon Kwasans Konte Collier 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-2305 david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov 11.B.d Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Municipal-Civic AND District Mtg Handout - Public Meeting Schedule (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview)   Redistricting Fact Sheet    Redistricting is the redrawing of congressional and state legislative districts to adjust for uneven growth rates in different  parts of the state. Districts determine which voters participate in which elections. This term also applies to County  Commission Districts and for the same reason ‐ to address population inequity.  The Constitution of the State of Florida [Article VIII, Section1.(e)] requires that, after each decennial census, the Board of  County Commissioners (BCC) is to divide the county into districts of contiguous territories as nearly equal in population as  practicable, with one commissioner residing in each district elected as provided by law. Chapter 124, Florida Statutes, also  provides for more frequent redistricting to maintain population balance, but provides that redistricting shall only occur in  odd‐numbered years.       Collier County Approved Criteria:  (1) the population of each district should be as similar as possible;   (2) all districts should be as compact and regularly shaped as feasible;   (3) the incumbent commissioner‘s residence (and same for school board members) must remain in his or her  current district; and   (4) consider racial and ethnic populations in accordance with the law.    Collier County Additional Criteria  (1) any plan that has a retrogressive effect on minority voting strength would be eliminated from further consideration;   (2) well‐defined, easily recognizable, and major boundaries, such as rivers, arterial and major roadways, should be utilized  when not in conflict with other criteria;   (3) former district boundaries should generally be maintained when not in conflict with other criteria; and   (4) communities of interest, such as Golden Gate Estates, and neighborhood integrity should be preserved when not in  conflict with other criteria.      The Voting Rights Act requires the creation of a district that performs for racial and language minorities where:   (1) a minority population is geographically compact and sufficiently numerous to be a majority in a single district;   (2) the minority population is politically cohesive;   (3) the majority votes sufficiently as a bloc to enable it usually to defeat the minority‐preferred candidate; and   (4) under all of the circumstances, the minority population has less opportunity than others to participate in the  political process and elect representatives of its choice.    The Voting Rights Act (VRA) also prohibits purposeful discrimination and protects against retrogression—or backsliding— in the ability of racial and language minorities to elect representatives of their choice.    Section 2 of the VRA prohibits denial or abridgement of the right to vote based on race, color or minority language status  including the opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representative of their choice. Section 2 further  forbids creating election districts that improperly dilute minorities‘ voting power. Tactics commonly used to dilute minority  voting strength include:   1. Cracking — Dividing groups of people with the same or similar characteristics into more than one district to  diminish their ability to elect a desired candidate.   2. Packing — Cramming large groups of people with the same characteristics into the same or as few districts as  possible to dilute their voting strength elsewhere.   11.B.e Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Timeline  Task Timeframe  Receive population data from U.S. Census Bureau. August 2021  Draft proposed maps with corresponding population data. September 2021  Notification of Public Information Meetings through Civic‐Municipality  presentations and newspaper advertisements.  October 2021  Hold Public Information Meetings throughout the community.  November 2021  Hold BCC public hearing to adopt final map. December 14, 2021    Collier County Redistricting Public Information Meeting Schedule  Collier County  Redistricting Public  Information Meetings  Location Date  District 1 Collier County Government Center Administrative  Building (Bldg. F, 3rd Floor) BCC Chambers  3299 E. Tamiami Trail   Naples, FL 34112  Monday  NOVEMBER 1  6 p.m.  District 2 North Collier Regional Park (Exhibit Hall)  15000 Livingston Road  Naples, FL 34109  Wednesday  NOVEMBER 10  6 p.m.  District 3 Golden Gate Community Center (Auditorium)   4701 Golden Gate Parkway   Naples, FL 34116  Tuesday  NOVEMBER 16  6 p.m.  District 4 Growth Management Department   (Conference Rooms 609/610)  2800 N. Horseshoe Drive   Naples, FL 34104  Tuesday  NOVEMBER R 2  6 p.m.  District 5 Immokalee Community Park (Conference Room)   321 N. 1st Street   Immokalee, FL 34142  Monday  NOVEMBER 15  6 p.m.  At the five evening public meetings attendees will have an opportunity to review the proposed maps and ask  questions. A brief presentation will be made at the beginning of each of those meetings. Every effort will be made  to have a Spanish and Haitian Creole interpreter at those five meetings. All meetings are open to the public,  regardless of the district in which you reside. Wearing of facemasks is encouraged but not required.    Contact information:  David Weeks, BCC Redistricting Project Manager   Collier County Growth Management Department Contract Employee  (239) 252‐2305  david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov  https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your‐government/divisions‐s‐z/zoning‐division/2021‐collier‐county‐bcc‐redistricting‐information  11.B.e Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Hoja informativa sobre el redistritaje El redistritaje es el rediseño de los distritos legislativos estatales y del Congreso para ajustar las tasas de crecimiento desiguales en diferentes partes del estado. Los distritos determinan qué votantes participan en qué elecciones. Este término también se aplica a los Distritos de la Comisión del Condado y por la misma razón: para abordar la desigualdad de la población. La Constitución del Estado de Florida [Artículo VIII, Sección 1. (e)] requiere que, después de cada censo decenal, la Junta de Comisionados debe dividir el condado en distritos de territorios contiguos, tan casi iguales en población como sea posible, con un Comisionado residiendo en cada distrito elegido según lo dispuesto por la ley. El Capítulo 124, Estatutos de Florida, también establece una redistribución de distritos más frecuente, para mantener el equilibrio de la población, pero establece que la redistribución de distritos sólo ocurrirá en los años impares. Criterios aprobados para el Condado de Collier: (1) la población de cada distrito debe ser lo más similar posible; (2) todos los distritos deben ser tan compactos y de forma regular como sea posible; (3) la residencia del Comisionado titular (y la misma para los miembros de la Junta Escolar) debe permanecer en su distrito actual; y (4) considerar las poblaciones raciales y étnicas de acuerdo con la ley. Criterios adicionales del Condado de Collier (1) cualquier plan que tenga un efecto regresivo sobre la fuerza de voto de las minorías se eliminaría de una consideración adicional; (2) los límites importantes, bien definidos y fácilmente reconocibles, como ríos, arterias y carreteras principales, deben utilizarse cuando no entren en conflicto con otros criterios; (3) los límites del distrito anterior generalmente deben mantenerse cuando no estén en conflicto con otros criterios; y (4) las comunidades de interés, como Golden Gate Estates, y la integridad del vecindario deben preservarse cuando no estén en conflicto con otros criterios. La Ley de Derechos Electorales requiere la creación de un distrito que funcione para las minorías raciales y lingüísticas donde: (1) una población minoritaria sea geográficamente compacta y suficientemente numerosa para ser mayoría en un sólo distrito; (2) la población minoritaria sea políticamente cohesionada; (3) la mayoría vota lo suficientemente en bloque como para permitirle derrotar al candidato preferido por la minoría; y (4) en todas las circunstancias, la población minoritaria tiene menos oportunidades que otras de participar en el proceso político y elegir representantes de su elección. La Ley de Derechos Electorales (VRA, por sus siglas en inglés) también prohíbe la discriminación intencionada y protege contra el retroceso —o deslizamiento— en la capacidad de las minorías raciales y lingüísticas para elegir representantes de su elección. La Sección 2 de la VRA prohíbe la negación o la limitación del derecho al voto por motivos de raza, color o idioma minoritario, incluida la oportunidad de participar en el proceso político y elegir al representante de su elección. La sección 2 prohíbe, además, la creación de distritos electorales que diluyan indebidamente el poder de voto de las minorías. Las tácticas comúnmente utilizadas para diluir la fuerza de voto de las minorías incluyen: 1. Agrietamiento: dividir grupos de personas con las mismas o similares características en más de un distrito, para disminuir su capacidad de elegir al candidato deseado. 2. Empaquetamiento - Agrupar a grandes grupos de personas con las mismas características en el mismo distrito, o en el menor número posible de distritos, para diluir su fuerza de voto en otros lugares. 11.B.e Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Cronología Tarea Periodo de tiempo Recibir datos de población de la Oficina del Censo de EE. UU. Agosto de 2021 Elaborar mapas propuestos con los datos de población correspondientes. Septiembre de 2021 Notificación de Reuniones de Información Pública a través de presentaciones Cívico- Municipales y anuncios en periódicos. Octubre de 2021 Realizar reuniones de información pública en toda la comunidad. Noviembre de 2021 Celebrar una audiencia pública de BCC para adoptar el mapa final. 14 de diciembre de 2021 Horario de la reunión de información pública sobre el redistritaje del Condado de Collier Reuniones de información pública sobre el redistritaje del Condado de Collier Ubicación Fecha Distrito 1 Collier County Government Center Administrative Building (Bldg. F, 3rd Floor) BCC Chambers 3299 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Lunes 1 DE NOVIEMBRE @6:00 Distrito 2 North Collier Regional Park (Exhibit Hall) 15000 Livingston Road Naples, FL 34109 Miércoles 10 DE NOVIEMBRE @6:00 Distrito 3 Golden Gate Community Center (Auditorio) 4701 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116 Martes 16 DE NOVIEMBRE @6:00 Distrito 4 Departamento de Gestión del Crecimiento (Salas de conferencias 609/610) 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Martes 2 DE NOVIEMBRE @6:00 Distrito 5 Immokalee Community Park (Sala de conferencias) 321 N. 1st Street Immokalee, FL 34142 Lunes 15 DE NOVIEMBRE @6:00 En las cinco reuniones públicas de la tarde, los asistentes tendrán la oportunidad de revisar los mapas propuestos y hacer preguntas. Se hará una breve presentación al comienzo de cada una de esas reuniones. Se hará todo lo posible para tener un intérprete de español y criollo haitiano en esas cinco reuniones. Todas las reuniones están abiertas al público, independientemente del distrito en el que resida. Se recomienda el uso de mascarillas, pero no es obligatorio. Información de contacto: David Weeks, Gerente de Proyecto de Redistritaje de BCC Empleado contratado del Departamento de Gestión del Crecimiento del Condado de Collier (239) 252-2305 david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier-county-bcc-redistricting-information 11.B.e Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Fich Enfòmasyon sou Redekoupaj Redekoupaj se retrasaj kongrè ak distri lejislatif l’eta Florid a yo pou ajiste ak pousantaj kwasans ki pa egal nan plizyè kote nan eta a. Distri yo detèmine nan ki eleksyon elektè yo ap patisipe. Mo sa a aplike pou tout Distri Komisyon Konte yo ak pou menm rezon an - pou rezoud inegalite popilasyon an. Konstitisyon Eta Florid la [Atik VIII, Seksyon1.(e)] egzije, apre chak resansman dis an, pou Konsèy Komisè yo divize konte a an distri teritwa vwazen ki prèske egal nan kantite popilasyon an nan jan sa posib, avèk yon Komisè ki ap rete nan chak distri ki eli jan lalwa prevwa sa. Chapit 124 Lwa Florid yo, prevwa tout redekoupaj pi souvan pou kenbe popilasyon an ekilibre men li prevwa tou ke redekoupaj la dwe fèt sèlman nan ane ki pa pè. Kritè Konte Collier Apwouve: (1) popilasyon chak distri ta dwe similè nan mezi posib; (2) tout distri yo ta dwe konpak ak egal nan tout pati li yo nan mezi posib; (3) rezidans Komisè ki an fonksyon an (ak menm bagay pou manm Konsèy Lekòl la) dwe rete nan distri aktyèl li a; epi (4) konsidere ras ak etnisite popilasyon an pou li konfòme ak la lwa. Kritè Siplemantè Konte Collier (1) nenpòt plan ki gen yon efè regresif sou kantite vòt minorite a yo pral elimine pou mank de konsiderasyon; (2) limit ki byen defini, ki ka fasil pou rekonèt epi ki gen gwo limit tankou rivy ou gwo wout, ta dwe itilize lè sa pa deranje lòt kritè yo; (3) ansyen limit distri a yo ta dwe jeneralman kontinye lè yo pa deranje lòt kritè yo; epi (4) kominote enterè tankou Golden Gate Estates ak entegrite katye a ta dwe prezève lè yo pa deranje lòt kritè yo. Lwa sou Dwa pou Vote a egzije kreyasyon yon distri ki fonksyone pou minorite rasyal ak lang kote: (1) yon popilasyon minoritè konpak sou plan jeyografik epi gen ase moun pou li se yon majorite nan yon sèl distri; (2) popilasyon minoritè a gen koyerans sou plan politik; (3) majorite a vote ase kòm yon blòk pou pèmèt li jeneralman pote viktwa sou kandida minorite a prefere; epi (4) nan tout sikonstans yo, popilasyon minoritè a gen mwens opòtinite pase lòt yo pou patisipe nan pwosesis politik ak eli reprezantan chwa li yo. Lwa sou Dwa pou Vote (Voting Rights Act, VRA) a an plis entèdi diskriminasyon entansyonèl ak pwoteje kont regresyon— oswa rekil—nan kapasite ras ak lang minoritè a pou l eli reprezantan yo chwazi a. Seksyon 2 VRA a entèdi refi oswa restriksyon dwa pou vote sou baz ras, koulè oswa estati lang minorite a ki gen ladan opòtinite pou patisipe nan pwosesis politik la ak eli reprezantan yo chwazi a. Seksyon 2 a entèdi tou kreyasyon distri elektoral ki pa byen disoud pouvwa vòt minorite yo. Taktik ki souvan itilize pou disoud fòs vòt minorite a gen ladan: 1. Fisire — Divize gwoup moun ki gen menm karakteristik oswa karakteristik ki sanble pou tounen plis pase yon distri pou diminiye kapasite yo pou eli yon kandida yo swete. 2. Antase — Kondanse gwo gwoup moun ki gen menm karakteristik pou tounen menm oswa pou tounen apèn kèk distri nan mezi posib pou disoud fòs vòt yo lòt kote. 11.B.e Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview) Kalandriye Aktivite Delè Resevwa done sou popilasyon an nan Biwo Resansman Etazini. Out 2021 Fè bouyon kat ki pwopoze ak done popilasyon ki koresponn. Septanm 2021 Notifikasyon sou Reyinyon Enfòmasyon Piblik atravè prezantasyon Sivik- Minisipalite ak anons nan jounal. Oktòb 2021 Reyalize Reyinyon Enfòmasyon Piblik nan tout kominote a. Novanm 2021 Reyalize odyans piblik Konsèy Komisyon Konte (BCC) pou adopte kat final. 14 desanm 2021 Kalandriye Reyinyon Enfòmasyon Piblik sou Redekoupaj Konte Collier Reyinyon Enfòmasyon Piblik sou Redekoupaj Konte Collier Lokal Dat Distri 1 Collier County Government Center Administrative Building (Bldg. F, 3rd Floor) BCC Chambers 3299 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Lendi 1er Novanm 6 p.m. Distri 2 North Collier Regional Park (Sal Ekspozisyon) 15000 Livingston Road Naples, FL 34109 Mèkredi 10 Novanm 6 p.m. Distri 3 Golden Gate Community Center (Oditoryòm) 4701 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34116 Madi 16 Novanm 6 p.m. Distri 4 Growth Management Department (Sal Konferans 609/610) 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Madi 2 Novanm 6 p.m. Distri 5 Immokalee Community Park (Sal Konferans) 321 N. 1st Street Immokalee, FL 34142 Lendi 15 Novanm 6 p.m. Nan senk Reyinyon Piblik nan aswè yo, patisipan yo ap gen opòtinite pou revize kat ki pwopoze yo ak poze kesyon. Yon prezantasyon kout ap fèt nan kòmansman chak reyinyon sa yo. Ap gen efò k ap fèt pou genyen entèprèt nan lang Panyòl ak Kreyòl Ayisyen nan senk reyinyon sa yo. Tout reyinyon yo ouvri pou piblik la, kèlkeswa Distri yo rete a. Nou ankouraje nou mete mask figi men se pa yon obligasyon. Enfòmasyon Kontak: David Weeks, Manadjè Pwojè pou Redekoupaj BCC Anplwaye Kontraktyèl Depatman Jesyon Kwasans Konte Collier (239) 252-2305 david.weeks@colliercountyfl.gov https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/2021-collier-county-bcc-redistricting-information 11.B.e Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Municipal-Civic Mtg Handout - Redistricting Fact Sheets (20248 : Redistricting Process Overview)