Loading...
Agenda 06/28/2022 Item #17D (Ordinance - Ord. Amending Ord. 89-05 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, N of Rattlesnake Road and west of Carman Drive RPUD-PL20210000624)06/28/2022 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 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 Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Future Land Use Map Series to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict by changing the designation of property from Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Carman Drive Subdistrict to allow up to 212 rental dwelling units, of which 48 units will be affordable housing and rent restricted. The subject property is located at 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, north of Rattlesnake Road and west of Carman Drive, in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 15.41f acres; and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [PL20210000623] (Companion to 22323 zoning petition RPUD-PL20210000624, Carman Drive 15 Residential Planned Unit Development) OBJECTIVE: To consider approving (adopting) the proposed small-scale amendment to the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and approve said amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: Petition PL20210000623 is submitted as a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment. As such, per Florida Statutes, the request is heard only once by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and the Board. If approved by the Board, the petition is transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). If denied by the Board, the petition is not transmitted to the DEO. This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Map Series of the GMP to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict. The Subdistrict text and maps proposed by this amendment are depicted in Ordinance Exhibit A. Staff s analysis is provided in the Staff Report to the CCPC. Note: A companion PUD rezone petition is scheduled for this same hearing • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Plan. County Resolution 12-234 provides for a public petition process to amend the Collier County GMP. Per Chapter 163.3187, Florida Statutes, limitations are in place for this type of small-scale amendment, as identified below, followed by staff comments in [brackets]. a. The proposed amendment involves a use of 50 acres or fewer. [The proposed amendment pertains to a f15.41-acre property.] 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 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 are permissible under this section. [This amendment involves text changes that relate directly to a site -specific Future Land Use Map and Map Series change.] 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 Packet Pg. 1896 06/28/2022 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 within an Area of Critical State Concern.] • Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177 [Internal consistency will be maintained if the GMP amendment is approved.] • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held its Adoption hearing for this petition on May 19, 2022. The staff and CCPC Adoption Hearing recommendation are presented further below. • This Adoption hearing considers an amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). The proposed amended Subdistrict text, as modified per CCPC recommendation, is depicted in Ordinance Exhibit "A." Based on the review of this small-scale GMP amendment petition, including the supporting data and analysis, staff makes the following findings and conclusions. • There are no unacceptable environmental impacts resulting from this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • Transportation Planning staff finds this petition to be consistent with Transportation Element Policy 5.1 regarding traffic impacts to the abutting segment of Collier Boulevard. • There are no utility -related concerns caused by this petition and no concerns regarding impacts upon other infrastructure components. • The petitioner's market demand analysis concludes there is a demand for the proposed rental project in their market area. • The market study does not adequately address employment income for entry level professionals in the identified categories and does not address lower -income non-professional and/or non- managerial positions. • The market study does not include a comparative analysis of other potential sites within the market area that may be more appropriate to accommodate the proposed project. • Of the rental projects approved through the public hearing process over the last several years that committed to provide some Affordable Housing units, almost all such DUs were for higher affordable income levels, typically >100% of AMI. As submitted, the subject petition proposed 42 out of 212 DUs for >80% - <120% of AMI (20% of the total DUs). These affordable housing rental units would be similarly rented at current market rate rents. (During discussion at the CCPC hearing, the number of affordable units and income ranges were modified; see the CCPC recommendation below.) • Based upon surrounding property approvals and development a density greater than 2.5 DU/A appears justified if the density provides a transition to address compatibility with the Sapphire Cove project north of the site, and affordable housing in the >50% - <100% AMI range is provided to greater meet the housing affordability needs in the community. • Based on permitted building heights to the north for single family residential development and the sparse nature of the preserve to the north, a building height that is similar or transitions between the two sites should be considered, and with increased setbacks and buffering from the residential Packet Pg. 1897 06/28/2022 development also could be justified. • The proposed density of 13.76 DU/A is significantly higher than the maximum density of 2.5 DU/A allowed by the FLUE, but the recent approvals within the area are more reflective of a traditional Activity Center at 16 units per acre. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, The Community Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12-234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: "plan amendments shall be based on relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue." 163.3177(1)(f), FS. In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies and data regarding the area, as applicable including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The need to modify land uses and development patterns with antiquated subdivisions. i. The discouragement of urban sprawl. j. The need for job creation, capital investment and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. And the FLUE map amendments shall also be based upon the following analyses per Section 163.3177(6)(a)8.: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. This item is approved as to form and legality. It requires an affirmative vote of four for approval because this is an Adoption hearing of the GMP amendment. [HFAC] FISCAL IMPACT: Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice for the public hearings. Therefore, no fiscal impacts to Collier County that result from the adoption of this amendment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Adoption of the proposed amendment by the Board and its transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity will commence the Department's (30) thirty -day challenge period for any affected person. Provided the small-scale development amendment is not challenged, it becomes effective (31) thirty-one days after Board adoption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20210000623 to the Board of County Packet Pg. 1898 06/28/2022 Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. Alternatively, staff recommended that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20210000623 with a recommendation to approve for adoption and transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required review agencies, subject to: 1) providing 20% of the total units (42 of 212 DUs) in the "Low" affordable housing category (>50% - <80% of the AMI); and, 2) providing 10% of the total units (21 of 212) in the "Moderate" affordable housing category, at a maximum of 100% of the AMI. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard this petition at their May 19, 2022, meeting. There were no registered speakers. The applicant initially proposed an affordable housing commitment of 42 units (20% of units) for households earning 80-120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). However, as part of the project discussions before the CCPC, the applicant agreed to increase the number of affordable housing units to 48, with 24 units serving households earning up to 80% of the AMI and 24 units serving households earning up to 100% of the AMI. The affordable housing commitment is included in the Subdistrict text and the restriction will remain in place for thirty (30) years from the date of issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Rent limit adjustments will be made annually according to the most recent Collier County approved Table of Rental Rates, and the developer will report annually on the occupancy of income restricted units as part of the PUD monitoring requirements. Staff supported this change to the affordable housing commitment. The CCPC unanimously recommended that the Board adopt PL20210000623 and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required agencies, subject to the applicant's commitment to provide 48 affordable housing units for a period of 30-years: 24 units at or below 100% of the AMI and 24 units at or below 80% of the AMI. (Vote: 510) RECOMMENDATION: To adopt and transmit petition PL20210000623 to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required agencies, as recommended by the CCPC. Prepared by: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. CCPC Staff Report _Carman Drive Subdistrict.FNL (PDF) 2.Ordinance & Exhibit A - 052422(1) (PDF) 3. [Linked] Application & Backup Documents_ Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA (PDF) 4. Collier County Housing Demand Model 2021 (PDF) 5.2022 Income Limits and Rent Limits Table (PDF) 6. Collier Apartments_0819 (PDF) 7. CCPC Ordinance & Exhibit A (PDF) 8. legal ad - agenda IDs 22346 & 22323 (PDF) Packet Pg. 1899 06/28/2022 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 17.1) Doc ID: 22346 Item Summary: 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 Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Future Land Use Map Series to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict by changing the designation of property from Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Carman Drive Subdistrict to allow up to 212 rental dwelling units, of which 48 units will be affordable housing and rent restricted. The subject property is located at 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, north of Rattlesnake Road and west of Carman Drive, in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 15.41f acres; and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date. [PL20210000623] (Companion to 22323 zoning petition RPUD-PL20210000624, Carman Drive 15 Residential Planned Unit Development) Meeting Date: 06/28/2022 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal — Zoning Name: Michele Mosca 05/26/2022 12:44 PM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director — Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 05/26/2022 12:44 PM Approved By: Review: Zoning James Sabo Additional Reviewer Completed 05/26/2022 1:25 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Kenneth Kovensky Additional Reviewer Completed Zoning Mike Bosi Zoning Director Review Completed 05/27/2022 9:39 AM Growth Management Department Diane Lynch Growth Management Department Completed 06/06/2022 5:29 PM Growth Management Department Trinity Scott Transportation Skipped 05/26/2022 5:27 PM Growth Management Department James C French Growth Management Completed 06/12/2022 2:24 PM County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 06/15/2022 9:18 AM Office of Management and Budget Laura Wells Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 06/15/2022 9:24 AM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 06/15/2022 2:56 PM Office of Management and Budget Laura Zautcke Additional Reviewer Completed 06/17/2022 1:40 PM Packet Pg. 1900 17.D 06/28/2022 County Manager's Office Board of County Commissioners Amy Patterson Level 4 County Manager Review Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending Completed 06/21/2022 4:34 PM 06/28/2022 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 1901 17.D.1 Co e-r Cou"ty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: May 19, 2022 RE: PETITION PL20210000623, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to RPUD-PL20210000624) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNE Agents: Alexis Crespo, AICP RVI Planning + Landscaping Architecture (formerly Waldrop Eng.) 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Ste. 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34145 and Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Ste. 300 Naples, FL 34103 Applicant: David Torres 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33912 Owner: Carman Drive 15, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33912 Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 15 Packet Pg. 1902 17.D.1 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, a ±15.41-acre parcel, is located north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and west of Carman Drive, in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, within the Rural Fakapalm Planning Community (see subject site below). mom ■° y i. Q --- - - - -CPUD 7 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM), specifically to establish the new Carman Drive Subdistrict, affecting approximately 15.41 acres, by: 1) Amending Policy 1.5 A. Urban — Mixed Use District, to add the Carman Drive Subdistrict; 2) Amending the Urban — Mixed Use District to add the new Subdistrict provisions; 3) Amending the Future Land Use Map Series listing to add the title of the new Subdistrict map; and 4) Amending the Future Land Use Map to depict the new Subdistrict; and adding a new Future Land Use Map Series map that depicts the new Subdistrict. The proposed amended/added text and maps are depicted on the Ordinance Exhibit A. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting a Growth Management Plan Amendment to create text and a map for a new residential Subdistrict (Carman Drive Subdistrict). The amendment is necessary in order to allow residential development of up to 212 rental dwelling units and related accessory uses, of which 42 dwelling units will be affordable housing units for persons earning >80% - <120% of the Area Median Income (2021 Collier County AMI - $84,300), at a density of 13.76 dwelling units per acre (DU/A). (Note: The 2022 Income Limits and Rent Limits Table, effective 4118122, is included in the attachments. The Staff Report was substantially complete when this was received, there was not time to reevaluate the petition and revise the Staff Report. However, based on the increase in the AMI, there appears to be greater need for affordable housing in the 80 % and below income categories.) Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 15 Packet Pg. 1903 17.D.1 SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The +15.41-acre subject site is undeveloped, zoned "A", Rural Agricultural District, and the Future Land Use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map is Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately adjacent to the north is a 150-foot-wide sparse preserve then single - story residential single-family units, zoned Lords Way 30 Acre (PUD) at a density of 2.5 DU/A, and designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict on the FLUM. South: Immediately to the south is an undeveloped tract, zoned McMullen Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), approved for a maximum intensity of 185,000 square feet of primarily C-5 commercial uses, medical uses, and Senior Housing at 0.60 FAR, and designated Urban, Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict on the FLUM and on the Activity Center #7 map. West: Immediately adjacent to the west is a Florida Power and Light substation, zoned A, Rural Agricultural zoning district, and designated Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict; and, an undeveloped tract, zoned Good Turn Center (MPUD), approved for 100,000 square feet of retail, office and personal services and a skilled nursing facility (200 units), and designated Urban, Urban Commercial District, MUAC Subdistrict on the FLUM and on the Activity Center #7 map. West -NW Immediately west-northwest are undeveloped tracts, zoned General Commercial (C-4), with use limitations per Ord. No. 14-28, and designated Urban, Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict on the FLUM and on Activity Center #7 map. This site is the subject of a proposed GMPA and PUDZ (Amerisite CB MPUD) to allow up to 303 multi -family units (rental or ownership at 16 DU/A), retain existing C-4 uses, and add gasoline service station use and truck rental up to 40 trucks The proposed GMPA and PUDZ petitions are scheduled for the June 2, 2022, CCPC meeting. East: Immediately adjacent to the east are two developed tracts — Florida Sports Park (f.k.a. Swamp Buggy Days (PUD) and Junior Deputy League — zoned Hacienda Lakes (MPUD), and designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict on the FLUM. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small -Scale Comprehensive Plan (GMP) Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes, Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small-scale comprehensive plan amendment, followed by staff analysis in bracketed bold text. (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. [The proposed amendment pertains to a 15.41-acre site.] Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 15 Packet Pg. 1904 17.D.1 (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 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 is for a site -specific Future Land Use Map change and directly related text change.] (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 within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (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. [Internal consistency will be maintained if the GMP amendment is approved.] Background and Considerations: The subject site is located within the Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict. The URF is located in the eastern portion of the County's Coastal Urban area, generally located south of Beck Boulevard and extends along Collier Boulevard to US 41, and largely includes those lands located 1-mile east of Collier Boulevard, as delineated on the Future Land Use Map. The lands within the URF were evaluated as part of the Urban Boundary Study in the late 1980s in preparation of the County's Growth Management Plan, adopted in 1989. The Study concluded that the URF lacked the necessary public facilities for urban development — water and sewer, roads, and water management infrastructure, etc. — and the area was subject to high hurricane risk. The lands within the URF have historically provided a transition from the urban area/uses to the west (generally allowing residential uses at 4 DU/A or higher and urban support uses) to the rural agricultural lands/uses to the east (predominately designated Agricultural Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands, and within the Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area — allowing residential uses at a density of 1 DU/40 acres). The subject property is one of many parcels/PUDs remaining in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to be developed. Proximate to the subject site there are several undeveloped and developing PUDS; and four undeveloped parcels (3 — 9.24-acre parcels and 1 — 10-acre parcel) located north and west of the site within '/4 mile, which are designated URF and zoned Rural Agricultural District. The density and intensity of uses currently allowed on the subject site, consistent with the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict FLUM designation, include residential uses (at a density of 1.5 DU/A or 2.5 DU/A with use of TDRs, Transfer of Development Rights Credits) and non-residential uses, such as an assisted living facility, church, childcare center, essential service uses, etc. The parcel directly to the north is the Lord's Way 30-Acre PUD, developed with single family residential uses at a density of 2.5 DU/A (75 DUs); south of the site is an undeveloped MPUD within the Mixed Use Activity Center #7 that allows C-5 commercial uses and senior housing; east is an "Activity" tract — Florida Sports Park and "Junior Deputy" tract within the Hacienda Lakes MPUD (.78 DU/A); and, west is the MUAC #7 with a mix of commercial intensities ranging from office, retail and restaurant use, personal services, and other uses of the C-4 commercial zoning district, with limitations, and residential multi -family rental units within the Hammock Park Commerce Centre MPUD at a density of 13.85 DU/A (265 MFDUs). Properties adjacent to MUAC are intended to transition from the higher intensity uses allowed there to lower intensity uses. The density and intensity of uses currently allowed on the subject site, consistent with the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict FLUM designation, include residential uses (at a Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 4 of 15 Packet Pg. 1905 17.D.1 density of 1.5 DU/A or 2.5 DU/A with use of TDRs, Transfer of Development Rights Credits) and non-residential uses, such as an assisted living facility, church, childcare center, essential service uses, etc. The applicant proposes to create a new Subdistrict to allow residential rental development at a density of 13.76 dwelling units per acre (212 units). The maximum allowable density that could be achieved on this site through the acquisition and redemption of Transfer of Development Rights Credits is 2.5 dwelling units per acre (38 DUs). The proposed text for the new Subdistrict allows these dwelling units at a maximum height of 55 feet (actual). Residential density, affordable housing, and compatibility (including appropriateness of the location) for this project are identified by staff as the main areas of concern to address. Density: This petitioner is proposing 212 residential rental units with forty-two (42) rent restricted units. Staff reviewed FLUE provisions to determine residential density eligibility for the site. Residential density within the Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict is limited to (capped at) 2.5 dwelling units/acre. As identified below, the maximum density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre can be achieved with the base density and the acquisition and redemption of Transfer of Development Rights Credits; the applicant has committed to provide 15 TDR Credits. Base Density: Additional Density Allowance: Transfer of Development Rights Credits Maximum Permitted Density: 1.5 dwelling units/acre (1.5 DU X 15.41 acres = 23.12 DUs) 1.0 dwelling units/acre (1.0 DU X 15.41 acres = 15 DUs) 2.5 dwelling units/acre (23 DU + 15 DU = 38 Total Dwelling Units) The requested 212 DUs is a density of 13.76 DU/A (212 DU / 15.41 Acres = 13.76 DU/A), which is approximately 11.29 DU/A higher than that allowed within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 5 of 15 Packet Pg. 1906 17.D.1 Additionally, the requested density exceeds the immediately surrounding project densities and other developments within the URF, except for the Hammock Park Commerce Centre, located within the MUAC #7, which has an approved density of 13.85 DU/A (via prior GMPA approval). Please see below table of surrounding uses. Proposed North South East West West Site Project Carman Lords Way McMullen Hacienda Good Turn FPL Name Drive (Sapphire Lakes Center Cove Density 13.76 DU/A 2.5 DU/A N/A 0.78 N/A N/A Land Residential Single Commercial Swamp Commercial Essential Use Rental Family (185,000 SF Buggy & (retail, ofc, Service 212 DUs Residential - mostly C-5 Junior personal Use 75 DUs uses, Deputy Svc - medical (Residential 100,000 uses, Senior Density SF); skilled Housing at within nursing 0.60 FAR) Hacienda — facility (200 0.78 DU/A units Zoning A RPUD MPUD MPUD MPUD A Because this is a request for a new Subdistrict, it is not limited by the Future Land Use designation, the petitioner may request 13.76 DU/A (or any other density). Affordable Housinq: The proposed project of 212 residential rental units includes a commitment to provide 42 DUs (20% of the total units) for those individuals earning >80% to <120% of Area Median Income (AMI). There is a need in Collier County for additional housing within all affordable housing income levels; however, projects typically do not commit to the lower income levels of affordability. Many of the rental projects approved over the last few years through the public hearing process that included affordable housing commitments were for higher income levels, typically housing in excess of 100% AMI. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 6 of 15 Packet Pg. 1907 17.D.1 Please see below table depicting 2021 Collier County Affordable Housing income information. (Note: The 2022 Income Limits and Rent Limits Table, effective 4118122, is included in the attachments.) Collier County 2021 Income Percent Income Limit by Number of People in Household 1 2 3 4 5 Rent Limit by Number of Bedrooms 1 2 3 Ext Low 30% $17,750 $20,250 $22,800 $26,500 $31,040 $475 $570 $719 Very Low 50°l0 $29,550 $33,750 $37,950 $42,150 $45,550 $791 $948 $1,096 Low 80% $47,250 $54,000 $60,750 $67,450 $72,850 $1,265 $1,518 $1,753 Moderate 120% $70,920 $81,000 $91,080 $101,160 $109,320 $1,899 $2,277 $2,631 Gap 14Wo $82,740 $94,500 $106,260 $118,020 $127,540 $2,215 $2,656 $3,069 Median Household Income Collier County 2021 = $84,300 The below table identifies market rate rental units in the vicinity of the subject project. The project commitment to provide 42 affordable housing units at the >80% to <120% of the AMI range would potentially place those affordable housing units in rental ranges consistent with some of the nearby market rate rents (see Aster and Advenir Apartment listings below). The requested increase in density from the allowed 2.5 DU/A (38 dwelling units) to 13.76 DU/A (212 dwelling units) yields 174 "bonus" units. A minimum of 42 DUs of the total 212 DUs will be affordable in the "Moderate" AMI range and the remaining 170 units are eligible as market rate rental units. Apartment Name Address Rents by Number of Bedrooms 1 2 3 Milano Lakes 3713 Milano Lakes Cir., Naples 34113 $2,044 $2,523 $3,153 Sierra Grande 6975 Sierra Club Cir., Naples 34113 $2,104 $2,368 $2,874 Inspira Apartments 7425 Inspira Cir., Naples 34113 $2,218 $2,665 $2,984 Aster @ Lely Resort 8120 Acacia Street, Naples 34113 $1,913 $2,386 $2,994 Advenir 9300 Marino Cir., Naples 34114 $1,945 $2,285 $2,735 Source: Website of the listed apartments (4/21/22) Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 7 of 15 Packet Pg. 1908 17.D.1 The 2021 Collier County Housing Demand Model (see below and Exhibit attachment in large print) identifies a shortage of available rental units in the Low (>50 - <80%), Very Low (>30 - <50%) and Extremely Low (less than 30%) categories. The demand for rental units in these 3 categories is 500+ units needed annually to serve the County's growing population. p i el : u.ni f Hu„s� ri; De :aril) Irl Wt. .3021 Ho.si-q Jcmand Methodology Approved hY the Collier County Board el County Commissioners 212712029IItcm I1A) R'e'hodol Goal OI Reducing Housing Cos[Burden 1"3Yeart Accommodate Yearly Population GmuAh -EKIOlq Supply= Units Wided Yearly txy III[RAI 1 2 3 4 5 4 7 9 9 10 11 1i 13 14 1ohl N. Max N. una Nrw unite lNfArdehle Household Household May Rent orhrdwa Existing Existing Schimberg Cast Heeded IN Ordntu NeededbY 2021 UMfordiib d d AVIii supply Acmaii,,r+ UnRType Income Target ncomeLeve Income once jmflrt4ale� Home Appmsed Burdened Lai mrerCea Popublke Unlls AflerdehleUni, CgoiMedlan INUp 2021i Imrerrtary unrls(Aprll Households Inked GIN (1Xreduction Ront lR NaAdod{pw±ly) Inmmej o,tergoh h0u:eh9ldi Pril 20211 20211 i2021 Est.1 �, t% tin InP, r.Pin I TG2 Nudil housrhulhi `Popr; on 11 Glc :"il Rental Exhemelglaw Les than M $ 2Z8(O $ 570 ON 322 11711 343 218 0 25 516 penlal 4'er9Low 31-508 $ 37,95C 948 nra 743 13CO2 325 248 , 0 7 530 Owner orIMrdal low 51-20% $ 60,750 $1519(r)I$0.000ip) 47,0N 6,667 15,954 390 '22 115 172 Q MI Moderate s1-iKs 91,W0 2,277 $339,00D 69,375 5,ni 11,014 27i 436 i-- Z12 353 19E Owl GA 171440% $ 1015t60 $Z,667f$4Q7p00 19,465 0 5,192 147 112 Sublil l 134,874 13,028 59S53 1.489 S02 2,4:''1 423 Fin Market Market 7144% 4106 60 > 407000 67.204 5693 142 051 993 J76TOTAL 2U2 0]B 55'A 1,631 2,353 3,994 Affordable Housing Program: The FLUE provides an affordable housing density bonus (AHDB) for up to an additional 12 DU/A under the Density Rating System for properties within the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, subject to Land Development Code Section 2.06.00. The subject project is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and, therefore, is not eligible to receive the affordable housing density bonus. However, an alternative would be for the petitioner to amend the GMPA to provide for the AHDB to be applicable to the subject site. LDC 2.06.03: Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) Rating System Maximum Allowable Density Bonus by Percent of Development Designated as Affordable Housing 1,2,3 Product (% of MI) 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Gap (>120—<_140)',5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 n/a n/a Moderate (>80—:5120) 4 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Low (>50—<_80) 3 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 Very -Low (<_50) 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 12 12 ' Total Allowable Density = Base Density + Affordable Housing Density Bonus. In no event shall the maximum gross density exceed that which is allowed pursuant to the GMP. 2 Developments with percentages of affordable housing units which fall in between the percentages shown on Table A shall receive an AHDB equal to the lower of the two percentages it lies between, plus 1/10 of a residential dwelling unit per gross acre for each additional percentage of affordable housing units in the development. Zoning Division o 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 0 239-252-2400 Page 8 of 15 Packet Pg. 1909 17.D.1 3 Where more than one type of affordable housing unit (based on level of income shown above) is proposed for a development, the AHDB for each type shall be calculated separately. After the AHDB calculations for each type of affordable housing unit have been completed, the AHDB for each type of unit shall be added to those for the other type(s) to determine the maximum AHDB available for the development. In no event shall the AHDB exceed 12 dwelling units per gross acre. 4 Owner -occupied only. 5 May only be used in conjunction with at least 20 % at or below 120 % MI. Proposed project calculations if eligible for the AHDB per the LDC: Base Density TDR Density Bonus Base + TDR Bonus AHDB of 11.29 DU/A Total 23 dwelling units (1.5 DU/A X 15.41 Acres) 15 dwelling units (1.0 DU/A X 15.41 Acres) 38 dwelling units 174 dwelling units (15.41 acres X 11.29 DU/A) 212 dwelling units The request for +11.29 DU/A density bonus for rental units would require over 70% of the total units to be affordable at the 50-80% AMI range; moderate (>80 - <120% AMI) would require 90% of units to be affordable and owner occupied. Note: AHDB for rental units are allowed only in the Low and Very -Low categories. Compatibility: FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, a compatibility analysis might include a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding properties as to the allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space, and location. There are commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding the proposed Subdistrict. The properties to the west and south are located within a Mixed Use Activity Center with a full range of commercial uses and intensities — including office, retail, personal services, and higher intensity C-4 and C-5 uses, with limitations. The FLUE encourages development to transition from higher intensities to lower intensities. Use intensities should diminish as development moves from the commercial lands to the west towards the project site. One purpose of the transition of uses is to ensure that residential developments are not located next to high intensity uses. The proposed residential use and related uses within this Subdistrict help produce this type of transition; however, the density proposed at 13.76 DU/A along with the zoned building height of 45' (55' actual), increases the use intensity of the site. A challenge to developing a higher density residential rental community, such as the one proposed, is the protection of living conditions for the adjacent community, especially preserving the residential character, privacy, and access to natural light. To ensure this community is not significantly impacted, appropriate setbacks, screening, and buffers should be established. It should be noted that the preserve on the adjacent site to the north has minimal vegetation and will likely provide very little buffering or screening from the proposed project. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 9 of 15 Packet Pg. 1910 17.D.1 Potential impacts from the proposed development adjacent to the single -story, lower density, community to the north will likely be from two sources — ground level impacts, such as vehicular movement, parking, and other development related services, e.g., deliveries and waste collections; and upper -level impacts that affect natural light, privacy, noise and visual quality. Potential impacts from the ground level are typically addressed with screening, which may include a solid masonry wall with mature trees that are in excess of two -stories — 20 to 25 feet tall. Trees at this height (of the appropriate species) can screen views into and from area residences' windows. Potential impacts from upper -level units, such as loss of privacy, may be mitigated with greater separation between buildings on the project site and the adjacent single-family residences. Planning principles indicate a greater building setback with substantial screening with mature trees would be needed to address privacy issues within the adjacent community, and without enhanced screening the building setback should be significantly greater. Compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback, and buffer requirements, etc. Staff requested line of sight renderings be provided in the project submittal package and presented at the NIM, but the petitioner did not provide or present to the community the requested renderings. Note: There is a companion zoning petition to this GMP amendment petition. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The petitioner states, "The Subdistrict is intended to promote affordable and workforce housing in proximity to transit, employment centers, and public infrastructure, which will serve to reduce existing trip lengths." The firm of Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. prepared a rental apartment and detached build to rent market study for the proposed project. The firm established a Market Area of approximately 317 square miles that encompasses the entire coastal Urban area less Goodland; the entire City of Naples; three of the four Receiving Areas in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD); roughly one-half of the Rural Golden Gate Estates; and 80-90% of the RFMUD Sending Lands. The Market Area is generally bounded: on the north by a line from Wiggins Pass easterly to Palmetto Ridge High School (PRHS); on the east by a line from PRHS to the east side of Collier Seminole State Park (CSSP), on the south by a line from CSSP to the south end of Keewaydin; and on the west by the Gulf of Mexico. This market area encompasses about 77% of the population in Collier County (291,000). The demand analysis is based on population projections for renter households by year 2025 with targeted household incomes within the 80% - 120% of the AMI of $59,085 for a single person and $84,300 for a 4-person household. The study findings conclude there is a demand for 212 rental housing units to provide a diversity of housing options, particularly market -rate workforce housing. The consultant determined that the total supply of rental units will not be adversely affected by adding the proposed 212 rental units to the inventory. Based on the information provided in the petitioner's market study, staff finds many of the conclusions reached for countywide affordable housing needs reasonable. However, staff questioned the selected boundaries for this site specific GMPA, but the petitioner did not provide an explanation as to how or why the project boundaries were chosen. The petitioner's market study identifies weighted average incomes that generally correlate to the higher income ranges proposed for affordable units (80%-120% AMI). However, there is no information as to how many employees are below these average income levels. How many employees are entry level managers? How many employees are below those averages — not Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 10 of 15 Packet Pg. 1911 17.D.1 management positions, e.g., line cooks, retail clerks, receptionists, etc.? While the study seems to support the requested affordability ranges based on the mean wages for the targeted occupations, it cannot be determined with certainty without more information all on employees within those categories. It appears there is a greater need for lower income levels, i.e., below 80% of AMI, than is being targeted. Because the market area is expansive there is the potential that other sites are available within the market area that are equally or even more centrally located; and that may not require a GMPA. The petitioner did not provide a comparative inventory. Environmental Impacts: No listed animal species were observed on the property; however, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicate the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included at PPL or SDP review. The Environmental Data indicates the subject property falls within the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Primary Florida Panther Habitat (Felis concolorcoryi). Telemetry data indicates that two panthers have been recorded on -site (2013 and 2015); consultation with FWS may be required. Additionally, the property boundary intersects with an active bald eagle's nest buffer, which will require a bald eagle management plan as part of the review for the site development plan and/or plat. Staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 0.96 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 0.24 (25%) acres of preservation will be provided through an off -site mitigation land donation. Public Facilities Impacts: The project is located within the regional potable water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water -Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are readily available via an existing 8" water main and 4" force main at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Carman Drive. The water main and force main are more than 200 feet from the property line; connection is encouraged but not required. Transportation Impacts: Staff reviewed the applicant's May 4, 2021, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the then applicable 2020 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR) and the current 2021 AUIR. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 11 of 15 Packet Pg. 1912 17.D.1 According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed 212 residential rental development will generate a projected total of +/- 209 PM peak hour, 2-way trips on the adjacent roadway segment of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. The trips generated by this development will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links using the both the 2020 and current 2021 AUIR: Roadway/Link Link 2020 2021 Current Peak Projected 2020 2021 # AUIR AUIR Hour Peak P.M Peak Remaining Remaining LOS LOS Direction Hour/Peak Capacity Capacity Volume/Peak Direction Direction Project Traffic 1 Collier Davis Blvd. D D 3,000/North 27/NB 429 (2) 417 (2) Boulevard/34.0 to Rattlesnake Hammock. Rattlesnake Collier B B 2,900/West 23/WB 1,988 1,949 Hammock/75.0 Boulevard to Santa Barbara Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is May 4, 2021; Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. Projected deficiency in 2030 for this segment are due to background traffic from trip bank not caused by this development. Planned improvements on this segment in the 5-year work program are the funded design - build 1-75 interchange and the six -lane expansion from the Golden Gate Main Canal to Green Boulevard. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2020 AUIR and the currently adopted 2021 AUIR, the subject PUD can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below. Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 12 of 15 Packet Pg. 1913 17.D.1 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area's proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2.: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community's economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 13 of 15 Packet Pg. 1914 17.D.1 c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. Also, the state land planning agency has historically recognized the consideration of community desires (e.g. if the community has an articulated vision for an area as to the type of development desired, such as within a Community Redevelopment Area), and existing incompatibilities (e.g. presently allowed uses would be incompatible with surrounding uses and conditions). NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), was duly advertised, noticed, and held on October 25, 2021, 5:00 p.m. at the Fairway Bible Church, 3855 The Lords Way, Naples, FL 34113. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Planned Unit Development rezone (PUDZ) petition. The applicant's team provided introductions and gave an overview of the project. The overview generally included a discussion about the allowed uses under the existing Rural Agricultural zoning district; review of the conceptual Master Plan Exhibit (Note: The Master Plan has changed since the NIM to include the relocation of the water management tract, removal of an access point; and reconfiguration of residential tracts); and discussion about the proposed RPUD development standards. At the conclusion of the presentation, the applicant's team provided an opportunity for questions. The public asked questions about the proposed four-story building height; distance between the Sapphire Cove development to the north and the subject site; the eagle nests in the area; maximum number of units proposed and development type; and the development timeframe. There was a total of four members of the public that attended in person and the meeting concluded at 5:50 p.m. A copy of the NIM summary and related documents are included in the back-up materials FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • There are no unacceptable environmental impacts resulting from this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • Transportation Planning staff finds this petition to be consistent with Transportation Element Policy 5.1 regarding traffic impacts to the abutting segment of Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. • There are no utility -related concerns caused by this petition. • There are no concerns regarding impacts upon other infrastructure components. • The petitioner's market demand analysis concludes there is a demand for the proposed rental project in their market area. • The market study does not adequately address employment income for entry level professionals in the identified categories and does not address lower -income non- professional and/or non -managerial positions. • The market study does not include a comparative analysis of other potential sites within the market area that may be more appropriate to accommodate the proposed project. • Of the rental projects approved through the public hearing process over the last several years that committed to provide some Affordable Housing units, almost all such DUs were for higher affordable income levels, typically >100% of AMI. The subject petition proposes 42 out of 212 DUs for >80% - <120% of AMI (20% of the total DUs). These affordable housing rental units would be similarly rented at current market rate rents. • Based upon surrounding property approvals and development a density greater than 2.5 DU/A appears justified if the density provides a transition to address compatibility with the Sapphire Cove project north of the site, and affordable housing in the >50% - <100% AMI range is provided to greater meet the housing affordability needs in the community. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 14 of 15 Packet Pg. 1915 17.D.1 Based on permitted building heights to the north for single family residential development and the sparse nature of the preserve to the north, a building height that is similar or transitions between the two sites should be considered, and with increased setbacks and buffering from the residential development also could be justified. The proposed density of 13.76 DU/A is significantly higher than the maximum density of 2.5 DU/A allowed by the FLUE. The proposed density of 13.76 DU/A may be considered out of character with the density of abutting and nearby properties. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This project requires Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as the project meets the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, the project is within the 660-foot bald eagle nest protection zone. Environmental Services staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. LEGAL REVIEW: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney's Office on April 29, 2022. 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. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20210000623 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of denial. Alternatively, staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20210000623 with a recommendation to approve for adoption and transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required review agencies, subject to: 1) providing 20% of the total units (42 of 212 DUs) in the "Low" affordable housing category (>50% - <80% of the AMI); and, 2) providing 10% of the total units (21 of 212) in the "Moderate" affordable housing category, at a maximum of 100% of the AMI. Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 Page 15 of 15 Packet Pg. 1916 17.D.2 ORDINANCE NO. 2022 - 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 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 212 RENTAL DWELLING UNITS OF WHICH 48 UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND RENT RESTRICTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 8496 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD, NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND WEST OF CARMAN DRIVE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 15.41f ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL202100006231 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Carman Drive 15 LLC requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or a rural area of opportunity; and [21-CMP-01106/1722311/1181 Page 1 of 3 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 5/24/22 Words underlined are added, words struck-t#reuo are deleted. Packet Pg. 1917 17.D.2 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on May 19, 2022 considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small-scale amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and map amendment are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after Board adoption. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. [21-CMP-01106/1722311/1]81 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 5/24/22 Words underlined are added, words stmok through are deleted. Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 1918 17.D.2 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of , 2022. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK M. Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: h L .L2 Heidi Ashton-Cicko 4 " Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA go William L. McDaniel, Jr., Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [21-CMP-01106/ 1722311 / 1181 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 5/24/22 Words underlined are added, words stmok tkough are deleted. Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 1919 17.D.2 PL20210000623 EXHIBIT A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY [Page 9] GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** ***** *** *** Policy 1.5: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN — MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 21. Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard East Residential Subdistrict 22. Meridian Village Mixed -Use Subdistrict 23. Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 24. Immokalee Road Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict 25. Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict 26. Carman Drive Subdistrict [Page 10] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT [Page 261 N DESCRIPTION SECTION N *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** N N LO O I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Page 28] a *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK 's x A. Urban Mixed Use District W *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 06 a� c 26. Carman Drive Subdistrict [Page 551 =a The intent of this Subdistrict which comprises 15.4 acres is to allow for a maximum of 212 O dwelling units (limited to rental units) This Subdistrict is intended to promote affordable and workforce housing in proximity to transit employment centers and public infrastructure, which will E serve to reduce existing trip lengths The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the r following criteria: a a. Rezoning is required to be in the form of a PUD. Words underlined are added; words stFUelthMug# are deletions Page 1 of 4 05.24.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1920 17.D.2 PL20210000623 b. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 13.8 dwelling units per acre, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage yielding a maximum of 212 dwelling units. The first 15 units above the base density of 23 units must be through the acquisition of TDR credits. c. Lands described as Carman Drive Subdistrict are subject to the following: A total of twenty- four (24) units will be rented to households earning up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) and a total of twenty-four (24) units will be rented to households earning up to and including 100% of the AMI. Any time that a unit becomes vacant, assuming less than 48 units are occupied by households that qualify for the designated thresholds the next available unit will be offered to a qualifying household subject to the specified thresholds This restriction shall remain in place for no less than thirty (30) years from the date issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. AMI rent limit adjustments will be made on an annual basis according to the most recent Collier County approved Table of Rental Rates As part of the annual PUD monitoring report the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of income restricted units. d. All dwellings will be rental units. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Activity Center Index Map [Page 159] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Immokalee Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict Map Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Carman Drive Subdistrict Map Words underlined are added; words StFU& thFeUgh are deletions Page 2 of 4 05.24.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1921 PL20210000623 R 25 E I R 26 E I R 2012.2025 FUTURE LAND USE MAP Coll,ar Cou" Florida Alk�ml! —L1 01 — R- OVERLAY ON THE FM" —TnID 'COWER_ RURAL. AORICULT— AREA ,p OVERLAY IA - SUBJECT SITE It, V1 pj- EXHIBIT A B E R 29 E R 3GE R32 E B ti R 25 E R 26 E I R 27 E R 29 E I R 29 E I R 30 E I R31E R 32 E I R 33 E I R 34 E Page 3 of 4 Words underlined are added; words G41:161( thFOugI4 are deletions RC- 04 04 1* 04 LO Q x LU 015 0 E U a 05.24.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1922 PL20210000623 A� -1 M EXHIBIT A CARMAN DRIVE SUMDISTRICT colLmp, COLNT-17, FLORmA SUBJECT SITE >cKRD ADOPTED - XXXX, XXXX D 250500 1,000 Feet LEGEND (Ord. No- xxxx-x) COWMAN DRIVE SLOMSTRICT Words underlined are added; words StFUGI( thFEM914 are deletions Page 4 of 4 E E A CO E m CM C14 04 N le C14 LO O LU Oa m 0 E 05.24.22 mrm I Packet Pg. 1923 Collier County Housing Demand Model - 2021 17.D.4 Housing Demand Methodology Approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners 2/27/2018 (Item 11A) Methodology: Goal of Reducing Housing Cost Burden 1%/Year + Accommodate Yearly Population Growth - Existing Supply = Units Needed Yearly by Income Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 New Units New Units Total New Household Max ExistingExisting g Schimberg Cost g Needed in Needed for Affordable Units Needed Available Supply of Available d Income Level Household Max Rent or Purchase Home Approved Burdened Orderto 2021 Per Year Units for Supplyof Remaining New Unit Type Income Target (/ D of Median Income Price (mortgage) Inventory Units (April Households Lower Cost Population D (1/n reduction Purchase Units for Affordable Units (� Income) (3 Person (HUD 2021) (April 2021) 2021) (2021 Est.) Burdened Growth in Cost Burden (April Rent (April Needed (yearly) 2 household) by 1%D +Population 2021) 2021) (Yearly) households(in) Growth) N Rental Extremely Low Less than 30% $ 22,800 $ 570 n/a 382 13711 343 218 561 0 25 536 Rental Very Low 31-50% $ 37,950 $ 948 n/a 743 13002 325 248 573 0 7 566 N Owner or Rental Low 51-80% $ 60,750 $1519(r) / $189,000 (p) 47,034 6,667 15,954 399 388 787 115 172 500 Owner Moderate 81-120% $ 91,080 $2,277/$338,000 68,375 5,236 11,014 275 436 711 196 367 148 G Owner Gap 121-140% $ 106,260 $2,657/$407,000 19,465 0 5,872 147 212 359 112 0 247 E Sub Total 134,874 13,028 59,553 1,489 1,502 2,991 423 571 1997 to U Market Market >140% >$106,260 >$407,000 67,204 5693 142 851 993 976 n/a n/a to M C4 TOTAL 202,078 65,246 1,631 2,353 3,984 1,399 571 n/a blumns (2,3 &4) HUD Income of 3 Collier County 1-7 Pea en'� Income Limit for Household of 3 Extremely Low 3096 $ 22,8D0 Very Low so% $ 37,950 iHaples/Immokalee/P.la'- s s r-1•.'_-' 202_: a.-:5.>=sr1 4/s,2a2. Low ao% $ 60,750 Moderate 120% $ 91,080 Gap 140% $ 1D6,260 Source: HUD 2021 Income Limits Column (6) Existing Housing Inventory HUD Reru limits Collier Cou my Perramage hma«r w,ream umc 30% $ 570 [Napps/Yr.rwkaleefNHrro Isbnd MSA] 2D21 Medae 50% $ 948 80% SY4,3m 4ls12D21 120% $ 2,277 140% $ 2,- 5- FkAda Horsing I'manre Cap. based on figures prwidrd by Me US. Dept. o HUD Single Family Single Mobile Mul[iFamily Co-Dps- Multifamily Maximum Appraised Vak. Homes Homes- - to units or code 04 Code 05 - 10 units or Totals Cude-01 Code 02 r Cade03 <- Code US 55U,000-9189.000 8,210 2,029 6 35,D47 1,445 297 47,034 5189,001-$338,000 33,878 233 2 33,D12 234 1,016 68,375 5338,001-$407,001) 13,4D3 D 1 5,566 196 299 19,465 st4 Tod 134,374 $407,001> 43,523 2 1.01 22,961 185 332 67,2D4 Grand Total 2v2,D78 SGUF- Collier County Property Appraiser EadsVrlg Values April 2021 Column (5) HUD Max Purchase Prices In-. Target Percemage ply Illranle Monthly Income Max Housug ARmeanne@am DTI HOA Fees Tares & Imurance Mortgage Insurance 3596Down Pa"nerlt Max Sale Price Rounded Max Sale Price Low 80% $ 60,750 $ 5,062 $ 1,519 $ 420 $ 200 $ 127 $ 6,624 $ 189,250 $ 189,060 Moderate 120% $ 91,080 $ 7,590 $ 2,277 $ 420 $ 250 $ 230 $ 11,846 $ 338,456 $ 338,000 Gap140% 106260 8,850 2,657 420 300 279 14 272 407 769 407,000 Source: Collier County HELP www.tioddahelp.org "30-year rate as of 4/14/1021 of 3%as posted on www.wellsfargo.commortgage/rates Shimberg Cost Burden Households and units Needed to l-, lry 1% Number Number Needed m Needed m Cost Burden HOuseho Ids 5chimberg 4 2020 Reduce Sth s1 2a21 Hedge by Income Level Co. Hurdened Imrease (-21.1W Enirrlate County -wide Cost Burden Increase (2.12-1W Fslinare County- wi-Cost Households by 1%per Hurae I by 2D16 Year 1% rYear 313%AMI a 1- 12345 1D81 13426 336 285 13711 343 3D.1-:.0%AMI 11707 1025 12732 319 270 131302 325 50.1-80% AMI 14365 1 1258 1 15623 39.1 331 1 15954 1 399 8D.1-120%AMI 9919 869 1D787 270 229 11D16 275 120.1-140%AMI [es1t) 5287 463 5750 144 122 5877 147 Subtotalc140% AMI 53523 4694 58317 1459 1237 59554 1489 >140%AMI1 5126 449 5575 139 118 5693 142 Total Households 59749 5143 63892 1597 1355 65247 1631 2m1 rePraa,w., o-aw.n ur I,�,..� I.�w 2018 2019 2020 2021 Pop odor Ho2352 - 367.347 376,706 384, 61x1 391, 656 7,1156 Inrame Level Percent of Population Aof New Ho ear by lnoome 3H96 AMI or Less 9.25% 218 30.1-50%AMI 10.55% 24 SD.1b09r. AMI 16.50% 388 80.1-120%AMI 18.53% 436 124.1-140%AMI 9.00% 212 c14U%AMI 5N8 TOTAL 63.83% 1501 >14119G AM15NH TryrAL 366- 851 TOTAL 10D% 2352 ShirBerg Center].s, W,u don -mat.: [Ober Ca GND t%Reduccon rw -.(.p ,"J6 o HH by Income Lrrel - nulnbunm, SF, rg rover-16 NIABOR & MIAAOR Inventory for Sale ril 2021 NABDR Units MIAADRUnits Total Units c$189,000 115 0 115 $189,D01-$338,000 194 12 196 $338,001-$407,000 104 8 112 Subtotal < $407,OOD 403 20 423 1$407,001 834 142 976 TOTAL 1237 162 1399 Column 13 A-il. blel 212 artrnent Rental. April 2021 Collier Cou my Community and Human Services Division Quarterly Rental Apartment Survey April 2021 xarnlsAvaiktle Income Level Rent Available Units <30%AMI $ 570 25 31V-50%AMI $ 949 7 51V-80%AMI $ 1,519 172 81%-1205AAMI $ 2,277 n/a 121%-140%AMI $ 21657 n/a TOTAL 204 Source: NABOR & MIAADR Sing -Family, Multi -Family& Condos for sale April 2021 S,m- CHS Ap,nmem:-%,w-V April 2D21 Packet Pg. 1924 17.D.5 HUD release: 411BJ2022 Effective: 411872022 2022 Income Limits and Rent Limits Florida Housing Finance Corporation SHIP and HHRP Programs Percentage Income Limit by Number of Persons in Household Rent Limit by Number of Bedrooms in Unit 1 2 3 4 5 B T $ 9 1 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 County (Metm) Cate o Calhoun County 30% 13,590 18,310 23,030 27,750 32.470 35,950 38,400 41900 Refer to HUD 339 398 575 752 898 991 50% 21,700 24,800 27,900 30.950 33,450 35,950 38AN 40,904 43,330 45,806 542 561 07 805 699 991 80% 34,650 39r600 44,550 49.500 53.500 57AW 61,400 65,35Q 69.328 73.290 866 928 1,t13 1.287 1.436 1,584 Median: 63.600 1209E 52,980 59,520 66,960 74,280 80.290 96,290 92,160 %160 103,992 1091934 1.302 1,395 1.674 1,932 2,157 4379 140% 60.760 69.440 78.120 1 86,660 1 93,660 100,680 1107.520 114.520 121,324 128.257 1.519 1,627 '.9',:3 2.254 2,516 1 2,775 Charlotte County 30% 15.250 18r310 23,030 27,750 32.470 37.190 41.910 45,830 Refer to HUD 391 419 575 752 929 1,106 (Punta Gorda MSAi 504E 25,400 290H 32,69 38,250 3%150 42,050 44,950 47,850 50,750 53.650 635 680 816 942 1,051 1,160 80% 40.600 46,400 52,200 58,000 62.650 67.300 71.950 75,600 81,200 85,840 1,015 1.097 1.305 1,505 102 1,B66 Median: 76,000 1209E 60,980 69AN 79,360 87,000 93,960 100,920 101,880 11400 121,860 128,760 1,524 1,632 1,959 2,262 2,523 2;794 140% 71.120 81.200 91A20 101,500 109,620 117,740 12S.860 133,980 142,100 150.220 1.778 1.904 2,265 2.639 2,943 3,2415 Citrus County 304E 13.590 18310 23.030 27,750 32,470 35.950 38,400 40,900 Refer to HUD 339 398 575 752 89S 991 504E 21,700 24AN 27,900 30,950 33,450 35,950 38,400 40,900 43,330 45.806 542 581 697 805 898 991 80% 34.650 39,600 44,550 49,500 53,506 57,450 61,400 65,3S0 69,328 73.290 866 928 1,113 1.287 1,436 1,584 Klemm: 68.600 1209E 52,080 59AN 66,960 74,280 80,280 86�80 92,160 9%160 103,992 10919U 1,302 11395 11674 11932 2,157 Z379 140% 60.760 69.440 78.120 86,660 93,660 100,660 107,520 114.520 121,324 125.257 1.519 1,627 1,953 2.254 2.516 2,775 Clay County 30% 17.600 20.100 23.030 27.750 32.470 37.190 41.910 46.630 Refer toHLID 4z0 4r' 0".. 752 929 1.106 {Jacksnmrille HMFA) 50% 29,300 33,450 37,650 41,900 45,150 48.500 51,BSU 55,20U 58,520 B1,884 732 794 941 1,096 1,212 1,338 80% 46.850 53.550 60,250 66,900 72,3D0 77.650 83,0D0 88,350 93,632 98,9B2 1,171 1255 1.506 1.740 1,941 Z141 Median: 86.500 120% 70,320 110,2110 90,360 t00,320 14NO 116,400 f24,440 132,480 146m 148,474 f,75a 1,882 Z259 21608 2,910 3,21l 140% B2,M 93,660 165,420 117,MO 126,420 135,800 145,1B0 154,560 163,856 173,219 2,051 2,196 2.635 3,043 3,395 3,746 ColliarCounty 30% 19,850 22,650 25,560 28,300 32.470 37,196 41,910 45,63) Refer to HUD 496 531 637 759 929 7166 (Naples•Immokalee- 50% 4050 37,750 42AM 47,150 50,950 54,700 Si,500 62,256 64010 69,762 $28 885 1,061 1,22E 1,367 1,509 Marco Island M5A} 804E 52,850 60,400 67.950 75,456 81,506 87.550 93,600 99,600 105,616 111.651 1321 1.415 1,698 1.961 7188 Z415 Median- MAW 120% 79,320 90AN 101AB0 113.160 122,280 131,280 1401400 149A00 158,424 167,477 1,993 2,124 2,547 2,943 3,282 3,622 140% 1 92,540 1 105,700 1118.880 1132,020 1 142,660 1153,160 1163.800 1174,300 184,929 195.390 12.313 12.478 12,971 13.433 1 3,829 1 4,226 Columbia County 30% 13,800 18,310 23.030 27,750 32,470 37.190 40AW 43.250 Refer to HUD 345 401 575 752 929 1,646 595E 22,950 26p2N 29,500 32,750 38,400 38,000 40,69 d3250 45,$50 41,470 573 614 737 851 950 1,848 80%36,700 41950 47,200 52,400 56,600 60)M 65,0D0 fi9,200 73,360 77,552 917 963 1,160 1.362 1,520 1,577 Median: 65,560 120% 55,080 62AN 70,800 72,600 84,960 91,= 97,560 103,800 11Q,040 116,328 1,377 1,474 1,770 2,044 4280 4517 1409E 64,260 73,380 82,600 91,700 99.120 196,400 113,820 121,100 121M 135,716 ikM 1.720 2.065 2.385 ZfifiO Z93fi Florida Houslrtg Finance Corparation (FHFC) income, and rent limits are, based upon figures provided bythe LhMed States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HILID) and are subject to change. Updated schedules will be provided when changes occur. Packet Pg. 1925 COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT INVENTORY IMMOKALEE INSET MAP 17.D.6 LEGEND O COLLIER COUNTY EXISTING/BUILT RENTAL APARTMENT O COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT IN PROCESS 0 1 2 4 6 Miles ,r GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP I OPERATIONS DEPT./GMD codicY CoRnty FILE: COLLIER APARTMENTS.MXD ,J DATE: 08/2019 snow .brASEM�r�PAarME� BONITA BEACH RD i V S 51 60 57 LAKE TRAFFORD RP IN ST 56 55 50 52 COLLIER COUNTY EXISTINGBUILT RENTAL APARTMENT Map ID Name Address City Units 1 Bear Creek 2367 Bear Creek Dr Naples 120 2 Belvedere 260 Quail Forest Blvd Naples 162 3 Berkshire Reserve 3536 WinifredRow Ln Naples 146 4 Bermuda Island 3320 Bermuda Isle Cir Naples 360 5 Brittany Bay I & II 14815 Triangle Bay Dr Naples 392 6 Bryn Mawr 7701 Davis Blvd Naples 240 7 College Park 6450 College park cir Naples 210 8 Coral Palms 4539 Coral Plams Ln Naples 288 9 Goodlette Arms 950 Goodlette-Frank Rd Naples 250 10 Heritage -MerSoleil 4250 Jefferson Ln Naples 320 11 Heron Park - Point at Naples 2155 Great Blue Dr Naples 248 12 Ibis Club 8210 Ibis club Dr Naples 134 13 Jasmine Cay 100 Jasmine Cir Naples 72 14 La Costa 3105 La Costa Cir Naples 276 15 Laguna Bay 2602 Fountain View cir Naples 363 16 Malibu Lakes 2115 Malibu Lakes cir Naples 356 17 Meadow Lakes 6472 Radio Rd Naples 252 18 Naples 701 3531 Plantation Way Naples 188 19 Naples Place I -III 4544 Sunset Rd Naples 160 20 Noah's landing 10555 Noahs Cir Naples 264 21 Northgate Club 4300 Atoll CT Naples 120 22 Oasis -Arbor Walk 2277 Arbour Walk Cir Naples 216 23 Ospreys landing 100 Ospreys Landing Naples 176 24 Meadow Brook Preserve - Turtle Creek 1130 Turtle Creek Blvd Naples 268 25 River Reach 2000 River Reach Dr Naples 556 26 Sabal Key 1600 Wellsley Cir Naples 200 27 Saddlebrook Village 8685 Saddlebrook Cir Naples 140 28 San marino-Aventine 9300 Marino Cir Naples 350 29 Shadowood Park 6475 Sea Wolf Ct Naples 96 30 Somerset Palms - Arbor View 15995 Arbor View Blvd Naples 168 31 Summer Lakes I 5520 Jonquil Ln 5600 Jonquil Cir Naples Naples 140 276 32 Summer Lakes II 33 Summer Wind-Arium Gulfshore 5301 Suinmerwind Dr Naples 368 34 Tuscan Isle 8680 Weir Dr Naples 298 35 Villas of Capri 7725 Tara Cir Naples 235 36 Waverley Place 5300 Hemingway Ln Naples 300 37 Whistler's Cove 11400 Whistlers Cove Blvd Naples 240 38 Whlsder's Green 4700 Whistlers Green Cir Naples 168 39 Windsong Club 11086 Windsong Cir Naples 120 40 Aster Lely Resort 8120 Acacia ST Naples 308 41 Sierra Grande 6975 Sierra Club cir Naples 270 42 Collier Housing Alternatives 4211 Thomasson Dr Naples 10 43 44 George Washington Carver Apt 350 loth St N Naples Naples 176 12 Housing Alternatives Of Sw Florida 3401 21st Ave Sw 45 Leawood Lakes 474 Leawwood Cir Na les 42 46 Orchild Run 10991 Lost Lake Dr Naples 282 47 Gorden River 1400 5th Ave N Naples 96 48 Crestview Park 2903 Lake Trafford Rd Immokalee 208 49 Crestview Park II 715 Crestview Dr Immokalee 96 50 Cypress Run 550 Hope Cir Immokalee 40 51 Eden Gardens II 1375 Boxwood Dr Immokalee 41 52 Farm Worker Village 1800 Farm Worker Way Immokalee 365 53 Garden Lake A is 1022 Garden Lake Cir Immokalee 66 54 Heritage Villas Of Immokalee Ltd 1109 Hickock Ln Immokalee 41 55 Immokalee A is 601 W Delaware Ave Immokalee 100 56 Oakhaven 580 Oakhaven Circle Immokalee 160 57 Sanders Pines 2449 Sanders Pines Cir Immokalee 40 58 So Villas Immokalee 1802 Custer Ave Immokalee 35 59 Summer Glen 1012 Summer Glen Blvd Immokalee 46 60 Timber Ridge of Immokalee Willowbrook Place 2711 Wilton Ct Immokalee 34 61 1836 Ash Ln Immokalee 42 62 Inspira at Lely Resort 7425 Inspira Cir Naples 304 63 Milano Lakes 3713 Milano Lakes Cir Naples 296 TOTAL 129346 N COLLIER COUNTY RENTAL APARTMENT IN PROCESS Map ID Name Parcel# City Units 64 Springs at Sabal Bay 71750000402 Naples 340 65 Ave Maria Apartment 227004009 Naples 250 66 Briarwood Apartment 24767504003 Naples 320 67 Legacy Naples New Hope Ministries 399760006 Naples 304 68 Addison Place & Addison Place Expansion 188360002 Naples 294 69 Pine Ride Commons 240280606 Naples 375 70 I-75/Alh ator Alley PUD 21968000121 Naples 425 71 Courthouse Shadows PUD 28750000523 Naples 300 72 Livingston Rd/GG Parkway Residential Subdistrict 38100120001 Naples 382 73 Allura RPUD 150280000 Naples 304 74 Hammock Park 416720000 Naples 265 75 Vanderbilt Common 79271800044 Naples 52 76 Alligator Alley Apartments at Naples 21968001120 Naples 320 77 Pelican Apartments 192360001 Naples 400 TOTAL 49331 CR 846 W-�� OIL WELL RD E E a a 'i r 'L 0 E U M N N co 0 N r L Q a 0 U r E a (Data Source: Best available data from Growth Management Department & Public Services Department as of 08/19) Packet Pg. 1926 17.D.7 ORDINANCE NO. 2022 - 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 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 212 RENTAL DWELLING UNITS OF WHICH 42 UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND RENT RESTRICTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 8496 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD, NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND WEST OF CARMAN DRIVE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 15.41f ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000623] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Carman Drive 15 LLC requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1), Florida Statutes, this amendment is considered a Small Scale Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Subdistrict property is not located in an area of critical state concern or a rural area of opportunity; and [21-CMP-01106/1714130/1]58 Page 1 of 3 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 4/18/22 Words underlined are added, words stfuek ugh are deleted. Packet Pg. 1927 17.D.7 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) on considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan and recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and held public hearings concerning the proposed adoption of the amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan on ; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this small-scale amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text and map amendment are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after Board adoption. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. [21-CMP-01106/ 171413 01115 8 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 4/ 18/22 Words underlined are added, words struoU�gn are deleted. Page 2 of 3 Packet Pg. 1928 17.D.7 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of 32022. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: L Heidi Ashton-Cicko''�' Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA William L. McDaniel, Jr., Chairman Attachment: Exhibit A — Proposed Text Amendment & Map Amendment [21-CMP-01106/ 171413 0/ 115 8 Carman Drive 15 / PL20210000623 4/ 18/22 Page 3 of 3 Words underlined are added, words stfursk through are deleted. Packet Pg. 1929 17.D.7 PL20210000623 EXHIBIT A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES [Page 9] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK Policy 1.5: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN — MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 21. Livingston Road/Veterans Memorial Boulevard East Residential Subdistrict 22. Meridian Village Mixed -Use Subdistrict 23. Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict 24. Immokalee Road Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict 25. Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict 26. Carman Drive Subdistrict [Page 10] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT [Page 26] DESCRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Page 28] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Urban Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 26. Carman Drive Subdistrict [Page 55] The intent of this Subdistrict. which comprises 15.41 acres. is to allow for a maximum of 212 dwelling units (limited to rental units), of which 42 units (20%) will be affordable housing units for persons earning between 81-120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). This Subdistrict is intended to promote affordable and workforce housing in proximity to transit, employment centers, and public infrastructure. which will serve to reduce existing trip lengths. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is required to be in the form of a PUD. Words underlined are added; words s#FUsl( thFeWgI4 are deletions Page 1 of 4 r c a� E c a� E Q a r N U) a� 'L 0 c E L M U M N Q x w 06 aD c c L O U a U U r c as E �a r w Q 04.11.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1930 17.D.7 PL20210000623 b. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 13.8 dwelling units per acre, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 212 dwelling units. The first 15 units above the base density of 23 units must be through the acquisition of TDR credits. c. Lands described as Carman Drive Subdistrict are subject to the following: Twenty Percent (20%) of the units will be affordable housing units and restricted to households earning 81-120% of the AMI. This restriction shall remain in place for no less than thirty (30)years from the date issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of income restricted units. d. All dwellings will be rental units. *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Activity Center Index Map [Page 159] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Immokalee Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict Map Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Carman Drive Subdistrict Map Words underlined are added; words GtFWGk thFOUgh are deletions Page 2 of 4 04.11.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1931 PL20210000623 R 25 E I R 26 E I R 27E R 28 2012.2025 FUTURE LAND USE MAP C64, C.-y R.,W. 7 LU��VM �E� ORT�FUTURE �O�EWTMW, TOLUER COU� RURAL & AGRICVLTUM *0- AREA ANEONEW 5TMRMKP OVER�Y N ME� Tm � "L,u V"�IMP r SUBJECTSITE EXHIBIT A R 29 E I R 30E R32 E 7L 0616 Em =--m- ------------- R25E R 26 E R 27 E R 28E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R32 E I R 33 E I R 34 E Words underlined are added; words StFUGI( thmugI4 are deletions ;.1 411 Page 3 of 4 04.11.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1932 17.D.7 PL20210000623 EXHIBIT A �S CARMAN DP-n7E SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COU."M. FLORIDA The Lords WAY SUBJECT SITE ca p ., d c Rattlesnake Hammock RD 1 DIZIT- miCILT o ADOPTED 250500 1,000 Feet o - xxxx, xxxx LEGEND (Ord. No,xxxX-xy F--f-+--I--I--Y1 rncrAntu ur toll rA»�o.. wecv^ CARMAN DRIVE .WODISTRICT onawcra uurrAar: x- bcmx PIZ CAiQ!'. aft1w SIAOIS'TRICT S"r i0CFx10 M4F`0M!"x W1C0 D " luI =1 Words underlined are added; words are deletions Page 4 of 4 04.11.22 mrm Packet Pg. 1933 w aa3 z3 17.D.8 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCES Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9.00 A.M. on June 28, 2022, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL, to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMEN DING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN, URBAN -MIXED USE DISTRICT, CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 212 RENTAL DWELLING UNITS OF WHICH 48 UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND RENT RESTRICTED. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 8496 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD, NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND WEST OF CARMAN DRIVE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 15.41: ACRES; AND FURTHERMORE, DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000623] AND AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CREATING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE CARMAN DRIVE 15 RPUD, TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A MAXIMUM OF 212 RENTAL DWELLING UNITS OF WHICH 48 UNITS WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND RENT RESTRICTED ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT B496 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD, NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND WEST OF CARMAN DRIVE IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 15.41m ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20210000624] 0 J m .......... , �... �.._......... ....... .......... ::i Project ... ._......................._._. Location .............._...; ........... ,Rattlesnake; Hammock R, _: R4ke Hammock RD v Copies of the proposed Ordinances are on file with the Clerk to the Board and are available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda Item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on. any item. The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be.considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven V) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record: As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals Who would fiketo participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meating entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.colliercountyfl.gov/ our-county/visitors/calendar-of-events after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user's risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willigocolliercountyfl.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiarni Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356.; (239) 252-8380, at least two (2)days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WILLIAM L. MCDANIEL, JR., CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT & COMPTROLLER By: Ann Jenne)ohn Deputy Clerk (SEAL) ND-GC1089a025-m Z a r y Z M N 0 F1 Packet Pg. 1934 CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT G M PA -P L20210000623 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION PACKAGE IA�IA i I , 0 ENGINEERIING PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Application Form APPLICATION NUMBER: PL20210000623 DATE RECEIVED: PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE: April 7, 2021 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 239-252- 2400, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. The application is to be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline. The applicant will be notified, in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 12-234. If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant: David Torres Company: CARMAN DRIVE 15, LLC Address: 7742 Alico Rd City: Fort Myers State: Florida Zip Code: 33912 Phone Number: 1-877-357-8271 x700 Fax Number: N/A Email Address: David@torrescompanies.com B. Name of Agent* Alexis Crespo, AICP& Richard Yovanovich, Esq • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company: RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture. & Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Address: 28100 Bonita Grande Dr # 305 City: Bonita Springs State: Florida Zip Code: 34135 Phone Number: (239) 405-7777 Fax Number: (238) 405-7899 Email Address: acrespo@rviplanning.com ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com C. Name of Owner (s) of Record: Same as applicant Address: City: State: Phone Number: Fax Number: Zip Code: D. Name, Company, Address and Qualifications of all consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application, as well as Qualifications of the Agent identified above. (please refer to Exhibit I.D.) 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). 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 David E. Torres Revocable Trust (David E. Torres Beneficiary) George P. Bauer Revocable Trust (George P. Bauer Beneficiary) Percentage of Ownership 50'79 507q 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 Date of Contract: Percentage of Ownership F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address G. Date subject property acquired ( ) leased ( ): 12/29/2020 Term of lease: yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: NOTE: 3 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. PARCEL I.D. NUMBER: 00417000004 B. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Please refer to Exhibit III.A. C. GENERAL LOCATION: North of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and West of Carman Drive. D. Section: 14 Township: 50 Range: 26 E. PLANNING COMMUNITY: F. TAZ: 359 G. SIZE IN ACRES: 15.4+ - H. ZONING: Agricultural I. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S): Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict J. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN: Mixed Use, Commercial, Single Family Residential IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub -Element Aviation Sub -Element Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element Solid Waste Sub -Element Capital Improvement Element X Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan Recreation/Open Space Mass Transit Sub -Element Potable Water Sub -Element NGWAR Sub -Element Drainage Sub -Element CCME Element Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S): 61 OF THE: Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike -+" h-to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: Please refer to Exhibit IV.B 4 C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM: Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict TO Carman Drive Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A 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 1 1 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A. Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit V.A. Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit V.A. Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibit V.B. Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C. Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Exhibit V.C. Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.) Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference , F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S.? (Reference , F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1) (c), F.S.? 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. Y Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference , F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES l . Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exhibit ME Potable Water Exhibit ME Sanitary Sewer Exhibit ME Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Carman Dr Exhibit ME Drainage Exhibit ME Solid Waste Exhibit ME Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit ME 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. 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: N/A Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Coastal High Hazard Area, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION X $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus, proportionate share of advertising costs) $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) X Proof of ownership (copy of deed) X Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) * If you have held a pre -application meeting within 9 months prior to submitted date and paid the pre -application fee of $500.00 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 if petition submitted within 9 months of pre -application meeting date. 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. *All attachments should be consistently referenced as attachments or exhibits, and should be labelled to correlate to the application form, e.g. "Exhibit I.D." * Planning Community, TAZ map, Traffic Analysis Zone map, Zoning maps, and Future Land Use Maps. Some maps are available on the Zoning Division website depicting information herein: Zoning Services Section: Comprehensive Planning Section: THIS HAS CHANGED SINCE DCA BECAME DEO. SEE GMP PAEG 2011 UPDATES: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/zoning-services- section/land-use-commission-district-maps Affidavit of Authorization AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) PL20210000624 & PL20210000623 1 David Torres (print name), as Managing Member (title, If applicable) of Carman Drive 15, LLC (company, If applicable), swear or affirm under oath, that I am the (choose one) owner0 applicant Qcontract purchaser and that: 1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this application and the Land Development Code; 2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true; 3. 1 have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and restrictions imposed by the approved action. 5. We/I authorize Alexis Crespo, AiCP & Rich Yovanovich, Esq. to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above. *Notes: • If the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres. • If the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member." • If the applicant is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. • If the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general partner" of the named partnership. • If the applicant is a trust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trustee". • In each instance, first determine the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then use the appropriate format for that ownership. Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the f regoing Affidavit of Authorization and that the facts stated in it are true. � ['I� -z 1�- Date Signature STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowleged before me by means of ki physical presence or Qonline notarization this 2A day of :Vokri , 2oZ.2 by (printed name of owner orlqualifier) T)ct U1cl --Th r MS Such person(s) Notary Public must check applicable box: JNAre personally known to me M Has produced a current drivers license 0 Has produced /� as identification. Notary Notary Signature: O1c� MACA�� CP\08-COA-00115\155 REV 3/4/2020 TAMELA M. SCHRODER *. MY COMMISSION # HH 121444 :'�•'o c EXPIRES: April 25, 2025 Bmded TW NoLW Public UnderwrKem Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants -A i D , O P -Ltr ■ ISOMA SPRINGS Tampa Orlando Scirasofa JIENGINEERING 28100 kwro Grande Dr, Suirr. 305, 8anito Springs, FL 34135 PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE p.12391 405.7777 1[ j239j 405.7899 Carman Drive 15 Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants Planning: Alexis Crespo, AICP Waldrop Engineering, P.A. 28100 Bonita Grande Drive #305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.405.7777 239.405.7899 fax alexis.crespo@waldropengineering.com Land Use Attorney: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 239.435.3535 239.435.1218 fax ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com Transportation: Ted Treesh Transportation Consultants, Inc 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, FL 33901 239.278.3090 tbt@trtrans.net Market Analysis: Russ Weyer Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 239.269.1341 rweyer@ree-i.com Environmental: Bethany Brosious Senior Ecologist Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, #200 Fort Myers, FL 33912 239.274.0067 bethanyb@passarella.net Exhibit III.A. Legal Description Legal Description Parcel One: The East % of the North % of the Southeast % of the Southwest % of Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26, Collier County, Florida Parcel Two: The South % of the West % of the North % of the Southeast % of the Southwest % of Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida Parcel Identification Number: 00417000004 Exhibit IV. B. Proposed Text Amendment Carman Drive Subdistrict Proposed Text Amendment REVISED APRIL 2022 22. Carman Drive Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises 15.41 acres, is to allow for a maximum of 212 dwelling units (limited to rental units), of which 42 units (20%) will be affordable housing units for persons earning between 81-120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). This Subdistrict is intended to promote affordable and workforce housing in proximity to transit, employment centers, and public infrastructure, which will serve to reduce existing trip lengths. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the followina criteria: a. Rezoning is required to be in the form of a PUD. b. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 13.8 dwelling units per acre, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 212 dwelling units. The first 15 units above the base density of 23 units must be through the acquisition of TDR credits. c. Lands described as Carman Drive Subdistrict are subject to the following: Twenty Percent (20%) of the units will be affordable housing units and restricted to households earning 81-120% of the AMI. This restriction shall remain in place for no less than thirty (30) years from the date issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of income restricted units. d. All dwellinas will be rental units. RM Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 • www.rviplanning.com Exhibit V.A. Aerial Map, Zoning Map & Existsing Land Use Map I IIWALDROP �ol ow lr lw s � 1 f • A � II 50 E a aa�ar�aoaC� • off: , e'er--•----^— . ' i.: a..� � �. - ::� _ ■r. �■- - - � �, 'NO 41401149 ol � � i• �. J� �ZrIS� i � - - MI-111 I] [ZI] ENGINEERING • - ncinEEv�'F r. ....r- .�. �.�.. . SINGLEiFAMILY RESIDENTIAL VACANT t (FUTURE COMMERCIAL) ' - w RECREATIOI (SWAMP BUGGY A VACANT VACANT (FUTURE MIXED -USE) (FUTURE ALF) _r Rattlesnake Hammock VACANT VACANT (FUTURE COMMERCIAL/ (FUTURE ALF) MIXED -USE) k m-N Miles WALDROP Carman Drive u ENGINEERING I ­­E ARCH-C-E Existing Land Use Ma I Exhibit V.B. Existing and Proposed Future Land Use Maps URF =Aj/r4,OA, WALDROP •----,o--- -A URF �1 m WALDROP Exhibit V.C. Environmental Report CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT April 2024 Prepared For: Carmen Drive 15, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 208-4079 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 Project No. 20CDL3377 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction....................................................................................................................................1 Vegetation Associations and Land Uses........................................................................................1 Soils...............................................................................................................................................2 JurisdictionalWetlands..................................................................................................................2 ListedSpecies................................................................................................................................3 References......................................................................................................................................4 i LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1. Project Location Map...........................................................................................E-1 Exhibit 2. Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map .......................................................... E-1 Exhibit3. Soils Map............................................................................................................. E-1 Exhibit 4. Listed Species Survey..........................................................................................E-1 Exhibit 5. Aerial with Boundary and Eagle Nest................................................................. E-1 ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Existing Land Use and Cover Summary................................................................1 Table 2. Soils Listed by the NRCS......................................................................................2 Table 3. Wetland Acreages by FLUCFCS Code.................................................................2 iii INTRODUCTION The following information regarding site conditions and environmental considerations has been prepared for the proposed growth management plan amendment for Local Greens (Project). The Project site is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Exhibit 1). More specifically, the Project site is located approximately 0.3 mile northeast of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard (County Road (CR) 951). The Project site is bordered to the north by the Sapphire Cove residential community, to the south by the Watercrest Parcel, to the east by Florida Sports Park Road, and to the west by a Florida Power and Light easement. The Project site is comprised of undeveloped, forested and non -forested upland and wetland areas that contain high levels of cover by exotic vegeation including melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and Peruvian primrose willow (Ludwigia peruviana). VEGETATION ASSOCATIONS AND LAND USES The vegetation mapping for the property was accomplished using December 2020 rectified color aerials (Scale: 1" = 100% and groundtruthing was conducted on April 13, 2021. The vegetation associations and land uses were mapped utilizing the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance, and "B" codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (i.e., melaleuca, spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), and earleaf acacia). AutoCAD Map 3D 2021 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map (Exhibit 2). A total of two vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401), accounting for 79.1 percent of the property (12.19± acres). Exotic vegetation documented on -site includes, but is not limited to, melaleuca, earleaf acacia, spermacoce, and torpedograss (Panicum repens). Table 1 summarizes the FLUCFCS acreages, and a brief description of each FLUCFCS classification follows. Table 1. Existing Land Use and Cover Summary FLUCFCS Percent Description Acreage Code of Total 740 Disturbed Land 3.22 20.9 7401 Disturbed Land, Hydric 12.19 79.1 15.4115.4 Totals 100.0 Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) The canopy of this upland habitat type is dominated by earleaf acacia. The sub -canopy is primarily melaleuca and includes earleaf acacia with scattered saltbush (Baccharis halimifolia) and climbing senna (Senna pendula). The ground cover includes broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), caesarweed (Urena lobata), spermacoce, and swamp flatsedge (Cyperus ligularis). Disturbed Land, Hydric FLUCFCS Code 7401) The canopy of this wetland habitat type is open. The sub -canopy is dominated by melaleuca and includes earleaf acacia, slash pine (Pious elliottii), and Peruvian primrose willow. The ground cover includes broomsedge, torpedograss, swamp flatsedge, yellow -eyed grass (Xyris sp.), spermacoce, rosy camphorweed (Pluchea baccharis), spreading beaksedge (Rhynchospora divergens), Southern beaksedge (Rhynchospora microcarpa), and big head rush (Juncus megacephalus). SOILS The soils for the property, per the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), are shown on Exhibit 3 and listed in Table 2. Table 2. Soils Listed by the NRCS Mapping Unit Description 21 Boca fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 38 Urban land - Matlacha-Boca complex 121 Hallandale - Boca fine sand association, zero to two percent slopes JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS The subject property was reviewed for wetlands using the "Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface Waters" (Chapter 62-340, Florida Administrative Code). The Project site contains 12.19± acres of wetlands (Exhibit 2). The wetlands are further identified as Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401). The wetlands for the property are shown in Exhibit 2. The wetlands by FLUCFCS code are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Wetland Acreage by FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acreage Code 7401 Disturbed Land, H dric 12.19 Total 12.19 2 LISTED SPECIES A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. on the Project site on April 13, 2021. No listed species were observed utilizing the Project site. The listed species survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit 4. The western portion of the Project site is located within 660 feet of Bald Eagle Nest CO-060. An aerial depicting the location of the bald eagle nest and the 330- and 660-foot USFWS nest protection buffer zones is included as Exhibit 5. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County and the USFWS regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements, as described in the USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007). REFERENCES Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Third Edition. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines EXHIBIT I PROJECT LOCATION MAP a 25TH AVE SW p - it fF GR"EY U7 2! J y. 27TH AVE SW: -Z 4`'1 ❑ '9 KSO� r EXIT ¢ Qy.' NA 29TH AVE SW ..,W .�.q�:.of IVY DR fn N = 105 GOLDEN GAI' N .... z "r3 - Z Ko m - * 31 STAVE SW: j32ND AVE SW - = --y MARKLEYAVE J O O # - 75 1� EVERLY-AVE F _ � EXIT � rr J 101 w t wN•%ATE-L•A E F y .BEND RADIO RD �'ECKBL-VuQ p BLACKBWRN-�I D— N IlI! p GAIL BLVD U �. � Om'- �j a VV ,4 � LU NORTH RD Z N p. Q .m -z ESTEYAVE._¢_ ,,>F-�� DAVIS BLVD ° " co`'-'1'/Ty OED Q.:. p Y Z COPE LN Y_ - 0 '. a W KINGS m CREWS RD - G_ A p�GNE� F. WHITAKER RD �Mp� •JECT LOCATION O THONIgs RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD �;,•�" SON- O m y LU co OI� SAINT_; ANDR <O`� ^- YERONA _SABALPALM RD I _ OW ni �k�g sue, '�• -- .. ., Ay .. 'PLO , : ...9�K s , •� i,l A mG G •7 a m-;`,- p A 3. . . . . . . . W MANATEE RDmill :� w•. �, l EXHIBIT 2 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP SCALE: 1" = 200' *. .. . y y y W W W y 740 W Y W y y W r w `M `, W yyyyy W W y y (0.26Ac.±) W W W yyyyy W yyyyy W W y K yyWWyyWyWWWWyW WW.WW... ... .WWy.. . W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W �`�y"�•�W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W . y W . . W W . W W . W �• W W W W . W W y W W y W . y y W y W W W y 4 y y W y W 740 W y W y W W y (1.62 Ac.±) W W W W W W W W W W W WyW. W. .W.W. W.W.W. W.WyyyWyyi1. 7401 y y W y y W W Wy y W W W W W y W W W y Y W (12.11 Ac+)W y W y W W W W W W W Y W y W y 740 y W Y y y Y W W y Y y W Y i W W W W y W y y W W y (0.94 Ac.}) W W y W W W W W y W W W y W y W y W W W y W y W Y W y W y W W W W W y W W W W W y W y W W W W W y W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W y W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W y y W y y . W W W W W W W W W W W W y W W W W W y y W W y y . � y y W y W W W W Y y y W i y y Y W y y i W W i W y Y y y y W y y W y y W W W y 740 y W y W W W Y W y y y W W y y y y W W y W W W y y W y y (0.40 Ac.±) ♦ �> , e -��� ' �. ti% +��, � �' - i� a• A+ Sri � 6 ry xr1 �� 7 _ .. �r. EXHIBIT 3 SOILS MAP LEGEND 0 100 200 Feet EXHIBIT 3. SOILS MAP LOCAL GREENS PROJECT LOCATION Soil Unit Description 21 Boca fine sand, Oto 2 percent slopes 38 Urban land-Matlacha-Boca complex 49 Hallandale -Boca fine sands association, Oto 2 percent slopes P.F. 4/14/21 REVIEWE°BY DATE PASSARELLA B.B. 4/14/21 c�„su , �t ASSOCIATES z EXHIBIT 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY LOCAL GREENS LISTED SPECIES SURVEY April 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) on April 13, 2021 for the 15.41± acre Local Greens (Project). The Project site is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Appendix A). More specifically, the Project site is located approximately 0.3 mile northeast of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard (County Road (CR) 951). The Project site is bordered to the north by the Sapphire Cove residential community, to the south by the Watercrest Parcel, to the east by Florida Sports Park Road, and to the west by a Florida Power and Light easement. The Project site is comprised of undeveloped, forested and non -forested upland and wetland areas. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD SURVEY METHODOLOGY A literature review and field survey were conducted to determine whether the Project site was being utilized by state and/or federally listed species as identified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In addition, the property was surveyed for plant species listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited or species included on the Collier County Rare and Less Rare plant lists (Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.04.03). 2.1 Literature Review The literature review involved an examination of available information on listed species in the geographical region of the Project. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species (2018); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region (1987); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and USFWS and FWCC databases for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), and wading bird rookeries (such as wood stork (Mycteria americana)) in Collier County. FWCC and USFWS database information is updated on a periodic basis and is current through different dates, depending on the species. The data is current through the noted dates: bald eagle nest locations — 2020; panther telemetry — June 2020; and RCW locations — December 2020. D-1 2.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted during daylight hours by qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the Project site. Transects were spaced to ensure that sufficient visual coverage of ground and flora was obtained. Approximate transect locations and spacing are shown on Appendix B. At regular intervals the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The survey was conducted with the aid of 8x or IOx power binoculars. The listed wildlife species surveyed for included, but were not limited to, the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), RCW, wood stork, Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and Florida panther. The listed plant species surveyed for included species typical to forested upland and wetland habitats in this geographical region, as well as listed epiphytes and terrestrial orchids common in Southwest Florida. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Literature Review According to FWCC and Audubon Eaglewatch databases, the closest documented bald eagle nest is CO-060 located approximately 620 feet west of the western Project limits (Appendixs C and D). The nest distance is within the the USFWS and the FWCC recommended 660-foot buffer zone for active and alternate bald eagle nests. Bald eagles are not a state or federally listed species; however, they are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The Project site is located within the USFWS consultation for RCWs (Appendix E); however, no RCW locations are documented on the Project site (Appendix C), and the Project site does not contain suitable habitat for the RCW. The closest documented RCW location is located approximately 0.5 mile west of the Project site. This location, along with the others documented west of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), is considered a relic or historic location. The RCW is a state and federally listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the 30± kilometer (18.6± miles) Core Foraging Area (CFA) of one documented wood stork rookery (No. 619018) (Appendix F). The wetlands within the proposed development limits are infested with exotic vegetation including torpedograss (Panicum repens), spermacoce (Spermacoce sp.), melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis); and they offer poor quality foraging habitat for wood storks. The wood stork is a state and federally listed threatened species. Two Florida panther telemetry points are located on the Project site, with additional telemetry points located in the vicinity (Appendix Q. The on -site telemetry points were from Florida Panther No. 219 (FP 219) and were recorded in November and December D-2 2013. FP 219 died in September 2015, and no additional telemetry has been recorded on - site. The property is within the Florida Panther Primary Zone (Kautz et al. 2006) (Appendix G). The Florida panther is a state and federally listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the USFWS Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) (FBB) consultation area and proposed critical habitat area (Appendix H). The Project site contains potential FBB roosting and foraging habitat. The Florida bonneted bat is a state and federally listed endangered species. 3.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted on April 13, 2021. Weather conditions during the survey were partly cloudy skies, five to ten miles per hour easterly winds, and temperatures in the upper 70s. The field survey documented no listed wildlife or plant species on the Project site. Appendix B shows the location of the transects traversed during the survey. 4.0 SUMMARY The literature search and review of agency databases found two Florida panther telemetry points within the Project limits. The telemetry points are from FP 219 and were recorded in November and December 2013. FP 219 died in September 2015, and no additional telemetry has been documented on -site. No other documented occurrences for listed species were found on the Project site during the literature review. The Project site is located within the USFWS and the FWCC recommended 660-foot buffer zone for Bald Eagle Nest CO-060. The Project site is located within the CFA for one documented wood stork colony and within the RCW consultation area. In addition, the Project site is located within the Primary Zone for Florida panthers and within the consultation area and proposed critical habitat area for Florida bonneted bats. The field survey conducted on the property, documented no listed species within the Project limits. 5.0 REFERENCES Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2018. Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non -Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages 118-133 D-3 Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Gainesville, Florida. Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. APPENDIX A PROJECT LOCATION MAP a 25TH AVE SW p - it fF GR"EY U7 2! J y. 27TH AVE SW: -Z 4`'1 ❑ '9 KSO� r EXIT ¢ Qy.' NA 29TH AVE SW ..,W .�.q�:.of IVY DR fn N = 105 GOLDEN GAI' N .... z "r3 - Z Ko m - * 31 STAVE SW: j32ND AVE SW - = --y MARKLEYAVE J � O # - 75 1� EVERLY-AVE F _ � EXIT � rr J 101 w t wN•%ATE-L•A E F y .BEND RADIO RD �'ECKBL-VuQ p BLACKBWRN-�I D— N IlI! p GAIL BLVD U �. � Om'- �j a VV ,4 � LU NORTH RD Z N p. Q .m -z ESTEYAVE._¢_ ,,>F-�� DAVIS BLVD ° " co`'-'1'/Ty OED Q.:. p Y Z COPE LN Y_ - 0 '. a W KINGS m CREWS RD - G_ A p�GNE� F. WHITAKER RD �Mp� •JECT LOCATION O THONIgs RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD �;,•�" SON- O m y LU co OI� SAINT_; ANDR <O`� ^- YERONA _SABALPALM RD I _ OW ni �k�g sue, '�• -- .. ., Ay .. 'PLO , : ...9�K s , •� i,l A mG G •7 a m-;`,- p A 3. . . . . . . . of Y J MANATEE RDmill :. APPENDIX B AERIAL WITH SURVEY TRANSECTS (.. a 0 'mil Z Ito c - ya2 s, ♦ e F Mr\1i ;f.:r:l �!C�\�-.. 1�. ._ _ ..�.. t. � La'A'f � Y.. .. h'".. Y' • .. - ��V �Iri�i.J� L� .. ... REVISIONS DATE DRAWN BY DATE P.F. 4/13/21 13620 Metropolis Avenue DESIGNED BY DATE Suite 200 R.F. 4/13/21 Ft. Myers, FL 33912 REVIEWED BY DATE Phone (239) 274-0067 B.B. 4/13/21 Fax (239) 274.0069 PASSARELLA iocs� & ASSOCIATES z tiq 'v... .. e� `�• P�� 6y 1 J \. t y. i 0 Of Y Q U) IY Q (/i O LL LEGEND: NOTES: APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WALKED AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGH TRANSECTS THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2020. PROPERTY BOUNDARY ESTIMATED FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S GIS WEBSITE. DRAWING No. LOCAL GREENS 20CDL3377 AERIAL WITH SURVEY TRANSECTS SHEET No. APPENDIX B APPENDIX C DOCUMENTED OCCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECIES ' • o GOLDEN,GATE PKWY • g• �• t • • • • Q' _ •' •� ® ® /•, ..'•• • !� •�••'t :•: » LEGEND BECK'BLVD- RADIO RD • • • ,' • t „•, ,• • • .� 2 • • • • • • .. »'r • _ :• 7.. • • •rb/ COJLL•IER-•• mot try S� ...• •; .. •. t f uk DAVIS BLVD •S • •t SIP N 00 • .• • • i •S • �• • '• '• • • ~ • • • •• • Z•' • • ♦ • • • •� 1 ••• • • • • W E • • • • •S r; > 7•• s..•• X • 's ••'• •• ' O •• • [PROJECT LOCATION � � 1• fl ; t = v , • , • .t � • :: ; 0 1 2 • ,. • • _ f Miles RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK •' •• ' • f i • t • • ' • • • •� ' "• •• • :. .. • •. • ••• • j DRAWN BY DATE P.F. 4/12/21 APPENDIX C. DOCUMENTED OCCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECIES PASSARELLA REVIEWED BY DATE LOCAL GREENS R.F. 4/12/21 F�JIt,�'i5L5 & ASSOCIATES 2 REVISED DATE APPENDIX D AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY AND EAGLE NEST 71-1 4� 'A �1- t. P/L Q, N,W -Av.- i\nl OFF=. a 1- Oe 41Yk Va Va APPENDIX E RCW CONSULTATION AREA WITH LOCATIONS APPENDIX F FLORIDA WOOD STORK NESTING COLONIES AND 18.6 MILE CORE FORAGING AREAS Z v m CORKSCREW RD O t 850 6 (p LEGEND °ewD`' L E E P io 1 1 0 � TERRY ST Y BON'ITABEACH RD _ —+-- �+—�— �O N 1 O v Z OIL WELL RD p A o W E 4 S VANDERBILT BEACH RD eY \ d o m GOLDEN GATE BLVD 0 2 4 6 Miles a I� 'OD PINE RIDGE RD o COLLIER m J \ yp D O Lj O D w o / o � a i �mi p O w w -o � GOLDEN GATE P� \ "' I A c Z 6 r � G) RADIO RD Q o my 951 DAVIS / \ PROJECT LOCATION Gulf \ _ of Mexico 0 APPENDIX F. FLORIDA WOOD STORK NESTING COLONIES DRAWN BY P.F. DATE 4/12/21 PAS REVF. BY R.F. DATE 4/12/21 AND 18.6 MILE CORE FORAGING AREAS SARE LLA 1°"`°'""� ASSOCIATES E`1--& � REVISED DATE LOCAL GREENS � APPENDIX G PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER FOCUS AREA L L o z I o `l1 > J m 1 N Y ��� ANDFR82T BEACH RD I� PINE RIDGE-RD—E 1 �o Y Z o � J Z � m F LL W ` O \`� m IJ �o Q I RADIO RD z DAVIS BLVD PROJECT LOCATION LEGEND dr N W E S 0 0 1 2 3 Miles e a GOL-DEN-GATE-BLVD Qd� 114 �`V a. 4 n� Gulf v of Mexico Lo B 4� -4x, DRAWN BY DATE P.F. 4/12/21 APPENDIX G. PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER FOCUS ARE REVIEWEDBY DATE PASSARELLA LOCAL GREENS R.F. 4/12/21 � & ASSOCIATES REVISED DATE - .ECOLO,^,IS[e APPENDIX H FLORIDA BONNETED BAT CONSULTATION AREA AND PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT MAP EXHIBIT 5 AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY AND EAGLE NEST Np. SCALE: V, 4� I U i 1.0a Al t - i� Ott 40 Ll Master Site File Letter This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at CompliancePermits@dos.MyFlorida.com for project review information. April 29, 2021 Patrick Murray Project Planner / GIS Analyst t 1 11, 1 1 IkIENGINEERING RLANHIrTU C Y•L EWSPYEEUING LMr,51-WE PAD,1TEC1vg1. In response to your request on April 29, 2021, the Florida Master Site File lists no cultural resources recorded in the designated area located at 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. East of Collier Blvd and North of Rattlesnake Hammock Rd and sits within Section 14 / Township 50 / Range 26, Collier County, Florida. When interpreting the results of our search, please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Because vandalism and looting are common at Florida sites, we ask that you limit the distribution of location information on archaeological sites. • While many of our records document historically significant resources, the documentation of a resource at the Florida Master Site File does not necessarily mean the resource is historically significant. • Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at CompliancePermitskdos.MyFlorida.com Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Eman M. Vovsi, Ph.D. Florida Master Site File Eman.VovsikDOS.MyFlorida.com 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph 1 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile@dos. state.fl.us PO 1 _ a �S - OL 1.0 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd f i. r ��.r�,. r,'.+►,�.e,x,.. _ fir. LC �: h •w- �S`Y�' AFC �'�1� -`.. ib 1 1 ' k. x♦ -- r { ` *► f 1�.- it yJi% Ste' Js S0�90 U o EM, D o o o - - c L -, IE U e • . o °� o D C { • _ e 0, �mo C;o ]Cr C014 .ty Public Utilities Department Engineering & Project Management Division April 27, 2021 VIA: E-MAIL Luke Schultheis P.E. Luke.Schultheis@waldropengineering.com Project Manager Waldrop Engineering 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Subject: Water and Wastewater Service Availability Project: Carman Drive 15 (8496 Rattlesnake Hammock RD) Parcel #: 00417000004 Dear Luke: The subject project is in the service areas of the Collier County Water -Sewer District's (CCWSD) regional WTP and South County Water Reclamation Facility. Connections to the CCWSD's water distribution and wastewater collection/transmission systems will be permitted only in the locations referenced herein, or in a superseding utility service availability letter, and only after the GMD Development Review Division's approval of hydraulic calculations prepared by the Developer's Engineer of Record in accordance with the Design Criteria found in Section 1 of the Collier County Water -Sewer District Utilities Standards Manual. Water service is readily available to the project via an existing 8" water main at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Carman Drive. The water main is more than 200 feet from the property line. As such, connection is encouraged but not required. Source pressure shall be verified by the results of a fire flow test not older than six months, in accordance with subsection 2.2.1, paragraph A. Unless served by a master meter, the project shall include a stub - out for future development at the northeast corner of the project, as required per subsection 2.2.2 of the Design Criteria. Potable water is available for domestic use, fire protection, and irrigation, subject to the provisions of LDC 4.03.08 C, the Collier County Irrigation Ordinance (2015-27), and other applicable rules and regulations. Wastewater service is readily available to the project via an existing 4" force main at the northwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Carman Drive. The force main is more than 200 feet from the property line. As such, connection is encouraged but not required. Please contact the Wastewater Engineering Section(WasteWaterEngineering@colliercountvfl.gov) to confirm downstream wastewater collection/transmission system capacity. See the attached GIS screen shot for approximate existing utility locations. Pubk UtHes Engineering & Project Management Division - 3339 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 • Nap]es, Flonda 34112-5361 •239-252-4285 • FAX 239-252-5378 A preliminary utility plan must be reviewed and discussed at a pre -submittal conference with representatives of the Public Utilities Department and the Growth Management Department, as required by Sec. 134-58, paragraph (b)(2) of the Code of Ordinances. This conference may be conducted by email at the discretion of the Public Utilities Department. Please contact Brett Rosenblum (Brett.Rosen blum@colIiercountyfLgov) for assistance with this requirement. If you have any questions, you may contact me at (239) 252-1037 or Eric. Fey@col IiercountyfLgov. Respecp.f Ily, r' c Fey, P.E., Principal Project Manager CC: Steve Messner, Division Director —Water, PUD/WD; Beth Johnssen, Division Director — Wastewater, PUD/WWD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD; Dan Roman, Principal Project Manager — Wastewater, PUD/EPMD; Brett Rosenblum, Principal Project Manager, GMD/DRD; Joanna Nicholson, Site Plans Reviewer, GMD/DRD; Utility Planning Section GIS Screen Shot :emValiR U666432 7!G e a �Hk •. -1 Zcnin0: MPUD _,Cr_iy. �1 HY wpf1'9Uy9s¢t_3e_mYalve_ppppd_-3d —' _— wsystem�DVa{11lie_y00w1f9STy5sdte m— Y-H0aY0lDv0eO1-d1000-03 2 0303fi5 w-u�3Sr=w+ sysi SV19fii ;wSystemValrei1112G352 wSystemValveOD19753 Sys 02.w9ystemValve111975HYDR904 te wCvl71B-PV3U2.# ') i �WsystmValwste116:1, temV31ve400003_w WCV142 w&sysmale 000238CV1529 Manho1e0017838 SV19fi0 SV1959ss 0000370=~ vw5semv0 5fi . ssManhole_0017837 ,sv19 rA k mValve_0600191 �� Exhibit IV.E. Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis 1 , BONITA SPRINGS Tampa Orlando Sarasota AIENGINEERING 28100 Bonita Grande Dr., Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE p. (239) 405-7777 f. (239) 405-7899 Carman Drive Subdistrict Exhibit IV.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis REVISED JANUARY 2022 The proposed text amendment is site -specific and only applies to the subject property known as Carman Drive, located northeast of Mixed Use Activity Center#7. The subject property is in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, which permitsup to 1.5 dwelling unit per acre, or a maximum of 23 dwelling units (DUs) on the 15.4+/-acre parcel. The following public facilities analysis evaluates the project impacts on potable water, wastewater, drainage, parks, schools, roadways, fire/EMS, and solid waste.The source for the LOS information is the 2020 AUIR. 1. POTABLE WATER Adopted Level of Service Standard = 150 GPD/person/day for Collier CountyUtilities Existing Demand: 23 DU x 150 GPD x 2.5 = 8,625 GPD Proposed Increase in Demand: 189 DU x 150 GPD x 2.5 = 70,875 GPD Permitted Capacity: 53.88 MGD Required Plant Capacity FY28: 40.8 MGD The proposed GMP amendment results in total potable water demand of 79,500 GPD. The property is located within the Collier County potable water service area. The County has existing plant capacity of approximately 52 MGD. The proposed additional 189 multi -family dwelling units will not create any LOS issues in the 5-year planning horizon. This Project will have no significant impact onthe potable water system and capacity is available in Collier County. 2. SANITARY SEWER Adopted Level of Service Standard = 100 GPD/person/day Existing Demand: 23 DU x 100 GPD x 2.5 = 5,750 GPD Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 1 of 3 Proposed Increase in Demand: 189 DU x 100 GPD x 2.5 = 47,250 GPD Permitted Capacity: 16.0 MGD Required Plant Capacity FY28: 14.5 MGD The proposed GMP amendment results in a total sanitary sewer demand of 53,000 GPD. The subdistrict is located in the South Sewer Service Area of theCollier County Water/Sewer District. 3. ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement for discussions of the project's impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project'sradius of development influence. 4. DRAINAGE The County has adopted a LOS standard for private developments which requiresdevelopment 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 single project within the proposed subdistrict has been issued a surface water management permit by the South Florida Water Management District which has established criteria for the volume of water storedon site as well as the quality of the water which may be discharged from the site. The development within the subdistrict is consistent with the County LOS standards. 5. SOLID WASTE The adopted LOS for solid waste is two years of lined cell capacity at the previous3year average tons per year disposal rate and 10 years of permittable landfill capacity of the disposal rate. Existing Demand: 23 DU x 0.54 tons per person x 2.5 = 31.05 tons Proposed Increase in Demand: 189 DU x 0.54 tons per person x 2.5 = 255.15 tons The proposed GMP amendment results in an increased solid waste demand of 255.15 tons a year. Current landfill capacity is anticipated to be 18,710,256 tons. There are no current capacity issues, and none are anticipated through the year 2069. Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 2 of 3 6. COMMUNITY & REGIONAL PARKS The proposed 212 dwelling units will pay park impact fees to mitigate for theirimpacts on this public facility. No adverse impacts to Community or Regional Parks result from the amendmentof the subdistrict. 7. SCHOOLS The proposed 212 dwelling units will pay school impact fees to mitigate fortheir impacts. No adverse impacts to schools result from the creation of the subdistrict. 8. FIRE CONTROL AND EMS The proposed project lies within the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District. The Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District - Station #23 is located at 6055 Collier Blvd., which is approximately 4.5 miles from the property boundary. No significant impacts to Fire Control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for EMS and fire would be determined at time of SDP based on each unit. Sheriff, Fire Protection and EMS Services location/address of facilities intended to serve the project are: • North Collier Fire and Rescue District - Station #23 6055 Collier Blvd. • Collier County Sheriff North Naples Substation 8075 Lely Cultural Pkwy. Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 3 of 3 Amendment Justification Narrative & Sprawl Analysis RXIi Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA AMENDMENT JUSTIFICATION NARRATIVE REVISED JANUARY 2022 The Carman Drive Subdistrict subject property ("Property") comprises 15.4+/- acres and is generally located to the northeast of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Property has access from Carman Drive and located in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The Property is designated Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) on the Future Land Use Map and is zoned Agricultural. The Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict allows for 1.5 units per gross acre. The Property is currently undeveloped and partially vegetated. The Applicant is requesting a site -specific map and text amendment to the Future Land Use Element to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict to allow up to 212 dwelling units (limited to rental units). The amendment will allow for build -out of this quadrant at an arterial intersection and activity center node with a compact, residential project that provides for market -rate and affordable workforce housing in close proximity to available public infrastructure, goods, services and employment. Similar to other developments in the Urban Residential Fringe that have utilized TDR credits to increase density, the Applicant proposes the utilization The first 15 units above the base density of 23 units must be through the acquisition of TDR credits. An affordable housing component is proposed consisting of a minimum of 42 units (20%) at the moderate -income level, or 81-120% of Area Median Income (AMI). This project does not cater to the higher end of the affordable AMI range, known as "GAP" households earning up to 140% of the AMI, but rather those earning between 81-120% of the AMI, which is particularly high demand in Collier County. As outlined in detail below, the proposed text amendment will further the County's stated goals to: • Provide affordable workforce housing at the "Moderate" income level, to address gaps in the existing local affordable housing supply; • Efficiently use the County's investment in public infrastructure by locating intensive land uses in urban -designated areas of the County where adequate and available public facilities and infrastructure exist; • Uphold the intent of the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) future land use category by providing the necessary transition between the urban and rural designated areas of the County. The following is data and analysis that supports approval of the proposed GMP Amendment and RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture • 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Sutie 305 • Bonita Springs, FL 34135 • 239.405.7777 www.rviplanning.com identifies the request's appropriateness in relation to the adopted Goals, Objectives and Policies in the GMP and the requirements set forth in Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. PROJECT HISTORY/BACKGROUND The Property is currently in the Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District and abutting Activity Center #7. Surrounding parcels have secured zoning entitlements to allow for intensive commercial retail and office development, as well as Assisted Living Facilities (ALF). Additionally, the Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI has been approved, allowing for a master -planned community consisting of 1,760 dwellings units, 327,500 square feet of retail, 70,000 square feet of office, 135 hotel rooms, and 140,000 square feet of business park uses. These approvals and the resulting development pattern along the Collier Blvd. corridor have significantly urbanized this portion of the County and resulted in continued investment in public infrastructure to serve the growth of the corridor. These investments include, but are not limited to: utilities, roadways, transit, schools, Fire/EMS, library and other facilities outlined in Exhibit IV.E., which includes the Urban Facilities Map. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN The Property is located in a rapidly developing urbanized portion of the County as evidenced by the property's proximity to Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The property is also proximate to existing and approved urban levels of development, as well as major public facilities including schools, hospitals, and libraries. The location of this property is adjacent to similar projects and compliments approved developments such as: The Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI, The Sierra Meadows PUD, Good Turn Center MPUD, and McMullen MPUD, contributing to the compatibility and similarity of the surrounding area. The Property is located northeast of Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road, both county -maintained arterial roadways. The site represents infill development based upon the existing and approved/planned developments surrounding the project. Please refer to Table 1 below, which provides an inventory of the immediately adjacent Future Land Use Categories, zoning districts, and existing land uses. TABLE 1: INVENTORY OF SURROUNDING LANDS DIRECTION FUTURE LAND USE ZONING DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE Single Family Residential North Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict RPUD (The Lord's way 30 Acre RPUD); FPL Utility Site South Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict MPUD Vacant Mixed Use McMullen MPUD Florida Sports Park East Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict MPUD (Swamp Buggy) Hacienda Lakes Vacant Mixed Use (Good Mixed Use Activity Center; Urban MPUD, Turn Center) Vacant West Residential Fringe Subdistrict Commercial; Commercial; FPL Utility Agriculture Site RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 2 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 The Property is northeast of a designated Mixed -Use Activity Center, which is specifically intended to provide for concentrated commercial and mixed -use development with "carefully configured access to the road network". Activity Center #7 in general encompasses 209+/- acres and includes a diverse mix of approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments (MPUDs). The Lord's Way 30 Acre RPUD to the north of the Property is approved for residential dwelling units of single-family, two-family, townhomes, and multi -family types with a maximum of 75 units (2.5 du/acre) per Ordinance 14-11. The Good Turn Center MPUD immediately to the west of the Property is approved for a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facility uses with a maximum of 200 units (21 du/acre) per Ordinance 09-53. The Hacienda Lakes MPUD to the east of the Property allows for a maximum of 1,760 residential dwelling units and a variety of commercial, professional, business park, medical office, and hotel uses throughout the MPUD per Ordinance 11-41. The Property is immediately adjacent to the Attraction Tract within the Hacienda Lakes MPUD which allows for a variety of amusement and recreational uses and is the location of the Swamp Buggy Race at the Florida Sports Park. The McMullen MPUD to the south of the Property is approved for a maximum of 185,000 square feet of commercial uses pursuant to Ordinance 10-18. Care units are also permitted in this project utilizing a commercial intensity conversion. The commercial tract of the Hacienda Lakes MPUD to the south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road is approved for up to 327,500 square feet of retail land uses and 70,000 square feet of professional and medical office uses. 135 hotel rooms are also allowed on this tract. The surrounding development pattern is indicative of the intent for compact, urban levels of development at the Collier Blvd./Rattlesnake Hammock intersection to accommodate the need for goods and services in southern Collier County. This area is lacking in housing types that are closely integrated with these existing and planned commercial uses. GMP ANALYSIS & CONSISTENCY • TRANSITION OF DENSITY The Property is within the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). This subdistrict is specifically sited on the Future Land Use Map to provide transitional densities between the Urban -designated area along the coast, and the Agricultural/Rural area generally located 1 mile east of Collier Blvd. The URF was established in 1989 to provide a transition from the urban area which allowed a density of 4 units per acre, to the rural area that allowed a density of 1 unit per 5 acres. Since 1989, the Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI has been approved, which fully satisfies the intended transition of land uses and densities from the arterial frontage to the Urban/Rural interface one mile east of the Property. Specifically, Hacienda Lakes' master plan provides for commercial uses at the arterial intersection, which transitions to residential uses straddling the future Benfield Parkway, and finally designated preserve tracts along the project's eastern edge. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 3 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 Due to this confirmed development pattern, along with other intervening MPUDs, namely Hacienda Lakes to the east, the GMP's intent to provide for a logical transition from Urban to Rural in this area of the County is not impacted by this amendment. • WORKFORCE & AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Property's location on a key growth corridor in the County makes it an ideal area to accommodate higher density residential uses. The site is not located adjacent to established low - density areas that would result in compatibility concerns with neighboring developments. The amendment will allow for the development of a combination of up to 212 market rate and affordable workforce housing units, which directly addresses the identified demand for diversified housing to accommodate the County's existing residents and projected population growth. The enclosed Market Study further substantiates the need for this amendment to meet housing needs in the County. Higher densities are necessary to support commercial uses, multi -modal development patterns, and transit usage, all of which result in reduced vehicle miles traveled. The Property is ideally located adjacent to a mixed -use activity center that currently permits higher densities and intensities within other approved mixed -use developments surrounding the property. As detailed in the enclosed Ch. 163 Sprawl Analysis, the amendment directly supports sound planning principles, including the integration of residential uses. The requested amendment directly facilitates live -work opportunities in the Urban - designated area, and locates residents in close proximity to goods, and services and employment. • GMP POLICY ANALYSIS FLUE Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The project will be accessed via Carman Drive, a two-lane local road connecting to Rattlesnake Hammock Road and The Lord's Way. Carman Drive is a private road owned by Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC and will be constructed to county standards. Carman Drive improvements have been approved and reviewed by Collier County under PL2018000046. FLUE Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. The proposed development pattern as evidenced in the companion RPUD will have an insignificant impact on nearby collector and arterial roads. Due to the size of the site and the proposed layout of the project, looping will not be possible. FLUE Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 4 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. Due to buildout of the surrounding properties as well as the location of off -site preserve areas, interconnection is not possible. FLUE Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. Per LDC 6.06.02, the project will include 5' sidewalks located on either side of the street and between units. These sidewalks provide residents with walkability within the project. Additionally, the project will provide a range of housing types with a significant affordability component as outlined in the companion RPUD application. CCME Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural -Industrial District and Rural -Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. In accordance with Section 3.05.07.H.1.f.vi.b, off -site land donations provided at a 4:1 ratio may be utilized to satisfy the native vegetation preservation requirement. As determined by the native vegetation present on the Project site prior to clearing, the Collier County native vegetation preservation requirement totals 0.24± acre and the utilization of off -site lands at a 4:1 ratio would result in the requirement of a 0.96± acre off -site land donation (i.e., 0.24 acre x 4 = 0.96 acre). Compensation for SFWMD and COE wetland impacts will be provided through the preservation and enhancement of a 25.95± acre Off -Site Mitigation Parcel. The Parcel is located within the limits of the Belle Meade NRPA, an area of Collier County targeted for acquisition and protection by the state, is surrounded by other state owned lands, provides habitat for listed species, and also provides a corridor for wildlife movement through the Picayune Strand State Forest. The Off -Site Mitigation Parcel is comprised of 25.78± acres of native vegetation and therefore exceeds the 0.96± acre off -site native vegetation preservation requirement. The Off -Site Mitigation Parcel will be enhanced through the removal of exotic vegetation, preserved in perpetuity, and protected via a conservation easement dedicated to the SFWMD and Collier County. CCME Objective 7.1: The County shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats. The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern, in accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-27.004, and 68A-27.005, F.A.C. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 5 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 and those species designated by various federal agencies as Endangered and Threatened species published in 50 CFR 17. Within the environmental report, the listed species survey concluded that no listed species were found within the property boundary. A Bald Eagle nest has been documented within 660 feet of the proposed project and the developer will coordinate with Collier County and USFWS regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL As outlined in the Environmental Report prepared by Passarella & Associates, Inc., the site consists of undeveloped forested and non -forested uplands. In addition to wetland areas that contain high levels of exotic vegetation. Per the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS), a total of two vegetative associations and land uses where identified on the property. The dominate habitat type located on the property is Disturbed Land, Hydric. The listed species survey conducted on the property documented no listed species within the Property. A small western portion of the project site is located within 660 feet of a Bald Eagle Nest. Prior to construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County and the USFWS regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements. The forthcoming PUD application identify any required preservation area in full compliance with the GMP and LDC. A letter from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded or likely to be present within the subject property. As noted above, the development will meet the required minimum preservation and vegetation retention requirements through a donation of 25.78 acres of an Off -site Mitigation Parcel, as detailed in the attached Environmental Report prepared by Passarella and Associates. The enhancement and preservation of the Off -Site Mitigation Parcel and its connectivity to the Picayune Strand State Forest will benefit the wildlife species known to utilize the area and will function as a corridor for wildlife movement. The proposed Off -Site Mitigation Parcel will be of greater regional ecological value and will also provide greater long-term value than additional preservation efforts of the degraded on -site wetlands. Based upon this information, the site is suitable for increased densities due to a lack of environmental sensitivity and on -site natural resources, and significant off -site mitigation commitment. INFRASTRUCTURE Access to the subject property is proposed via two connections to Carman Drive. The northern connection will be limited to an egress only and southern connection will be a full access connection. As outlined in the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., included an assumption of 212 single-family units only, on order to provide a worst -case scenario, and demonstrates no roadway segments show a significant impact as a result of the development of traffic being added to the roadway network. Carman Drive is a private road owned by Hacienda Lakes of Naples, LLC, which will be improved to county standards prior to site development. These improvements have been approved and reviewed by Collier County under PL2018000046. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 6 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 Potable water and sanitary sewer for this project will be provided by Collier County Utilities (CCU) through existing infrastructure located along Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Exhibit IV.E. demonstrates the property's proximity to available public infrastructure including parks, schools, fire, and EMS services. This data reflects that the subject property is an appropriate location for the addition of density, and the compact development pattern will effectively utilize the County's investment in public infrastructure in this area. CONCLUSION In summary, the proposed site -specific text amendment is justified as follows 1) The proposed amendment will provide an appropriate location for market rate and affordable workforce housing and provides for a transition in density in an area where it is appropriate and will reduce the impacts on transportation networks. 2) The proposed amendment will facilitate a live -work opportunity in an urban -designated area and allow residents to walk short distances for goods, services, and employment. 3) The proposed amendment will allow for a compact and contiguous development pattern along a major arterial thoroughfare with available public services and infrastructure surrounded by other mixed used planned developments. 4) Will be compatible with adjacent existing and approved developments. Accordingly, the Applicant respectfully requests approval of this petition. RVi Planning + Landscape Architecture 1 7 of 7 Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA PL2021000620 Exhibit G Proof of Ownership (Warranty Deed) INSTR 5977918 OR 5868 PG 3974 E-RECORDED 12/30/2020 12:25 PM PAGES 2 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC@.70 $4,900.00 REC $18.50 CONS $700,000.00 This Instrument Prepared By: Shari M. Garcia PATRIOT TITLE SERVICES, LLC 5237 Summerlin Commons Blvd. Fort Myers, Florida 33907 File Number: 7131 Strap Number: 00417000004 Made this 29 day of Dbc't1 Warranty Deed terms "grantor" and "grantee" herein shall be construed to include all genders and singular or plural as the context indicates ) 20 20, BETWEEN Local Greens Company, LLC,,a Florida limited liability company whose post office address is: 1490 511 Avenue South, Suite 104, Naples, Florida 34102, grantor and �, E Carman Drive 15, LLC, a Florida Lilrriited.;Giability Company whose post office address is:7742 Alico Rd, Fort M rs, Uorida 33912 grantee, WITNESSETH: That the said grantor, for and in considerati/ sum of Seven Hundred Thousand dollars & no cents ($700,000.00) , and other good and valuable considerattpns�. said grantor in hand paid by said grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sd'tol3e,said grantee, and grantee's heirs, successors and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and eringlin ltier County, Florida towit: Parcel 1: The East 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest f/4 ec'ion 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Parcel 2: The South 1/2 of the West 1/2 of the North 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwgst 17�'1of Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Subject to easements and restrictions of record, if any, which are specifically not extended ofnjsed hereby. Said grantor hereby covenants with said grantee that the grantor is lawfully seized of said land Jdfe- simple; that the grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey said land; that the grantor hereby warrants the title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever; that the land is free of all encumbrances except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 2020. Page 6/13 *** OR 5868 PG 3975 *** File Number: 7131 Strap Number: 00417000004 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set grantor's hand and seal the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: 1 Local Greens Company, LLC, a Florida limited liability company Witness # 1 signature p, V i Oskari Kariste Witnpc it nrint naira J Title: Manager/Member/Chairman 0' p Witness #2 signature : witness TTz print name STATE OF Texas 1 HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this 29i of physical presence) personally appeared Oskari Kariste, as _l Company, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, who is,pi Florida DL as identification and who is the per instrument and who after being duly sworn says and has acknowl the uses and purposed herein mentioned. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me the undersi day and year last aforesaid. My Commission Expires: October 11, 2022 000IIIIII ��(seal) % P • • •.R ELECTRONIC•• Z: NOT ORTARY`ID AY LIC ' 131757026 ' m '� Nam•• O� .�. • �pN e VA S I E� �` `.`. Notary Public OF Harris ember , 2020 before me (by means of Member/Chairman of Local Greens y known to me or who has provided gibed in and who executed the foregoing h.t e execution hereof is free act and deed for Ana Laura Salazar Uribe Notary printed ublic by my hand and official seal, the Document Notarized using a Live Audio -Video Connection Page 7/13 Market Study RENTAL APARTMENT AND DETACHED BUILD TO RENT MARKET STUDY FOR CARMAN DRIVE 15 PARCEL WEST OF AND ON CARMAN DRIVE JUST NORTH OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Revised January 30, 2022 Prepared for Carman Drive 15, LLC Mr. David Torres 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33912 Prepared by /1 Planning— E--tion—R—It, Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Suite 100 707 Orchid Drive Naples, Florida 34102 (239) 269-1341 Ree-i.com Background Carman Drive 15, LLC ("Applicant") is submitting a comprehensive growth management plan change to modify the 15 +/- acre tract ("Subject Property") that is located west of and on Carman Drive just north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Collier County, Florida ("County"). The Applicant wishes to modify the future land use element through a Growth Management Plan Amendment ("GMPA") and create a residential planned unit development ("RPUD") on the site for up to 212 multi -family rental apartment or low-rise condominium units on the property. The underlying land use designation for the Subject Property is Urban Residential Fringe which only permits 1.5 density units per acre. Collier County staff has requested a market study ("Study") that addresses the market for multi -family rental apartment or detached build to rent market for the Subject Property. The Consultant is well -versed in preparing real estate needs analysis and market studies especially in the Southwest Florida marketplace. the Study is comprised of four parts; the rental multi -family market definition and description, the rental market supply and demand analysis, conclusions and a commercial demand analysis for the area. 1.0 Potential Multi -Family Rental Unit Market Development The Client seeks to develop the 212 multi -family rental units on the site as either a small rental apartment complex or detached build to rent neighborhood. The Consultant performed the following analysis on the Collier County rental apartment market to determine how the proposed 212 multi -family rental units would affect the rental apartment market. Market Area Definition Due to the development of the Collier County urban area west of Interstate 75, future population growth in the County is now focused along the Immokalee Road corridor heading east and along U.S. 41 East heading in the same direction. Residential development is following those growth areas including up and down Collier Boulevard. The Subject Property is located northeast of the Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Hammock Road intersection, which is an integral location for the future commercial and supporting residential growth in the County. This area is showing recent significant growth with the opening of the Collier County Regional Sports Park and the announcement of Uline opening a major distribution center in the City Gate Park of Commerce to the north and the rapid commercial growth taking place at the U.S. 41 East and Collier Boulevard to the south. This intersection is between those two rapid growth areas. Apartment complexes are being developed in all areas of the County to address the significant demand for rental apartments. That demand is being fueled by the significant increase in real estate prices that is forcing people to move into lower cost housing (while rental prices are increasing at the same time, they are still lower than a mortgage payment on for sale housing) and by workers who cannot afford for sale housing thus seek housing that is both affordable and near their workplaces. Since apartment complexes are being developed mostly in the urban area of the County, the Consultant determined the market area to be an approximately 317 square mile area that encompasses the urban and urban fringe areas of the County. The Consultant utilized the ESRI Business Analyst GIS program to obtain demographic data and to include all potential rental m complexes located within the boundaries of the Subject Property's market area. Figure 1.1 below depicts the market area for the Subject Property. Figure 1.1 Subject Property Market Area Source: ESRI ArcGIS Business Analyst Mapping System 2 Market Area Demographic Detail Table 1.1 on the next page depicts the 2010 U.S. Census demographic profile updated through 2025 of the population that lives within the 317.18 square -mile market area of the subject site. It is important to note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses the Decennial Census as the basis for issuing their annual American Community Survey census data that is used in the demand section of this report. The 2020 ACS report was the most recent data source available at the time of this report. \s� Table 1.1 Market Area Demographic and Income Profile Polygon 6 Area: 317.18 square miles Prepared by Esri Summary Census 2010 2020 2025 Popu lat ion 245,430 291,078 316,431 Households 105,329 126,131 137,551 Families 69,303 82,021 89,141 Average Household Size 2.31 2.29 2.28 Owner Occupied Housing Units 75,738 89,927 98,022 Renter Occupied Housing Units 29,591 37,107 41,997 Median Age 48.2 52.1 53.5 Trends: 2020-2025 Annual Rate Area State National Popu lat ion 1.68% 1.33% 0.72% Households 1.75% 1.27% 0.72% Families 1.68% 1.23% 0.64% Owner HHs 1.74% 1.22% 0.72% Median Household Income 1.85% 1.51% 1.60% 2020 2025 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent <$15,000 8,890 7.0% 8,420 6.1% $15,000 - $24,999 8,827 7.0% 8,542 6.2% $25,000 - $34,999 9,617 7.6% 9,470 6.9% $35,000 - $49,999 16,820 13.3% 17,058 12.4% $50,000- $74,999 21,406 17.0% 22,606 16.4% $75,000- $99,999 16,489 13.1% 18,060 13.1% $100,000- $149,999 17,848 14.2% 20,750 15.1% $150,000 - $199,999 10,475 8.3% 13,219 9.6% $200,000+ 15,759 12.5% 19,427 14.1% Data Note: Income is expressed in currentdollars. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2020 and 2025. Source: ESRI and U.S. Census Bureau 3 Also important to the development of this multi -family rental unit project is the location of businesses and subsequent employment centers located near the subject site. Figure 1.2 below shows businesses by employee size near the Subject Property that would benefit from having residential offerings available to their employees. The Subject Property is located in a burgeoning area of the County and as the population increases, housing will be needed to accommodate that growth. That growth will also foster new commercial opportunities that will service that growth and also provide additional employment opportunities. The employees fulfilling the employment needs of the future commercial opportunities will need rental housing nearby as places to live near their work. Figure 1.2 Businesses by Employment Size Source: ESRI ArcGIS Business Analyst Mapping System Table 1.2 on the next page shows the top 25 employers in Collier County. El Table 1.2 Collier County Top 25 Employers Rank Company Name Employment 1 NCH Healthcare System** 7,017 2 Collier County School District 5,604 3 Collier County Local Government* 5,119 4 Publix Super Market 3,083 5 Arthrex, Inc.** 2,500 6 1Walmart 1,480 7 Ritz Carlton -Naples 1,450 a City of Maples 1,169 9 Physicians Regional 950 10 Mooring Park 888 11 Seminole Casino 800 12 Naples Grande Beach Resort 750 13 Germain Cars 554 14 ❑owning Frye Realty 550 15 Gulf Bay Group Of Companies 500 16 Bentley Village A Classic 500 17 Agmart Produce Inc 500 18 Home Depot 480 19 John R Wood Properties 470 20 McDonald's 441 21 1Nalgreens 373 22 Naples Beach Hotel & Golf Club 350 23 Naples Lakes Country Club 320 24 Nordstrom 313 25 Lowds Home Improvement 310 Source: Southwest Florida Regional Economic Alliance Of the top 25 employers in Collier County, the Collier County Public Schools, Publix, Walmart, Physicians Regional, Gulf Bay Group of Companies and the Naples Lakes Country Club are nearby the Subject Site. Despite an economy that relies a great deal on real estate, construction and tourism, the industry mix for the Naples MSA is not severely out of line with U.S. averages. The shares of employment devoted to the Trade, Transportation & Utilities; Financial Activities; Information; and Education & Health Services industries are within about 100 basis points ("bps") of the national norms. 5 Figure 3.3 below shows the industry mix within the Naples Metropolitan Statistical Area ("MSA"). Figure 3.3 NAPLES MSA 2020 INDUSTRY MIX Transporation, Production & Repair 14% Construction & Mining 3% Sales & Office - Administrative Support 23% Management 6% siness & Financial Operations 7% ommunity & Social Services 7% Healthcare 10% 1, Maintenance & Personal Care 25% Source: Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation, Labor Market Statistics The largest differences from the national norms are in Leisure & Hospitality (+939 bps); Manufacturing (-592 bps); Professional & Business Services (-284 bps); Other Services (+249 bps); and Government (-596 bps). Given the number of wealthy retirees who make Naples at least their winter home, it is not surprising to see larger shares of employment in industries that cater to this population. Although the share of Health Services was not significantly different from the U.S. share, it has increased by about 200 bps since 1996. The increase of industries outside of construction and leisure/hospitality will continue to diversify the market economy and will continue to increase the median income leading to an increase in the demand for multi- family rental unit living as a residential choice. Although the nearby employment hubs will provide a source of future residents, the demographics trends and lifestyle choices will also determine the subject site's demand potential. 0 Figure 1.4 below depicts the in -demand labor force by occupation with a 5-mile radius of the Subject Property. All types of sales representatives make up the largest amount of the labor force in this area followed closely by office/administration, food preparation, building maintenance, management, construction and health practices. These seven categories were analyzed since individually, they each comprised over 5% of the market area work force. Four of those seven labor force definitions exceed the percentage of the County wide percentages. That indicates a greater concentration of sales, office administration, food preparation and building maintenance employees are located within the 5-mile radius. In addition, the seven definitions account for 71.7% of the 16+ adults in the 5-mile radius. Figure 1.4 In -Demand Labor Force by Occupation within 5-Mile Radius of Subject Property Life/Social Sciences Architecture/Engineer Social Service Computer/Mathmatica I Farm/Fish/Forestry Arts/Enterta inment/Rec Legal Protective Service Health Support Business/Financial Production Education/Library Personal Care Mai ntena nce/Re pair Transportation/Moving Health Practices Construction/E xtra ct i o n Management Building Maintenance Food Preperation Office/Admin Sales Labor force by Uccupatlon (`% Q% 4% 8% 12% Percent of adults 16+ Dots show comparison to Collier County Source: ESRI and U.S. Census Bureau The labor force makeup within five miles of the site would benefit from accessibility to market -rate rental multi -family as would the businesses located in the same area by providing more affordable rental opportunities for their employees. The next section of the report addresses the rental apartment needs of the seven labor force in -demand definitions the meet or exceed 5% of the County adults 16+ and total 71.7% of the labor force in the Market Area. 7 2.0 Five -Mile Market Area Employment Housing Need Analysis To calculate the need for the apartment rents to address nearby employment, the Consultant determined the wage qualifications of the seven labor force definitions defined previously. The Consultant used the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity ("FDOE") 2021-2022 Regional Demand Occupations List ("RDOL") for the Southwest Florida region (WDA24) as the data from this list is the closest micro list to Collier County. The RDOL utilizes the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics Standard Occupational Classifications ("SOC") to define specific jobs. Appendix A, Page 33 shows the entire list for the specific SOC-related jobs that make up the seven definitions. The Consultant generated a weighted average hourly wage for each of the seven definitions and calculated annual incomes for those even definitions based on those weighted averages. Table 2.1 below shows those calculations. Table 2.1 In -Demand Job Types and Annual Incomes within 5-Miles of Subject Site Job Type Annual Openings 2020-21 Hourly Wage Weighted Average Annual Income SALES 777 $36.97 $76,899 OFFICE/ADMINISTRATIVE 3,671 $32.91 $68,451 FOOD PREPARATION 400 $32.65 $67,907 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 689 $18.23 $37,922 MANAGEMENT 183 $42.32 $88,021 CONSTRUCTION 3,439 $24.45 $50,860 HEALTH PRACTICES 6,358 $25.00 $52,004 Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Table 2.2 below indicates the potential monthly rent payment based on household incomes using the rule of thumb that no more than 30% of monthly income should be used toward housing. Table 2.2. 30% of Gross Income used for Housing Household Income Monthly Income Monthly Payment @ 30% 40,000 3,333 1,000 50,000 4,167 1,250 60,000 5,000 1,500 69,659 5,805 1,741 70,000 5,833 1,750 80,000 6,667 2,000 90,000 7,500 2,250 100,000 8,333 2,500 Source: Consultant Table 2.3 below shows the range of affordable housing incomes based on the County median household income of $84,300 (Appendix B, Page 34) for a four (4) person household. Table 2.3 Household Incomes by Percent of Median Household Income (AMI) at $84,300. Household Income Percent of Median Income $67,440 $84,300 $101,160 80% 100% 120% Median Household Income (AMI): $84,300 Source: Florida Housing Finance Corporation The $84,300 median income for Collier County is based on a family of four (4). In order to calibrate the job types and annual incomes shown in Table 2.1 above, the Consultant utilized the median income for one (1) person occupying a residential unit as shown in Appendix B, Page 34. The AMI for a one (1) person residential unit is $59,085. Table 2.4 below shows those affordable housing income levels for one (1) person occupying a residential unit. Table 2.4 Household Incomes by Percent of Median Household Income (AMI) at $59,085 Household Income Percent of Median Income $47, 250 80% $59,085 100% $70,920 120% Median Household Income (AMI): $59,085 Source: Florida Housing Finance Corporation Using the 30% of income for housing rule, Table 2.5 below shows the range of rents that would fall in the 80% - 120% affordable housing category with the AN of $59,085. Table 2.5 Monthly Rent Payment by AMI Affordable Housing Range Household Income Percent of Median Income Monthly Income Monthly Payment @ 30% $47,250 $59,085 $70,902 80% 100% 120% $3,939 $4,924 $5,909 $1,182 $1,477 $1,773 Median Household Income (AMI): $59,085 Source: Florida Housing Finance Corporation and Consultant 9 Finally, Table 2.6 below matches up the top seven (7) jobs annual incomes with the affordable housing percentile based on the County's AMI of $59,085 for a one (1) person per residential unit. Table 2.6 Top Seven In -Demand Jobs Incomes and AMI Affordable Housing Range Job Type Annual Openings 2020-21 Hourly Wage Weighted Average Annual Income Affordable Housing Percentile SALES 777 $36.97 $76,899 130.2% OFFICE/ADMINISTRATIVE 3,671 $32.91 $68,451 115.9% FOOD PREPARATION 400 $32.65 $67,907 114.9% BUILDING MAINTENANCE 689 $18.23 $37,922 64.2% MANAGEMENT 183 $42.32 $88,021 149.0% CONSTRUCTION 3,439 $24.45 $50,860 86.1% HEALTH PRACTICES 6,358 $25.00 $52,004 88.0% Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Florida Housing Finance Corporation and Consultant Based on the analysis of the labor force within the 5-mile area of the subject site, the Applicant is proposing that 20% (42) of the units be identified as affordable (fall within the 80% to 120% of the one (1) person median household income of $59,085 (median household income of $84,300 for a four (4) person household). 3.0 Market Analysis Market Area Supply Shown on the next page in Table 3.1 is the existing and developing rental apartment complexes located in all of Collier County. This table is the latest (February 2021) Collier County quarterly rental apartment inventory available at the time of this report. (Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank) 10 Table 3.1 Collier County Quarterly Rental Apartment Inventory Collier County Community and Human Services Division Quarterly Rental Apartment Inventory Survey February 2021 -Information deemed reliable but should be independently verified - Property Name Total 9 of Units in Development Occupancy Rate Total Available Units as of Jan 15, 2021 College Park 210 7000% 0 Windsong Chub 120 95.0% 6 Summer lakes 1&2 415 99.8% 1 Bear Creek 108 100.0% 0 Saddlbrook Village 140 1D0.0% 0 Whistler's Green 168 1D0.0% 0 Jasmine Cary 73 98.6% 1 Osprey's Land ing 176 100.0% 0 Villas of Capri 235 90.6% 22 Whistler's Cove 240 100.0% 0 Noah's landing 264 98.9% 3 Tuscan Isle 298 100.0% 0 Brittany Bay 392 98.7% 5 Naples Place l-III 170 1J0.0% 0 Briar Landings 240 99.6% 1 The Point a Naples(Hwon Park) 248 84.3% 39 M ealow Brook Preserve 268 94.8% 14 Ma Soleil 320 87.2% 41 Wavaley Place 300 98.3% 5 Advenir Avertine 350 94.6% 19 Somerset Palms 'B9 94.7% 9 Oasis Naples 215 100.0% 0 AlVislaal Golden Gate/Sabal Key 200 92.0% 16 Aster at Lely Resort 308 98.1% 6 Inspira Apartments 304 96.7% 10 M eadow Lakes 252 99.6 % 1 River Reach 556 99.3% 4 Alvistaat Laguna Bay 456 90.4% 44 Sierra Grade at Naples 300 92.0% 24 Belvedere At Quail Run 162 100.0% 0 M ilac, Lakes 296 94.6% 16 The Springs at Harncck Cove 340 89.P/o 35 Bermuda Island 360 97.8% 8 M alibu Lakes 356 98.6% 5 Orchid Run 262 96.2% 10 Addison Place 294 96.6% 10 Arius Gulfelare 368 90.5°h 35 Laud Ridge 78 100.0% 0 Goodlette Arms 242 100.0% 0 Naples 701 'BB 93.6% 12 Wild Pines of Naples 1&2 200 99.59/6 1 Berkshire Reserve(Dali of Naples) 146 97.3% 4 Legacy Naples Apartments 304 79.9% 61 Lago Apartments 320 75.3% 80 Active Market Rate Total Pine Ridge Commons (2021) 11,413 375 -- 548 -- Crest et Naples (2021) 200 -- -- Edge75(2021) 320 -- -- Allura(2022) 304 -- -- TheHaldeman(Pelican Apartmems)(2022) 400 -- -- CouthouseShadows(2023) 300 -- -- Tree FarmApartmenls(2023) 286 -- -- Blue Coral Apartments(2023) 234 Carman lS LLC(Proposed)(2024) 212 Hammock Park 265(2024) 265 -- -- Immokalee Rd.&4lh Street Apartments(2025) 400 Creekside Apartments(2025) 300 -- -- Market Total 15,009 -3% 548 Heritage Villas 41 90.2% 4 Garden Lake 65 98.5% 1 Sanders Pines 41 fro 07 0 Farm Worker Village(non-farmrvorker) 276 98% 5 Willowbrook Piece 41 95.P/o 2 M ain Street Village 79 100.0% 0 Summer Glen 45 100.0 % 0 Espararea 47 100.0 % 0 Bromelia Piece 30 100.0% 0 Southern Villas 35 97.1% 1 Oak Haven 150 975% 4 Eden Gard ens 1&2 92 967% 3 Imnnkalee Apartments 100 100.0% 0 Crestview Park 1&2 304 97.0% 9 Timber Ridge 34 100.0% 0 Cypress Run 39 100.0% 0 Sub -Total Immokalee 1,429 98.0% 29 Grand Total 16,438 1 97.17% 577 Source: Collier County Community and Human Services Division 11 The previous table shows a mixture of subsidized and market rate rental apartment complexes. For purposes of this study, the subsidized apartment complexes were removed along with the apartment complexes in Immokalee as the Subject Property is not seeking to acquire subsidized grants and the Immokalee apartments are outside of the Subject Property market area. Market Rate Rental Apartments Market rate rental apartments were the first developed in the county, with subsidized housing starting in the late 1980's to accommodate the increasing employment for hotels and other hospitality related industries. There is a total of 14,609 market rate rental units in Collier County. The 14,609 market rate rental units used in the supply analysis accounts for 91.09% of the total supply in the County. The increase in market rate rental apartment supply of 3- and 4-bedroom units did not begin until 2000 when the availability of affordable family accommodations was restricting due to rapidly rising home prices. Home prices are still on the rise, which continues to create a demand for the larger market rate rental apartment units. Most of the market rate rental apartment communities are located on major arterial roadways allowing for easy access to a wider market area. Market rate rental apartment complexes prefer to be located closer to employment centers, entertainment venues and other support facilities to attract tenants. Average occupancy rate for market rate rental apartments is 96.0% (Collier County Apartment Market 1st Qtr. 2021 Performance Summary (Appendix C, Page 35), which is indicative of a very tight under -supplied rental market. Table 3.2 on the next page shows the market rate rental apartment complexes from the latest Collier County quarterly rental apartment inventory that are used in this report. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 12 Table 3.2 Collier County Market Rate Apartment Complexes Collier County Community and Human Services Division Quarterly Rental Apartment Inventory Survey February 2021 'Information deemed reliable but should be independently verified' Property Name Total # of Units in Development OccupancyUnits Rate Total Available as of Jan 15, 2021 College Park 210 100.0% 0 Windsong Club 120 95.0% 6 Summer Lakes 1&2 416 99.8% 1 Bear Creek 108 100.0% 0 Saddlebrook Village 140 100.0% 0 Whistler's Green 168 100.0% 0 Jasmine Cay 73 98.6 % 1 Osprey's Landing 176 100.0% 0 Villas of Capri 235 90.6% 22 Whistler's Cove 240 100.0% 0 Noah's Landing 264 98.9 % 3 Tuscan Isle 298 100.0% 0 Brittany Bay 392 98.70/ 5 Naples Place 1-III 170 100.0% 0 Briar Landings 240 99.6% 1 The Point at Naples(Heron Park) 248 84.3% 39 M eadow Brook Preserve 268 94.8% 14 Mar Soleil 320 87.2% 41 Waverley Place 300 98.3 % 5 Advenir Aventine 350 94.6% 19 Somerset Palms 169 94.70/ 9 Oasis Naples 216 100.0% 0 AlVista at Golden Gate/Sabal Key 200 92.0% 16 Aster at Lely Resort 308 98.1 % 6 Inspire Apartments 304 96.70/ 10 Meadow Lakes 252 99.6% 1 River Reach 556 99.3 % 4 AlvistaatLaguna Bay 456 90.4% 44 Sierra Grande at Naples 300 92.0% 24 Belvedere At Quail Run 162 100.0% 0 M ilano Lakes 296 94.6% 16 The Springs at Hammock Cove 340 89.70/ 35 Bermuda Island 360 97.8 % 8 Malibu Lakes 356 98.6% 5 Orchid Run 262 96.2 % 10 Addison Place 294 96.6% 10 Arium Gulfshore 368 90.5% 35 Laurel Ridge 78 100.0% 0 Goodlette Arms 242 100.0% 0 Naples 701 188 93.6 % 12 Wild Pines of Naples 1&2 200 99.5% 1 Berkshire Reserve (Daili of Naples) 146 97.3 % 4 Legacy Naples Apartments 304 79.9% 61 Lago Apartments 320 75.3% 80 Active Market Rate Total 11,413 95.2% 548 Pine Ridge Commons (2021) 375 -- -- Crest at Naples (2021) 200 -- -- Edge75(2021) 320 -- -- Allure(2022) 304 -- -- TheHaldeman(Pelican Apartments)(2022) 400 -- -- Courthouse Shadows (2023) 300 -- -- Tree Farm Apartments(2023) 286 -- -- Blue Coral Apartments (2023) 234 Carman 15 LLC (Proposed) (2024) 212 Hammock Park 265 (2024) 265 -- -- Immokalee Rd. &4th Street Apartments (2025) 400 Creekside Apart ment s(2025) 300 -- Market Total 15,009 96.3 % 548 Source: Collier County Community and Human Services Division 13 Table 3.4 below shows the proposed apartment units approved and/or under construction that are coming to the market by year. Table 3.4 Collier County Proposed/Under Construction Apartments Year Units 2021 895 2022 704 2023 820 2024 477 2025 700 3,596 Source: Collier County Growth Management and Development Services, and Consultant The aging of market rate rental apartments must also be considered. 38.76% of the market rate rental apartments in Collier County are more than 20 years old. A national report by Apartmentlist.com noted that the balance of new and old units affects the rents being charged. The report stated the percentage of rental units less than 10 years old is at an all-time low in the Naples area. The report also shows that rentals over 30 years old increased 33% from 2000 to 2016 while buildings aged out so that the share of rentals 10 years old or less declined by 26%. The result of the study is that the cost of renting a house or apartment isn't likely to go down in older units until there are enough new ones coming into the market to replace them. Note Appendix D, Page 38 where the report was referenced in the Naples Daily News editorial September 7, 2018. The current (1st Qtr. 2021) real estate market is being fueled by an influx of buyers heading to Florida and the Collier County area who are fleeing northern states due to the ramifications of the Covid-19 pandemic. That has put pressure on the multi -family rental market to produce rental units to accommodate this surge in new permanent residents as explained in a May 25, 2021 Wink News article (Appendix E, Page 40). 2020 saw a significant increase in multi -family rental units brought on line with 940 units constructed. There will still be a need even with the proposed multi -family rental units in the pipeline. Chart 3.1 on the next page shows the number of rental apartment units that were brought on line by year in Collier County since 1975. 14 Chart 3.1 Apartments Built by Year in Collier County Total Apartment Units Built by Year 1000 900 BOG 700 600 500 400 300 200 10C � 1 1975 15BG 19891989 199013911995 1598 2000 290120022014 2015 2017 2019 2019 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser Rental housing outside of apartments should also be considered in the supply side of the analysis. The Consultant took a snapshot of the available rental housing units available for rent as of January 20, 2022. The research included Trulia.com, Zillow.com, Homes.com and Rent.com sites as shown in Appendix F, Page 43. Table 3.5 below shows the rental units available by website on that date and the average number of rental housing units to be added to the supply side of the analysis. Table 3.5 Rental Homes in Collier County on January 20, 2022 Rental Site Units for Rent Trulia.com 125 Zillow.com 125 Homes.com 111 Rent.com 129 Average: 123 Source: Trulia .com, Zillow.com, Homes.com & Rent.com 15 Market Area Demand The first step in determining market demand is to start with the current population of the rental apartment market area. The market area covers many Collier County planning areas and bisects a few of them. In order to determine an accurate population, forecast for the rental apartment market area, the Consultant utilized the American Community Survey ("ACS") which is the annual update to the 2010 Census performed the by the US Census Bureau. The ACS is an ongoing survey that provides vital information on a yearly basis about our nation and its people. Information from the survey generates data that help determine how more than $675 billion in federal and state funds are distributed each year. Table 3.5 on the next page is the 2020-2025 ACS market area housing profile. This table is the updated ACS survey for the 317.18 square mile market area. It shows the current population for this market area is 291,078. The ACS survey also estimates the same data in the report for 2025, which matches the County's 5-year planning horizon. ACS estimates that the market area population will be 316,431 in 2025. The census annual percent growth of 1.60% was used to calculate the annual population from 2020 to 2025. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 16 Table 3.5 2020-2025 Market Area Housing Profile esri. Housing toProfile Polygon 6 Prepared by ESri Area: 317.18 square miles Population Households 2010 Total Population 245,430 2020 Median Household Income $71,052 2020 Total Population 291,078 2025 Median Household Income $77,885 2025 Total Population 316,431 2020-2025 Annual Rate 1.85% 2020-2025 Annual Rate 1.681/a Census 2010 2020 2025 Housing Units by Occupancy Status and Tenure Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Housing Units 152,882E 100.0% 180,133E 100.0% 195,335E 100.0% Occupied 105,329 68.9% 126,131 70.0% 137,550 70.41/o Owner 75,738 49.5% 89,927 49.9% 98,022 50.2% Renter 29,591 19.4% 37,107 20.6% 41,997 21.5% Vacant 47,553 31.1% 53,099 29.5% 55,316 28.3% E 2020 E 2025 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Number Percent Number Percent Total 89,929E 100.0% 98,022E 100.0% <$50,000 1,323 1.50% 706 0.7% $50,000-$99,999 I I 1,716 1.9% 915 0.9% $100,000-$149,999 4,094 4.60% 2,699 2.8% $150,000-$199,999 I 6,832 7.60/c 5,512 5.6% $206,000-$249,999 9,898 11.00% 9,860 10.1% $250,000-$299,999 9,633 10.7% 10,868 11.1% $300,000-$399,999 16,981 18.9% 20,463 20.9% $400,000-$499,999 10,443 11.60% 12,803 13.1% $500,000-$749,999 13,554 15.1% 16,372 16.7% $750,000-$999,999 5,370 6.00% 6,335 6.5% $1,000,000-$1,499,999 4,099 4.6% 4,728 4.8% $1,500,000-$1,999,999 1,972 2.2u/0 2,269 2.3% $2,000,000+ 4,014 4.50% 4,492 4.6% Median Value $367,537 $390,168 Average Value $535,580 $563,978 Census 2010 Housing Units Number Percent Total 152,882E 100.0% In Urbanized Areas 144,671 94.6% In Urban Clusters 1,964 1.3% Rural Housing Units 6,247 4.1% Data Note' Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race_ Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2020 and 2025. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Table 3.5 also shows that the percent of renter occupied housing units is 20.6% in 2020 and increases to 21.5% in 2025. That is an increase of 0.2% annually and is used in the calculation of the market area demand. Table 3.6 on the next page establishes the household income and corresponding monthly rental payment. The median household income in Collier County in 2020 is $84,300. The table shows the income ranges that are used in the calculation of demand. Current rents are approaching $3,000 a month as shown in the area market reports in Appendix G, Page 46. Table 3.6 Monthly Rental Payment Calculations 17 Household Income Monthly Household Income Monthly Rental Payment @ 30% $40,000 $3,333 $1,000 $50,000 $4,167 $1,250 $60,000 $5,000 $1,500 $63,202 $5,267 $1,580 $70,000 $5,833 $1,750 $80,000 $6,667 $2,000 $90,000 $7,500 $2,250 $100,000 $8,333 $2,500 $110,000 $9,167 $2,750 $120,000 $10,000 $3,000 Source: The Consultant The percent of households by income is shown in Table 4.5 on the next page. The percentage of households in the up to $100,000 category ranges from the current 65.0% to 61.1 % in 2025. That is a reduction of 0.8% annually and is used in the calculation of the market area demand. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) im Table 4.5. Apartment Study Market Area Demographic and Income Profile Polygon 6 Area: 317.18 square miles Prepared by Esri Summary Census 2010 2021 2026 Population 245,430 291,078 316,431 Households 105,329 126,131 137,551 Families 69,303 82,021 89,141 Owner Occupied Housing Units 75,738 89,927 98,022 Renter Occupied Housing Units 29,591 37,107 41,997 Median Age 48.2 52.1 53.5 Trends: 2020-2025 Annual Rate Area State National Population 1.68% 1.33% 0.72% Households 1.75% 1.27% 0.72% Families 1.68% 1.23% 0.64% Owner HHs 1.74% 1.22% 0.72% Median Household Income 1.85% 1.51% 1.60% IF 2020 2025 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent <$15,000 8,890 7.0% 8,420 6.1% $15,000- $24,999 8,827 7.0% 8,542 6.2% $25,000- $34,999 9,617 7.6% 9,470 6.9% $35,000- $49,999 16,820 13.3% 17,058 12.4% $50,000- $74,999 21,406 17.0% 22,606 16.4% $75,000- $99,999 16,489 13.1% 18,060 13.1% $100,000- $149,999 17,848 14.2% 20,750 15.1% $150,000- $199,999 10,475 8.3% 13,219 9.6% $200,000+ 15,759 12.5% 19,427 14.1% Per Capita Income $47,140 $52,669 Census 2010 2020 2025 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0 4 12,092 4.9% 12,577 4.3% 13,565 4.3% 5 9 12,582 5.1% 13,454 4.6% 14,198 4.5% 10 - 14 12,731 5.2% 14,130 4.9% 15,088 4.8% 15 19 12,734 5.2% 13,060 4.5% 14,072 4.4% 20 24 11,163 4.5% 12,527 4.3% 12,453 3.9% 25 34 24,110 9.8% 29,235 10.0% 29,864 9.4% 35 44 27,040 11.0% 28,744 9.9% 32,844 10.4% 45 54 31,871 13.0% 31,497 10.8% 31,007 9.8% 55 64 33,516 13.7% 42,475 14.6% 43,535 13.8% 65 74 36,367 14.8% 48,142 16.5% 54,872 17.3% 75 84 23,604 9.6% 32,369 11.1% 39,988 12.6% 85+ 7,620 3.1% 12,866 4.4% 14,944 4.7% Data Note: Income is expressed in currentdollars. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2021 and 2026. Source: U.S. Census Bureau 19 Table 4.6 below shows the renter -occupied housing units by contract rent. The number of units in the $800 to $3,000 range is 23,221. That is 81.13% of the 28,621 total cash rent units and is used in the calculation of the rental apartment market area demand. That data range is highly reliable data according to ACS. Table 4.6. Apartment Study Market Area Housing Summary Polygon 6 Prepared by Esri Area: 317.18 square miles 2014-2018 ACS Estimate Percent MOE(t) Reliability RENTER -OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY CONTRACT RENT Total 30,220 100.0% 1,149" With cash rent 28,621 94.7% 1,124LW Less than $100 94 0.3% 71W $100 to $149 22 0.1% 23W $150 to $199 22 0.1% 271 $200 to $249 303 1.0% 151W $250 to $299 94 0.3% 751 $300 to $349 206 0.7% 126W $350 to $399 141 0.5% 1451 $400 to $449 53 0.2% 611 $450 to $499 82 0.3% 50W $500 to $549 470 1.6% 199LD $550 to $599 62 0.2% 421 $600 to $649 257 0.9% 157W $650 to $699 437 1.4% 153W $700 to $749 813 2.7% 238LE $750 to $799 1,310 4.3% 264LIJ $800 to $899 2,798 9.3% 396U $900 to $999 4,208 13.9% 553MJ $1,000 to $1,249 6,129 20.3% 614L[D $1,250 to $1,499 4,829 16.0% 557LM $1,500 to $1,999 3,431 11.4% 475LW $2,000 to $2,499 1,310 4.3% 280LU $2,500 to $2,999 516 1.7% 191L $3,000 to $3,499 499 1.7% 185L� $3,500 or more 534 1.8% 194L� No cash rent 1,599 5.3% 293" Median Contract Rent $1,120 N/A Average Contract Rent N/A N/A RENTER -OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY INCLUSION OF UTILITIES IN RENT Total 30,220 100.0% 1,149LUJ Pay extra for one or more utilities 26,665 88.2% 1,097U No extra payment for any utilities 3,555 11.8% 408" Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 American Community Survey Source: U.S. Census Bureau Table 4.7 below shows the rental apartment study market area demand calculation using the data points previously explained in Tables 4.3 through 4.6. The population is increased annually. The percent of rental households were reduced annually and multiplied with the corresponding annual households to obtain the annual rental households. 20 The rental households were then multiplied by the percentage of households with incomes up to $120,000. That calculation establishes the annual demand for market rate rental housing units in the market area. That annual number is then multiplied by the percent of rental units with rents in the $800 to $3,000 range to establish the demand for market rate rental apartment units. That demand is slowly increasing over the next five years using 2020 as the base year. Table 4.7 Apartment Study Market Area Demand Calculation With % of Units Total Percent Rental Income up to Annual with rent Unit Year Population Households Rental Households $120k Demand $800-$3,000 Demand 2020 291,078 126,131 20.6% 25,983 70.7% 18,370 81.13% 14,904 2021 296,149 128,415 20.8% 26,685 68.8% 18,354 81.13% 14,891 2022 301,219 130,699 21.0% 27,395 66.9% 18,316 81.13% 14,860 2023 306,290 132,983 21.1% 28,113 64.9% 18,256 81.13% 14,812 2024 311,360 135,267 21.3% 28,839 63.0% 18,174 81.13% 14,745 2025 316,431 137,551 21.5% 29,573 61.1% 18,069 81.13% 14,660 2026 321,502 139,835 21.7% 30,316 59.2% 17,941 81.13% 14,556 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau and the Consultant Table 4.8 on the next page shows the same market area demand calculation from Table 2.7 above and adds the existing market rate rental apartments and the future rental apartment complexes in the development process shown in Table 4.2. Table 4.8 on the next page establishes that there is a current deficit of nearly 3,500 market rate rental apartments in the market area and falling to a deficit of 159 market rate rental apartments in 2026. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 21 Table 4.8 Apartment Study Market Area Supply - Demand Analysis % With Income % of Units Surplus/ Total Percent Rental up to Annual with rent Unit Market Deficit Year Population Households Rental Households $120k Demand $800-$3,000 Demand Supply Units 2020 291,078 126,131 20.6% 25,983 70.7% 18,370 81.13% 14,904 11,413 -3,491 2021 296,149 128,415 20.8% 26,685 68.8% 18,354 81.13% 14,891 12,431 -2,460 2022 301,219 130,699 21.0% 27,395 66.9% 18,316 81.13% 14,860 13,258 -1,602 2023 306,290 132,983 21.1% 28,113 64.9% 18,256 81.13% 14,812 14,201 -611 2024 311,360 135,267 21.3% 28,839 63.0% 18,174 81.13% 14,745 14,377 -368 2025 316,431 137,551 21.5% 29,573 61.1% 18,069 81.13% 14,660 15,412 752 2026 321,502 139,835 21.7% 30,316 59.2% 17,941 81.13% 14,556 15,412 856 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ARCgis mapping system and the Consultant Adding the proposed 212 proposed multi -family rental units to the market supply (the units would most likely be added in 2023) shows that a deficit of market rate rental multi -family units will continue and eventually turn positive in 2025 if market supply/demand factors stay constant as shown in Table 4.9 below. Table 4.9 Apartment Study Market Area Supply - Demand Analysis with Subject Property Units Included % With % of Units Market Income with rent Supply with Surplus/ Total Percent Rental up to Annual $800- Unit Market Subject Deficit Year Population Households Rental Households $120k Demand $3,000 Demand Supply Property Units 2020 291,078 126,131 20.6% 25,983 70.7% 18,370 81.13% 14,904 11,413 11,413 -3,491 2021 296,149 128,415 20.8% 26,685 68.8% 18,354 81.13% 14,891 12,431 12,431 -2,460 2022 301,219 130,699 21.0% 27,395 66.9% 18,316 81.13% 14,860 13,258 13,258 -1,602 2023 306,290 132,983 21.1% 28,113 64.9% 18,256 81.13% 14,812 14,201 14,413 -399 2024 311,360 135,267 21.3% 28,839 63.0% 18,174 81.13% 14,745 14,377 14,589 -156 2025 316,431 137,551 21.5% 29,573 61.1% 18,069 81.13% 14,660 15,412 15,624 964 2026 321,502 139,835 21.7% 30,316 59.2% 17,941 81.13% 14,556 15,412 15,624 1,068 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ArcGIS mapping system and the Consultant 5.0 RESIDENTIAL UNITS NEEDED TO SUPPORT COMMERICAL DEVELOPMENT There is a lack of commercial development in East Naples as is shown in Section 6.0. There is a significant amount of potential commercial square feet to be developed within Activity Center #7 including the 200,000+ at the southeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. Activity Center #7 is an anomaly of all the activity centers in the County in that it only allows for 1.5 units per acre and up to 2.5-units per acre via the transfer of up to once dwelling unit per acre from lands designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending. 22 The commercial acreage is located within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict ("Subdistrict"), which was created to provide transitional densities between Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area. The lower densities of this Subdistrict do not support the significant development of commercial opportunities identified in the East Naples Community Development Plan described in Section 6.0 of this report or as needed at this high traffic volume intersection. To demonstrate the residential unit demand needed to support the potential commercial supply identified within Activity Center #7, the Consultant first determined the per capita commercial demand in the County then determined the average persons per household in nearby apartment complexes and multiplied that number by the number of potential apartment units that are to be developed within a mile of the activity center and multiplied that per capita population along with the future per capita 5-year population growth within 2.5-miles by the demand to calculate the total square feet of commercial demand nearby. The most reliable indicator of commercial market demand in the County is to determine the amount of commercial square footage built in the County then divide that total amount by the County population to arrive at square feet per capita (person) in the existing market. Historical commercial development in relation to population growth encompasses all aspects of land development over time including geography, economic fluctuations and various commercial uses as they relate to market demographics. Collier County in particular has shown a propensity for commercial development to follow residential development as the primary economic drivers are tourism, agriculture and real estate construction. The limited economic diversification fuels residential development, which then supports commercial development as peoples moving into the County require goods and services. Therefore, the commercial square feet per capita measure takes into account all of the factors previously mentioned. The Consultant utilized the 2014 commercial inventory spreadsheets by planning area as provided by the Collier County Growth Management Department ("CCGMD") to determine the total amount of commercial square footage built in the County as of 2015. The 2014 commercial inventory is the latest available data from the County as of this report. The Consultant then used the 2014 Collier County population from the CCGMD to calculate the commercial square footage per capita in the County. The Commercial square foot demand per capita in Collier County is 78.22 as shown in Table 5.1 on the next page. 23 Table 5.1 Per Capita Square Feet Demand in Collier County Collier County 2014 Planning Area Square Feet Immokalee Area 2,355,554 Marco Island 158,081 Central Naples 2,732,949 Corkscrew 70,748 East Naples 4,244,976 Golden Gate 1,574,301 North Naples 9,726,289 Royal Fakapalm 522,764 Rural Estates 452,781 South Naples 2,277,828 Urban Estates 2,500,631 26,616,902 2014 Population 340,293 (October 1st Fiscal Year) Demand in Square Feet: 78.22 Source: Collier County Growth Management Department By comparison, Lee County had a 2015 Commercial Demand Forecast Report prepared by Metro Forecasting Models, the same company that is updating the Collier Interactive Growth Model ("CIGM") adopted in September, 2007. The Lee County county -wide commercial demand per capita was 109.00 sq. ft. It was forecasted to go up to 111.53 sq. ft. per capita in 2020. (Appendix H, Page 51) The CIGM Executive Summary (Appendix I, Page 56) prepared by Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc. (now Metro Forecasting Models) in September 2008 focused on the future development of lands east of CR 951 in Collier County. The Subject Parcel falls within this future growth area. The CIGM summary pointed out that the build out population for this area would be 442,537 and the commercial square footage needed to support this population would be 45,498,963 square feet. The demand for commercial square feet in this area would be 102.81 sq. ft. per capita. Table 5.2 below show the potential apartment complexes within and nearby Activity Center #7. There are potentially 781 apartment units either approved or in the process of going through the County's approval process. 24 Table 5.2 Area Apartment Complexes Apartment Complex Units Hammock Park Apartments 265 Amerisite Property 304 Carmen 15 Property 212 Total Apartment Units 781 Source: Collier County Growth Management Department and Consultant Table 5.3 below shows the persons per household ("PPH") average calculation for a nearby apartment unit. The average PPH is 2.88 in nearby apartment complexes where available from the U.S. Census Bureau. Table 5.3 Area Apartment Complexes Apartment Complex PPH College Park Apartments 3.63 Springs at Hammock Cove 3.26 Tuscan Isle 2.56 Saddlebrook Village 2.56 Advenir at Aventine 2.37 Persons Per Household Average: 2.88 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ArcGIS and Consultant Table 5.4 Population from Nearby Future Apartments Category Totals Nearby Apartments 781 PPH in Standard Apt. Complex 2.88 Total Population: 2,249 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ArcGIS and Consultant 5-Year population growth does not anticipate high density growth as the ACS looks primarily at existing census growth patterns and nearby land uses. As a result, the apartment unit population calculation in Table 5.4 is not included in the general population growth. Table 5.5 on the next page shows that the estimated 5-year per capita population growth for the 2.5-mile area surrounding the commercial intersection is 2,318. 25 Table 5.5 Per 2.5-Mile, 5-Year Population Growth esno Demographic .. 4P • Income Profile Hacienda Lakes Commercial Prepared by Esri 34114, Naples, Florida Latitude: 26.10839 Ring: 2.5 mile radius Longitude: -81 Summary Census 2010 2021 2026 Population 11,674 17,084 19,402 Households 5,606 8,220 9,371 Families 3,785 5,638 6,438 Average Household Size 2.03 2.05 2.04 Owner Occupied Housing Units 4,158 5,915 6,847 Renter Occupied Housing Units 1,448 2,306 2,524 Median Age 60.3 61.1 61.3 Source: U.S. Census, ESRI ArcGIS and Consultant Adding the two population projections together shows a future population of 4,567 within the 2.5-mile market area surrounding the commercial intersection. Table 5.6 Total 5-Year Per Capita Population Growth Totals Nearby Apartment Population 2,249 5-Year 2.5-Mile Population Growth 2,318 Total 2.5-Mile Population Growth 4,567 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ArcGIS, U.S. Census Bureau and Consultant The potential commercial demand coming from those 4,567 future residents is 356,248 as shown in Table 5.7 below. Table 5.7 5-Year Per Capita Commercial Square Foot Demand Totals 5-Year 2.5-mile Population & Apartment Growth 4,567 Demand per Capita: 78 2.5-Mile Commercial Sq. Ft. Demand 356,248 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser, Collier County Growth Management Division, ESRI ArcGIS, U.S. Census Bureau and Consultant 26 The higher density in the activity center is essential to increase commercial demand and to spur the commercial development in and around Activity Center #7 as well as support the commercial need identified in the East Naples Community Development Plan shown in Section 6.0. 6.0 THE EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVEOPMENT PLAN SUPPORT This Community Development Plan ("East Naples Plan") focuses on the East Naples Study Area and aims to embrace the area's assets, address current needs, and respond to growth and development trends in the area. Specifically, it provides a community vision for the long-term future to: Guide land uses and development • Support multiple transportation types • Highlight community assets/improvements • Provide options for follow-up efforts to address other topics of interest to the community • Provide steps on implementation The East Naples Plan was put together with the help of county staff, consultants and residents to deliver an identity to the rapidly growing area and draw businesses community members would like to see there. The East Naples plan fully supports the development of commercial opportunities. The East Naples study area has long been fueled primarily by residential growth. Figure 6.1 on the next page depicts that uneven development between residential and commercial square footage. The East Naples study area has long been unserved by commercial uses with only 11 % of the square footage built in the study area compared to 15% in the unincorporated area of the County as a whole. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 27 Figure 6.1 East Naples Commercial vs. Residential Square Foot Mix EAST NAPLES COMM UNIT OEVELOPMENI PLAN \ 2.0 KEY TAKEAWAYS 0 VISION Figure 9: Residential and Nan -Residential Share of Square Footage Built by Decade in East Naples Study Area 1001!, 89% 1 1 1 6C' 1 1 1 Unincorporated 40' county share of non- residential: 15% 2M- A/►p�r 0% 1 % Pre 1960 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s —Residential SF —Non -Residential SF Source: Florida Department of Revenue, 2019 Source: Collier County East Naples Community Development Plan Commercial development generally follows residential development because commercial development requires the supporting population that is generated by residential development. Exceptions to that rule of thumb include large corporate moves that would generate residential development. In the case of the East Naples study area, residential development has typically been low density (mostly single family, villas and townhomes) thus requiring a lower amount of commercial square footage to support that population. Figure 6.2 on the next page from the East Naples Plan supports the need for increased density to drive the development and variety of commercial opportunities desired by the East Naples residents. Other limitations to commercial development include roadway connections, seasonal population and general market demand. The addition of the apartments around the Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Collier Boulevard intersection will fuel the development of commercial opportunities by providing additional demand as indicated in Section 5.0 above and significantly increase the local residential base. The apartment sites area is indicated by the red circle. Figure 6.2 East Naples Key Commercial Take Aways and Visions FAIT N,,F F� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN N3qerz 2.0 KEY TAKEAWAYS 5 VISION The area may already face some potential limita- tion adding more commercial uses, which may moderate the amount of development that could be reasonably anticipated. Although this planningeffort did not involve a comprehensive market analysis, it did include some preliminary outreach and an alysis to identify passible iimiti ng factors to development in the area for fu rther consid eration: • Roadway connections: There are a limited num- ber of connections between the large residential a real, pa rticukarly at the center of the study a rea a nd a long larger roadways th at contai n most of the commercial businesses in the area. Although this land use and transportation pattern can help buffer residential areas, it also can create challeng- es for neighborhood residents to access commer- cial and other local destinations, particularly by non -motorized means. It can also limit the suitable places where new commercial businesses might locate and be compatible with surroundings. • Population density: East Naples issimilarto Colli- er County as a whole in that most of the area is relatively low density (4 persons per acre or be- low); an interview with representatives of the de- velopment community noted this maybe a limit- ing factorto having local residential base that can support local commercial uses - Seasonal population: East Naples is also similar to Collier County as a whole in that it has a high estimated seasonal population; this analysis esti- mated seasonal households at around 61y{Qoof total households, based on homestead exemptions and the limited share of rental units relative to tota I units. Thisfinding indicatesthere may be some li mits to the population that is in the area year- round to support local commercial usesfull-time- :� '.[ASi XAPIES [OMIICXIEY CCVCLOMAIN-PL.1X General market demand: There may he other factors influencing the market demand forcom- mercial space in the area; although the County does not have control over the private market, this analysis evaluated ways It might influence market demand to attract desirable development. Map 6: Existing Land Uses and Roadways in the East Naples Study Area v..,.. � Fahtlee laN Uw 4F �. cwca... - a esna re ammoc * '•""r"° - ! caaa•..n•... sarrww. jt°' `1 � s �► MAOr [OIGCLOr r- Arterial Local/Major A n ovs sMr.T.,aoaamrerzmnon � ( I Source: Florida f3eparrment of ReYenue, 2a19 with same exceptr'ons Source: Collier County East Naples Community Development Plan Figure 6.3 on the next page identifies site connectivity and access as a key land use concept in the development of the East Naples study area. The location of the previously mentioned apartment sites and their proximity to the potential 200,000 square feet of commercial development at the southeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard would foster easy access between the residential and commercial development along with connectivity as the apartment sites are within 1 mile of the commercial development. The apartment sites are also within walking distance of the existing and future commercial development at that intersection. 29 Figure 6.3 East Naples Land Use Concepts EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3.0 LAND USE CONCEPTS also require more administrative efforts from the County to ensure the aggregated open space is located and properly maintained. These options should he weighed with additional options for public green space (discussed further in Section 5.0), Alternatively, open space design standards can be evaluated to ensure quality green space; heightened open space design standards could also be the focus for incentives or financial support to obtain more nam- rally oriented open space and infrastructure on the site while offsetting additional costs to developers. SITE CONNECTIVITY AND ACCESS Regarding site connectivity, mixed -use design criteria for C-3 (Sec. 4.02.38) recommend a grid street system and bicycle, pedestrian, and pathway connections to the extent possible to support interconnectivity in the development; Section 6.06 encourages increased inter - connectivity. More explicit provisions can be evaluated to facilitate the addition of connections to break up extremely large blocks. Regarding site access, explicit requirements for shared access can be evaluated forowners of neighboring properties. COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS Much of the study area is zoned as PUD. PUD design criteria (Sec.4.07.00) should be evaluated in lightof the potential adjustments mentioned herein to guide development in areas under consideration for a re- zone to PUD with commercial uses or mixed -use, as well as redevelopment of existing commercial PU Ds. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR UNDESIRED USES The2018 US 41 Corridor Study identified gas stations and storage facilities as undesirable uses for the area based on outreach; many comments collected as part of this planning effort also noted carwashes and fast au I CAST NPLB cuMMOHIt40EVELUNAENT Pus food as undesirable. A full prohibition of new undesired uses in the area can require a strong legal basis and defense to implement; as a result, a more moderate approach is often used that involves placing limitations on the location, de- sign, and operations for these new uses. This ap- proach, in coordination with allowances and incentives for desired uses, helps bring a more favorable mix of uses into an area. Regarding location and types of development with undesired uses, the following are adjustments already proposed to or under consideration bythe County that can be continued through the review and/or imple- mentation process: • The Land DevelopmentCodealready includes sep- aration standards forfacilities with fuel pumps, at 500 feet; the 2018 Study recommended increasing spac'ingta quartermile (1,320 feet) and spacing cou Id range higher (e.g., 5,000 feet). Regarding warehousing, the County has already considered some options for placing some con- trols on this use. The latest effort for considera- tion, as detailed in Technical Memorandum 1, is to address concerns with the self -storage use by al- lowing it in C-4 commercial districts only in combi nation with other permitted uses as part ofa mixed -use development and if it occupies less than 50% of the total area of the first floor. Regarding design of u ndesired uses, the 2018 study noted in its summary of findings support for la ndscap- Ing and screening. The County has additional design and site requirements for several undesired uses. Feel[- ities with fuel pumps have special design standards that include additional buffer and landscaping require- ments (Sec. 5.05.05); there are additional general de- sign standards for self storage buildings (5.05.08) and carwashes abutting residential districts 15A5.11). There may be some additional adjustments to these Fxample of convenience stare fronting the intersec5on with fuel pumps at the back in Gainesville, FL; image source: Gaggle Maps Source: Collier County East Naples Community Development Plan Finally, the East Naples Plan points out that increased density and site connectivity and shared access are key short term implementation concepts that could significantly drive the development of the much -needed commercial opportunities. Figure 6.4 on the next page indicates that those two elements could be implemented within 1 to 2 years. 30 Figure 6.4 East Naples Plan Short Term Concepts Implementation EAST NAPLES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 6.0 IMPLEMENTATON Figure 34: Implementation Summary Short -Term (1-2 years) Branding and Marketing Effort (Section 5.0) Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendment evaluation/implementation of overlay elements for promotion of land use concepts, discouragement of undesired uses, development review process incentives, and housing options (Section 3.0 and housing size/type diversity recommendations in Section 5.0): • Density/intensityincreaseswith evaluation ofmastaIbuild ingconsiderations • Adjust permitted uses in C-3 and C-4 to facilitate mixed use and any desired uses not already captured • Potentialrezoning ofcertain TTRVCand C-5designations onthe corridor • Height allowance adjustments to accommodate three stories in C-3 mixed -use projects • Allowances to r setback and buffer decreases in certain cases, with requirements for pedestrian -friendly imp roverrents where [a rgersetbacks are maintained. • Parking mini mum red uctions and adjus(rinerits to parking structurelspace requirements to facilitate mixed -use and multi-modaIenvironment • Explicit provisions on increasing site connectivityandrequirementsforsharedaccessforneighboringproperties • Adjustments to PUD design criteria in support of adjustments noted herein • Increased separation standards for gas stations • Continued current effort of requirement in C-4 to incorporate self -storage into mixed -use development with certain amount restrictions onfirstfloor • Placement of fuel pumps at back of site and expansion of supplement design requirements for undesired uses that currently lack sup plementa I standards • Expedited review and fee incentives for desired development • Allow more diverse housing sizes/typethrough corridor mixed -use provisions Housing affordability toollprogram implementation based on outcomes of current study and use of existing housing programs (e.g., for housing upgrades; Section 5.0) Recycling drop-off center relocation (Section 5.0) IN Source: Collier County East Naples Community Development Plan 31 7.0 CONCLUSIONS • The Consultant used all of the data and analysis in the previous sections to determine that the total supply of rental apartments and/or rental condominiums will not be adversely affected by the addition of the proposed 212 rental units. There is a current deficit of nearly 3,500 market rate rental units in the market and even with the addition of 3,150 rental units over the next 5-years, the market returns to equilibrium in the 2025. • The analysis also shows that the addition of the Subject Property's proposed 212 multi -family rental units will help alleviate some of the need for multi -family rental units in 2023 and beyond as highlighted in Table 4.9 above. • With the addition of the 212 multi -family rental residential units, the Subject Property will provide a diversity of housing options, particularly market -rate workforce housing, to address gaps in the existing local housing supply. • The addition of the 212 multi -family rental units along with the 569 other multi- family rental units under consideration in the immediate vicinity will provide just over 175,000 square feet of commercial demand. This demand should foster the development of nearby commercial properties. • Within the 2.5-mile market area, the population growth over the next 5 years plus the development of the Always multi -family complexes will create a commercial demand for over 356,000 square feet of commercial space. • The East Naples Community Development Plan calls for the development of additional commercial space. The short-term implementation plan identifies two immediate changes that would foster the development of future commercial space. The first change is to increase the density and intensity of residential development to support the needed commercial supply. The second is to create provisions that incentivize site connectivity. The development of the Subject Site will have connectivity to the large commercial parcel at the southeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard intersection. • Based on the analysis of the labor force within the 5-mile area of the subject site, the Applicant is proposing that 20% (42) of the units be identified as affordable (fall within the 80% to 120% of the one (1) person median household income of $59,085 (median household income of $84,300 for a four (4) person household). 32 APPENDIX A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY 2021-22 Regional Demand Occupations List Sorted by Occupational Title Workforce Development Area 24 - Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee Counties SOC Code Job Type Mean Hrly Wage Annual Openings Total Hrly Job Wages Mean Hrly Job Wage Annual Pay CONSTRUCTION 472031 Carpenters 20.15 1,068 $21,517 472051 Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers 19.95 229 4,568 119021 Construction Managers 42.34 315 13,337 131051 Cost Estimators 33.07 131 4,332 472111 Electricians 20.80 379 7,884 471011 First -Line Superv. of Construction and Extraction Workers 30.55 721 22,024 472141 Painters, Construction and Maintenance 16.89 478 8,073 472044 Tile and Marble Setters 19.96 118 2,356 $84,090 $24.45 $50,860 FOOD PREPARATION 119051 Food Service Managers 31.83 216 $6,876 351011 Chefs and Head Cooks 33.60 184 6,183 400 $13,059 $32.65 $67,907 HEALTH PRACTICES 291141 Registered Nurses 34.52 761 $26,272 291126 Respiratory Therapists 28.22 776 21,898 292099 Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other 21.43 941 20,166 119111 Medical and Health Services Managers 53.67 91 4,884 292010 Medical and Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians 25.99 1,713 44,513 319092 Medical Assistants 17.31 540 9,346 499062 Medical Equipment Repairers 18.00 112 2,016 292071 Medical Records and Health Information Technicians 21.43 1,267 27,152 436013 Medical Secretaries 17.31 157 2,717 292055 Surgical Technologists 22.19 809 17,950 6,358 $158,963 $25.00 $52,004 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 499071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General 18.23 689 $12,562 $18.23 $37,922 MANAGEMENT 119199 Managers, All Other 42.32 1 $42.32 $88,021 SALES 112022 Sales Managers 58.58 87 $5,096 414011 Sales Representatives, Wholesale & Mfg, Tech. & Sci. Prod. 44.17 127 5,609 414012 Sales Representatives, Wholesale and Manufacturing, Other 32.01 563 18,021 777 $28,726 $36.97 $76,899 OFFICE/ADMINISTRATION 113011 Administrative Services Managers 433031 Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks 131141 Compensation, Benefits, and Job Analysis Specialists 431011 First -Line Superv. of Office and Admin. Support Workers 44.46 1,537 $68,334 20.00 699 13,979 26.93 756 20,359 26.71 679 18,139 3,671 $120,810 $32.91 $68,451 33 APPENDIX B Note: The general hold harmless provisions of IRC Section 142(d)(2)(E) mean that projects with at leastone building placed in service on or before the end of the45-day transition period for newly -released limits use whichever limits are greater, the current -year limits or the limits in use the preceding year. HUD release: 4/1/2021 2021 Income Limits and Rent Limits Effective: 4/1/2021 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Implement on1before: 5/16/2021 Multifamily Rental Programs and CWHIP Homeownership Program NOTE: Does not pertain to CDBG-DR, HHRP, HOME, NHTF or SHIP Percentage Income Limit by Number of Persons in Household I Rent Limit by Number of Bedrooms in Unit County (Metro) Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 Collier County 20% 11,820 13,5.00 15,180 16,860 18,220 19,560 20,920 22,260 23,604 24,953 295 316 379 438 489 539 (Naples-Immokalee- 25% 14,775 16,876 18,975 21,075 22,775 24,450 26,150 27,825 29,505 31,191 369 395 474 548 611 674 Marco IslandMSA) 28% 16,548 18,900 21,252 23,604 25,508 27,384 29,288 31,164 33,046 34,934 413 443 531 613 684 755 30% 17,730 20,250 22,770 25,290 27,330 29,340 31,380 33,390 35,406 37,429 443 474 569 657 733 809 33% 19,503 22,275 25,047 27,819 30,063 32,274 34,518 36,729 38,947 41,172 487 522 626 723 806 890 35% 20,685 23,625 26,565 29,505 31,885 34,230 36,610 38,955 41,307 43,667 517 553 664 767 855 944 40% 23,640 27,000 30,360 33,720 36,440 39,120 41,840 44,520 47,208 49,906 591 633 759 877 978 1,079 45% 26,595 30,376 34,155 37,935 40,995 44,010 47,070 50,085 1 53,109 56,144 1 664 712 853 1 986 1,100 1,214 50% 29,550 33,750 37,950 42,150 45,550 48,900 52,300 55,650 59,010 62,382 738 791 948 1,096 1,222 1,349 60% 35,460 40,500 45,540 50,580 54,660 58,680 62,760 66,780 70,812 74,858 886 949 1,138 1,315 1,467 1,619 70% 41,370 47,250 53,130 59,010 63,770 68,460 73,220 77,910 82,614 87,335 1,034 1,107 1,328 1,534 1,711 1,889 80% 47,280 67,440 Median: 84,300 54,000 60,720 72,880 78,240 83,680 89,040 94,416 99,811 1,182 1,266. 1,518 1,754 1,956 2,159 120 % 70,920 81,000 91,080 101,160 109,320 117,360 125,520 133,560 141,624 149,717 1,773 1,899 2,277 2,631 2,934 3,238 140% 82,740 94,500 106,260 118,020 127,640 136,920 146,440 155,820 165,228 174,670 2,068 2,215 2,656 3,069 3,423 3,778 HERA Special Limits 25%-HS 14,875 17,000 19,125 21,250 22,950 24,650 26,350 28,050 29,750 31,450 371 398 478 552 616 680 per Section 142(d)(2)(E) 28%-HS 16,660 19,040 21,420 23,800 25,704 27,608 29,512 31,416 33,320 35,224 416 446 535 618 690 761 (est.2009) 30%-HS 17,850 20,400 22,950 25,500 27,540 29,580 31,620 33,660 35,700 37,740 446 478 573 663 739 816 For use by projects that 33%-HS 19,635 22,440 25,245 28,050 30,294 32,538 34,782 37,026 39,270 41,514 490 525 631 729 813 897 placed in service at least 35%-HS 20,825 23,800 26,775 29,750 32,130 34,510 36,890 39,270 41,650 44,030 520 557 669 773 862 952 one building on or 40%-HS 23,800 27,200 30,600 34,000 36,720 39,440 42,160 44,880 47,600 50,320 595 637 765 884 986 1,088 45%-HS 26,775 30,600 34,425 38,250 41,310 44,370 47,430 50,490 53,550 56,610 669 717 860 994 1,109 1,224 before1213112008 50%-HS 29,750 34,000 38,250 42,500 45,900 49,300 52,700 56,100 59,500 62,900 743 796 956 1,105 1,232 1,360 60% - HS 35,700 40,800 46,900 51,000 55,080 59,160 63,240 67,320 71,400 75,480 892 956 1,147 1,326 1,479 1,632 Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) income and rent limits are based upon figures provided bythe United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and are subject to change. Updated schedules wII be provided when changes occur. 34 APPENDIX C Realpage Market Performance Summary Report Naples — Immokalee — Marco Island Apartment Market 1st Quarter, 2021 35 -71 MARKET PERFORMANCE SUMMARY Naples -I mmokalee-Marco Island, FL First Quarter 202 > © 2021 Realf age, Inc. 1-877-325-7243.AII trademarks are the properties of their respecive owners. DMCA Notice: real page.com/dmca-notice ASO-18-151 12/13/18 Effective rent increased 4.0% from $1,301 in 4Q20 to $1,357 in 1Q21, which resulted in an annual growth rate of 2.0%. Annual effective rent growth has averaged 2.9% since 2Q96. The market's annual rent growth rate was above the national average of -0.9%. Out of the 150 markets ranked by RealPage nationally, Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL was 1 st for quarterly effective rent growth, and 95th for annual effective rent growth for 1 Q21. The market's occupancy rate increased from 95.1% in 4Q20 to 96.0% in 1Q21, and was up from 95.5% a year ago. The market's occupancy rate was above the national average of 95.6% in 1 Q21. The market's occupancy rate has averaged 93.2% since 2Q96. Effective Rent Per Unit Per Sq. Ft Effective Rent Growth - Annually Effective Rent Growth - Quarterly Occupancy Rate Occupancy Change - Annually Occupancy Change - Quarterly Economic Concessions Concession Value As a % of Asking Rent Effective Rent Per Unit Effective Rent Growth - Annually Effective Rent Growth - Quarterly Occupancy Rate Occupancy change - Annually Occupancy change - Quarterly Concession Value Build Average *Ranking based on Top 150 Markets 2Q20 3Q20 4Q20 1Q21 Mar-21 2019 2020 2021F 2022F 2023F 2024F 2025F $1,287 $1,282 $1,305 $1,357 $1,405 $1,333 $1,299 $1,330 $1,384 $1,451 $1,489 $1,515 $1.31 $1.30 $1.32 $1.37 $1.41 $1.35 $1.32 $1.34 $1.40 $1.46 $1.50 $1.53 -3.7% -4.5% -1.7% 2.0% 5.1 % -2.0% -1.7% 3.5% 5.1 % 3.8% 1.8% 1.4% -2.7% -0.4% 1.8% 4.0% 93.6% 93.9% 94.8% 96.0% 96.1 % 94.8% 94.3% 95.2% 93.1 % 93.7% 93.9% 94.1 % -1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% 0.7% -1.1 % 0.0% -0.3% -1.2% 0.6% 0.1 % 0.3% -1.4% 0.3% 0.9% 1.4% $54.00 $91.00 $76.00 $48.00 $98.00 $50.50 $74.50 4.1 % 6.9% 5.8% 3.6% 6.9% 3.8% 5.7% $1,357 $1,421 40 2.6% -0.9% 80 4.0% 0.8% 1 96.0% 95.5% 78 1.2% 0.0% 30 1.4% -0.1% 1 $48.00 $92.00 72 1998 1991 22 Annual Effective Rent Growth _ Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, National FL 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% -5.0% -10.0% MVifJ(D I�oJOO�NM VifJ (O I�oJOO�NMVN(O I�oJm O�NMVN(O rnrnrnrnrnrnrno 0o0000000 EE000OOOOOOOOOOOO � � � � � N NO N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N By Bedroom Type % Area Occ ERG Erent ERSF Studio/One bedroom 30.7% 737 95.7% 3.7% $1,172 $1.59 Two bedroom 48.9% 1,020 96.1% 1.9% $1,344 $1.32 Three + bedrooms 20.3% 1,241 96.3% 0.4% $1,490 $1.20 By Year Built - 1980 4.0% 533 93.0% 12.6% $1,022 $1.92 1981-1990 18.8% 921 97.1% 2.7% $1,258 $1.37 1991-2000 23.7% 971 96.7% 0.2% $1,239 $1.28 2001-2010 44.4% 1,024 95.6% 1.1% $1,340 $1.31 2011-Current 9.1% 1,085 95.1% 6.0% $1,699 $1.57 100.0% 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% Annual Occupancy Rate Naples-Immokalee-Marco Island, FL M v m r m MO E NM V 0MOO-NI-NMV0( rnrnrnrnrnrn0000000000000000000000000 o N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N APPENDIX D Naples Daily News Editorial September 18, 2018 Kudos & Kicks: Reviewing the good, bad and questionable Editorial Hoard, Naplcs Daily News, USA TODAY NETWORK - FLOlUDA Published 4:45 p.m. LT Sept 1, ?019 Kick Another challenge in providing rental housing to the workforce and seniors it Collier County surfaces with a new report by apartmentiist.com. A spokesman said by email the new national report shows the percentage of rentak units less than 10 years old is "at an all-time row-" In the Naples area, the report shows rentals over 30 years old increased 33 percent from 2000 to 2016 while buildings aged out so that the share of rentals 10 years old or less declined by 26 percent. The point? The cost of renting a house or apartment isn't likely to go down in older units until there are enough new ones coming onto the market to replace them_ Read or Share this story: https:/Iw%vw.napiesnews.com/story/opin ionleditorials120181091071kudos-and-kicks-reviews-goad-bad-questionable-collier-lee- state112212730021 39 APPENDIX E WINK News Article on rental market pressure May 25, 2021 .m CORON"IRUS LATEST UPDATES COVID-19 VACCINE UNEMPLOYMENT WHO Resources FORT MYERS Hot real estate market making it hard for people to find rentals Published: May 25, 2021 6:43 PM EDT Updated: May 26, 2021 10:38 AM EDT A red-hot housing market is forcing people out of their homes as some landlords are selling their valuable rentals. It's putting renters in a difficult spot and leaving them with nowhere to go. While there are "help wanted" signs everywhere, it's tough finding one that says "for rent." People on Facebook say looking for a place to live is like playing the lottery. It's a bidding war with some people paying a year of rent in advance. Because landlords are selling their rental properties, there's nothing left to rent. "I keep looking at houses and basically as soon as they're posted they're gone," said one woman who asked not to be named due to fear of jeopardizing her chances of finding a home. Her landlord is trying to sell her home. She is fighting him to stay. "They put the house on the market and then I think it was like the next day it was under contract," the woman said. "I just signed a new lease in January for this new rental company and then a couple months later they decide to sell the house, so if I would've known that, I would've never signed the lease to begin with," The best advice is to know what is in your lease and hold your landlord to it. 41 "If there's a silver lining at all, I work with a lot of developers that are buying homes or building homes that they plan to rent out, so I foresee a lot of homes coming to market as rentals," said Realtor Peter Davis. In the meantime, it's little help for people about to lose their homes. This is just not a Southwest Florida problem. According to Core Logic data, home prices are up more than 17% nationwide compared to a year ago and that's pushing more people to rent. Reporter: Dannielle Garcia Writer: Melissa Montoya Do you see a typo or an error? Let us know. 42 APPENDIX F Rental Housing Supply Available as of January 20, 2022 43 Collier County Rental Homes on January 20, 2022 TRULIA —125 Houses for Rent j ✓9 hr1p+.;rwmv.trulia.com,'lor_rentlNaples,F1/SINGLE-FAMILY_HOME_type/ -., SIR m � O o �' ❑ other Bookmarks trul{u Naples, FL ® Buy Rena Mortgage Saved Homes Saved Searches Sign up or Log In aza„„u— Any Price v All Beds v Pets v 0 Single Family Home v More v Sava Search Houses For Rent in Naples, FL 125rentolso 11.1,,leon Tn71l I Sort: Just For You v him :"NEW-19 HRs No. $3,700/mo $2,800/mo k4 31od J 2ha \ 1,494 sgft F. 3bd } 2ha hL 1,550 sgft 1399 Cooper pr, 665 99th Ave N, Naples, FL 34103 Naples. FL 34108 Cherk Avallabiiay Check Avafl bkrty Move with Xfinity $3,000/mo 14'. hnme -","-1 s...... p, 2bd .3 2ha ► 979 soft Zillow -125 Houses for Rent J 8 naps.iilhv+•.zillow.com/naples-fllrent-houses; Buy Rent Sell Home Loans Agentfinder V ZilioW Naples FL a I •iw Rent Pnce 9eds&Baths `I Hortses A W. 01-111 mbel FvnMyerrs schools 9 Maples FL Houses For Rent Beam ESIe.o ImmpMalce 125 results A.dubo Co kscrew Swamp I � Springs � _ Ave Manu YlerMe� L)�9 ronlla • 1 • C n9^tieF✓ �•Yaras • • •� � • }r♦ �ada9e � � Florida Parnher �, •.ere ry WildI Q ftVfe... I•�. ♦ry •.ly y.lyw •a PVcayune ✓� 9taterFOres1 CD Marco Island pe Romano Co lard ooioPee n ou d a aaes Islands,. nY Mep v ulim000� d Omer Boowna Manage Rentals Advertise Help Sign in Sort by: Newest v $3,250/mo $3,700/mo 3 hds 2 ha 2, 459 sgfl -House fui rent 3 hds 2 ha 1,494 sgrt -House for rent 296Q39th Sr SW, Naples, Ft 34' .. 1399Cooper Or, Naples, F! 341C3 —1WV fdbl Heave with Xfinity $2,800/mo New home, same great service. 3 bell 26a 1,560 sqk - House for rent Visit website 0 Xfinity ws N. Naples. rL W N v r HOMES.COM — 111 Homes for Rent Ig '°-.... •�rhomes.com/naples-flJhomes-for-rent/?bbox=25.951822229167963,-81.9W32193456431,Z6.36906110033051,-81.479 � �Ilt �} Q fl Q 'i' [] Omer (ookni Find Agent l0b Hoidles.Corn d Sign In / Sign Up 4 For Rent S1K - S2 5K 3eds v Botf s `a More Filters Save worth „ Area SanctuaryONLINE- 111 Homes For Rent in Naples, FL Suggested ?: " -" S9 Remove Boundary Bonaa SPnngs CREW Bird ••-��� 1301C Posit— ear 108 C% Rookery ♦ Swamp S2,500/mo New r- oMONO elnorwigglns Grangerree 3 Beds . 2 Baths . 1,239 Sq_ Ft_ Pass Stale Park Naples, FL, 34105 �m nspl. ` �♦ - Robert Daggett Premiere Plus Realty Ca, - 16210 Allura Cir 51, 753-53,947Img Naples?� � em�ian Gme Caribbean Gar 1-3 Beds . 784-1,373 Sq_ R Naples, FL, 34114 ',.11`''♦1�1,� Allure Property Manager S' C #1 ♦'t - 8820 Walter Way 0 01' ♦_r Keewaydin \ Pro V'rre Island Strand 51,079-53,799/mo State Foresi f Sl ia-3 Beds . 684-1,535 Sq. F- ♦ _ tLlQtr r ' Naples, FL, 34120 E Sa y ' } 1 / Property Manager Vol Collier P.,'k e State Park 10200 Sweetgrass Cir n ,. Go gle rwao.menonr a. reaa�emu�mv, laesl s— -Wa, RENT.COM — 129 Homes for Rent rcntcom/floricia/naples-houses/max-price-5000?property-type=houses } I1h m Q O G Z C3 Me, Bookmaria rent.co Q Naples, FL Market Trends MmAng Center UstaProperly Log In ine Island Name) ._ M,000 max houses for rent m Naples, FL caleway Cape Coral O � Map Hybrid ie1id State Forest NapEes, FL X $5,000 v Beds v Mole fillers v sl Is- City R. ®® Clear All nibel Island Sanibel FOB.¢chrs N lselo ImTokalee N,il1- l•! N .:_.-.r Audubon • • Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary -ONLINE.. Harker }29 Propemes Soft by Beet Match v �r a,e Maaa 26.0 y O Home For Rent N411 lvMee 53 High Point Cir W "'�••• Naples, FL 34103 • yards • e _ �2 Beds 12 Bams.......................................$2,600 Florida en Gete • Panther Ir Floor Plan National A a Wildlife._ d 4* Response Score' tlalock firs J ``I� ty art and Picayune • Str • ) State Forest S U(677] 9343713 -- tfupdaiea t2 nags age M coFelaaa M'co Island No Pals Central NaplesTeir Cave Romano ocfiaoe1r� Available Now Homo For Rent Thousand Eveiglaees 980 7th Ave S Islands,.. car - Naples, FL 34102 Chokalaskes 1 Bed 11 Bath..............._......__..._.._...._._S5,000 600 5gfT t Floor Plan qh Response Score. Unix dt Gooale ----------- ••-- ...-_. -----...- 45 APPENDIX G Greystar and Costar Apartment Market Reports w Market Survey. Lago Apartments :r presented to: nson Development Survey Date: 11 /22/2021 Properties Included in Survey: Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information — Not for distribution or4s7without prior written authorization. GREYSTAR" Comp 1 Orchid Run 2015 282 97% 1040 $3,223 $3.10 $3,223 $3.10 Comp 2 Magnolia Square 2021 290 66% 1216 $2,767 $2.28 $2,767 $2.28 Comp 3 Legacy Naples 2018 304 96% 1173 $2,806 $2.39 $2,806 $2.39 Comp 4 Inspira 2018 304 98% 1059 $2,504 $2.36 $2,396 $2.26 Comp 5 Addison Place 2018 294 100% 1029 $2,337 $2.27 $2,337 $2.27 Comp 6 Edge 75 2021 320 44% 1012 $2,505 $2.47 $2,505 $2.47 Total/Avg (Market) 2114 86% 1082 $2,768 $2.57 $2,753 $2.55 Total/Avg. (Market less Subject) 1794 83% 1087 $2,684 $2.47 $2,665 $2.46 -i- Map Satellite 5-Addison Place 2-Magnolia Square 1-Orchid Run rrnrq.i r+.i n�l.i�i. [„ir. PanrM1a S-Lago Apartments H,nla, �® o 4-Inspira e,y� . pan Manor ark © i t I Lely heson s c Y Avg. Mkt Rent/Unit � Avg. Eff Rent/Unit - - Avg. Eff Rent $/SF $3.50 $3,500 $3.00 ® $3,000 $2.50 $2,500 $2.00 $2,000 $1.50 $1,500 $1.00 $1,000 $0.50 $500 $0.00 $0 Subject Comp 1 Comp 2 Comp 3 Comp 4 Comp 5 Comp 6 Greystar Proprietary and Confidential Information - Not for distributic,48r use without prior written authorization. C0mpetitive Analysis w Naples - Fl. PREPARED BY -MAN AO E M E N T- Gary Hains t0 CoStar-, Following a surge in 2021, rent growth in Naples is some of the strongest in the country. The record growth comes after rents fell slightly for two years from 2019-20. After falling in Mancc and April 2020, rents gradually improved through the rest of 2020 before taking off at the start of 2021. As is the case in many peer markets, recent growth has been concentrated in high -rent submarkets where losses were steepest in the early months of the pandemic. The average rent in Central Naples is 6% higher than the DAILY ASKING RENT PER SF $2.20 $2.10 ................... . $2.00 $1.90 $1.80 $1.70 $1.60 $1.50 $1.40 metro average and more than 50% higher than it was a year ago. Naples has the second highest asking rent in Florida behind Palm Beach. Recent growth has pushed the average rent in the market over the other high -rent South Florida metros Fort Lauderdale and Miami. This is primarily due to the market's abundance of luxury units, which comprise 45% of the market compared to the national proportion of 27%, which itself reflects the metro's relative affluence. $1.30 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 ■ Naples + © 2021 Costar Group - Licensed to FL Star Development - Milano Lakes 1, 11/6/2021 -M , „s-r;A--FRApartments - 91 0 %gr CoStar Page 6 APPENDIX H Lee County 2015 Commercial Demand Forecast Report 51 1111 MFM METRO FORECASTING MODELS Ise County, Florida — 2015 ForecafA Report Population, Housing and Commerci&I Demand Thank you for purchasing this report, which contains forecasts of population growth, housing demand and demand for commercial space for goods and services for Lee County, Florida (the Cape Coral —Fort Myers Metropolitan Statistical Area or MSA). The analytical methods used to prepare these forecasts have proven to be more accurate than the industry standard of straight-line (linear) forecasts- Our goal is to maintain the most accurate forecasting models, which are based on our history of forecasting= ■ In 1982 the City of North Port, Florida, asked Dr_ Paul Van Buskirk (author of the Metro Forecasting Model) to forecast the population of their city in 2007, then 25 years into the future. In 1980 North Port had a permanent population of 5,350 people. Dr. Van Buskirk forecasted that in 2007 there would be a permanent population of 57,452) in 2010, the Census counted 57,350 people in North Port. The forecast was 99.7% accurate 25 years into the future. ■ In 2002 the City of Cape Coral, Florida, engaged Dr. Van Buskirk to prepare a population forecast for their city to use in planning for future commercial sites, fire stations and schools- His 2010 forecast was 155,179 permanent residents; in 2010, the Census counted. 154,305 permanent residents. The information in this report can be used by businesses, property owners, developers, lenders and planners to help understand the past and future of the Lee County metro area and then use accurate forecasts in decision -making; Businesses: Metro's growth forecasts help make marketing decisions because growth forecasts can be compared to forecasts in other metropolitan areas_ Property Owners: Housing and commercial demand forecasts help property owners understand how their land may increase or decrease in value based on the current and future supply versus demand for their respective land uses. * Develapers: Current and forecasted demand versus supply are used in due - diligence reviews and pro forma preparation, as well helping to broadly gauge absorption_ ✓ Lenders- Loan requests for new construction can be compared to the forecasted demand for commercial or residential projects. 1 Planners: Population, housing and commercial forecasts are used to evaluate the need for zoning changes desired by their clients. For more detailed forecasts of population, housing and commercial demand, see our 9001 Highland Woods Boulevard, Suite 2, Bonita Springs, FL 34136 239-913-6949 ww•w.MetroForecasting.com Crmrright 2015T: Metre FmT-CW7%in_ %Inde1�,, Ali Rights iieai Ywvv d. Rep mnt. p nmisLzion must he PFLlue.Avd in wrlting from Aletn Fureristing Modals, LLC_ 52 Lee County, Florida — Cape Coral —Fort Myers MSA Population, Housing and Commercial Demand Forecast The Lee County metro area is located in southwest Florida. In 2014 the permanent population was 679,513 according to the US Comm, up from 1,414 in 1890. Metro Forecasting Models 0&7W uses proprietary modeling software to forecast the future population of this MSA in 5-year increments. Whereas forecasters often apply linear extrapolation of past census data, a technique which becomes inaceuxate over longer periods, MFM forecasting methodology has been documented to be far more accurate over time_ Figure I. below is a population graph of the Lee County metro area showing actual change in population from 1950 to 2010. 1,600.000 IJCO,ODD 900.003 604,000 400,001) After the MFM Composite Forecast Curve is established (the blue line), similar curves are generated for both an expanding and contracting eeonomy for the entire MSA. In statistical jargon, these similar curves are each two standard deviations from the mean (composite) curve. We find that MSA growth falls within these boundaries 95% of the time, barring catastrophic events (war, natural disaster, etc) that permanently alter development potential - Figure 1 presents a summary of our population forecasts for 2020 and beyond for the Lee County metro area (Cape Coral —Fort Myers MSA). =figure 1. MFM Population Forecast in 201 S Lee County, Florian Iii 20'0,000 f '950 1970 2010 — -population C. risuS �.�-�:Lial - - W FM 202O Pop- 752,585 2030 2050 Expanding Economy Source: US Census & Metra Forecasting Models, LLC 2070 2090 2110 - - Contracting Economy Fu&Uihed JulF 3015 53 Population Forecast Table 1 presents our specific analysis and population growth forecast for the Lee County metro area in 5-year increments for three different economies. The blue column, labeled "Composite," shows haw the population will grow over time in a balanced economy. The orange column, labeled. "Expanding," presents a higher forecast for the population growth curve in a `Bull Market" economy. The data presented in this Column provides a reliable guide for our clients who need to understand how this MSA will grow under favorable economic conditions. The green column, labeled "Contracting," presents a lower forecast for the population growth curve in a "Bear Marke- ' economy_ The data presented in this column provides a guide for our clients who need to understand how economic trends, lousiness decisions and government policy (national or local) could affect this MSA's growth under less favorable economic conditions_ As the economy cycles from bull to bear markets, the day-to-day or year-to-year population growth will revert to the Composite forecast. Depending upon the significance of economic trends and government and business policy, the change in growth can appear to be a never-ending room -bust cycle. The general population tends to mentally forecast growth by what has happened over the last year of their lives_ If last year showed low or no growth, then next year would be the same or worse under that scenario. if last year was a good year, then next year will be just as good or better. The Composite forecast provides a balanced view of what the future holds for this MSA. The population forecasted in Table I provides a reliable guide for wise industry leaders who understand the pace of the last few years' growth does not mean that growth will continue in the same pattern. The expanding and contracting economy forecasts provide ranges for strategic planning by governments and the private sector. Table 1: fee Metro Area Population Forecast Year Composite Expanding Contracting 1970 114,069 119,811 108,502 1975 155,643 162,536 148,919 1980 204,751 212,733 196,926 1985 260,810 269,762 251,994 1990 322,901 332,663 313,250 1995 389,856 400,248 379,564 2000 460,405 471,208 449,653 2005 533,183 544,208 522,179 2010 606,905 617,966 595,839 2015 680,385 691,316 669,425 2020 752,585 763,244 741,876 2025 822,636 832,910 812,297 2030 889,850 899,650 879,974 2035 953,711 962,974 944,364 2040 1,013,862 1,022,547 1,005,089 2045 1,070,088 1,078,172 1,061,912 2050 1,122, 288 1,129, 768 1,114,718 2055 1,170,465 1,177, 346 1,163, 495 2060 1,214,G94 1,220,993 1,208,309 2065 1,255,111 1,260, 853 1,249,287 2070 1,291,892 1,297,107 1,286,601 2075 1,325,245 1,329,965 1,320,454 2080 1,355, 393 1,3S9,651 1, 351,067 2085 1,382,565 1,386,398 1,378,671 2090 1,406,997 1,410,438 1,403,499 2095 1,428,915 1,431, 999 1,425,780 z100 1,448,5401 1,451, 299 1,445,735 Source: Metro Forecasting Models, LLC 11ablished Juh-wn1•S 54 Commercial. Demand Forecast Table 3 presents the Lee County metro area commercial retail trade and services demand forecast in 5-year increments. The demand for retail and office space increases as the population grows - When the increased population meets certain thresholds, the market can support new or expanded stores and services- For example a small population may want a big -box retail stare but not have enough people to support the economic investment by the retailer. In those cases, the demand for the big box store is met. by neighboring communities that are large enough to meet the minimum investment enectation by the retailer. Lee County has two super -regional shopping centers that are supplemented in part by demand from Collier, Hendry and Charlotte Counties. The demand forecast shown in Table 3 is the t Owner commercial and office space in the MSA. A community of commercial development allowed through local zoni sticky Nate demand for commercial space exists but supply is n demand is met outside that community. For examp 1sf r shopping centers may require a population of only 8,(111..53 sf = self-sustaining, while community and regional shopp need a threshold population of 30,000 and 150,000 respectively - An MSA may also have more commercial space than the MSA's population could naturally support. In these cases, demand for certain services from the population of neighboring communities may be met by the local MSA's supply. The forecasted commercial demand in Table 3, combined with the knowledge of the existing commercial supply and vacancy rates, is useful in determining how much new space will be needed in 5-year steps. Note the demand is not linear; one 5-year step may forecast a demand rate that is greater or less than the previous 5-year period. Figure 2 helps illustrate the changing demand for commercial space over time. Figure 2. Lee Metre Area Commercial Demand Forecast 1,000's SF U0,000 i.-0,oxo 120.017, im.000 8r3 R7C 83,939 60 a"n r 65,391 r ► 47.188 �0.G7G - r 20 CC) 0 = 15yQ 1°5!i i?Ri7 20Q�] 2Q2t} 2040 2060 2080 2100 source: Metro Forecasting Models, LLC MFM Forecast-Ir2000 _Ak 2010 l- 2020 P.•rgJ, :s 55 Puhlished Ja h- '01-7 APPENDIX I Collier Interactive Growth Model Executive Summary 56 THE COLLIER INTERACTIVE GROWTH MODEL CIGM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prepared for: The Collier County Board of County Commissioners And. The Collier County Comprehensive Planning Department Collier County Sy: Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc. 100 Estero Boulevard, Suite 434 Fort Myers Beach, Florida 33931 Phone: (239) 463-3929 Fax: (239) 463-5050 Webpage and Email. www.interactivegrowthmodel.com September 29, 2008 t Cop),right 211008 by Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc., all rights reserved. Reiirint permission must be requested in writing from Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc. Interacti\.,e Growth rVloiielThs is a registered trademark. 57 Section 5 Population Distribution to Build -out Table 4 Study Area Population Forecast 2007-Build-out* 2007 79568 2010 89910 2015 117916 2020 153631 2025 191329 2030 230283 2035 269814 2040 308560 2045 343071 2050 371180 2055* 392562°1 2060 407970 2070 418623 2075 430524 2080 433628 Build -oat 442537 Source: Van Buskirk, Ryffel. and Associaie4 Inc. =90% of Build-0ut In the interest of a clearer understanding, the population forecast output data shown above, was converted to visual representations that are more easily interpreted. By way of example, Maps 3 to 12 shows the population distribution and intensity in the years 2007, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070, 2080, and Build -out, respectively for the entire study area_ Likewise, Maps 13 to 22 show the RFMiUD and GGE areas and Maps 23 to 32 show the RLSA and lmmokalee areas during those same time intervals. The various degrees of green shadings on these maps represent the percentage of build -out population of each TAZ at the particular 10-year interval. This was done in 10 percent increments with greater populations shown in darker shading. ?I Map 19 Population Distribution, Year 2060 CG+II®r tntemawe m [n Gm ode+ RPrauA aM Gr,E Year 206Q Poou"IE— x953+9 rz _ Map 21 Population Distribution. Year 2080 Curlier lnlerGrowth :Yodel - RFL+DOIfO —spd GGE Year2a80 ' PopuF]u— M.954 26 Map 20 Population Distribution. Year 2070 CDplef In Year 2070 +1 !lOdN RFrauo and GGE Year207D P.P.b 1pn: Tau,3f1 Map 2Z Population Distribution, Year Build -Out . cuuer �ntenxu•ecarovnu c+odp RP .= and GGE Year Build -Out vogdmo+r: +u.u� . I 59 3500000 3000000 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 500000 0 Retail Supply Source: Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc. 50000000 45000000 40000000 35000000 30000000 25000000 20000000 15000000 10000000 5000000 0 Retail Supply Figure 7 Commercial/Office Floor Area Supply And Demand - 2007 Retail Office Supply Office Total Supply Total Demand Demand Retail/Office Demand Retail/Office Figure 8 Commercial/Office Floor Area Supply And Demand - Build -Out Retail Office Supply Office Total Supply Total Demand Demand Retail/Office Demand Retail/Office Source: Van Buskirk, Ryffel and Associates, Inc. Note: 45,498,983 sf / 442,537 pop. = 102.81 sf per capita Collier County Planned Unit Developments with remaining Multi -Family Units NAME STATUS Ord. # Date App'd Est. Buildoul AIC CMTY LOCATIONS/T/R TOTAL SIZE ACRE1ES. MF TOTAL RES. MF DEViIF UNITS LEFT TO DEVELOP TAZ ID-Num PELICAN BAY (DRI-77-1) ACTIVE 04-59 9/21/2004 12/31/2024 5,12 NN 32,33-48-25 & 4, 2,104.00 5,686 4,096 1,590 128/131 193 HACIENDA LAKES (DRI-11-05) ACTIVE 11-41 10/25/2011 1/17/2029 RF 11-14,23-25/50/2E 2,262.14 1,232 24 1,208 355, 357-359,36 415 ENBROOK ACTIVE 20-06 1/14/2020 7/17/1905 RF 10-51-26 65.88 526 0 526 345 458 MARCO SHORES COUNTRY CLUB ACTIVE 16-37 9/13/1994 2004 RF 26,27,28-51 321.00 1,580 1,062 518 343/343.3 148 ARROWHEAD ACTIVE 08-36 3/22/2005 2010 IMM 31-46-29 & 6- 307.30 809 332 477 418.1 7 IMPERIAL LAKES ACTIVE 82-81 9/14/1982 n/a NN 15-48-25 78.20 430 0 430 90 114 MINI TRIANGLE ACTIVE 18-25 5/8/2018 2023 EN 11-50-25 5.35 377 0 377 270 451 SHADOW WOOD ACTIVE 08-43 7/13/1982 tbd SN 16-50-26 168.10 558 194 364 246 236 PINE RIDGE COMMONS ACTIVE 99-94 12/14/1999 2004 12 NN 10-49-25 31.00 325 0 325 117 199 ALLURA ACTIVE 19-22 9/24/2019 2024 NN 1348-25 35.92 304 0 304 85 457 COURTHOUSE SHADOWS/COLLIER-- ACTIVE 16-45 1/28/1992 2021 16 EN 11,12,13-50 20.35 300 0 300 289 47 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE CENTER ACTIVE 16-32 10/24/2006 2026 NN 27-48-25 106.06 300 0 300 142 49 HAMMOCK PARK ACTIVE 07-30 11/28/2000 2/27/2017 RF 14-50-26 19.13 265 0 265 359 99 1-75/ALLIGATOR ALLEY- ACTIVE 07-26 2/13/2007 2023 91 GG 34-49-26 40.80 425 160 265 251 110 AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB ACTIVE 96-69 6/25/1991 2006 NN 5,7,8,948-2 754.75 300 36 264 8,79,81,82,83,8, 10 SHOPPES AT SANTA BARBARA ACTIVE 98-22 3/24/1998 2026 6 GG 4-50-26 18.10 242 0 242 264 238 BLUE CORAL APARTMENTS ACTIVE 21-32 9/28/2021 2026 UE 30-48-26 9.35 234 0 234 161 470 GARDEN WALK VILLAGE ACTIVE 96-4 2/13/1996 2003 IMM 11-47-29 17.06 204 0 204 411 84 RUSSELL SQUARE ACTIVE 18-51 10/23/2018 2023 SN 9-50-26 32.90 230 32 198 245 455 RCMA IMMOKALEE ACTIVE 21-38 10/26/2021 7/18/1905 IMM 31-46-29 62.22 160 0 160 473 ANTILLES ACTIVE 18-02 2/13/2018 2023 MI 15-51-26 43.77 212 68 144 343 448 ONE NAPLES ACTIVE 21-09 3/1/2021 2026 NN 32-48-25 5.42 140 0 140 137 466 NORTH PORT BAY ACTIVE 00-05 6/13/2000 2007 RF 4,9-52-28 49.96 248 116 132 354 175 IMMOKALEE FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE ACTIVE 20-23 9/8/2020 2015 IMM 32-46-29 9.52 128 0 128 417 462 CAMDEN LANDING ACTIVE 21-13 3/9/2021 7/18/1905 N 14-50-25 9.93 127 0 127 287.1/288.1/295/ 362 REGAL ACRES ACTIVE 05-36 6/28/2005 2023 RF 12-51-26 59.90 300 184 116 357 353 MAGNOLIA POND ACTIVE 10-06 6/9/1998 2/23/2020 GG 34-49-26 47.05 106 0 106 252 145 IMMOKALEE SENIOR HOUSING ACTIVE 04/29 5/11/2004 5/11/2012 IMM 33-46-29 7.44 119 30 89 435 338 BRIARWOOD ACTIVE 95-33 4/25/1995 2005 CN 3149-26 209.17 525 455 70 259 20 BERKSHIRE LAKES (DRI-82-1) ACTIVE 15-66 1/13/1998 2003 6 GG 5-50-26 & 32, 1,093.90 2,944 2,904 40 257 15 MERCATO ACTIVE 06-32 11/15/2005 2010 5 NN 34-48-25 53.00 175 137 38 144 358 BOYNE SOUTH ACTIVE 04-60 9/21/2004 2010 RF 20-51-27 242.35 34 0 34 343.3 16 MERIDIAN VILLAGE ACTIVE 13-47 6/6/2006 2025 EN 2-50-25 11.68 31 0 31 114.1 363 MICELI ACTIVE 92-62 9/1/1992 20031 SN 29-50-26 8.70 17 0 17 312 154 ESTATES SHOPPING CENTER ACTIVE 11-30 9/13/2011 2026 RE 4/49/27 40.62 12 0 12 215 413 SALVATION ARMY ACTIVE 01-65 11/27/2001 2004 EN 1-50-25 6.51 20 10 10 272 231 THREE HUN.AC.GOODLETTE RD ACTIVE 96-80 12/10/1996 2003 NN 3,10-49-25 300.00 900 890 10 116 261 MIRALIA ACTIVE 96-12 3/26/1996 2006 NN 32-48-25 8.96 210 205 5 133 155 71,558.81 20,7351 10,9351 9,800 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY 2021-22 Regional Demand Occupations List Sorted by Occupational Title Workforce Development Area 24 - Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee Counties Selection Criteria: 1 FLDOE Training Code 3 (PSAV Certificate), 4 (Community College Credit/Degree), or 5 (Bachelor's Degree) 2 80 annual openings and positive growth 3 Mean Wage of $15.62/hour and Entry Wage of $12.71/hour 4 High Skill/High Wage (HSHW) Occupations: Mean Wage of $24.49/hour and Entry Wage of $15.62/hour SOC Codet HSHWtt Occupational Titlet Annual Percent Growth Annual Openings 2019 Hourly Wage Mean Entry FLDOE In EFI Training Targeted Code Industry? Sourcefff Data 132011 HSHW Accountants and Auditors 1.61 390 32.65 19.44 5 Yes R 113011 HSHW Administrative Services Managers 1.55 1,537 44.46 25.26 4 Yes S 493011 HSHW Aircraft Mechanics and Service Technicians 1.67 1,474 31.54 16.75 3 Yes S 532011 HSHW Airline Pilots, Copilots, and Flight Engineers 1.44 610 113.51 69.15 4 Yes S 274011 Audio and Video Equipment Technicians 3.23 869 23.38 14.44 4 Yes S 493021 Automotive Body and Related Repairers 1.26 1,104 21.85 14.10 3 Yes S 493023 Automotive Service Technicians and Mechanics 0.66 5,668 21.81 12.68 3 Yes S 433031 Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks 0.69 699 20.00 13.28 4 Yes R 472021 Brickmasons and Blockmasons 2.05 127 19.59 14.65 3 No R 493031 Bus and Truck Mechanics and Diesel Engine Specialists 1.61 88 22.76 16.86 3 Yes R 533021 Bus Drivers, Transit and Intercity 1.52 1,744 19.81 13.59 3 No S 131199 HSHW Business Operations Specialists, All Other 1.86 349 34.12 16.00 4 Yes R 535021 HSHW Captains, Mates, and Pilots of Water Vessels 2.09 742 29.34 18.11 3 Yes S 472031 Carpenters 1.88 1,068 20.15 15.03 3 Yes R 472051 Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers 2.28 229 19.95 14.30 3 Yes R 351011 HSHW Chefs and Head Cooks 3.59 184 33.60 19.04 3 Yes R 111011 HSHW Chief Executives 0.50 103 80.52 30.96 5 Yes R 131031 HSHW Claims Adjusters, Examiners, and Investigators 0.26 2,070 30.92 20.07 3 Yes S 212011 HSHW Clergy 1.34 92 25.32 15.69 5 Yes R 532012 HSHW Commercial Pilots 1.74 592 78.64 26.04 3 Yes S 211099 Community and Social Service Specialists, All Other 2.37 124 18.48 14.28 5 Yes R 131141 HSHW Compensation, Benefits, and Job Analysis Specialists 1.61 756 26.93 17.88 4 Yes S 131041 HSHW Compliance Officers 1.11 2,155 34.71 19.90 3 Yes S 151143 HSHW Computer Network Architects 1.57 979 51.96 34.03 3 Yes S 151199 HSHW Computer Occupations, All Other 1.49 1,118 37.67 17.86 3 Yes S 151131 HSHW Computer Programmers 2.17 1,169 41.69 23.31 3 Yes S 151121 HSHW Computer Systems Analysts 1.89 2,652 43.26 24.53 4 Yes S 151151 Computer User Support Specialists 2.24 171 23.14 16.17 3 Yes R 119021 HSHW Construction Managers 2.54 315 42.34 23.38 4 Yes R 131051 HSHW Cost Estimators 1.35 131 33.07 21.69 4 Yes R 151141 HSHW Database Administrators 1.52 669 45.51 27.69 4 Yes S 319091 Dental Assistants 1.57 139 20.25 15.22 3 Yes R 292021 HSHW Dental Hygienists 1.42 1,022 28.14 18.37 4 Yes S 292032 HSHW Diagnostic Medical Sonographers 2.57 522 30.43 22.17 3 Yes S 472081 Drywall and Ceiling Tile Installers 0.98 90 18.08 13.10 3 No R 472111 Electricians 1.86 379 20.80 15.23 3 Yes R 252021 HSHW Elementary School Teachers, Except Special Education 1.43 370 30.33 22.02 5 No R 292041 Emergency Medical Technicians and Paramedics 1.50 104 19.88 13.99 4 Yes R 113031 HSHW Financial Managers 2.65 140 51.52 27.61 5 Yes R 332011 HSHW Firefighters 1.08 171 27.75 18.88 3 Yes R 371012 First -Line Superv. Landscaping & Groundskeeping Workers 3.36 261 24.32 15.13 3 Yes R 471011 HSHW First -Line Superv. of Construction and Extraction Workers 2.01 721 30.55 19.88 4 Yes R 371011 First -Line Superv. of Housekeeping & Janitorial Workers 3.67 114 21.78 15.07 3 Yes R 491011 HSHW First -Line Superv. of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers 1.72 237 28.41 17.81 3 Yes R 431011 HSHW First -Line Superv. of Office and Admin. Support Workers 0.91 679 26.71 16.88 4 Yes R 511011 HSHW First -Line Superv. of Production and Operating Workers 1.16 125 27.79 18.46 3 Yes R 331099 First -Line Superv., Protective Service Workers, All Other 2.04 662 22.72 13.88 3 Yes S 411012 HSHW First -Line Supervisors of Non -Retail Sales Workers 1.02 160 39.04 22.07 4 Yes R 391021 First -Line Supervisors of Personal Service Workers 2.53 2,046 21.96 14.13 3 Yes S 411011 First -Line Supervisors of Retail Sales Workers 0.98 888 22.93 13.91 3 Yes R 119051 HSHW Food Service Managers 2.49 216 31.83 19.94 4 Yes R 111021 HSHW General and Operations Managers 1.98 761 47.53 23.10 4 Yes R 472121 Glaziers 2.42 113 18.59 13.87 3 Yes R 271024 Graphic Designers 0.62 84 22.68 14.49 4 Yes R 292099 Health Technologists and Technicians, All Other 1.72 941 21.43 13.45 3 Yes S 499021 Heating, A.C., and Refrigeration Mechanics and Installers 1.49 397 23.92 17.31 3 Yes R 533032 Heavy and Tractor -Trailer Truck Drivers 1.36 552 19.57 13.72 3 Yes R 131071 HSHW Human Resources Specialists 2.30 174 28.41 18.81 5 Yes R 499041 Industrial Machinery Mechanics 2.05 1,698 21.93 14.95 3 Yes S 537051 Industrial Truck and Tractor Operators 1.40 3,811 18.34 12.37 3 Yes S 151122 HSHW Information Security Analysts 1.80 565 43.26 26.49 3 Yes S 413021 Insurance Sales Agents 0.85 274 26.78 14.78 3 Yes R 252012 HSHW Kindergarten Teachers, Except Special Education 1.42 84 30.25 23.80 5 No R 292061 Licensed Practical and Licensed Vocational Nurses 2.27 340 20.99 16.28 3 Yes R 434131 Loan Interviewers and Clerks 1.36 1,629 22.10 15.46 3 Yes S 132072 HSHW Loan Officers 0.85 1,690 34.72 18.08 4 Yes S 514041 Machinists 1.57 85 22.38 15.35 3 Yes R 499071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General 2.20 689 18.23 12.95 3 Yes R 131111 HSHW Management Analysts 2.39 308 48.86 22.91 5 Yes R 119199 HSHW Managers, All Other 1.79 183 42.32 24.14 4 Yes R Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Workforce Statistics and Economic Research (WSER) 2021-22 Regional Demand Occupations List Sorted by Occupational Title Workforce Development Area 24 -Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, and Lee Counties Selection Criteria: 1 FLDOE Training Code 3 (PSAV Certificate), 4 (Community College Credit/Degree), or 5 (Bachelor's Degree) 2 80 annual openings and positive growth 3 Mean Wage of $15.62/hour and Entry Wage of $12.71/hour 4 High Skill/High Wage (HSHW) Occupations: Mean Wage of $24.49/hour and Entry Wage of $15.62/hour Annual FLDOE In EFI Percent Annual 2019 Hourly Wage Training Targeted Data SOC Codet HSHWtt Occupational Titlet Growth Openings Mean Entry Code Industry? Sourcettt 131161 Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists 3.08 165 24.24 14.17 5 Yes R 119111 HSHW Medical and Health Services Managers 4.34 91 53.67 28.86 5 Yes R 292010 HSHW Medical and Clinical Laboratory Technologists and Technicians 1.73 1,713 25.99 15.73 4 Yes S 319092 Medical Assistants 2.81 540 17.31 13.74 3 Yes R 499062 Medical Equipment Repairers 4.77 112 18.00 13.41 3 Yes R 292071 Medical Records and Health Information Technicians 1.80 1,267 21.43 13.45 4 Yes S 436013 Medical Secretaries 1.93 157 17.31 13.67 3 Yes R 131121 HSHW Meeting, Convention, and Event Planners 2.81 1,194 24.67 15.51 4 Yes S 252022 HSHW Middle School Teachers, Exc. Special & Voc. Education 1.42 200 30.73 23.38 5 No R 151142 HSHW Network and Computer Systems Administrators 1.48 1,754 41.57 26.59 4 Yes S 472073 Operating Engineers/Construction Equipment Operators 1.76 187 21.12 14.99 3 Yes R 472141 Painters, Construction and Maintenance 1.40 478 16.89 13.20 3 Yes R 232011 Paralegals and Legal Assistants 1.30 142 24.25 16.49 3 Yes R 132052 HSHW Personal Financial Advisors 1.30 88 57.33 20.57 5 Yes R 292052 Pharmacy Technicians 1.70 2,962 16.45 12.67 3 Yes S 319097 Phlebotomists 3.32 1,346 16.45 12.85 3 Yes S 312021 HSHW Physical Therapist Assistants 3.88 113 30.68 23.92 4 Yes R 472151 Pipelayers 1.39 559 19.38 16.19 3 Yes S 472152 Plumbers, Pipefitters, and Steamfitters 1.40 322 21.85 15.36 3 Yes R 333051 HSHW Police and Sheriffs Patrol Officers 1.06 148 26.77 20.36 3 No R 251199 HSHW Postsecondary Teachers, All Other 2.39 114 32.43 25.01 4 No R 119141 HSHW Property, Real Estate & Community Association Managers 1.79 276 30.13 18.73 4 Yes R 292053 Psychiatric Technicians 2.15 931 16.00 12.78 3 Yes S 131020 HSHW Purchasing Agents, Except Wholesale, Retail, and Farm Products 0.60 91 27.12 17.40 Yes No R 292034 HSHW Radiologic Technologists 1.57 1,112 27.45 19.60 3 Yes S 419021 Real Estate Brokers 1.87 874 29.34 13.81 3 No S 291141 HSHW Registered Nurses 1.74 761 34.52 27.29 4 Yes R 291126 HSHW Respiratory Therapists 2.62 776 28.22 23.54 4 Yes S 535011 Sailors and Marine Oilers 2.21 555 15.40 13.35 3 No S 112022 HSHW Sales Managers 1.82 87 58.58 23.70 5 Yes R 414011 HSHW Sales Representatives, Wholesale & Mfg, Tech. & Sci. Prod. 3.70 127 44.17 17.09 3 Yes R 414012 Sales Representatives, Wholesale and Manufacturing, Other 1.35 563 32.01 15.26 3 Yes R 252031 HSHW Secondary School Teachers, Exc. Special and Voc. Ed. 1.42 216 32.66 24.74 5 No R 413031 HSHW Securities and Financial Services Sales Agents 0.72 155 36.66 17.49 5 Yes R 492098 Security and Fire Alarm Systems Installers 2.20 81 22.18 15.79 3 No R 472211 Sheet Metal Workers 2.16 114 18.78 14.21 3 Yes R 211093 Social and Human Service Assistants 3.03 96 19.53 13.17 3 Yes R 151132 HSHW Software Developers, Applications 2.54 161 48.71 25.16 4 Yes R 472221 Structural Iron and Steel Workers 1.87 506 21.16 16.08 3 Yes S 211018 Substance Abuse, Behavioral Disorder, and Mental Health Counselors 4.13 111 22.36 16.55 5 No R 292055 Surgical Technologists 1.45 809 22.19 16.10 3 Yes S 492022 Telecommunications Equipment Installers and Repairers 0.38 87 24.34 16.83 3 Yes R 472044 Tile and Marble Setters 2.07 118 19.96 14.32 3 Yes R 113071 HSHW Transportation, Storage, and Distribution Managers 1.35 513 46.32 26.13 4 Yes S 292056 Veterinary Technologists and Technicians 2.59 998 18.31 13.04 4 Yes S 251194 HSHW Vocational Education Teachers, Postsecondary 1.69 658 29.91 20.20 4 Yes S 151134 HSHW Web Developers 1.68 868 34.50 20.68 3 Yes S 514121 Welders, Cutlers, Solderers, and Brazers 1.21 98 22.24 13.53 3 Yes R tSOC Code and Occupational Title refer to Standard Occupational Classification codes and titles. ttHSHW = High Skill/High Wage. tttData Source: R = Meets regional wage and openings criteria based on state Labor Market Statistics employer survey data. Regional data are shown. S = Meets statewide wage and openings criteria based on state Labor Market Statistics employer survey data. Statewide data are shown. NR = Not releasable. EFI - Enterprise Florida, Inc Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Workforce Statistics and Economic Research (WSER) Traffic Analysis 2726 OAK RIDGE COURT, SUITE 503 FORT MYERS, FL 3356 '�° T RA N S P O RTC I O N OFFICE 239.278.3.278.3090 Tr% 6 FAX 239.278.1906 CONSULTANTS, INC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING SIGNAL SYSTEMS/DESIGN TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR CARMAN DRIVE 15 GMPA & PUDZ PL#20210000623 (GMPA) PL#20210000624 (PUDZ) (MAJOR STUDY REVIEW FEE - $1,500) (METHODOLOGY REVIEW FEE - $500) (PROJECT NO. F2103.09) PREPARED BY: TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. Certificate of Authorization Number: 27003 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, Florida 33901-9356 (239) 278-3090 May 4, 2021 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC CONTENTS INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT & REZONING IV. TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION V. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY VI. CONCLUSION TRANSPORTATION 7ATRCONSULTANTS, INC I. INTRODUCTION TR Transportation Consultants, Inc. has conducted a traffic impact statement for projects seeking Comprehensive Land Use Amendment and rezoning approval. The approximate 15 acre subject site is located at 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Collier County, Florida. This report has been completed in compliance with the guidelines established by the Collier County Transportation Planning Division for developments seeking the aforementioned approvals. The approximate location of the subject site is illustrated on Figure 1. The current future land use designation for the subject site is Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict which allows the development of the site with up to 23 residential dwelling units (1.5 units per acre). The current zoning designation on the subject site is Agriculture (AG) which allows the site to be developed with up to 3 residential dwelling units (1 unit per 5 acres). The proposed Carman Drive 15 GMPA and Rezone request will allow the approximately 15 acre subject site to be developed with up to 212 residential dwelling units or a density of up to 13.8 residential units per acre. The analysis in this report will determine the impacts of the proposed change in land use as well as rezoning to allow the approximate 15 acre subject site to be developed with up to 212 single-family residential units. The transportation related impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Land Use Amendment and proposed rezoning will be evaluated based on the estimated build -out year of the project and the impacts the proposed amendment and rezoning will have on the surrounding roadway infrastructure. Access to the subject site is proposed to be provided to Carman Drive via two connections. The northern connection will be limited to an egress only and the southern connection will be a full access connection. Page 1 OL A Florida=Sports-Park'Rd - _ - .% IN . , w M • • • MAMMON N 0 0 7 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC Methodology meeting notes were exchanged with Collier County Staff via e-mail in order to discuss the proposed Comprehensive Land Use Amendment and rezoning of the subject site. The initial meeting checklist and the latest methodology notes are attached at the end of this document for reference. This report examines the impact of the development on the surrounding roadways. Trip generation and assignments to the various roadways within the study area will be completed and analysis conducted to determine the impacts of the development on the surrounding roadways. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site is currently vacant. The site is bordered by vacant land to the north, Carman Drive to the east, vacant land to the south, and by Florida Power and Light Electrical Substation and Florida Sports Park Road to the west. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is a six -lane divided arterial within the vicinity of the subject site. The Level of Service Standard on Collier Boulevard between Davis Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road is LOS "E", or 3,000 vehicles (Link ID #34.0). The Level of Service Standard on Collier Boulevard between Rattlesnake Hammock Road and US 41 is LOS "E", or 3,200 vehicles (Link ID #35.0). Collier Boulevard has a posted speed limit of 50 mph and is under the jurisdiction of the Collier County Department of Transportation. Rattlesnake Hammock Road is a six -lane divided arterial to the west of Collier Boulevard and a four -lane divided roadway within the public right-of-way to the east. The Level of Service Standard on Collier Boulevard between Santa Barbara Boulevard and Collier Boulevard is LOS "E", or 2,900 vehicles (Link ID #75.0). Rattlesnake Hammock Road has posted speed limit of 45 mph to the west of Collier Boulevard and 40 mph to the east. Rattlesnake Hammock Road is under the jurisdiction of the Collier County Department of Transportation. Page 3 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC III. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT & REZONING The proposed Land Use Amendment and rezoning request would change the future land use and zoning designations on the approximately 15 acre subject site to permit the site to be developed with up to 212 residential dwelling units or a density of up to 13.8 residential units per acre. Table 1 summarizes the land uses that could be constructed under the existing future land use designation and the intensity of uses under the proposed future land use designation. Table 2 summarizes the land uses that could be constructed under the existing zoning category and the intensity of uses under the proposed zoning category. Table 1 Land Uses Carman Drive 15 GMPA & P1JDZ Existing/ Proposed Land Use Category Intensity Urban Residential 23 Single -Family Existing Fringe Subdistrict Dwelling Units i(1.5 DU/Acre) 212 Single -Family Proposed Carman Drive 15 GMPA Dwelling Units (13.8 DU/Acre) Table 2 Land Uses Carman Drive 15 GMPA & PUDZ Existing/ Proposed Zoning District Intensity 3 Single -Family Existing Agriculture (AG) Dwelling Units (1 DU/ 5 Acres) 212 Single -Family Proposed Carman Drive 15 PUDZ Dwelling Units (13.8 DU/Acre) Page 4 7A TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC IV. TRIP GENERATION & DISTRIBUTION The trip generation for the proposed development was determined by referencing the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) report, titled Trip Generation, 10"' Edition. Land Use Code 210 (Single -Family Detached Housing) was utilized for the trip generation purposes of the proposed development. The equations used from the aforementioned land use are contained in the Appendix of this report for reference. Table 3 outlines the anticipated weekday AM and PM peak hour trip generation based on the proposed Land Use Amendment and rezoning request. The daily trip generation is also indicated in this table. Table 3 Trip Generation Based on Proposed Land Use Amendment and Rezoning Carman Drive 15 GMPA & P1JDZ Land Use WeekdayAM Peak Hour WeekdayPM Peak Hour Daily (2-way) In Out I Total In Out T Total Single -Family Detached Housing 39 116 155 132 77 209 2,076 (212 Dwelling Units) The trips the proposed development is anticipated to generate were assigned to the site access drives and the surrounding roadway network. The project traffic distribution was determined in the methodology with staff and is illustrated on Figure 2. Figure 2 also illustrates the assignment of the total project trips to the site access drives and surrounding intersections based upon the project traffic distribution. Page 5 N 8-0 Lo eM i W E S N.T.S. rl- THE LORDS WAY LAKES B41 (27) BLVD. `► Z (46) 14 r N rn 0 0 Z W Q U J m -- J(7) 10 O (13) 19 ^ o (O M N SITE r ■ - (20) 31 '7 (37) 56N N 0 ♦ 34 (23) 41 HAMMOCK RD.K41 (27) (86) 25 ♦30%-*(40) 11 v r CO LEGEND m ♦ 000 WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC ■ 4-(000) WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR SITE TRAFFIC ♦20%-► PERCENT TRIP DISTRIBUTION TRANSPORTATION TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ;FATRCONSULTANTS, INC SITE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT CARMEN DRIVE 15 GMPA & PUDZ Figure 2 7 TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC V. PROJECTED CONCURRENCY In order to determine which roadway segments surrounding the site will be significantly impacted, Table 1A, contained in the Appendix, was created. This table indicates which roadway links will accommodate an amount of project traffic greater than the 2%-2%-3% Significance Test. The trips generated as a result of the proposed Land Use Amendment and rezoning on the subject site was compared with the Capacity for Peak Hour — Peak Direction traffic conditions as defined by the 2020 Collier County Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR). Based on the information contained within Table 1 A, no roadway segments show a significant impact as a result of the development traffic being added to the roadway network. In addition to the significant impact criteria, Table 2A includes the concurrency analysis on the Collier County Roadway network. The current remaining capacity and Level of Service Standard for each roadway segment analyzed was obtained from the 2020 Collier County Annual Inventory Update Report (AUIR). A five-year planning analysis was also conducted. In order to estimate the projected 2025 background traffic volumes, the existing 2020 peak hour peak direction traffic volumes from the 2020 AUIR were adjusted by the appropriate growth rate. These projected volumes were then compared with the 2020 existing plus trip bank volumes from the 2020 AUIR. The more conservative of the two volumes was then utilized as the 2025 background traffic volume. The concurrency analysis was performed by subtracting the project traffic volumes that will result with the proposed development from the 2025 background remaining capacity in order to determine whether or not sufficient capacity will be available after the addition of the net new traffic associated with the proposed development. Based on the information contained within Table 2A, there will be sufficient capacity on the surrounding roadway network to serve the new trips generated as a result of the proposed development. Figure 3 was created to indicate the results of the concurrency analysis on the adjacent roadway network. Page 7 NAPLES LAKES BLVD. J m _W J J 0 U RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD. 1,974 (1,939) [1,951] 1.37% 283 (242) [256] 1.54% 660 (646) [614] 1.44% THE LORDS WAY SITE LEGEND N W E S N.T.S. O z W ry Q U 000 2025 CURRENT REMAINING CAPACITY (000) 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ AM PROJECT TRAFFIC [000] 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY W/ PM PROJECT TRAFFIC 0.0% PROJECT IMPACT PERCENTAGE 7A�TRCONSULTANTS, TRANSPORTATION 2025 REMAINING CAPACITY ON INC SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED LINKS CARMEN DRIVE 15 GMPA & PUDZ Figure 3 7 TRANSPORTATION TRCONSULTANTS, INC Turn lane improvements at the site access drive intersections will be evaluated at the time the project seeks site development plan approval application. VI. CONCLUSION The proposed Land Use Amendment and Rezoning request is to allow the approximate 15 acre subject site to be developed with up to 212 single-family residential dwelling units. The proposed development meets Collier County Consistency and Concurrency requirements. The surrounding roadway network was analyzed based on the 2020 Collier County Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR) and future 2025 buildout traffic conditions. As a result, sufficient capacity is indicated along surrounding roadways in 2025 both with and without the proposed development. K:\2021\03 Mamh\09 Carmen Drive 15 Acres Comp Plan Rezoning\5-4-2021 Report.doc Page 9 APPENDIX METHODOLOGY MEETING NOTES APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Location: via e-mail People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Yury Byl-au, TR Transportation Consultants, Inc., (239) 278-3090 2) Michael Sawyer, Transportation Planning 239 252-2926 Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Y ury_Bykau Organization: TR Transportation Consultants. Inc. Address & Telephone Number: 2726 Oak Ridge Court, Suite 503 Fort Myers, FL 33901 (239) 278-3090 Reviewer's Name & Title: Michael Sawyer, Transportation Collier County Transportation Planning Department Organization & Telephone Number: (239) 252-2613 Applicant: Applicant's Name: Address: Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: Canaan Drive 15 - PL20210000624 (PUDZ) PL20210000623 (GMPA) Location: 8496 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Land Use Type: Single -Family Residential ITE Code #: LUC 210 — Single -Family Detached Housing Proposed number of development units: 212 Dwelling Units Other: N/A Description: Residential Existing: Currently the site is vacant. Requested: GMPA and PUDZ K 12021W]t MarchM Carmen Drive 15 Acres Comp Plan RezoningMelhodologyWefhodology f leefing Notes 5-1-2021 doc Findings of the Preliminary Study: Pro 'ect is anticipated to generate less approximately 209 net new PM peak hour trips. See the attached trip generation table. Study Type: Small Scale TIS ❑ Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS Study Area: Boundaries: Collier Boulevard (Links #34.0 and 35.0) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (Link #75.0) based upon the Collier County- 2%-2%-3% Significant Impact Criteria.. Additional intersections to be analyzed: Horizon Year(s): 2025 Analysis Time Period(s): AM & PM peak hours Future Off -Site Developments: None Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE Trip Generation, 10"' Edition Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: Pass -by trips: None Internal trips (PUD): None Transmit use: n/a Other: n/a Horizon Year Roadway Network hnprovements: None Nlethodolo-,y & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: 2020 AUIR Site -trip generation: ITE Trip Generation 10"' Edition - LUC 210 (Single -Family Detached Housin& Trip distribution method: By Hand - 35% to/from the north on Collier Boulevard. 35°10 to/from the south on Collier Boulevard and 30% to/from the west on Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Traffic assignment method: By Hand Traffic growth rate: From comparison of the 2011 & 2020 AUIR's Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations: Sight distance: Queuing: RI2021103 March109 Carmen Drive 15 Acres Como Plan RezoningVIelhodologylMethodology P Ieeling Notes 5-1-2021 doc Access location & configuration: Two site access connections to Carman Drive. Traffic control: Signal system location & progression needs: On -site parking needs: Data Sources: ITE Trip Generation Report, 101h Edition Base maps: Prior study reports: Access policy and jurisdiction: Review process: Requirements: _ Miscellaneous: SIGNATURES Study Preparer Reviewers Applicant C2021103 MarchO Carmen Drive 15 Acres Comp Plan RezoninglMethodologylMelhodology Meeting Notes 5-1-2021 doc \ 2 2 2 $ k g a u , f o � (� )0 ■ � N G ) 2 § K § * g $ § Lu 2 _ CM ¥ @ @ a # q $ o § o B ( k 0 r m a m ) 2 K ■ K S 2 3 0 ■ F-Lu z o R IL / § § o ( S 2 G 2 LU 2 z § _Uo LLJ � L) § k d IL§ § k K cn jL 2 F-§ 0 o § 0 0 /$ (( w LL k K_ K 0 o o IL k§ 2& K L o U) 8 8 8 7 2 2 � ° m 2 k $ u $ 2 } � z i + ) - k 2 2 LU § � 7 _ % _ % U) § z § cm® ® § § J $ I E 3 3 - £ \ \ j ) In b b z m ) ■ 2 £ k ) § 2 w k k k _ = E ¥ ¥ E LU IL } § I \ k k 2 > ■ 0 0 2 8 2 TRIP GENERATION GMPA/PUDZ CARMAN DRIVE 15 Trip Generation Based on Proposed Land Use Amendment and Rezoning Carman Drive 15 GMPA & PUDZ Land Use Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM P:2L- Daily (2-way) In Out Total In Out Single -Family Detached Housing 39 116 155 132 77 209 2,076 (212 Dwelling Units) TABLES 1A, 2A & 3A m zN o S \a � _Uo _j mCLw zZ «Z U� L� � $ � ■ \ [ k� a J Q .0 § W ■ § § § ) \ � 02 \ » ; m F § § § a ■ aR § F 8 2 A 0 s o LL « , w § z § _ _ G ) ) (2 2 # LL § z A§ G z y $ z g ® M K K / LU ) § § ° § \ w 0 ( ( \ ■ ■ § � ° 0 0 k § 3 m k ) § ( \ 8 � w o \ m 2 2 ) 2 § u z , 9 0 i i § a 2 § z , � 2 ■ � , Ix % % z § § I % ] $ 3 3 ■ 7 f) k k � � _ ■ b b Z 2 k ; ( ) § j j ) E _ = « « E ƒ ƒ f j } 3 k § } e e « a R R 2 j £ N 0 N D Na J � as aa� C N C7 J V Lo T- m W W u n O O D0 V Z Z a 0 V a L) O N co V a a Lo m N W W ZLLJ H W J W v v a w w w a LL a a J Q r } y U 'a F K U a co u4 N 'cl- o rn U W a a U a. a QI N N M cco C o w C7 Z N U n Z_cD Q U M o O5- N a a. C.) (N (D at W N a' Z z U LL r O c F N Q n N IBIScli N U- m J j = 3 W o 0 0 Z ZQ 0 a OO' N Lq Z ZLLI _ � Z_ _F U N o 0 O5- U U 7 O J a ~ W n Ifs N Cl) Q N 0 ,=j p N N Q N � Q V (14 M m [.) W 7 Np a N LL D 0 M N O CD V N F � 0 a N V co N w a L 'p < w 6 a [ v M W Q `1 O O p a z z �ol3j� 0 0O O N OS a M M N H Z W # O O O �I V Lo Lo w CL' Y U O E a m m N 2 Y Y J C m F N m m m W O U CD O O O W (n Z (n v Y O E E m x Q Y CCI m C O In a a`7 m O o m w U W 5 N j O N 5 E - o v 1 C i5 cq 1 Z O n m 3 r m 5 O 5 � 7 � 5 C .N W TABLE M ANNUAL GROWTH RATE CALCULATIONS BASED UPON HISTORICAL AUIR DATA 2011 2020 ANNUAL ACTUAL CURRENT AUIR AUIR YRS OF GROWTH GROWTH ROADWAY SEGMENT ID# VOLUME VOLUME GROWTH RATE RATE Collier Blvd N. of Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 34.0 1,374 2,130 9 4.99% 4.99% S. of Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 35.0 1,413 2,060 9 4.28% 4.28% Rattlesnake Hammock Rd W. of Collier Blvd 75.0 494 740 9 4.59% 4.59% ^ All traffic volumes were obtained from the 2011 & 2020 Annual Update Inventory Reports (AUIR) In instances where the historical data indicates a reduction in traffic or insufficient data was available to calculate a growth rate due to construction, a minimum annual growth rate of 2 0% was assumed. GROWTH RATE CALCULATION Annual Growth Rate (AGR) = AGR (Collier Blvd) = 2020 AUIR ^(1Nrs of Growth) -1 2011 AUIR 2,130 ^(1/9) -1 1,374 AGR (Collier Blvd) = 4.99% AUIR REPORT I--_- - 5, ij 6 4 C5 4 M, F- 3 r 8 8 n f Z Z 7� 7- 7. Z 1 1 -417 .1. Wix 1J I Z. 7. 7, 7. d+ I - + + n, M� � F-D 71 4 9 Z 55 E 7 3 5; '! 9, 4 E: w A C3 > - E:fig �7 '.7�7 J u ;I, 'k > 9 A E 79 - - - I -25 W W C W i 3 3 .7 '2 -R N w C4 1,Y w w W - - - - - - �51 - - - -.nx - - - - < < Z, :51 J z 3 3 Z 31,L75 L2 1 Z-51 13 3 35 1 L -9 E E E L, L, L, Page 11 of 128 r6 trmr� T= L �-7 67 -71 Q R 2� Y 9 4 z: 3E 7 F F 88 T s 'F a E 9 F, Fig 8 R - El . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z I Z. yJZ Z 01=101J 1W •., 7TF 7 . Z. m c o c M. M, Z�rl, Z; 7 < I all 1. , =1 14 7R Z� Z, 31 'R Z -1.2 >• Ld I. LJ a Z. W :4 t t F R B R 9 R a 11 L4 Lq u 1� 14 14 I.E > > > > —.-- I 'R u L) Uu Lj u u Uipi, 4, 4, 4 U i U Page 12 of 128 TRIP GENERATION EQUATIONS Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Setting/Location Number of Studies Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units Directional Distribution General Urban/Suburban 159 264 50% entering, 50% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates 9A4 4.81 - 19.39 Data Plot and Equation Standard Deviation 2 10 2 Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Residential (Land Uses 200-299) Nu Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 173 Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: 219 Directional Distribution: 25% entering, 75% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.74 0.33 - 2.27 027 Data Plot and Eauation we- Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition - Volume 2: Data • Residential (Land Uses 200-299) 3 Single -Family Detached Housing (210) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: On a: Setting/Location: Number of Studies: Avg. Num. of Dwelling Units: Directional Distribution: Dwelling Units Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. General Urban/Suburban 190 242 63% entering, 37% exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates 0.99 0.44 - 2.98 Data Plot and Equation Standard Deviation 031 4 Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition • Volume 2: Data • Residential (Land Uses 200-299). w NIM SYNOPSIS IAIENGINEERING PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Memorandum BONITA SPRINGS Tampa Orlando Sarasota 28100 Bonita Grande Dr., Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 P. (239) 405-7777 f. (239) 405-7899 To: Laura DeJohn, AICP, Collier County Zoning Division Michele Mosca, AICP, Collier County Zoning Division From: Alexis Crespo, Waldrop Engineering, P.A. Date: November 8, 2021 Subject: Carman Drive 15 RPUD (PL20210000624) Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA (PL2021000623) Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. conducted a neighborhood informational meeting (NIM) for the Carman Drive Subdistrict Growth Management Plan Amendment and Carman Drive 15 Planned Unit Development (RPUD) rezone. The meeting was held on Monday, October 25, 2021, at 5:00 p.m. at the Fairway Bible Church, 3855 the Lords Way, Naples, FL. The sign -in sheets are attached as Exhibit "A" and demonstrate approximately 4 attendees came to the meeting, including Collier County Staff. Additionally, one (1) attendee participated via Zoom. A copy of the legal notice, affidavit of publication, a copy of the letter sent to surrounding property owners, and a list of the surrounding property owners are attached as Exhibit "D". Alexis Crespo started the meeting by introducing the project team Waldrop Engineering, the property owner David Torres and Florida Star Development, and Rich Yovanovich with Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. She introduced Collier County staff Laura DeJohn and Michele Mosca. Exhibit boards were provided for the audience depicting Carman Drive Property location and proposed RPUD Master Plan. A handout summarizing the requested changes was distributed as Exhibit "B" and handout identifying the uses that are allowed under the current Agricultural Land Use as Exhibit "C". She reviewed the proposed RPUD development standards inlcuding 45' maximum zoned height and 55' actual height. Following the presentation questions were asked by attendees and responses were provided as outlined below. Public Comment Summary: 1. Could this be up to four stories? RESPONSE: Yes. Could be up to four -stories. 2. Can give more of an explanation on how offsite preserve works. RESPONSE: Off -site mitigation will be provided with land that has more environmental value. This is not simply cutting a check to the County this is negotiated with an environmental agency whether it be the Water Management District, Army Core of Engineers or Department of Environmental Protection. The on -site preserve requirement is 0.25 acres and are committing to 25.95 acre mitigation parcel. This is exponentially more than what would be required on site. 3. Are the buffers 130' from Sapphire Cove to this development? Is that wall to wall? Page 1 of 3 RESPONSE: Let me clarify that. The preserve area tract that exists within Sapphire Cove is 120' wide. Would be about 150' from wall to wall. 4. Steps to protect the existing eagles nest on the south east corner of Sapphire Cove. What about the new eagles nest? RESPONSE: Mr. Torres identified the current location the environmental agencies have of an active eagles nest. For development within 660 feet of an eagles nest you have to go through what is called an eagle take permit which is done through the Fish and Wildlife Service. To get this permit there is a bunch of criteria. The environmental agencies don't automatically put restrictions on the nest, I don't know the code but I believe it has to be used for at least 2 or 3 seasons before it gets monitored. We used a company called Passarella & Associates and they are familiar with what is happening. We are not requesting any variance to skirt around the permit obligations. The county gets involved but not to heavily on listed species this is more a federal issue and something we deal directly with the Fish and Wildlife Service on. For the county we do a Environmental Impact Statement where we discuss what is in the area. 5. Can you provide me a resource to look at the eagles nest regulations? RESPONSE: If you look under Fish and Wildlife Service website its called an eagle take permit. I think it is a section 10 permit if I am not mistaken. 6. How many stories will Watercrest and this development be? Okay with single family or townhouses but I am not okay with 3,4,5 stories. RESPONSE: Watercrest will be 4-stories, and this development will be 4-stories. 7. Is the 212 units will that be the maximum? For me that eliminates single family homes. So 212 is not physically possible? RESPONSE: Yes, 212 is the maximum. You can always do less than the maximum density. It is physically possible just not at the same size lots as Sapphire Cove. 8. Are you looking for townhomes? RESPONSE: We are looking for a number of different scenarios townhomes is one of them. 9. What is the timeframe? What about Carman Drive the road. RESPONSE: Expect to start beginning of 2024. The road has been permitted. Fine with having a commitment in the PUD by the time of Site Development Plan we will have Carman Drive completed. 10. What about the Swamp Buggy do you own that land? RESPONSE: We do not. Page 2of3 11. Emergency access is it coming from Rattlesnake or Lords Way or both? RESPONSE: I think both there is a couple of other roads coming in that area so there will be other interconnections. We under Hacienda Lakes, LLC have to build it from Rattlesnake to the Lord's way it's a commitment we negotiated with the County years ago. There was general discussion about other developments in the area. Contacting the project team and County staff was offered for any further questions about the surrounding developments. There were no further comments and the meeting concluded at approximately 5:50 p.m. Page 3 of 3 W CD Z z O� N W W W O� 75 C) Z Z)O a. �-- 0. Q W 75 0-O � Z WD >O O�O Z � QO 5m Q� UW Z r O N LO N W m O U O W V J V � v Z a G a W W 0 d { a 0 (� V7 d S v a � f W � p r � V L � 4 < S r 002 M Z � i BONITA SPRINGS Tampa Orlando Sarasota IAIENGINEERING 28100 Bonita Grande Dr., Suite 305, Banlla Springs, FL 34135 PLANNING I CML ENGINEERING LANVSCAPE ARCH17ECTVRE p, {239) 405-7777 f, (239) 405-7899 CARMAN DRIVE SUBDISTRICT GMPA CARMAN DRIVE 15 RPUD PL20210000623 & PL20210000624 Neighborhood Information Meeting Monday, October 25, 2021 5:00 p.m. PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET Project Size: 15.4+/- Acres Current Future Land Use: Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict Proposed Future Land Use: Carman Drive Subdistrict Current Zoning: Rural Agricultural (A) Proposed Zoning: Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Approved Density/Intensity/Uses: 23 single-family dwelling units (1.5 du/acre) and agricultural uses Proposed Density/Intensity/Uses: 212 dwelling units (13.8 du/acre), to include single-family, two-family, townhouses and/or multi -family dwelling types Project Requests: 1) (PL20210000623) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a site -specific Future Land Use text and map amendment to change the property from Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to the Carman Drive Subdistrict to allow up to 212 dwelling units, of which 42 units will be affordable housing units for "Moderate Income" persons or households earning between 80% -120% of the Area Median Income (AMI). 2) (PL20210000623) PUD Rezone to the Carman Drive 15 Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) to allow for a maximum of 212 dwelling units, including single- family, two-family, townhouses, and multi -family dwelling types; allow for deviations; and include commitments relating to on -site affordable housing units consistent with the companion GMPA. B TrojedsU24B -100 (Carman Drive 15) Planning&ZoninglDrawing s-Exhlbltsl1248-100-01 MCMCurrent Pis nr02481000102.cWg Z Jll y M 2 0 O y r p 2 m m 0 g856M � y ❑.jm3 y mMDy— �Ormn�mG7pcn yyz XQomz0 Z Q r U T❑ O ❑ m e m o C Z M,O;uommmmm m 0 0 S7 � W Omr umou-'xzz C m o a am�Y -< z mmmm o>n >z TY❑ y o r C Z �m m mLZ10 mu, m0 �❑�m(D �m yCJC Z l C y� p Ohm m Q rmc, Tm7 Z omy Oc O T 4 7 m y v, p Z COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 9B1) — I r� m> m ;u z m r y❑ _ O TO m I m � o rim m i M D> 14 rrl o M z 0 M m� cmn m Z Znm G C T m m mQ - �m m yO �� �m �C7 �IM ❑mm. I ram. 4°m r- I =a I LT�TI mmn °i1 w�mM y I Ty 4 O 4m � nm m- 0: mmTI m �mQ �Q �I mm �� vZ m C 00 z � co m Z . — Gm7 O m LJJ L� A z 4 m CARMAN DRIVE jj m 0 N I„ r. tCA O OR1 z rm (PRNA7E) r p m�v a� =2m L7 �1>0 m a Ra - p D C 's - - PLAN REVISIONS ++ T 0&2d121 REVISED PER COUNTY COMIAEYTS - = CARMAN DRIVE 15 RFUD FN61NEERING RPM MASTER PLAN wwdriitaenirre g EXIMBIT C 2.03.01 Agricultural Districts. A. Rural Agricultural District (A). The purpose and intent of the rural agricultural district (A) is to provide lands for agricultural, pastoral, and rural land uses by accommodating traditional agricultural, agricultural related activities and facilities, support facilities related to agricultural needs, and conservation uses. Uses that are generally considered compatible to agricultural uses that would not endanger or damage the agricultural, environmental, potable water, or wildlife resources of the County, are permissible as conditional uses in the A district. The A district corresponds to and implements the Agricultural/Rural land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, and in some instances, may occur in the designated urban area. The maximum density permissible in the rural agricultural district within the urban mixed use district shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in A district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. The maximum density permissible in the A district within the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP shall be consistent with and not exceed the density permissible or permitted under the agricultural/rural district of the future land use element. 1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the rural agricultural district (A). a. Permitted uses. 1.Single-family dwelling. 2.Agricultural activities, including, but not limited to: Crop raising; horticulture; fruit and nut production; forestry; groves; nurseries; ranching; beekeeping; poultry and egg production; milk production; livestock raising, and aquaculture for native species subject to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits. i. The following permitted uses shall only be allowed on parcels 20 acres in size or greater: a) dairying; b) ranching; c) poultry and egg production; d) milk production; e) livestock raising; and f) animal breeding, raising, training, stabling or kenneling. ii. On parcels less than 20 acres in size, individual property owners are not precluded from the keeping of the following for personal use and not in association with a commercial agricultural activity provided there are no open feed lots: a) Fowl or poultry, not to exceed 25 in total number; and b) Horses and livestock (except for hogs) not to exceed two such animals for each acre. i. Notwithstanding the above, hog(s) may be kept for a 16 week period in preparation for showing and sale at the annual Collier County Fair and/or the Immokalee Livestock show. The following standards shall apply: a) One hog per child enrolled in a 4-H Youth Development Program, Collier County Fair Program or similar program is Page 1 of 7 permitted. In no case shall there be more than 2 hogs per acre. b) Premises shall be fenced and maintained in a clean, healthful, and sanitary condition. c) Premises or roofed structure used for the sheltering, feeding, or confinement of such animals shall be setback a minimum of 30 feet from lot lines and a minimum of 100 feet from any dwelling unit on an adjacent parcel of land. d) Hog(s) shall not be returned to the property once removed for showing and/or sale. 3-Wholesale reptile breeding and raising (non -venomous), subject to the following standards: i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size; ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such reptiles shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any lot line. 4.Wildlife management, plant and wildlife conservancies, wildlife refuges and sanctuaries. 5.Conservation uses. 6.Oil and gas exploration subject to state drilling permits and Collier County site development plan review procedures. 7.Family care facilities, subject to section 5.05.04. 8.Communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09. 9.Essential services, as set forth in section 2.01.03. 10.Schools, public, including "Educational plants." Accessory uses. 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the uses permitted as of right in the A district. 2. Farm labor housing, subject to section 5.05.03. 3. Retail sale of fresh, unprocessed agricultural products, grown primarily on the property and subject to a review of traffic circulation, parking, and safety concerns pursuant to the submission of a site improvement plan as provided for in section 10.02.03. 4. Packinghouse or similar agricultural processing of farm products produced on the property subject to the following restrictions: i. Agricultural packing, processing or similar facilities shall be located on a major or minor arterial street, or shall have access to an arterial street by a public street that does not abut properties zoned RSF-1 thru RSF-6, RMF-6, RMF-12, RMF-16, RT, VR, MH, TTRVC and PUD or are residentially used. ii. A buffer yard of not less than 150 feet in width shall be provided along each boundary of the site which abuts any residentially zoned or used property, and shall contain an Alternative B type buffer as defined within section 4.06.00. Such buffer and buffer yard shall be in lieu of front, side, or rear yards on that portion of the lot which abuts those districts and uses identified in subsection 2.03.01 A.1.b.4.i. above. Page 2 of 7 iii. The facility shall emit no noxious, toxic, or corrosive dust, dirt, fumes, vapors, or gases which can cause damage to human health, to animals or vegetation, or to other forms of property beyond the lot line of the use creating the emission. iv. A site development plan shall be provided in accordance with section 10.02.03. 5. Excavation and related processing and production subject to the following criteria: The activity is clearly incidental to the agricultural development of the property. The affected area is within a surface water management system for agricultural use as permitted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). iii. The amount of excavated material removed from the site cannot exceed 4,000 cubic yards. Amounts in excess of 4,000 cubic yards shall require conditional use approval for earthmining, pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in LDC section 10.08.00 and the Administrative Code. 6. Guesthouses, subject to section S.03.03. 7. Private boathouses and docks on lake, canal or waterway lots, subject to section 5.03.06. B. Use of a mobile home as a temporary residence while a permanent single-family dwelling is being constructed, subject to the following: i. Receipt of a temporary use permit from the Development Services Director, pursuant to section 5.04.04, that allows for use of a mobile home while a permanent single-family dwelling is being built; ii. Assurance that the temporary use permit for the mobile home will expire at the same time of the building permit for the single-family dwelling, or upon the completion of the single-family dwelling, whichever comes first; iii. Proof that prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy for the single- family dwelling, the mobile home is removed from the premises; and iv. The mobile home must be removed at the termination of the permitted period. 9. Use of a mobile home as a residence in conjunction with bona fide agricultural activities subject to the following: The applicant shall submit a completed application to the site development review director, or his designee, for approval of a temporary use permit to utilize a mobile home as a residence in conjunction with a bona fide commercial agricultural activity as described in subsection 2.03.01 A.1.2. Included with this application shall be a conceptual plot plan of the subject property depicting the location of the proposed mobile home; the distance of the proposed mobile home to all property lines and existing or proposed structures; and, the location, acreage breakdown, type and any intended phasing plan for the bona fide agricultural activity. The receipt of any and all local, state, and federal permits required for the agricultural use and/or to place the mobile home on the subject site including, but not limited to, an agricultural clearing permit, building permit(s), ST permits, and the like. iii. The use of the mobile home shall be permitted on a temporary basis only, not to exceed the duration of the bona fide commercial agricultural activity for which the mobile home is an accessory use. The initial temporary use permit Page 3 of 7 may be issued for a maximum of three years, and may, upon submission of a written request accompanied by the applicable fee, be renewed annually thereafter provided that there is continuing operation of the bona fide commercial agricultural activities. iv. The applicant utilizing, for the bona fide commercial agricultural activity, a tract of land a minimum of five acres in size. Any property lying within public road rights -of -way shall not be included in the minimum acreage calculations. V. A mobile home, for which a temporary use permit in conjunction with a bona fide commercial agricultural activity is requested, shall not be located closer than 100 feet from any county highway right-of-way line, 200 feet from any state highway right-of-way, or 500 feet from any federal highway right-of-way line. 10. Recreational facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development and have been designated, reviewed and approved on a site development plan or subdivision master plan for that development. Recreational facilities may include but are not limited to golf course, clubhouse, community center building and tennis facilities, parks, playgrounds and playfields. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the rural agricultural district (A), subject to the standards and procedures established in LDC section 10.08.00 and the Administrative Code. 1. Extraction or earthmining, and related processing and production not incidental to the agricultural development of the property. NOTE: "Extraction related processing and production" is not related to "Oil extraction and related processing" as defined in this Code. 2. Sawmills. 3 .Zoo, aquarium, aviary, botanical garden, or other similar uses. 4. Hunting cabins. 5. Aquaculture for nonnative or exotic species, subject to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits. 6. Wholesale reptile breeding or raising (venomous) subject to the following standards; i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size. ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such reptiles shall be located at a minimum of 100 feet away from any lot line. 7. Churches. 8. Private landing strips for general aviation, subject to any relevant state and federal regulations. 9. Cemeteries. 10. Schools, private. 11. Child care centers and adult day care centers. 12. Collection and transfer sites for resource recovery. 13. Communication towers above specified height, subject to section 5.05.09. 14. Social and fraternal organizations. 15. Veterinary clinic. Page 4 of 7 16. Group care facilities (category I and 11); care units; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to § 429.02 F.S. and 58A-5 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to ch. 651 F.S. and ch. 690-193 F.A.C., all subject to LDC section 5.05.04 when located within the Urban Designated Area on the Future Land Use Map to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 17. Golf courses and/or golf driving ranges. 18. Oil and gas field development and production subject to state field development permits. 19. Sports instructional schools and camps. 20. Sporting and recreational camps. 21. Retail plant nurseries subject to the following conditions: i. Retail sales shall be limited primarily to the sale of plants, decorative products such as mulch or stone, fertilizers, pesticides, and other products and tools accessory to or required for the planting or maintenance of said plants. ii. Additionally, the sale of fresh produce is permissible at retail plant nurseries as an incidental use of the property as a retail plant nursery. iii. The sale of large power equipment such as lawn mowers, tractors, and the like shall not be permitted in association with a retail plant nursery in the rural agricultural district. 22. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants subject to the following conditions: i. Asphaltic or concrete batch making plants may be permitted within the area designated agricultural on the future land use map of the future land use element of the growth management plan. ii. The minimum site area shall not be less than ten acres. iii. Principal access shall be from a street designated collector or higher classification. iv. Raw materials storage, plant location and general operations around the plant shall not be located or conducted within 100 feet of any exterior boundary. V. The height of raw material storage facilities shall not exceed a height of fifty (50) feet. vi. Hours of operation shall be limited to two (2) hours before sunrise to sunset. vii. The minimum setback from the principal road frontage shall be 150 feet for operational facilities and seventy-five (75) feet for supporting administrative offices and associated parking. viii. An earthen berm achieving a vertical height of eight feet or equivalent vegetative screen with eighty (80) percent opacity one (1) year after issuance of certificate of occupancy shall be constructed or created around the entire perimeter of the property. ix. The plant should not be located within the Greenline Area of Concern for the Florida State Park System as established by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): within the Area of Critical State Concern as depicted on the Future Land Use Map GMP; within 1,000 feet of a natural reservation; or within any County, State or federal jurisdictional wetland area. Page 5 of 7 23. Cultural, ecological, or recreational facilities that provide opportunities for educational experience, eco-tourism or agri-tourism and their related modes of transporting participants, viewers or patrons where applicable, subject to all applicable federal, state and local permits. Tour operations, such as, but not limited to airboats, swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of transportation, shall be subject to the following criteria: i. Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the South Florida Water Management District shall be presented to the planning services director prior to site development plan approval. ii. The petitioner shall post the property along the entire property line with no trespassing signs approximately every 300 yards. iii. The petitioner shall utilize only trails identified and approved on the site development plan. Any existing trails shall be utilized before the establishment of new trails. iv. Motor vehicles shall be equipped with engines which include spark arrestors and mufflers designed to reduce noise. V. The maximum size of any vehicle, the number of vehicles, and the passenger capacity of any vehicle shall be determined by the board of zoning appeals during the conditional use process. vi. Motor vehicles shall be permitted to operate during daylight hours which means, one hour after sunrise to one hour before sunset. vii. Molestation of wildlife, including feeding, shall be prohibited. viii. Vehicles shall comply with state and United States Coast Guard regulations, if applicable. ix. The board of zoning appeals shall review such a conditional use for tour operations, annually. If during the review, at an advertised public hearing, it is determined by the board of zoning appeals that the tour operation is detrimental to the environment, and no adequate corrective action has been taken by the petitioner, the board of zoning appeals may rescind the conditional use. 24. Agricultural activities on parcels less than 20 acres in size: i. animal breeding, raising, training, stabling, or kenneling. ii. dairying; iii. livestock raising; iv. milk production; V. poultry and egg production; and vi. ranching. 25. The commercial production, raising or breeding of exotic animals, other than animals typically used for agricultural purposes or production, subject to the following standards: i. Minimum 20 acre parcel size. ii. Any roofed structure used for the shelter and/or feeding of such animals shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any lot line. Page 6 of 7 26. Essential services, as set forth in subsection 2.01.03 G. 27. Model homes and model sales centers, subject to compliance with all other LDC requirements, to include but not limited to section 5.04.04. 28. Ancillary plants. d. Prohibited uses. 1. Owning, maintaining or operating any facility or part thereof for the following purposes is prohibited: a) Fighting or baiting any animal by the owner of such facility or any other person or entity. b) Raising any animal or animals intended to be ultimately used or used for fighting or baiting purposes. c) For purposes of this subsection, the term baiting is defined as set forth in § 828.122(2)(a), F.S., as it may be amended from time to time. Rural Agriculture Development Standards: • Minimum Lot Size: 5 acres • Minimum Lot Width: 165 feet • Maximum Building Height: 35' • Minimum Floor Area: 550 SF • Minimum Front & Rear Yard Setback: 50' • Minimum Side Yard Setback: 30' Page 7 of 7 ��}11PS �F[t11j �Yllt+� PART OF THE. USA TODAY NETWORK Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 WALDROP ENGINEERING PA 28100 BONITA GRANDE DR BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135-6221 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WISCONSIN COUNTY OF BROWN Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared said legal clerk who on oath says that he/she serves as Legal Clerk of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in said newspaper issue(s) dated: Issue(s) dated: 10/10/2021 Subscribed and sworn to before on October 10, 2021: 61 4.11-0 f Notary, ate of W C my of town �136 0 -� My commissi expires Publication Cost: $476.00 Ad No: 0004946029 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by Waldrop Enee ginring, P.A. on behalf of Car- man Drive 15, LLC at the following time and bocation: Monday, October 25. 2021, at 5:00 p.m. Fairwa Sible Church 3855 The Lords Way, Naples, FL 34113 Attending Virtually is also available using Zoom Meeting ID: 82816811801 Please be advised that Carman Drive 15, LLC has filed two con- current applications (PL20210000623 & PL20210000624) with Collier County. These applications are seeking approval of: (1) a Growth Management Pi an Amendment (GMPA) for a site -spe- cific amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Map to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict; and (2) a Planned Unit De- velopment Rezone (PUDZ). The Applications will allow for the development of up 212 dwelling units on the ,.uh"ect property, of which 42 dwelling units will be affordabie " sing units priced for households earning between 91.120% of the Area Median Income. The Carman Drive 15 Property totals 15+/- acres and is generally located northeast of the Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Ham- mock Road intersection in unincorporated Collier County, Flori- da, approximately 'A mile east of Collier Boulevard and immedi- ately west of Carman Drive. r ra �_�r• _ wnw�...v�_ei. rp �� I-e�r�sx��seua:r�aee I A WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Business and property owners and residents are welcome to at- tend the presentation and discuss the pro j'ect with the owners' representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to at- tend this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed to: Waldrop Engineering, P.A. Jo Alexis Crespo 28100 Bonita Grande Dr., Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 (239) 850.8525 OR alexis.crespo*waidropengineering.com oct 10. 2021 4946029 Customer No:1308418 AMY KOKOTT PO #: 10/25 Meeting Notary Public it of Affidavits State of Wisconsin This is not an invoice AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a rezoning, PUD amendment, or conditional use, at least 15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen's description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner's list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this day of fin 1 .tom , ' by -f U\c ) S C� =� who is personally known to me or who has produced. nTL(A� (Sig a of Notary Public) 2SSiCG 1C . (., i o h Printed Name of Notary G:\NIM Procedures/Affidavit Of Compliance - NIM Oct2010.13loc as identification. >aY'�•,,, JESSICA K LINN ra° °A -State of Florida-Motary Public �SV*mission # GIG 170813 �''`'°' �0'''4Rr My CommiApril ssion 2022Pires BONITA SPRINGS Fort Myers Tampa Orlando Sarasota ENGINEERING PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE October 8, 2021 RE: Carman Drive Subdistrict GMPA & Carman Drive 15 PUD Rezone PL20210000623 & PL20210000624 Dear Property Owner: 28100 Bonita Grande Dc, Suite 305, Bonita Springs, FL 34135 p. 1239I 405-7777 I. (239) 405-7899 Please be advised that Carman Drive 15, LLC has filed two concurrent applications (PL20210000623 & PL20210000624) with Collier County. These applications are seeking approval of: (1) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a site -specific amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Map to create the Carman Drive Subdistrict; and (2) a Planned Unit Development Rezone (PUDZ). The Applications will allow for the development of up 212 dwelling units on the subject property, of which 42 dwelling units will be affordable housing units priced for households earning between 81-120% of the Area Median Income. The Carman Drive 15 Property totals 15+/- acres and is generally located northeast of the Collier Boulevard/Rattlesnake Hammock Road intersection in unincorporated Collier County, Florida, approximately '/4 mile east of Collier Boulevard and immediately west of Carman Drive (see attached location map). In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Monday, October 25, 2021, at 5:00 p.m. at Fairway Bible Church, 3855 The Lords Way, Naples, FL 34113. Attending virtually is also available via Zoom. Please visit www.zoom.us, click on "Join A Meeting" in the top right corner, and enter Meeting ID: 828 168 11801 Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 850-8525, or alexis.crespo(a)waldropengineerinq.com. Sincerely, WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. XN70 Alexis V. Crespo, AICP Senior Vice President — Planning Cerramar Dr The Lands Way m C] ////7//rA tt Rattlesnake Hamm k Rd Rattlesnake Hamm k Eo PROJECT LOCATION MAP HACIENDA LAKES OF NAPLES LLC COLLIER RATTLESNAKE LLC CARMAN DRIVE 15 LLC 7742 ALICO RD 801 ANCHOR RODE DR #206 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS FL 33912 NAPLES FL 34103 FORT MYERS FL 33912 AMERISITE LLC 3295 FORT CHARLES DR NAPLES FL 34102 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO 700 UNIVERSE BLVD JUNO BEACH FL 33408 TRACT L DEVELOPMENT LLC 7742 ALICO ROAD FORT MYERS FL 33912 HAMMOCK PARK APARTMENTS 7742 ALICO ROAD FT MYERS FL 33912 COLLIER CNTY JUNIOR DEPUTIES 3200 BAILEY LN STE 199 NAPLES FL 34105 MAROLT, JACQUELINE 3706 SAPPHIRE COVE CIR NAPLES FL 34114 SWAMP BUGGY INC PO BOX 10528 NAPLES FL 34101 MATSON III, DUFFIELD W=& SARAH 4960 SUNSET DR MIAMI FL 33143 LOUGHERY, STEPHEN J 3710 SAPHIRE COVE CIR NAPLES FL 34114 LORDS WAY 30 LLC ROSONE, EVA HACIENDA LAKES CMNTY DEV DIST 7742 ALICO ROAD 3671 SAPPHIRE COVE CIR 707 ORCHID DR STE 100 FT MYERS FL 33192 NAPLES FL 34114 NAPLES FL 34102 FOLIO Name 48586001048 HACIENDA LAKES OF NAPLES LLC 417400002 COLLIER RATTLESNAKE LLC 417000004 CARMAN DRIVE 15 LLC 416800001 AMERISITE LLC 416720000 HAMMOCK PARK APARTMENTS 418400807 SWAMP BUGGY INC 418400603 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO 418400409 COLLIER CNTY JUNIOR DEPUTIES 418400001 MATSON III, DUFFIELD W=& SARAH 417760001 TRACT L DEVELOPMENT LLC 31374001681 MAROLT, JACQUELINE 31374001665 LOUGHERY, STEPHEN J 31374001649 LORDS WAY 30 LLC 31374000828 ROSONE, EVA 31374000129 HACIENDA LAKES CMNTY DEV DIST Address City 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS 801 ANCHOR RODE DR #206 NAPLES 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS 3295 FORT CHARLES DR NAPLES 7742 ALICO ROAD FT MYERS PO BOX 10528 NAPLES 700 UNIVERSE BLVD JUNO BEACH 3200 BAILEY LN STE 199 NAPLES 4960 SUNSET DR MIAMI 7742 ALICO ROAD FORT MYERS 3706 SAPPHIRE COVE CIR NAPLES 3710 SAPHIRE COVE CIR NAPLES 7742 ALICO ROAD FT MYERS 3671 SAPPHIRE COVE CIR NAPLES 707 ORCHID DR STE 100 NAPLES State FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL FL WE 33912 34103 33912 34102 33912 34101 33408 34105 33143 33912 34114 34114 33192 34114 34102 SIGN POST AFFIDAVIT & PHOTOS SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS (CHAPTER 8, COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code, Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner's agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner's agent must replace the sign(s NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED Alexis Crespo WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER PL20210000006jj233&& PL20210000624 : `I 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX Alexis Crespo Bonita Springs, FL 34135 NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY, STATE ZIP STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OFJ X1MXXXXX PINELLAS The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 21nd day of April , 2022 , by Alexis Crespo , personally known to me or who produced FL Driver's License as identification and who did/OjAW takc an oath. Signature of Notary Public 'i*j;".. SANDRA NAY rAIllan Notary Public - xGState67of 08Flor7"itla anmission orng My Cann. Eapin. Mar S, 2023 Banded through National Notary Assn. My Commission Expires: March 5, 2023 (Stamp with serial number) Sandra K. Fabrizio Printed Name of Notary Public Rev. 3/4/2015 ftQqi3uVDjWlA1J� 7. r gyp. SIGN LOCATION r. 5D5b0(aa ga(a WALDROP