Loading...
Agenda 03/28/2023 Item # 9B (Resolution proposing housing initiatives to increase density for housing that is affordable within Urban areas of the Future Land Use Element, Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Golden Gate City, Immokalee Master Plan for the DEO)03/28/2023 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing County-initiated amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, to address housing initiatives to allow affordable housing by right in certain commercial zoning districts with a sunset date; to increase density for affordable housing; to establish a Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict; and to increase density for affordable housing projects along Collier Area Transit routes; specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map; Golden Gate City Sub-Element of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; and adding a policy to the Transportation Element pertaining to affordable housing along transit routes; and furthermore directing transmittal of these amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. [PL20210000660] OBJECTIVE: To review and consider approving the proposed County-initiated amendments to address housing initiatives to increase density for housing that is affordable within Urban areas of the Future Land Use Element, Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Golden Gate City Sub-Element, and the Immokalee Area Master Plan for transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) and other statutorily required review agencies. CONSIDERATIONS: The Urban Land Institute (ULI) conducted an affordable housing study and subsequently prepared a Community Housing Plan. In October 2017, the BCC accepted the Community Housing Plan that included several initiatives intended to increase opportunities for housing that is affordable. These initiatives require regulatory changes. In October 2018, the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to move forward with these initiatives. The County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. (JEI) to prepare the necessary Growth Management Plan amendments (GMPAs). Housing staff (Community and Human Services Division) worked with consultants, stakeholders, the development industry, non-profit agencies, and various other interested parties for a period of about twelve months. JEI submitted the GMPAs to the County in December 2020, and staff has modified them into final form (proper GMP format and terminology, added parameters and some standards, other modifications). Each initiative and related GMPA is identified below. Each GMPA either modifies an existing subdistrict or establishes a new one. For each GMPA, a related Land Development Code Amendment (LDCA) is being drafted with the intention for them to be heard at the Adoption hearings for the GMPA as a companion item. [For additional and detailed background information, please see the attachment titled, County Initiated GMPA Application - Housing Plan GMPA (Johnson Engineering, Inc.).] Two of the five initiatives are implemented by right (no rezone required - thus no public notice process and no public hearings). There are advantages (to the developer) of allowing development of housing that is affordable by right via this GMPA and a pending LDC amendment rather than requiring a rezone: certainty of outcome, less expense, less time (to get through the process). Likewise, the certainty of outcome is an advantage for proponents of housing that is affordable - with possible exception of those that live or own property nearby. A disadvantage to nearby residents and property owners is that there is no opportunity for public input. Owners of nearby properties would have, in performing their due diligence prior to purchase of their property, been able to determine the uses and development standards permitted on the nearby Commercial zoned property(s). By introducing residential uses to these Commercial zoned properties, the hours of activity change since most commercial uses - whether office, retail, personal service, restaurant, etc. - have established hours of operation outside of which there is minimal or no impacts generated from the site (traffic, “people” noise, deliveries, etc.). Residential uses introduce extended hours of activity. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES: The below summary of proposed amendments represents recommendations of County staff to the CCPC. The amendments are intended to create incentives to expand opportunities for housing that is affordable by increasing density within the Urban areas of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Golden Gate City Sub-Element (GGCS-E), and the Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP). These initiatives are stand-alone provisions, and the intent is that they cannot be combined, nor can these provisions be added to other density bonus provisions provided in the GMP. Initiative: Streamlining conversion of commercial zoning to residential zoning when providing of housing that is affordable [Streamline Commercial to Mixed Use Residential Conversions]. 9.B Packet Pg. 93 03/28/2023 Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict This initiative is implemented by two separate GMPAs, the first to modify an existing subdistrict, the second to establish a new subdistrict - discussed further below. The first amends the existing (but never used) Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict in the FLUE, in two ways. The existing subdistrict is a provision to allow mixed use development (mix of commercial and residential) on properties zoned C-1 thru C-3 (Commercial Professional and General Office District, Commercial Convenience District, Commercial Intermediate District) and PUDs (Planned Unit Development) that allow no greater than C-1 thru C-3 uses, by right. First, mostly clean-up changes are proposed with relatively minor effects. These revisions are to modify the title to add the words “by right” (it is designed to be by right but the subdistrict did not explicitly state this), delete reference to the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (there are no qualifying properties there), add a reference to an LDC provision previously created to implement this Subdistrict, increase the affordable housing density bonus from eight to twelve DU/A, dwelling units per acre (to reflect a previous GMP amendment that increased that density bonus provision in the Density Rating System from eight to twelve DU/A). Second, this Subdistrict is modified to add a provision to allow mixed use development on properties zoned C-4 and C-5 (General Commercial District, Heavy Commercial District) and by right. Additional changes to that expanded Subdistrict include increasing density [to 16 DU/A] in some areas, requiring all dwelling units to be housing that is affordable, and capping building height at fifty feet in the C-4 district (whereas C-4 permits 75 feet). Finally, this Subdistrict is added to the GGCS-E for properties zoned C-1 thru C-5 and deemed “consistent by policy.” Staff’s analysis yields this second modification would impact a total of only 6.42 acres yielding a maximum of approximately 103 DUs. (Please see the attached Commercial MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory; Consistent by Policy Maps: FLUE-9, FLUE-10, FLUE-11, FLUE-13; countywide FLUM; GGCS-E FLUM.) This initiative is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE or GGCS-E and is implemented by right (no rezone is required) and the related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict This second GMPA for Initiative 2 is to establish the new Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict in the FLUE and GGCS-E to allow residential-only development with housing that is affordable on properties zoned Commercial (C-1 thru C-5) and deemed “consistent by policy” [at a density of up to 16 DU/A]. This Subdistrict will require all dwelling units to be housing that is affordable, a public facilities comparative analysis will be required to demonstrate the proposed residential project has the same or less impacts than the highest intensity commercial use allowed and building height will be capped at fifty-feet in the C-4 district. This initiative is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE or GGCS-E and is implemented by right (no rezone required) and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Two areas are excluded - properties within the boundaries of the East Naples Community Development Plan (see attached map of ENCDP study area) and within the Downtown Commercial Center Subdistrict (see attached Golden Gate City FLUM) - as these areas have development plans that differ in intent from this subdistrict. Initiative: Increasing density within Activity Centers from 16 units per acre to 25 units per acre when providing for housing that is affordable [Incentivize Mixed Income Residential Housing in Future and Redeveloped Activity Centers]. Mixed Use Activity Center and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts This GMPA will modify the Mixed-Use Activity Center (MUAC) Subdistrict and the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict [eligible density of 16 DU/A] in the FLUE to increase density to 25 DU/A when providing a mixed income residential project (mix of market rate housing and housing that is affordable) in accordance with provisions to be adopted into the LDC. This density increase may result in more mixed-use developments, which is one of the purposes of Activity Centers. However, for the Interchange Activity Centers, which allow some commerce and industry uses that need proximity to the interstate highway system, this creates a competition between GMP objectives: industry vs. mixed use development and housing that is affordable. The MUAC Subdistrict is further modified to allow residential only and mixed use developments within the Urban Residential Fringe to increase the eligible density of 1.5 DU/A [2.5 DU/A with Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Credits] to 25 DU/A; increase the eligible density of 4 DU/A in the Urban Coastal Fringe (except per the 9.B Packet Pg. 94 03/28/2023 Density Rating System (DRS) - Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) of 12 DU/A, and the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay) to 25 DU/A for residential only projects; and, increase the eligible density of 4 DU/A in the Coastal High Hazzard Area (CHHA) to 25 DU/A (except for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Overlay) for mixed use projects - all pursuant to the Mixed-Income Housing Program (pending LDCA). The Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict is further modified to allow residential only and mixed-use development in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to increase the eligible density of 1.5 DU/A [2.5 DU/A with Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Credits] to 25 DU/A pursuant to the Mixed-Income Housing Program (pending LDCA). This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Initiative: Creation of Strategic Opportunity Sites as an identified subdistrict within the GMP to allow for the development of a mixed-use development that provides for residential density up to 25 units per acre which is integrated with non-residential land uses with a high degree of employment opportunities, such as corporate headquarters or business campuses [Create a Strategic Opportunity Sites Designation Process and Allow for Increased Density]. This GMPA will establish the new Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict in the FLUE that provides for mixed use projects that include “qualified target industry business uses” (QTIB) as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida Statutes, and a mix of market rate housing and housing that is affordable up to 25 DU/A. Also, support commercial uses [C-1 thru C-3] are allowed. This Subdistrict will require the following: 1) minimum 10-acre project size; 2) primary access to an arterial road as identified in the Transportation Element; 3) minimum/maximum density of 10/25 DU/A; 4) QTIB uses at a minimum/maximum of 40%/80%; 5) Residential uses at a minimum/maximum of 20%/60%; 6) support commercial at a maximum of 20%; and, 7) rezone in the form of a PUD. This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Initiative: Increasing density opportunities along bus/transit lines through the creation of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) up to a maximum of 25 units per acre [Increase Density Along Transit Corridors]. 9.B Packet Pg. 95 03/28/2023 Transient Oriented Development Subdistrict This GMPA will establish the new Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict in the FLUE, IAMP and GGCS-E that will provide for increased residential density, with or without housing that is affordable, along transit (CAT, Collier Area Transit) corridors for qualifying projects. The intent of this provision is both to increase housing that is affordable and increase CAT ridership thus increase its viability. Also, a new policy is added to the Transportation Element referencing the new Subdistrict. This subdistrict is not applicable to certain portions of the Urban area [Urban Coastal Fringe, Urban Residential Fringe, Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict in the GGCS-E, Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict, and Recreational Tourist Subdistrict of the IAMP] as its purpose is at odds with provisions for those areas. This Subdistrict allows a maximum eligible market rate density of 13 DU/A and a maximum affordable housing density bonus of 12 DU/A; maximum density may not exceed 25 DU/A in this Subdistrict. Additional Subdistrict requirements include multi-family only development that is compact and pedestrian oriented. This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). This Subdistrict is not consistent with, nor is it required to be, the definition of “Transit -oriented development” found in Florida Statutes, Ch. 163.3164” Community Planning Act; definitions,” as it does not provide for mixed use development. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs associated with processing and advertising the proposed GMP amendment has been allocated within the approved budget for the Zoning Division. Therefore, no fiscal impacts to Collier County result from the transmittal of this amendment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of the proposed amendment by the Board for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required review agencies will commence the Department’s thirty (30) day review process and ultimately return the amendments to the CCPC and the Board for Adoption hearings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the Collier County Planning Commission, serving as the statutory Land Planning Agency and acting as the Environmental Advisory Council, forward the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to Transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required review agencies. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC reviewed and discussed the proposed amendments at their May 19, 2022, meeting. There were two (2) registered speakers; one in-person and the other online. The speakers spoke in support of the proposed amendments, noted the cost to develop affordable units, and identified that the number of affordable housing units actually needed in the County exceeded 5,000 units. The CCPC unanimously recommended that the Board approve the amendments for transmittal, with the inclusion of a sunsetting provision for the “by right” Subdistricts. (Vote: 5/0) LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: 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: 9.B Packet Pg. 96 03/28/2023 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 non- conforming 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 FLUE map amendments shall also be based upon the following analysis 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 and requires a majority vote for Board approval because this is a Transmittal hearing. [HFAC] RECOMMENDATION: To approve the proposed County-initiated amendments to address housing initiatives for transmittal to the DEO and other statutorily required agencies, as recommended by the CCPC with a provision for sunsetting of the two “by right” Subdistricts. Prepared by: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Resolution 03-06-23R (PDF) 2. Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (PDF) 3. [Linked] Housing Plan- GMPA LDCA- Johnson Eng Final Product (PDF) 4. [Linked] Countywide Future Land Use Map (PDF) 5. Golden Gate City Future Land Use Map (PDF) 6. Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (PDF) 7. East Naples Community Development Plan Boundary Map (PDF) 8. Coml MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory4-12-22 (PDF) 9. Consistent by Policy Maps (PDF) 10. Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (PDF) 11. legal ad - agenda ID 22375 (PDF) 12. legal ad - agenda ID 23024 (PDF) 9.B Packet Pg. 97 03/28/2023 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 9.B Doc ID: 23024 Item Summary: *** This Item continued from the June 28, 2022, and July 12, 2022, BCC Meetings. *** A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing County-initiated amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, to address housing initiatives to allow affordable housing by right in certain commercial zoning districts with a sunset date; to increase density for affordable housing; to establish a Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict; and to increase density for affordable housing projects along Collier Area Transit routes; specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map; Golden Gate City Sub-Element of Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; the Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; and adding a policy to the Transportation Element pertaining to affordable housing along transit routes; and furthermore directing transmittal of these amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. [PL20210000660] Meeting Date: 03/28/2023 Prepared by: Title: Sr. Operations Analyst – County Manager's Office Name: Geoffrey Willig 08/10/2022 9:04 AM Submitted by: Title: Zoning Director – Zoning Name: Mike Bosi 08/10/2022 9:04 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Completed 02/24/2023 8:23 AM Zoning Geoffrey Willig Additional Reviewer Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Growth Management Department Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Growth Management Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM Growth Management Department Geoffrey Willig Transportation Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM County Attorney's Office Geoffrey Willig Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM County Attorney's Office Geoffrey Willig Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM Office of Management and Budget Geoffrey Willig Additional Reviewer Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM Office of Management and Budget Geoffrey Willig Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Skipped 08/10/2022 9:03 AM County Manager's Office Amy Patterson Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 03/22/2023 3:19 PM Board of County Commissioners Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending 03/28/2023 9:00 AM 9.B Packet Pg. 98 160 PL20210000660 Housing Plan 3/6/23 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions. 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2023- _______ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING COUNTY-INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, TO ADDRESS HOUSING INITIATIVES TO ALLOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY RIGHT IN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS WITH A SUNSET DATE; TO INCREASE DENSITY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING; TO ESTABLISH A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES SUBDISTRICT; AND TO INCREASE DENSITY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS ALONG COLLIER AREA TRANSIT ROUTES; SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB-ELEMENT OF GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP; AND ADDING A POLICY TO THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT PERTAINING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ALONG TRANSIT ROUTES; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THESE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. [PL20210000660] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to 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, Collier County staff has prepared amendments to the following elements of its Growth Management Plan: Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; Golden Gate City Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; Transportation Element and Transportation Map Series; Immokalee Area Master Plan Element and Future Land Use Map; and 9.B.a Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 160 PL20210000660 Housing Plan 3/6/23 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions. 2 of 2 WHEREAS, on May 19, 2022, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, _________________, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County’s proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County’s adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments, prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION adopted after motion, second and majority vote this ____ day of __________________, 2023. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:_____________________________ By:_________________________________ Deputy Clerk Rick LoCastro, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: __________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A – Text and Maps 9.B.a Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA)HFAC 3-6-23R 1 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm EXHIBIT A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** GOAL: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** OBJECTIVE 1: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.5 The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 13. Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 26. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict 27. Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict 28. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION I. URBAN DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Urban Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 13. Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to encourage the development and re-development of commercially zoned properties with a mix of residential units and commercial uses. The residential uses may be located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building. Such mixed-use projects are intended to be developed at a pedestrian-scale, pedestrian oriented, and interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. Within one year of the effective date of regulation establishing this Subdistrict, the LDC shall be amended, as necessary, to implement the provisions of 9.B.a Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 2 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm this Subdistrict. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendment], unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. a. For properties zoned C-1, C-2 and C-3, as identified in the LDC, projects Projects utilizing this Subdistrict shall comply with the following standards and criteria: 1. This Subdistrict is applicable to the C-1 through C-3 zoning districts, and to commercial PUDs and the commercial component of mixed use PUDs where those commercial uses are comparable to those found in the C-1 through C-3 zoning districts. 2. Commercial uses and development standards shall be in accordance with the commercial zoning district on the subject property. 3. Residential density is calculated based upon the gross commercial project acreage. For property in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, density shall be as limited by that Subdistrict. For property not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, but within the Coastal High Hazard Area, density shall be limited to four (4) dwelling units per acre; density in excess of three (3) dwelling units per acre must be comprised of affordable housing in accordance with Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. For property not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and not within the Coastal High Hazard Area, density shall be limited to sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre; density in excess of three (3) dwelling units per acre and up to eleven (11) fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre must be comprised of affordable housing in accordance with Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. 4. In the case of residential uses located within a building attached to a commercial building, or in the case of a freestanding residential building, building square footage and acreage devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy percent (70%) of the gross building square footage and acreage of the project. 5. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. 6. All development shall comply with applicable portions of Section 4.02.38, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. b. For properties zoned C-4 and C-5, as identified in the LDC, projects utilizing this Subdistrict shall comply with the following standards and criteria: 1. This Subdistrict is applicable to the C-4 and C-5 zoning districts on properties found to be “consistent by policy” as identified in FLUE Policies 5.11 through 5.13 and depicted on Maps FLUE-9 through FLUE-15 in the Future Land Use Map series. 2. Commercial uses shall be in accordance with the commercial zoning district on the subject property. Development standards shall be no less restrictive than those for the commercial zoning district on the subject property and development in the C-4 District shall not exceed a zoned height of fifty (50) feet. 3. Residential density is calculated based upon the gross project acreage and shall not exceed sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. 4. In the case of residential uses located within a building attached to a commercial building, or in the case of a freestanding residential building, building square footage and acreage 9.B.a Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 3 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage and acreage of the project. In the case of a mixed-use building, building square footage devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage. 5. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. 6. All development shall comply with applicable portions of Section 4.02.38, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 26. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to encourage the development and re-development of certain commercially zoned properties within portions of the Urban designated area with housing that is affordable. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendment], unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Projects utilizing this Subdistrict shall be allowed up to sixteen (16) residential units per gross acre, subject to the following: a. The properties are within the Urban Mixed Use District but are not within the boundaries of the East Naples Community Development Plan. b. The properties are zoned Commercial. c. The properties have been found consistent by policy, as provided for in Policies 5.11 through 5.13 and depicted on Maps FLUE-9 through FLUE-15 in the Future Land Use Map series. d. Development standards shall be no less restrictive than those for the commercial zoning district on the subject property and development in the C-4 District shall not exceed an zoned height of fifty (50) feet. e. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. f. There is a commitment by Agreement approved by the County Manager and County Attorney, or respective designees, that all units shall be maintained affordable in accordance with Section 2.07.02., and pursuant to Section 4.02.40, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. g. A public facility impacts comparative analysis for vehicle trips, water consumption and wastewater generation between the proposed project and the highest intensity permitted use within the commercial zoning district on the subject property, has been submitted, and approved by staff, that demonstrates the proposed project would have the same or lesser impacts for all three public facilities. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 9.B.a Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 4 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm 27. Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict The Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict provides for mixed income residential use in conjunction with qualified target industry business uses and supporting commercial uses. This mix of an employment center and housing for potential employees within the same development has a mutual benefit and may benefit users of the County’s transportation system by potentially reducing the total vehicle miles traveled. Each Strategic Opportunity Sites project shall be designed as a mixed use development where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the employees, residents, and patrons of the project. Development in this Subdistrict shall comply with the following: a. The project site must be a minimum of ten (10) acres in size. b. The site must be abutting, and have direct principal access to, a road classified as an arterial road in the Transportation Element. Direct principal access is defined as an internal project roadway connection to the arterial road. c. The site must be rezoned to PUD. d. The site shall be a mixed use development including residential uses and qualified target industry business uses and may include support commercial uses. e. Qualified target industry business uses are as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida Statutes. f. Qualified target industry business uses shall comprise a minimum of forty percent (40%) and a maximum of eighty percent (80%) of the total acreage of the site. A minimum of eighty percent (80%) of the total building square feet, exclusive of residential development, shall be devoted to target industry uses. g. Support commercial uses allowed are those uses in the C-1 through C-3 Zoning Districts that provide support services to the target industries such as general office, banks, fitness centers, personal and professional services, medical, financial and convenience sales and services, computer related businesses and services, employee training, technical conferencing, day care center, restaurants and corporate and government offices. h. Support commercial uses shall be allowed to comprise a maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the total acreage of the site. A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the total building square feet, exclusive of residential development, shall be devoted to support commercial uses. i. Residential development shall comprise a minimum of twenty percent (20%) and a maximum of sixty percent (60%) of the total acreage of the site. The residential component may provide for a mix of single family and multi-family units or provide for multi-family units only. j. Residential development shall provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: 1. Base density shall be four (4) units per acre and an Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) agreement, in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00, is required in order to exceed this base density. 2. A minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the total units must be committed as affordable housing for either the Low or Very Low household income levels or mix of those income 9.B.a Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 5 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm levels, as provided in LDC section 2.06.03.A. All affordable housing density bonuses shall be doubled when dedicated to the Low or Very Low income levels. 3. Maximum density shall not exceed twenty-five (25) units per gross acre. 4. Minimum density shall be ten (10) dwelling units per gross acre. 5. Residential density is calculated based on the total site acreage. 6. Residential development is not subject to the Density Rating System. 7. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development must provide for the ratio of market rate housing units to housing units that are affordable, as stated within the AHDB agreement. k. When the site abuts residentially zoned land, residential development shall be located proximate to such abutting residentially zoned land, where feasible. 1. When qualified target industry business uses or support commercial uses on the site are adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to allow, single family dwellings, the setback along the common boundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building height and a 15-foot Type “C” buffer shall be provided. l. Residential uses shall be integrated, and made compatible, with non-residential uses in the development through vertical and/or horizontal mixed-use buildings, landscaping, buffering, open space, architectural embellishments and through pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular (multi- modal) interconnections. 1. The PUD shall include development standards to ensure that residential uses are integrated with the non-residential uses. m. The PUD shall include development standards for non-residential uses that are no less stringent than those in the C-5, Heavy Commercial, Zoning District. Development standards for residential uses shall be those in the residential zoning district closest to the density proposed. n. The PUD shall include a mechanism to ensure the minimum density is developed and the minimum percentage of target industry uses are developed. This might include specifying the timing of developing a minimum square foot of target industry uses in relation to the first Certificate of Occupancy for dwelling units. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 28. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high-density residential development along existing or proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system, known as Transit Oriented Development (TOD), within a portion of the Urban Mixed Use District. TODs are further described in the Land Development Code. As stated in Transportation Element Policy 12.10, TODs may increase transit ridership thereby reducing single occupancy trips and vehicle miles travelled. A TOD project is eligible for, but not entitled to, thirteen (13) dwelling units per gross acre, subject to paragraphs a. through f., below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. A TOD that includes housing that is affordable is eligible for, but not entitled to, up to an additional twelve (12) dwelling units per acre subject to paragraphs a. through h., below. 9.B.a Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 6 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm a. The TOD must be located along an existing or proposed CAT fixed route. b. At least one half (1/2) of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter (¼) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within ¼ mile of those units prior to, or concurrent with, the first residential Certificate of Occupancy. c. The TOD must comply with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. d. The project site is not within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. e. Only residential multi-family dwelling units are allowed. f. The TOD must be compact and pedestrian oriented. g. There is a commitment by Ordinance or Agreement approved by the Board of County Commissioners that all units shall be maintained affordable in accordance with LDC Section 2.07.02. and pursuant to LDC Section 4.02.42. h. The maximum density shall not exceed twenty-five (25) dwelling units per gross acre. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** C. Urban Commercial District (Page 56) This District is intended to accommodate almost all new commercial zoning; a variety of residential uses, including higher densities for properties not located within the Urban Coastal Fringe or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts; and a variety of non-residential uses. 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** For residential-only development, if a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict or Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, up to sixteen (16) residential units per gross acre may be permitted. Development located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center in all Subdistricts may be permitted up to twenty-five (25) units per gross acre in accordance with the standards of the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, the eligible density shall be limited to four dwelling units per acre, except as allowed by the density rating system, and the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, and the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict, except as allowed by the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. For a residential-only project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed throughout the project. Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building ‒ are allowed and encouraged within Mixed Use Activity Centers. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity 9.B.a Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 7 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density is sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. Development located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center in all Subdistricts may be permitted up to twenty-five (25) units per gross acre in accordance with the standards of the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center that is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict but is within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density shall be limited to four (4) dwelling units per acre, except as allowed by the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict, except as allowed by the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable outlined in the LDC. For a project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, and the portion within an Activity Center is developed as mixed use, some of the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed to that portion of the project located outside of the Activity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the density from a mixed use project is distributed outside the Activity Center boundary: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict: (Page 60) *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** For residential-only development, if a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be allowed. Development located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center in all subdistricts may be permitted up to 25 units per gross acre per standards of the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict, except as allowed by the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. For a residential-only project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed throughout the project. Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building - are allowed and encouraged within Interchange Activity Centers. Such mixed-use projects are intended to be developed at a human- scale, pedestrian-oriented, and interconnected with adjacent projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with adjacent properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, the eligible density is sixteen dwelling units per acre. Development located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center in all subdistricts may be permitted up to twenty- 9.B.a Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 8 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm five (25) units per gross acre per standards of the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict, except as allowed by the Mixed-Income Housing Program for housing that is affordable as outlined in the LDC. For a project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, and the portion within an Activity Center is developed as mixed use, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project shall not be distributed outside of the Activity Center. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 8. Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict: (p. 70) The purpose of this Subdistrict is to encourage the development and re-development of commercially zoned properties with a mix of residential and commercial uses. The residential uses may be located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building. Such mixed-use projects are intended to be development at a human-scale, pedestrian- oriented, and interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. This Subdistrict is allowed in the Urban Commercial District subject to the standards and criteria set forth under the Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP Add this text-based Subdistrict (Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict) in legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Add this text-based Subdistrict (Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Add this text-based Subdistrict (Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Add this text-based Subdistrict (Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Delete this text-based Subdistrict (Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Commercial District. 9.B.a Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm 9.B.a Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 10 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm EXHIBIT A GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB-ELEMENT A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL 1: TO GUIDE LAND USE AND PUBLIC FACILITY DECISION MAKING AND TO BALANCE THE NEED TO PROVIDE BASIC SERVICES WITH NATURAL RESOURCE CONCERNS THROUGH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH ENSURE THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, AND QUALITY OF LIFE OF THE LOCAL RESIDENTS. OBJECTIVE 1.1: Develop new or revised uses of land consistent with designations outlined on the Golden Gate City Future Land Use Map and provisions found in the Land Use Designation Description Section of this Element. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.1.4: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN ‒ MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. High Density Residential Subdistrict 3. Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict 4. Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict 5. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict 6. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 1.1.5: No development orders shall be issued inconsistent with the Golden Gate City Sub-Element with the exception of those unimproved properties granted a positive determination through the Zoning Re-evaluation Program and identified on the Future Land Use Map Series as properties Consistent by Policy and those development orders issued pursuant to conditional uses and rezones approved based on the County-Wide Future Land Use Element (adopted January 10, 1989, Ordinance 89-05) which was in effect at the time of approval. Any subsequent development orders shall also be reviewed for consistency with the Growth Management Plan based on the County-Wide Future Land Use Element. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 9.B.a Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 11 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm A. LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 1. URBAN DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** A. Urban – Mixed Use District *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** a. Urban Residential Subdistrict All land within the urban mixed-use designation is zoned and platted. However, any parcel to be rezoned residential is subject to and must be consistent with the Density Rating System. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 4. Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain commercially zoned properties with a mix of affordable residential units and commercial uses. The residential uses may be located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building. Such mixed-use projects are intended to be developed at a pedestrian-scale, pedestrian oriented, and interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendment], unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Projects utilizing this Subdistrict shall comply with the following standards and criteria: a. This Subdistrict is applicable to the C-1 through C-5 zoning districts on properties found to be “consistent by policy” as identified in FLUE Policies 5.12 and 5.13 and depicted on Map FLUE-10 in the Future Land Use Map series. b. Commercial uses shall be in accordance with the commercial zoning district on the subject property. Development standards shall be no less restrictive than those for the commercial zoning district on the subject property and development in the C-4 District shall not exceed a zoned height of fifty (50) feet. c. Residential density is calculated based upon the gross project acreage and shall not exceed sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. All residential units must be housing that is affordable. d. In the case of residential uses located within a building attached to a commercial building, or in the case of a freestanding residential building, building square footage and acreage devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage and acreage of the project. In the case of a mixed-use building, building square footage devoted to residential uses shall not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the gross building square footage. e. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. f. All development shall comply with applicable portions of Section 4.02.38, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. 9.B.a Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 12 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm *** *** *** *** ***text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 5. Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to encourage the provision of housing that is affordable on certain properties zoned commercial within portions of the Urban designated area.This provision will sunset 5-years from [the adoption date of this Growth Management Plan amendment], unless extended by the Board of County Commissioners. Projects utilizing this Subdistrict shall be allowed up to sixteen (16) residential units per gross acre, subject to the following: a. The properties are within the Urban Mixed Use District but are not within the boundaries of the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. b. The properties are zoned Commercial. c. The properties have been found consistent by policy, as referenced in Policy 1.1.5 and as provided for in Future Land Use Element Policies 5.12 and 5.13. d.Development standards shall be no less restrictive than those for the commercial zoning district on the subject property and development in the C-4 District shall not exceed an zoned height of fifty (50) feet. e.All residential units must be housing that is affordable. f.There is a commitment by Agreement approved by the County Manager and County Attorney, or respective designees, that all units shall be maintained affordable in accordance with Section 2.07.02., and pursuant to Section 4.02.40, of the Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. g.A public facility impacts comparative analysis for vehicle trips, water consumption and wastewater generation between the proposed project and the highest intensity permitted use within the commercial zoning district on the subject property, has been submitted, and approved by staff, that demonstrates the proposed project would have the same or lesser impacts for all three public facilities. *** *** *** *** ***text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 6 Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high-density residential development along existing or proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system, known as Transit Oriented Development (TOD), within the Urban Mixed Use District. TODs are further described in the Land Development Code. As stated in Transportation Element Policy 12.10, TODs may increase transit ridership thus reduce single occupancy trips and vehicle miles travelled. A TOD project is eligible for, but not entitled to, thirteen (13) dwelling units per gross acre, subject to paragraphs a. through f. below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. A TOD that includes housing that is affordable is eligible for, but not entitled to, up to an additional twelve (12) dwelling units per acre subject to paragraphs a. through h. below. a. The TOD must be located along an existing or proposed CAT fixed route. b. At least one half (1/2) of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter (¼) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said 9.B.a Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 13 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm facility within ¼ mile of those units prior to, or concurrent with, the first residential Certificate of Occupancy. c. The TOD must comply with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. d. The project site is not within the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. e. Only residential multi-family dwelling units are allowed. f. The TOD must be compact and pedestrian oriented. g. There is a commitment by Ordinance or Agreement approved by the Board of County Commissioners that all units shall be maintained affordable in accordance with LDC Section 2.07.02. and pursuant to LDC Section 4.02.42. h. The maximum density shall not exceed twenty-five (25) dwelling units per gross acre. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP Add this text-based Subdistrict (Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Add this text-based Subdistrict (Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban Mixed Use District. Add this text-based Subdistrict (Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban - Mixed Use District. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 9.B.a Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 14 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm 9.B.a Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 15 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm EXHIBIT A IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** GOAL 1: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** OBJECTIVE 5: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 5.1.1: Future Land Use Designation *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** A. URBAN – MIXED USE DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 6. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** B. URBAN – MIXED USE DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** 6. Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict The purpose of this subdistrict is to promote high-density residential development along existing or proposed transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT) system, known as Transit Oriented Development (TOD), within a portion of the Urban Mixed Use District. TODs are further described in the Land Development Code. As stated in Transportation Element Policy 12.10, TODs may increase transit ridership thereby reducing single occupancy trips and vehicle miles travelled. A TOD project is eligible for, but not entitled to, thirteen (13) dwelling units per gross acre, subject to paragraphs a. through f. below. The Density Rating System is not applicable to TODs. A TOD that includes housing that is affordable is eligible for, but not entitled to, up to an additional twelve (12) dwelling units per acre subject to paragraphs a. through h. below. a. The TOD must be located along an existing or proposed CAT fixed route. b. At least one half (1/2) of the proposed dwelling units must be located within one quarter (¼) mile of an existing CAT stop, shelter or station or the TOD shall commit to providing said facility within ¼ mile of those units prior to, or concurrent with, the first residential Certificate of Occupancy. c. The TOD must comply with the transit oriented development design standards contained in Chapter 4 of the LDC. 9.B.a Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 16 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm d. The project site is not within the Commercial – Mixed Use Subdistrict (C-MU) or Recreational/Tourist Subdistrict (RT). e. Only residential multi-family dwelling units are allowed. f. The TOD must be compact and pedestrian oriented. g. There is a commitment by Ordinance or Agreement approved by the Board of County Commissioners that all units shall be maintained affordable in accordance with LDC Section 2.07.02. and pursuant to LDC Section 4.02.42. h. The maximum density shall not exceed twenty-five (25) dwelling units per gross acre. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP Add this text-based Subdistrict (Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict) in the legend under the Urban - Mixed Use District. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 9.B.a Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 17 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm 9.B.a Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 18 of 18 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. 03/06/23 dw/mrm EXHIBIT A TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OBJECTIVE 12: Encourage the efficient use of transit services now and in the future. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** *** Policy 12.10: The County, through the Future Land Use Element, Golden Gate Area Master Plan’s Golden Gate City Sub-Element and the Immokalee Area Master Plan, provides for higher density residential projects along the Collier Area Transit (CAT) routes, known as Transit Oriented Development (TOD), within a portion of the Urban Mixed Use District. TODs, which may include housing that is affordable, proximate to employment centers and/or along transit routes that serve employment centers, may increase transit ridership thereby reducing single occupancy trips and vehicle miles travelled. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK] 9.B.a Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Resolution 03-06-23R (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 1 of 10 STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: May 5, 2022 RE: PETITION PL20210000660, COLLIER HOUSING PLAN AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVES GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA) [TRANSMITAL HEARING] ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT/GOLDEN GATE CITY SUB-ELEMENT, IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT APPLICANT/OWNER: Collier County Real Property Management Division, 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101 Naples, FL 34112 CONSULTANT: Laura DeJohn, AICP Johnson Engineering Inc. 2122 Johnson Street Fort Myers, FL 33901 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: This county-initiated amendment petition is not applicable to a single location. REQUESTED ACTION: This GMPA petition consists of multiple amendments. Three existing subdistricts in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) are amended (Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Centers, Commercial Mixed Use), three new subdistricts are established in the FLUE and on the countywide FLUM-Future Land Use Map (Conversion of Commercial by Right, Strategic Opportunity Sites, Transit Oriented Development). Also, three subdistricts are added to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan’s (GGAMP) Golden Gate City Sub-Element (GGCS-E) and FLUM (Commercial Mixed Use by Right, Conversion of Commercial by Right, Transit Oriented Development) and one subdistrict is added to the Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP) and FLUM (Transit Oriented Development). Also, related policy additions are included to list the names of the new subdistricts and the one subdistrict with a modified name. More explanation of the proposed amendments is provided later in this Report. The proposed text and map amendments are depicted on Resolution Exhibit A’s. 9.B.b Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 2 of 10 PURPOSE: The primary propose of this GMPA petition is to promote the development of housing that is affordable - by providing additional opportunities and incentives. BACKGROUND, DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND ANALYSIS: The Urban Land Institute (ULI) conducted an affordable housing study and subsequently prepared a Community Housing Plan. In October 2017, the BCC accepted the Community Housing Plan that included several initiatives intended to increase opportunities for housing that is affordable. These initiatives require regulatory changes. In October 2018, the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to move forward with these initiatives. The County contracted with Johnson Engineering, Inc. (JEI) to prepare the necessary GMPAs. Housing staff (Community and Human Services Division) worked with consultants, stakeholders, the development industry, non- profit agencies, and various other interested parties for a period of about twelve months. JEI submitted the GMPAs to the County in December 2020, and staff has modified them into final form (proper GMP format and terminology, added parameters and some standards, other modifications). Each initiative and related GMPA is identified below. Each GMPA either modifies an existing subdistrict or establishes a new one. For each GMPA, a related Land Development Code Amendment (LDCA) is being drafted with the intention for them to be heard at the Adoption hearings for the GMPA as a companion item. [For additional and detailed background information, please see the first attachment to this Staff Report: County Initiated GMPA Application – Housing Plan GMPA (Johnson Engineering, Inc.).] The ULI Study/Community Housing Plan included data that broadly supports the initiatives (GMPAs). Additionally, as staff has drafted the specific provisions of the GMPAs with some details, staff is in process of gathering additional, more detailed data (inventories of applicable sites); staff will present this data and/or a summary of it, at the CCPC hearing. Two of the subdistricts are implemented by right (no rezone required - thus no public notice process, no public hearings, no opportunity for public input). There are three advantages (to the developer) of allowing development of housing that is affordable by right rather than requiring a rezone: certainty of outcome, less expense, less time (to get through the process). Likewise, the certainty of outcome is an advantage for proponents of housing that is affordable – with possible exception of those that live or own property nearby. There is one disadvantage to nearby residents and property owners: no opportunity for public input (to attempt to sway hearing bodies to support the project, deny the project, or modify the project – e.g. limit hours of operation, prohibit certain uses, increase development standards). Owners of nearby properties would have, in performing their due diligence prior to purchase of their property, been able to determine the uses and development standards permitted on the nearby Commercial zoned property(s). By introducing residential uses to these Commercial zoned properties, the hours of activity change since most commercial uses – whether office, retail, personal service, restaurant, etc. – have established hours of operation outside of which there is minimal or no impacts generated from the site (traffic, “people” noise, deliveries, etc.). Residential uses introduce extended hours of activity. Initiative 2: Streamlining conversion of commercial zoning to residential zoning when providing for housing that is affordable [Streamline Commercial to Mixed Use Residential Conversions]. 9.B.b Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 3 of 10 COMMERCIAL MIXED USE BY RIGHT SUBDISTRICT, and CONVERSION OF COMMERCIAL BY RIGHT SUBDISTRICT This initiative is implemented by two separate GMPAs, the first to modify an existing subdistrict, the second to establish a new subdistrict – discussed further below. The first amends the existing (but never used) Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict in the FLUE, in two ways. The existing subdistrict is a provision to allow mixed use development (mix of commercial and residential) on properties zoned C-1 thru C-3 (Commercial Professional and General Office District, Commercial Convenience District, Commercial Intermediate District) and PUDs (Planned Unit Development) that allow no greater than C-1 thru C-3 uses, by right. First, mostly clean-up changes are proposed with relatively minor effects. These revisions are to modify the title to add the words “by right” (it is designed to be by right but the subdistrict did not explicitly state this), delete reference to the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (there are no qualifying properties there), add reference to an LDC provision previously created to implement this Subdistrict, increase the affordable housing density bonus from eight to twelve DU/A, dwelling units per acre (to reflect a previous GMP amendment that increased that density bonus provision in the Density Rating System from eight to twelve DU/A). Second, this Subdistrict is modified to add a provision to allow mixed use development on properties zoned C-4 and C-5 (General Commercial District, Heavy Commercial District) and by right. Additional changes to that expanded Subdistrict include increasing density in some areas, requiring all dwelling units to be housing that is affordable, and capping building height at fifty feet in the C-4 district (whereas C-4 permits 75 feet). Finally, this Subdistrict is added to the GGCS-E for properties zoned C-1 thru C-5 and deemed “consistent by policy.” Staff’s analysis yields this second modification would impact a total of only 6.42 acres yielding a maximum of approximately 103 DUs. (Please see the attached Commercial MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory; Consistent by Policy Maps: FLUE-9, FLUE-10, FLUE-11, FLUE-13; countywide FLUM; GGCS-E FLUM.) This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE or GGCS-E and is implemented by right (no rezone is required) and the related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Please see the below tables identifying the changes proposed. Table: Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict Changes Summary – A. Modify for C-1 thru C-3 Provision Existing Proposed Subdistrict Title Commercial Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use by Right Applicable Subdistricts URF, UCF, UR UCF, UR LDC Reference Establish implementing LDC provision within 1 year Section 4.02.38 Affordable Housing Density Bonus 8 DU/A (from 3-11 DU/A) 12 DU/A (from 3-15 DU/A) PUD = Planned Unit Development TDR = Transfer of Development Rights URF = Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict UCF = Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict UR = Urban Residential Subdistrict DU/A = Dwelling Units per Acre Table: Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict Changes Summary – B. Expand for C-4 and C-5 Eligible Zoning C-4 and C-5 deemed “Consistent by Policy” Development Standards Per commercial zoning district on the parcel except C-4 capped at 50 feet height Maximum Density & Affordability 16 DU/A, all DUs must be Housing that is Affordable (UCF, UR) Maximum Portion of Project as Residential 75% URF = Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict UCF = Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict UR = Urban Residential Subdistrict DU/A = Dwelling Units per Acre 9.B.b Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 4 of 10 The second GMPA for Initiative 2 is to establish the new Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict in the FLUE and GGCS-E to allow residential-only development with housing that is affordable on properties zoned Commercial (C-1 thru C-5) and deemed “consistent by policy.” This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE or GGCS-E and is implemented by right (no rezone required) and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Two areas are excluded - properties within the boundaries of the East Naples Community Development Plan (see attached map of ENCDP study area) and within the Downtown Commercial Center Subdistrict (see attached Golden Gate City FLUM) – as the intent of this subdistrict is at odds with provisions for these areas. Please see the below table that provides a summary of the major components of this proposed Subdistrict. Table: Conversion of Commercial by Right Subdistrict Summary Eligible Zoning C-1 thru C-5 deemed “consistent by policy” Development Standards Per commercial zoning district on the parcel except C-4 capped at 50 feet height Affordability All DUs must be Housing that is Affordable – commitment by Agreement required Maximum Density 16 DU/A (URF, UCF, UR) Public Facility Impacts Analysis Comparative analysis required to demonstrate proposed residential project has same or less impacts than highest intensity commercial use allowed (vehicle trips, water & wastewater) Excluded Areas Within boundaries of East Naples Community Development Plan (generally, along US 41 East corridor and north to approximately Davis Blvd., and 1 mile east of Collier Blvd. west to the CRA boundary), and Downtown Commercial Center Subdistrict in Golden Gate City Sub-Element (most of the Golden Gate Parkway corridor except for the Mixed Use Activity Center) CRA = Community Redevelopment Area (Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay on countywide FLUM) Initiative 3: Increasing density within Activity Centers from 16 units per acre to 25 units per acre when providing for housing that is affordable [Incentivize Mixed Income Residential Housing in Future and Redeveloped Activity Centers]. MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER and INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICTS This GMPA will modify the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict and the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict in the FLUE to allow density up to 25 DU/A when providing a mixed income residential project (mix of market rate housing and housing that is affordable) in accordance with provisions to be adopted into the LDC. This density may increase may result in more mixed use developments which is one of the purposes of Activity Centers. However, for the Interchange Activity Centers, which allow some commerce and industry uses that need proximity to the interstate highway system, this creates a competition between GMP objectives: industry vs. mixed use development and housing that is affordable. This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Please see the table on following page identifying the specific density changes proposed. 9.B.b Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 5 of 10 Table: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts Changes Summary EXISTING PROPOSED MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only Residential Only Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Not in URF or UCF Subdistricts 16 Not in UCF or URF 16//25 per Mixed-Income Housing Program URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per Mixed-Income HP UCF 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) and B/GTRO) UCF 4 except per DRS (AHDB of 12 du/a) and B/GTRO)//25 per Mixed-Income Housing Program MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict MIXED USE Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Not in CHHA or URF 16 Not in CHHA or URF 16//25 per Mixed-Income Housing Program CHHA 4 except B/GTRO CHHA 4 except B/GTRO//25 per Mixed-Income HP URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per Mixed-Income HP INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict INTERCHANGE Activity Center Subdistrict Residential Only AND Mixed Use Residential Only AND Mixed Use Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Location Eligible Density (DU/A) Not in URF 16 Not in URF 16//25 per Mixed-Income Housing Program URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs URF 1.5/2.5 with TDRs//25 per Mixed-Income HP CHHA = Coastal High Hazard Area TDR = Transfer of Development Rights HP = Housing Program DRS = Density Rating System AHDB = Affordable Housing Density Bonus B/GTRO = Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay 9.B.b Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 6 of 10 Initiative 4: Creation of Strategic Opportunity Sites as an identified subdistrict within the GMP to allow for the development of a mixed use development that provides for residential density up to 25 units per acre which is integrated with non-residential land uses with a high degree of employment opportunities, such as corporate headquarters or business campuses [Create a Strategic Opportunity Sites Designation Process and Allow for Increased Density]. STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES SUBDISTRICT This GMPA will establish the new Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict in the FLUE that provides for mixed use projects that include “qualified target industry business uses” as defined in Chapter 288.106, Florida Statutes, and a mix of market rate housing and housing that is affordable up to 25 DU/A. Also, support commercial uses are allowed. This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System in the FLUE and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Please see the below table that provides a summary of the major components of this proposed Subdistrict. Table: Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict Summary Minimum Project Size 10 acres Access Requirement Arterial Road Required Zoning PUD Required Uses Qualified Target Industry Businesses (QTIB) and Housing that is Affordable Optional Uses Support commercial uses (C-1 thru C-3) and market rate housing Minimum/Maximum Density 10/25 DU/A – based on total site acreage Density Calculations Base density: 4 DU/A. Additional density (up to 25): requires Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement. Affordability requirement: min. 20% of DUs at Low and/or Very Low income levels. Density bonus is doubled when dedicated for Low or Very Low income levels. Mixed Use Requirements & Limitations QTIB: min. 40%/max. 80% Residential: min. 20%/max. 60% Support commercial: max. of 20% Other provisions Compatibility, integration of uses, ensure percentage thresholds are met min. = minimum max. = maximum 9.B.b Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 7 of 10 Initiative 5: Increasing density opportunities along bus/transit lines through the creation of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) up to a maximum of 25 units per acre [Increase Density Along Transit Corridors]. TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SUBDISTRICT This GMPA will establish the new Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict in the FLUE, IAMP and GGCS-E that will provide for increased residential density, with or without housing that is affordable, along transit (CAT, Collier Area Transit) corridors for qualifying projects. The intent of this provision is both to increase housing that is affordable and increase CAT ridership thus increase its viability. Also, a new policy is added to the Transportation Element referencing the new Subdistrict. This subdistrict is not applicable to certain portions of the Urban area as its purpose is at odds with provisions for those areas. (Please see the below table for those subdistrict names and the attached FLUMs to see the location of those areas.) This GMPA is not subject to the Density Rating System and is implemented by rezone and related LDC provision (pending LDCA). Please see the below table that provides a summary of the major components of this proposed Subdistrict. This Subdistrict is not consistent with, nor is it required to be, the definition of “Transit-oriented development” found in Florida Statutes, Ch. 163.3164 ”Community Planning Act; definitions,” as it does not provide for mixed use development. Table: Transit Oriented Development Subdistrict Summary Locational Requirements Locational Exclusions UCF & URF in FLUE; Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict in GGCS-E; Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict & Recreational Tourist Subdistrict in IAMP Eligible Market Rate Density 13 DU/A max. Housing that is Affordable Density Bonus 12 DU/A max. Maximum Density 25 DU/A DU Type Multi-Family only Design Standards Per those in proposed LDCA; compact and pedestrian oriented Assuming this GMP amendment petition is approved for transmittal to the statutorily required review agencies, it will return to the CCPC and BCC for Adoption hearings. It is staff’s intent to accompany the GMP amendments at time of adoption hearings with the implementing LDC Amendments. Environmental Impacts: These are not site-specific amendments so impacts cannot be specifically determined. However, natural resource protection provisions in the LDC and GMP remain in effect. Historical and Archeological Impacts: These are not site-specific amendments so impacts cannot be specifically determined. However, historical and archeological protection provisions in the LDC and GMP remain in effect. Public Facilities Impacts, including Transportation: As these are not site-specific amendments, eligible residential densities vary, and the extent to which the development community will utilize these provisions is unknown, it is difficult to determine the impacts upon public infrastructure. However, three of the amendments require a rezone which includes infrastructure impacts analysis and consideration via the public hearing process. One of the two “by right” provisions includes an infrastructure impacts comparative 9.B.b Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 8 of 10 analysis to demonstrate no increase in impacts (for roads, water, wastewater). The other “by right” provision could impact less than a total ten acres, based upon staff analysis. 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. 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. 9.B.b Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 9 of 10 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. 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). FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: x These are not site-specific amendments, eligible residential densities vary, and the extent to which the development community will utilize these provisions is unknown, thus it is difficult to determine the impacts upon public infrastructure. However, three of the amendments require a rezone which includes infrastructure impacts analysis and consideration via the public hearing process. One of the two “by right” provisions includes an infrastructure impacts comparative analysis to demonstrate no increase in impacts (for roads, water, wastewater). The other “by right” provision could impact less than ten acres, based upon staff analysis. x These are not site-specific amendments, so it is difficult to determine the impacts of these amendments upon environmental resources and cultural resources resulting from these amendments. However, natural resource protection and historical and archeological protection provisions in the LDC remain in effect. x The primary purpose of these amendments is to provide additional opportunities and incentives for [the private sector to provide] much needed housing that is affordable, as identified in the Collier Housing Plan and as directed by the Board of County Commissioners. Additionally, one of the amendments (TOD) may increase the viability of the CAT bus system; one may also result in the development of target industry uses (SOS); and some may also result in more mixed use developments (SOS, Activity Centers, CMUS by Right). 9.B.b Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) Page 10 of 10 x Regarding the Commercial Mixed Use by Right Subdistrict (C-4 and C-5 zoning) and Conversion of Conversion Zoning by Right Subdistrict, there is some concern about the lack of opportunity for public involvement as neither provision requires a rezone thus no public hearing process. x Regarding the increased density in the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, there is some concern that the amendment creates a competition between different GMP objectives: some commerce and industry uses that need proximity to the interstate highway system vs. mixed use development and housing that is affordable. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: As this is not considered a site-specific GMP amendment, a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is not required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The County Attorney’s office reviewed the Staff report on April 13, 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 PL20210000660 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required review agencies. NOTE: After the County Attorney’s Office approval of the Resolution with Exhibit A’s and the legal advertisement being approved for this petition, it was discovered that text additions are needed for clarification in the FLUE, IAMP and GGCS-E. First, to clarify that density that is achieved by right cannot be combined with density achieved by rezone (such a provision already exists in the IAMP). Second, to clarify that these Subdistricts cannot be used in combination, e.g. cannot use TOD and SOS. Attachments: A) Resolution with Exhibit A’s B) Housing Plan- GMPA LDCA- Johnson Eng Final Product 021621- 1351 C) Countywide Future Land Use Map D) Golden Gate City Future Land Use Map E) Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map F) East Naples Community Development Plan boundary map G) Commercial MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory H) Consistent by Policy Maps: FLUE-9, FLUE-10, FLUE-11, FLUE-12, FLUE-13 I) Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (1-14, 16-18, 20) Prepared by: David Weeks, AICP, Senior Project Manager, Nova Engineering & Environmental LLC, Collier County Growth Management Department contract employee 9.B.b Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Transmittal CCPC Staff Report HsgPlan5.6.22.FNL (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) INTERSTATE 75COLLIER BLVDDowntown Center Commercial Subdistrict Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict GOLDEN GATE PKY SANTA BARBARA BLVDGREEN BLVD GOLDEN GATE CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAP AdditionAddition Addition Legend Category Golden Gate Urban Commercial Infill Subdistrict Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict Urban Residential Subdistrict Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Addition ¯ THIS MAP CAN NOT BE INTERPRETED WITHOUT THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN. NOTE: 0 1,000 2,000 3,000500 Feet PREPARED BY: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FILE: Proposed Golden Gate City FLU.mxd DATE: 10/2019 ADOPTED - SEPTEMBER 24, 2019 (Ord. No. 2019-24) GOLDEN GATE CITY FUTURE LAND USE MAPT49S R 26 E 9.B.e Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Golden Gate City Future Land Use Map (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing IMU LR LR LR IRA CMU MR HR CMU IN HR CMU SR HR HR HR HR HR HR HR CMU CMU CMU LR MR MR MR CMU IMU LR LR IMU RT MR MR A-MHO-RLSAO 11 11 3635 14 12 29 28 1817 07 25 2120 23 35 31 26 24 19 30 04 23 15 26 24 05 3332 25 24 01 27 36 13 02 16 08 22 22 09 34 03 14 02 12 13 0601 19 23 10 21 30 20 18 31 19 07 06 23 24 19 34 27 22 03 10 15 22 14 13 18 17 18 20 15 171516 29 1314 32 05 08 17 20 3025 29SR 29CR 846 ESR 29 NS 1st STN 15th STLake Trafford RD Immokalee RDWestclox ST N e w M a rk e t R D WE Main STW Main ST N e w M a r k e t R D E 00.511.50.25 Miles GIS MAPPING: BETH YANG, AICP GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FILE: Immokalee Future Land Use Map 2020.mxd DATE: MARCH 2020 E IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE MAP LAKE TRAFFORD Legend OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES URBAN DESIGNATION IMMOKALEE FUTURE LAND USE Immokalee Urban Area Boundary Collier County Arterial and Collector Roads Collier County Local Roads Wetlands Connected to Lake Trafford/ Camp keais Strand Overlay SR - Seminole Reservation Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area IMU Commercial Overlay URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT URBAN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT RT - Recreation Tourist Subdistrict LR - Low Residential Subdistrict MR - Medium Residential Subdistrict HR - High Residential Subdistrict CMU - Commercial Mixed Use subdistrict IMU - Industrial Mixed Use Subdistrict IRA - Immokalee Regional Airport Subdistrict IN - Industrial Subdistrict C M U (Disclaimer: The information provided is to be used for general mapping purposes only. Ground surveying and records search must be used for absolute boundaries/acreages) FUTURE LAND USE MAP ADOPTED - FEBRUARY, 1991 AMENDED - MAY, 1992 AMENDED - OCTOBER. 1987 AMENDED - OCTOBER. 2000 AMENDED - MAY, 2002 (ORDINANCE NO. 2002-25) AMENDED - JANUARY 25, 2007 (ORDINANCE NO. 2007-20) ADOPTED - DECEMBER 10, 2019 (ORDINANCE NO. 2019-47) 9.B.f Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable 9.B.g Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: East Naples Community Development Plan Boundary Map (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Commercial Mixed Use Subdistrict by Right (C-4 & C-5 Consistent by Policy) Zoning Location S T R # of Tax Parcels # Acres Width Depth Notes/Comments Map C-4 S/S Bonita Bch Rd 5 48 25 4 0.72 240 130 each Lot 0.18 acres, 60x130 FLUE-9 C-4 S/S Bonita Bch Rd 5 48 25 2 0.36 120 130 each Lot 0.18 acres, 60x130 FLUE-9 C-4 S/S Bonita Bch Rd 5 48 25 1 0.53 180 130 FLUE-9 C-4 S/S Bonita Bch Rd 5 48 25 1 0.22 75 130 corner Lot FLUE-9 C-4 E/S US41 N., north of US41/Old 41 apex 16 48 25 1 2.42 250 410 FLUE-9 sums 9 4.25 C-4 S/S Harbor Place, in Goodland 18 52 27 1 0.18 75 95 FLUE-13 C-4 SE corner Harbor Place/Goodland Drive West, in Goodland 18 52 27 1 0.31 185 75 FLUE-13 C-4 E. end of Palm Ave., in Goodland 18 52 27 1 1.68 350 220 irregular shape; waterfront FLUE-13 sums 3 2.17 TOTAL 12 6.42 S/S = south side UR = Urban Residential Subdistrict STR = Section-Township-Range UCF = Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict GGC = Golden Gate City FLUE = Future Land Use Element G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\David - NOVA\AH GMPAs\Coml MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory4-12-22 dw/4-12-22 9.B.h Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Coml MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory4-12-22 (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing FLUM Designation UR UR UR UR UR UCF UCF UCF G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\David - NOVA\AH GMPAs\Coml MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory4-12-22 dw/4-12-22 9.B.h Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Coml MUS C-4 & C-5 Inventory4-12-22 (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing 9.B.i Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Consistent by Policy Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.i Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Consistent by Policy Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.i Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Consistent by Policy Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.i Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Consistent by Policy Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.i Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Consistent by Policy Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.j Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Mixed Use and Interchange Activity Center Maps (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.k Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: legal ad - agenda ID 22375 (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 9.B.l Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: legal ad - agenda ID 23024 (23024 : Collier Housing Plan Affordable Housing Initiatives GMPA) 2350 Stanford Court ■ Naples, Florida 34112 (239) 434-0333 ■ Fax (239) 434-9320 SINCE 1 946 The Johnson Engineering Team is pleased to provide to the Housing Operations and Grants Development Staff the proposed Growth Management Plan (GMP) & Land Development Code (LDC) changes and support material associated with the final Initiatives recommended by the Collier Housing Plans and directed by the by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at their public hearing on October 8th, 2018. This memorandum is designed to provide a brief description of the final Housing Initiatives, consisting of GMP and LDC changes to implement the Initiatives. It should be noted that the LDC amendments associated with Initiative One, which was delivered on June 25, 2020, are scheduled to be heard by the BCC at their January 26, 2021 public hearing and adopted at their February 9, 2021 public hearing. The draft GMP and LDC amendments have been developed in coordination with Housing Staff and high level review and input from Growth Management Department staff Initiative Two – Five: These Initiatives cover a range of regulatory issues related to the provision of housing that is affordable that were advanced within the Community Housing Plan, these include: I2 - Streamlining conversion of commercial zoning to residential zoning when providing for housing that is affordable; I3 - Increasing density within Activity Centers from 16 units per acre to 25 units per acre when providing for housing that is affordable; I4 - Creation of Strategic Opportunity Sites as a identified subdistrict within the GMP to allow for the development of a mixed use development that provides for residential density up to 25 units per acre which is integrated with non-residential land uses with a high degree of employment opportunities, such as corporate headquarters or business campuses; and finally I5 - Increasing density opportunities along bus/transit lines through the creation of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) up to a maximum of 25 units per acre. Each of these Initiatives require amendments to the GMP, which requires a process of review through Transmittal Hearings before the CCPC and the BCC, then review by the State Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), followed by another round of review through Adoption Hearings by the CCPC and the BCC. The process for adoption of GMP amendments typically require 10 to 12 months to satisfy. Following the proposed four Initiatives, the deliverable package provides for an Appendix which contains the data and analysis to support the GMP and LDC amendments. This material is ordered as follows: 1. Marketing Brochure Five Initiatives, 2. 10-09-18 BCC Recap 3. 10-09-18 Housing Executive Summary and Support PowerPoint 4. Collier Housing Plan 5. ULI Collier Housing Assessment TO: Hilary Halford DATE: December 11, 2020 FROM: Mike Bosi, AICP RE: Final Delivery of Initiative Two, Three, Four and Five – Contract No. 13-6164 Initiative Two     OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 1 Statement of Issue – This initiative seeks to streamline the approval process for developments seeking to convert from existing Commercial zoning to Mixed Use and Residential, in exchange for those developments providing their residential units as housing that is affordable. The conversion process is limited to approved commercial zoning found consistent by policies 5.9 through 5.13 of the Future Land Use Element. The initiative seeks to reduce the uncertainty and the amount of time associated with the public hearing approval process for projects that seek to reduce overall intensity from commercial to mixed use or residential use. To be eligible for the administrative approval, the proposed project must contain a commitment for providing housing that is affordable. Strategy to implement – The Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan through policy 5.3.e allows for an evaluation of an existing project against a proposed project through a comparison of the overall intensity of development based upon public facilities impact, with transportation impact being the primary evaluation criteria, with a secondary analysis of utility impacts. Based upon this established process to evaluate or compare projects, the GMP and the LDC would be amended to add housing that is affordable as a permitted use in all commercial zoning districts when a traffic impact analysis, as provided for in the FLUE, yields a result of equal or reduced traffic impacts for a proposed residential or mixed use project. To qualify as a permitted use the project must contain a housing that is affordable commitment. Issues to Consider – The County Attorney’s office has stated that the Board cannot allocate it zoning powers to another body or an administrative process. Based upon this opinion the original concept behind this initiative, for a conversion project to submit for staff administrative review, with the Hearing Examiner certifying the application has meet the required regulatory code was abandoned. The concept of streamlining the conversion process is still desired, but the proposed strategy to attain will have to satisfy the County Attorney’s Office concerns. To address this concern, the initiative seeks to add to the Commercial zoning districts, housing that is affordable as a permitted use. This addition of housing that is affordable as a permitted use to the commercial zoning districts would eliminate the need to rezone commercial property. Area of change –Future Land Use Element (FLUE) & Land Development Code (LDC) II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION-MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. ****************************************************************************** OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 2 OBJECTIVE 1: Promote well planned land uses consistent with Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Subdistricts and the Future Land Use Map to ensure compatibility between the natural and human environments. ****************************************************************************** OBJECTIVE 5: Implement land use policies that promote sound planning, protect environmentally sensitive lands and habitat for listed species while protecting private property rights, ensure compatibility of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element. Policy 5.1: Land use policies supporting Objective 5 shall be implemented upon the adoption of the Growth Management Plan. ****************************************************************************** Policy 5.17: Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts To encourage the provision of housing that is affordable within the Urban Mixed Use District, sites zoned Commercial, which have been found consistent by policy and contain a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable shall be a permitted use up to a density of 16 gross units per acre, subject to satisfying a traffic impact analysis. The proposed affordable housing project’s traffic impact shall be evaluated against the highest intensity use within the applicable commercial zoning district and contain a reduced impact to qualify as a permitted use. LDC 2.03.03 – Commercial Zoning Districts A. Commercial Convenience District (C -1). 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediate district (C-3). a. Permitted uses. 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Housing that is Affordable , subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE and 4.02.xx of the LDC. ****************************************************************** OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 3 27. Mixed residential and commercial uses containing housing that is affordable subject to the Housing that is Afforda ble by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE, LDC section 4.02.xx and design criteria contained in section 4.02.38. B. Commercial Convenience District (C -2). 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediate district (C-3). a. Permitted uses. 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Housing that is Affordable, subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning District s provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE and 4.02.xx of the LDC. ******************************************************************** 46. Mixed residential and commercial uses containing housing that is affordable subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE, LDC section 4.02.xx and design criteria contained in section 4.02.38. ********************************************************************* C. Commercial Convenience District (C -3). 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediat e district (C-3). a. Permitted uses. 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Housing that is Affordable, subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE and 4.02.xx of the LDC. ***************************************************************** 59. Mixed residential and commercial uses containing housing that is affordable subject to the Housing that is Afforda ble by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE, LDC section 4.02.xx and design criteria contained in section 4.02.38 . ****************************************************************** OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 4 D. Commercial Convenience District (C -4). 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediate district (C -4). a. Permitted uses. 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Advertising – miscellaneous (7319). 5. Housing that is Affordable, subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE and 4.02.xx of the LDC. ****************************************************************************** E. Commercial Convenience District (C -5). 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediate district (C -5). a. Permitted uses. 1. Accounting (8721). 2. Adjustment and collection services (7322). 3. Advertising agencies (7311). 4. Advertising – miscellaneous (7319). 5. Housing that is Affordable, subject to the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provision of Policy 5.17 of the FLUE and 4.02.xx of the LDC. ************************************************************************************* 2.07.00 – Price Qualifying Program for Housing that is Affordable 2.07.01 – Purpose and Intent A. Section 2.07.00 is intended to implement and be consistent with the GMP, § 163.3161 et seq. F.S, F.A.C., and the Stipulated Settlement Agreement in DOAH Case No. 89-1299 GM, by providing for price points of housing units that is affordable to gap-moderate-, low-, and very- low-income levels through the use of density bonuses which allow an increase in the number of residential dwelling units per acre allowed on property proposed for development, thereby decreasing the per unit cost of land and development. B. This objective is accomplished by implementing a Price Qualifying program which consists of a commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable. The purpose of the commitment is to provide increased residential densities to developers who guarantee that a portion of their OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 5 housing development will provide price points of specific units that aligns as affordable to households of gap-, moderate-, low-, or very-low-income, thus expanding housing opportunities for households throughout the county. 2.07.02 – Program Criteria The following are required components of the commitment for a Price Qualifying Housing that is Affordable project. A. Price Qualification for Income Levels Served. The price points for all units dedicated as Housing that is Affordable within the project must be affordable to income levels as identified within the below chart. 1. Identify the total number of housing units within the development and the total number of units that are affordable, categorized by price points for the level of income, type of unit (single-family or multifamily, owner-occupied or rental), and number of bedrooms, required in the development. 2. The price associated with the Housing that is Affordable unit cannot exceed the thresholds established for the above income levels within the annually updated Collier County Housing Demand Methodology regarding for sale units or the annually updated Board approved Table of Rental Rates regarding rental units. B. Price Point Requirement. The commitment to the sales price or the monthl y rent for the Housing that is Affordable units shall be specified to a time period of five years from initial date of sale or rent. 1. The commitment shall require an annual monitoring report be submitted to the Housing Operations and Grant Development Di vision for a period of five years from the final CO for the project to ensure pricing does not exceed the thresholds established . 2. The conditions contained in the commitment shall constitute covenants, restrictions, and conditions which shall run with th e land and shall be binding upon the property and the owner’s successors and assigns . C. Eligibility Requirement. Owners or renters within the Housing that is Affordable Project must be employed within Collier County as an Essential Service Personnel as defined in the Collier Local Housing Assistance Plan or retired Essential Service Personnel as defined in the Collier Local Housing Assistance Plan . D. Violations and Enforcement. Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 6 1. It is a violation of section 2.07.00 to rent, sell or occupy, or attempt to rent, sell or occupy, an affordable housing unit provided under the Price Qualifying program except as specifically permitted by the terms of section 2.0 7.00, or to knowingly give false or misleading i nformation with respect to any information required or requested by the County Manager or designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is delegated to them by section 2.0 7.00. 2. The County Manager or designee shall have full power to enfor ce the terms of this section and any developer agreements, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned unit development (PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the rights, privileges and conditions described herein, by action at law or equity. In the event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be corrected within 60 days, the certificate of occupancy for all Housing that is affordable units within the development shall be withdrawn and the sa nctions or penalties provided in the Housing that is Affordable commitment shall be pursued to the fullest extent allowed by law. E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the form of developer’s agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of approval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. 4.02.xx –Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts A. As required by the Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts provisions within Policy 5.17 of the Growth Management Plan to qualify as a permitted use within the respective commercial zoning district, the property must have been found to be consistent by policy and contain a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable for all units within the project up to a density of 16 gross units per acre , subject to satisfying a traffic impact analysis provided for within Policy 5.3.e of the Future Land Use Element. 1. The proposed affordable housing project’s traffic impact shall be evaluated against the highest intensity use within the applicable commercial zoning district to qualify as a permitted use. The results of the impact analysis must show the proposed project to be of equal or reduced traffic impact to qualify as a permitted use in the zoning district. 2. In addition to the public facilities impact analysis, to qualify for the administrative process, the project must submit a School Impact Analysis per LDC Section 10.04.09. 3. The Affordable Housing by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts project must be multi - family, single family attached or townhouse. 4. Prior to approval of the Site Development Plan for the project, the application must satisfy the Traffic Impact Analysis, the School Impact Analysis and enter a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable . a. The commitment will contain the specifics of the price qualification for income levels served, term of commitment, eligibility requirements, and violations and enforcement as provided within LDC section 2.07.02. OUTLINE INITIATIVE TWO S TREAMLINE COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL CONVERSIONS 12/8/2020 Initiative Two 7 b. For units that are for sale, o ne half of the units must be at a price point that is affordable to either the Low or Very Low income le vels as provided for within LDC section 2.07.02.A.1. The other one half of the units can be provided at a price point that is affordable to any of the income levels provided for with section 2.07.0 2.A.1. c. For units that are for rent, all units must be at a price points affordable to Low and Very Low income levels. 5. A Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts project must satisfy the dimensional standards of the underlying commercial zoning district except that the minimum distance between structures shall be a minimum of 10 feet. a. When the proposed project is adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to permit, a single family dwelling unit : 1). Setback from the common boundaries shall be equal to the proposed zoned building height; and 2). A 15-foot Type “B” buffer shall be provided along the common boundaries. Initiative Three     INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 1 Statement of Issue – Per the Future Land Use Element of the Collier Growth Management Plan (GMP), mixed use activity centers are intended to be mixed use in character, with the allowable land uses to include the full array of commercial, residential and institutional uses, and other land uses as generally allowed in the Urban designations. The original design of the mixed-use activity center concept as part of the adoption of the GMP was to require a percentage of the activity centers to be developed with residential development at the highest density allowed by the plan. The intent was to allow higher density in the areas of the County where the highest intensity of use was expected and to allow for the market to provide for lower cost units in a high density setting to provide for a better spatial relationship to where job opportunities being created and where potential employees could gain housing that is affordable. This strategy is based upon the concept of reducing vehicle miles traveled, which results in an increase in capacity to the transportation system without the costly expenditures for new roads. While sound in concept, the resulting land use mix of the activity centers provided by the marketplace was a mono-culture of commercial and non-residential land uses. This initiative is designed to provide for incentives through higher densities to allow the marketplace to provide for the mixed use concept within activity centers through the development of mixed income residential housing. Strategy to implement – The Future Land Use Element currently limits density within the activity centers to 16 units per acre (except in the Urban Residential Fringe and Coastal High Hazard Area where the density limit is much lower). To further incentives the introduction of mixed income residential use to current activity centers this amendment seeks to increase the density within the activity centers from sixteen (16) units per acre to twenty-four (25) units per acre when providing for a mixed income residential project that contains housing that is affordable. The current limit of 16 units per acre will remain for all market based projects, but if a project is willing to set aside two-thirds of the bonus density units above the 16 units per acre to a price point affordable to an identified household income level, additional density can be achieved. The full nine units above the current sixteen unit maximum can be achieved if the mixed income residential project dedicates six of the nine additional units to price points affordable to more than one household income level. The density limit for activity centers in the Urban Residential Fringe and Coastal High Hazzard Area will remain unchanged. Considerations – The focus of this initiative is not to remove the public hearing component for a housing that is affordable project, but rather to provide for a satisfactory level of incentivization of the density allowed within an activity center for a market response. The benefit sits with the proximity of housing that is affordable to the job opportunities created within Activit y Centers (retail and service based). This not only benefits the transportation system by reducing or eliminating a percentage of trips to satisfy the Activity Center’s employment needs, but also places goods and services in much closer proximity to the housing that is affordable and market rate housing within the Activity Center, therefore reducing a percentage of those household’s daily trips. INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 2 Area of change –Mixed Use Activity Centers and Interchange Activity Center Subdistricts of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) & Land Development Code (LDC) GMP and Land Development Code changes FLUE - C. Urban Commercial District (Page 56) 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict For residential-only development, if a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict or Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be permitted and up to 25 units per gross acre when providing for a mixed income project, which contains a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, the eligible density shall be limited to four dwelling units per acre, except as allowed by the density rating system and the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict. For a residential -only project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed throughout the project. Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building ‒ are allowed and encouraged within Mixed Use Activity Centers. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density is sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre and up to 25 units per gross acre when providing for a mixed income project, which contains a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center that is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict but is within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density shall be limited to four (4) dwelling units per acre, except as allowed by the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict. For a project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, and the portion within an Activity Center is developed as mixed use, some of the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed to that portion of the project located outside of the Activity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the density from a mixed use project is distributed outside the Activity Center boundary: 2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict: (Page 60) INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 3 For residential-only development, if a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be allowed and up to 25 units per gross acre when providing for a mixed income project, which contains a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable If such a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict. For a residential-only project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed throughout the project. Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building - are allowed and encouraged within Interchange Activity Centers. Such mixed-use projects are intended to be developed at a human- scale, pedestrian-oriented, and interconnected with adjacent projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with adjacent properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, the eligible density is sixteen dwelling units per acre and up to 25 units per gross acre when providing for a mixed income project, which contains a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict. For a project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, and the portion within an Activity Center is developed as mixed use, the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project shall not be distributed outside of the Activity Center. ************************************************************************************* LDC 2.07.00 – Price Qualifying Program for Housing that is Affordable 2.07.01 – Purpose and Intent A. Section 2.07.00 is intended to implement and be consistent with the GMP, § 163.3161 et seq. F.S, F.A.C., and the Stipulated Settlement Agreement in DOAH Case No. 89-1299 GM, by providing for price points of housing units that is affordable to gap-moderate-, low-, and very- low-income levels through the use of density bonuses which allow an increase in the number of residential dwelling units per acre allowed on property proposed for development, thereby decreasing the per unit cost of land and development. B. This objective is accomplished by implementing a Price Qualifying program which consists of a commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable. The purpose of the commitment is to provide increased residential densities to developers who guarantee that a portion of their housing development will provide price points of specific units that align as affordable to INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 4 households of gap-, moderate-, low-, or very-low-income, thus expanding housing opportunities for households throughout the county. 2.07.02 – Program Criteria The following are required components of the commitment for a Price Qualifying Housing that is Affordable project. A. Price Qualification for Income Levels Served. The price points for all units dedicated as Housing that is Affordable within the project must be a ffordable to income levels as identified withi n the below chart. 1. Identify the total number of housing units within the development and the total number of units that are affordable, categorized by price points for the level of income, type of unit (single-family or multifamily, owner-occupied or rental), and number of bedrooms, required in the development. 2. The price associated with the Housing that is Affordable unit cannot exceed the thresholds established for the above income levels within the annually updated Collier County Housing Demand Me thodology regarding for sale units or the annually updated Board approved Table of Rental Rates regarding rental units. B. Price Point Requirement. The commitment to the sales price or the monthly rent for the Housing that is Affordable units shall be spe cified to a time period of five years from initial date of sale or rent. 1. The commitment shall require an annual monitoring report be submitted to the Housing Operations and Grant Development Division for a period of five years from the final CO for the project to ensure pricing does not exceed the thresholds established. 2. The conditions contained in the commitment shall constitute covenants, restrictions, and conditions which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property and the owner’s successors and assigns . C. Eligibility Requirement. Owners or renters within the Housing that is Affordable Proj ect must be employed within Collier County as an Essential Service Personnel as defined in the Collier Local Housing Assistance Plan or retired Essential Service Personnel as defined in the Collier Local Housing Assistance Plan. D. Violations and Enforcem ent. 1. It is a violation of section 2.0 7.00 to rent, sell or occupy, or attempt to rent, sell or occupy, an affordable housing unit provided under the Price Qualifying program except Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 5 as specifically permitted by the terms of section 2.0 7.00, or to knowi ngly give false or misleading information with respect to any information required or requested by the County Manager or designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is delegated to them by section 2.0 7.00. 2. The County Manager or designee shall have full power to enforce the terms of this section and any developer agreements, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned unit development (PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the rights, privileges and conditions described herein, by action at law or equity. In the event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be corrected within 60 days, the certificate of occupancy for all Housing that is affordable units within the developmen t shall be withdrawn and the sanctions or penalties provided in the Housing that is Affordable commitment shall be pursued to the fullest extent allowed by law. E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the form of developer’s agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of approval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. ************************************************************************* 4.02.xx –Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts ****************************************************************************** 4.02.xx –Housing that is Affordable within Activity Centers or an Interchange Activity Centers A. Within an Activity Center or an Interchange Activity Center to increase density beyond 16 units per acre, additional units per acre are required to be made available at a price point affordable for specified income levels, as identified in the chart within 2.07.02.A.1. Additionally, the project must: 1. Be a multi-family, single family attached, or townhouse project submitted as a Planned Unit Development or Planned Unit Development Amendment; 2. Enter into a commitment that will contain the specifics of the price qualification for income levels served, term of commitment, eligibility requirements, and violations and enforcement as provided within LDC Section 2.07.00. B. The following are additional required components of the commitment for Housing that is Affordable for a project. 1. For units that are for sale, two-thirds (2/3) of the first six units or four of six of bonus density above 16 units per acre must be made available at a price point affordable to the low level or very low income level identified within the chart in 2.07.03.A.1. Two-Thirds of the final three units or two of three of bonus density shall be made available at a price point from any of the income levels identified within the chart in 2.07.02.A.1. INITIATIVE THREE I NCENTIVIZE MIXED I NCOME RESIDENTIAL HOUSING IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS DRAFT GMP AND LDC AMENDMENTS Initiative Three 12/8/2020 6 2. If the proposed project is to be a rental community, two-thirds (2/3) of the bonus density must be made available at a price point affordable to the low level or very low income level identified within the chart in 2.07.03.A.1. C. When the proposed project is adjacent to any property occupied by,or zoned to permit, a single family dwelling unit: 1). Setback from the common boundaries shall be equal to the proposed zoned building height; and 2). A 15-foot Type “B” buffer shall be provided along the common boundaries. Initiative Four     OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 1 Statement of Issue – A main recommendation of the 2017 ULI Study is that Collier County should allow for greater residential densities to mitigate high land and development costs. Strategic Opportunity Site’s (SOS) would be designated by the BCC as areas where higher densities are encouraged when providing for housing that is affordable. Strategic Opportunity Sites are designed to strengthen the relationship between job creation and the location of housing that is affordable for that workforce, with SOS’s designed to include new corporate headquarter sites or industrial areas, employment centers, educational facilities or major transportation corridors and other appropriate locations outside of the activity center locations. Housing that is affordable in Strategic Opportunity Sites could be designated for Essential Services Personnel (teachers, first responders, health care professionals, etc.), but will be required to provide for commitments for housing that is affordable. The initiative seeks to develop a process for emerging areas for designation (floating designation to be applied for) where certain land uses (corporate headquarters, campus, research and development parks, etc.) are proposed. The intended benefits are anticipated to be an increase in certainty, a reduction in cost, a better job to housing spatial arrangement and an overall reduction on infrastructure expansion. Strategy to implement – To provide for the initiative, the GMP will be amended to create the criteria for the designation of SOS, similar to the industrial designation process, and develop criteria that must be satisfied: mix of housing types, minimum percentage of units at certain affordability levels, multi-modal design and the ratio of land use mix. The amendment will allow the SOS designation process for future designation based upon proposed land use changes such as corporate headquarters, business and industrial park development. The required commitment to provide for housing that is affordable will be secured through the existing Affordable Housing Density Bonus agreement program, which requires a percentage of the overall development to be made available at a price point correlated to accepted income levels, as shown below. Issues to Consider – The designation of Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) follows the precedent established in the Future Land Use Element for the designation of Activity Centers. The SOS would be designated on the FLUM to indicate an expectation for a higher density residential project integrated to where a significant number of employment opportunities exist or are expected to develop. Following the reasoning behind initiative three, incentivizing mixed income housing OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 2 projects in Activity Centers, a reduction in vehicle miles traveled is the expected outcome with the creation of an SOS. The maximum density allocated to an SOS will be, twenty-five (25) units per acre. The intent is to provide opportunities for housing that is affordable to areas with high employment needs, with a minimum of 20% of the housing that is affordable dedicated to low or very low income levels. Area of change – Future Land Use Element (FLUE) FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION (Page 25) The following section describes the land use designations shown on the Future Land Use Map. These designations generally indicate the types of land uses for which zoning may be requested. However, these land use designations do not guarantee that a zoning request will be approved. Requests may be denied by the Board of County Commissioners based on criteria in the Land Development Code or on special studies completed for the County. 1. Urban Designation Urban designated areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban designated areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non-residential uses. The Urban designated area, which includes Immokalee, Copeland, Plantation Island, Chokoloskee, Port of the Islands, and Goodland, in addition to the greater Naples area, represents less than 10% of Collier County’s land area. The boundaries of the Urban designated areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: a. Residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts and Overlays that follow, except as allowed by certain policies under Objective 5. b. Non-residential uses including: 1. Essential services as defined by the most recent Land Development Code; ************************************************************************ 17. Research and Technology Park uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban-Industrial District. 18. Strategic Opportunity Sites subject to criteria identified in the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban-Industrial District. OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 3 A. Urban Mixed Use District (Page 27) This District, which represents approximately 116,000 acres, is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses, including mixed-use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. Certain industrial and commercial uses are also allowed subject to criteria. ****************************************************************************** 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprises approximately 93,000 acres and 80% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Maximum eligible residential density shall be determined through the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. *********************************************************************************************************** 20. Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict This Subdistrict consists of 31 acres and is located at the northeast quadrant of two major arterial roadways, Pine Ridge Road and Goodlette-Frank Road. In addition to uses generally allowed in the Urban designation, the intent of the Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict is to provide shopping, personal services and employment for the surrounding residential areas within a convenient travel distance. The Subdistrict also permits multi-family rental residential dwelling units. The Subdistrict is intended to be compatible with the neighboring Pine Ridge Middle school and nearby residential development and therefore, emphasis will be placed on common building architecture, signage, landscape design and site accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as motor vehicles. ************************************************************************************************************* 21. Strategic Opportunity Site Subdistrict The Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) Subdistrict is intended to provide for the introduction of mixed income residential use to existing or planned industrial and/or commercial Planned Unit Developments or traditionally zoned projects. The addition of residential use to a geographic area of land with a high degree of employment opportunities (corporate headquarters, technology campus, research and development parks, etc.) provides for a beneficial relationship between households and job locations. This relationship benefits the employees and employers within a proposed SOS, but also benefits all users of the County’s transportation system by reducing the total vehicle miles traveled to satisfy a primary household need of employment. The SOS should be designed in a mixed use environment where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the employees, residents, and patrons of the Subdistrict. Strategic Opportunity Sites shall be allowed as a subdistrict in the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban Industrial District, and may include the general uses allowed within each District, the specific uses set forth below, are not subject to the Density Rating System, and shall comply with the following general conditions: OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 4 A. The proposed SOS subdistrict must provide for housing that is affordable in the following manner: 1. Base Density shall be at 4 units per acre with the requirement that an Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) agreement must be established. 2. The commitment for housing that is affordable shall be authorized through the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) program, as specified within LDC section 2.06.00. 3. A minimum of 20 percent of the total units must be committed as affordable housing opportunities from either the Low or Very Low income levels as provided in LDC section 2.06.03.A. All density bonuses awarded through the utilization of the Affordable Housing Density Bonus provided for in 2.6.03 shall be doubled when dedicated to the Low or Very Low income levels. 4. Maximum density shall not exceed 25 units per net acre. 5. Each phase of the project that proposes residential development, must provide for the ratio of market housing units to housing that is affordable units stated within the AHDB agreement. B. When locating in a District other than the Urban Industrial District, the SOS must be abutting, and have direct access to a road classified as an arterial and or collector in the Transportation Element. Direct principal access is defined as a local roadway connection to the arterial or collector road, provided the portion of the local roadway intended to provide access to the SOS is not within a residential neighborhood and does not service a predominately residential area. C. When the SOS is located within the Urban Industrial District or includes industrially zoned land, those uses allowed in the Industrial Zoning District shall be permitted provided that the total industrial acreage is not greater than the amount previously zoned or designated industrial. When a SOS is located in the Urban Commercial District or Urban-Mixed Use District, the industrial uses shall be limited to those target industry uses, as defined within the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict of this Element. The Planned Unit Development Ordinance for an SOS project shall list specifically all permitted uses and development standards consistent with the criteria identified in this provision. D. When the SOS project is abutting residentially zoned land, all, or a portion, of the housing is encouraged to be located proximate to such abutting residentially zoned land where feasible. 1. When the proposed project is adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to permit, a single family dwelling, the setbacks along the common boundary shall be equal to the proposed zoned building height and a 15-foot Type “B” buffer shall be provided. E. Housing shall be fully integrated with other compatible uses in the project through OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 5 vertical or horizontal mixed use buildings, landscaping, open space and through pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular (multi-modal) interconnections, demonstrated through the submittal of a Mobility plan and an internal capture analysis. 1. The Mobility Plan shall depict the configuration and phasing of all connecting streets, street behind/between out parcels, and other planned local streets, along with all access points from adjoining streets, as shown on a conceptual development plan, with cross-sections of each. The Mobility Plan shall also provide for an analysis of the project’s internal capture. F. Strategic Opportunity Sites shall be a minimum of ten-acres and utilize PUD zoning. 1. The development standards provided within the PUD zoning will ensure that the spatial arrangement and compatibility measures adopted integrate the residential development with the non-residential development of the project. 2. All proposed non-residential land uses that utilize hazardous substance or bulk storage of petroleum or like material will be adequately separated from the proposed residential portion of the Strategic Opportunity Site. G. All projects within a designated Strategic Opportunity Site must satisfy the concurrency management system at the time of Development Order. H. Strategic Opportunity Sites shall include a minimum of 20 percent and up to a maximum of 60 percent of the total acreage within the Subdistrict for residential development. The residential component may provide for a mix of single family and multi-family units or provide for a multi-family only option. I. The land uses within a proposed SOS may contain uses from Residential, Commercial and/or Business Park zoning districts. J. The non-residential portion of the SOS shall utilize the Commercial Five (C-5) Zoning District, as development standards. The residential portion of the SOS shall utilize the residential zoning district development standards closest aligned to the density sought within the SOS. Deviations are permitted in conformity with J. (below). K. Deviations from Land Development Code standards are allowed within a PUD request to implement an approved SOS. Justifications for the deviations shall be based upon their relationship to identified Goals, Objectives or Policies of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. ************************************************************************************* C. Urban Commercial District (Page 56) This District is intended to accommodate almost all new commercial zoning; a variety of residential uses, including higher densities for properties not located within the Urban Coastal Fringe or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts; and a variety of non-residential uses. 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Activity Centers have been designated on the Future Land Use Map Series identified in the Future Land Use Element. The locations are based on intersections of major roads and on OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 6 spacing criteria. When this Plan was originally adopted in 1989, there were 21 Activity Centers. There are now 19 Activity Centers, listed below, which comprise approximately 3,000 acres; this includes three Interchange Activity Centers (#4, 9, 10) which will be discussed separately under the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict. Two Activity Centers, #19 and 21, have been deleted as they are now within the incorporated City of Marco Island. ****************************************************************************** 14. Seed to Table Commercial Subdistrict The Seed to Table Commercial Subdistrict consists of ± 6.33 acres and is located on the west side of Livingston Road, just north of the terminus of Piper Boulevard. The purpose of this subdistrict is to allow for the development of a parking lot and Collier County utility facilities and services. ************************************************************************************************************* 15. Strategic Opportunity Site Subdistrict The Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) Subdistrict is intended to provide for the introduction of mixed income residential use to existing or planned industrial and/or commercial Planned Unit Developments or traditionally zoned projects. The addition of residential use to a geographic area of land with a high degree of employment opportunities (corporate headquarters, technology campus, research and development parks, etc.) provides for a beneficial relationship between households and job locations. This relationship benefits the employees and employers within a proposed SOS, but also benefits all users of the County’s transportation system by reducing the total miles traveled to satisfy a primary household need of employment. The SOS should be designed in a mixed use environment where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the employees, residents, and patrons of the Subdistrict. Strategic Opportunity Sites shall be allowed as a subdistrict in the Urban Commercial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. *************************************************************************** D. Urban Industrial District (Page 70) The Industrial Land Use District is reserved primarily for industrial type uses and comprises approximately 2,200 acres. Besides basic Industrial uses limited commercial uses are permitted. Retail commercial uses are prohibited, except as accessory to Industrial or Business Park uses. The C-5, C-4 and PUD Commercial Zoning Districts along the perimeter of the designated Urban Industrial District that existed as of October 1997 shall be deemed consistent with this Land Use District. Industrially designated areas shall have access to a road classified as an arterial or collector in the Transportation Element, or access may be provided via a local road that does not service a predominately residential area. Intensities of use shall be those related to: a. Manufacturing; ***************************************************************************** OUTLINE - INITIATIVE FOUR CREATE A STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY SITES (SOS) DESIGNATION PROCESS AND ALLOW FOR INCREASED DENSITY Initiative Four 12/8/2020 7 n. High density residential as part of a proposed Strategic Opportunity Site. 1. Business Park Subdistrict The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non- industrial uses, designed in an attractive park-like environment with low structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the Park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a Subdistrict in the Urban Industrial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Business Park Subdistrict in the Urban-Mixed Use District. 2. Research and Technology Park Subdistrict The Research and Technology Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of targeted industry uses ‒ aviation/aerospace industry, health technology industry, information technology industry, and light, low environmental impact manufacturing industry ‒ and non-industrial uses, designed in an attractive park-like environment where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the employees, residents and patrons of the park. Research and Technology Parks shall be allowed as a subdistrict in the Urban ‒ Industrial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. 3. Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict The Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) Subdistrict is intended to provide for the introduction of mixed income residential use to existing or planned industrial and/or commercial Planned Unit Developments or traditionally zoned projects. The addition of residential use to a geographic area of land with a high degree of employment opportunities (corporate headquarters, technology campus, research and development parks, etc.) provides for a beneficial relationship between households and job locations. This relationship benefits the employees and employers within a proposed SOS, but also benefits all users of the County’s transportation system by reducing the total miles traveled to satisfy a primary household need of employment. The SOS should be designed in a mixed use environment where landscaped areas, outdoor spaces and internal interconnectivity provide for buffering, usable open space, and a network of pathways for the enjoyment of the employees, residents, and patrons of the Subdistrict. Strategic Opportunity Sites shall be allowed as a subdistrict in the Urban Industrial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Strategic Opportunity Sites Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. Initiative Five     OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 1 Statement of Issue – The final initiative directed by the Housing Plan and the Board at the October 9, 2018 public hearing was for promoting housing that is affordable on major transit corridors. The initiative is recommended based upon two desired outcomes, in addition to adding to the supply of housing that is affordable. The first is that locating higher density housing along transit corridors can help reduce the number of single occupancy vehicles on the overall network, as well as reducing the overall trip length within the urbanized area where the majority of employment opportunities are located and therefore strengthening the spatial relationship between where employment opportunities exist and where employees live. The second intended outcome sits with the frequency of transit service. The addition of higher density housing along existing transit corridors is designed to increase the ridership of the system and the particular route that the housing is situated, and this increased ridership can have a positive effect of reducing the headway, or time between bus service of the particular route. This increased frequency ideally would promote more ridership on the system due to the decrease in wait times and the increase in efficiency for the individual rider. An outcome that would generate more self-funding to the Collier Area Transit system to increase the efficiency of the transit system. Strategy to implement – The Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan currently allows for an affordable housing project (whether or not along a transit route) to request up to 16 units per gross acre if specific percentages of housing that is affordable is committed to within the project. To further incentivize the development of housing that is affordable along transit routes, the Density Rating System will be amended to provide for additional density for projects that promote the utilization of the transit system within the design of the project and concentrate a majority of the project’s units within close proximity to the project entrance. Additionally, the Transportation Element of the GMP will be amended to explicitly state that higher density along transit routes is a County priority. The design of the project will allocate the highest density of the project occurring in the quarter- mile of the transit station/route, known as the, “Transit Core”. The project will pay close attention to the multi-modal design to provide for sufficient ease of use for the pedestrian or the bicyclist to access the transit station Considerations – The majority of collector and arterial roadways within the County are currently designated as set transit routes and based upon this recognition, the portion of the routes not within the FLUM Urban designation will not be recommended for density above the current 16 units per acre that can currently be requested if utilizing an affordable workforce density bonus. The transit oriented design (TOD) of the project will require that highest level of density will be allocated within a quarter mile of the transit stop along the project’s frontage, with density stepping down as the distance from the project frontage increases. This design function will address the issue of” first and last mile”, often cited as a barrier to transit usage, by reducing the distance between the transit stop and the residential unit of the rider and enhancing the connectivity between the two. Area of change – Transportation Element, Future Land Use Element (FLUE) & Land Development Code (LDC) Transportation Element Objective 12 (Page 22) OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 2 Policy 12.10: The County, through the Future Land Use Element and Density Rating System, will prioritize higher density residential and mixed use projects along Urban designated Collier Area Transit (CAT) routes. This prioritization is to encourage a better spatial relationship between the location of employment centers and available housing that is affordable. Increasing the proximity of this relationship between work opportunities and the location of employees provides for a direct benefit to the transportation system as a whole with the reduction in vehicles miles traveled and the availability of transit to reduce the number of single occupancy trips within the system. FLUE - Density Rating System (Page 50) FLUE - B. Density Rating System (Page 50) This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated on the Future Land Use Map as: Urban, Urban Mixed Use District; and, on a very limited basis, Agricultural/Rural. It is not applicable to the Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; these two Elements have their own density provisions. The Density Rating System is applicable to that portion of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus provisions for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation). 1. The Density Rating System is applied in the following manner: Within the applicable Urban Designated Areas, a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed, though not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project, such as a project proposed as a Transit Oriented Development may seek a base density of 13 residential dwelling units per gross acre. For purposes of calculating the eligible number of dwelling units for a project (gross acreage multiplied by eligible number of dwelling units per acre), the total number of dwelling units may be rounded up by one unit if the dwelling unit total yields a fraction of a unit .5 or greater. Acreage to be used for calculating density is exclusive of: the commercial and industrial portions of a project, except where authorized in a Subdistrict, such as the Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict; and, mixed residential and commercial uses as provided for in the C -1 through C-3 zoning districts in the Collier County Land Development Code; and, portions of a project for land uses having an established equivalent residential density in the Collier County Land Development Code. 2. Density Bonuses (51) h. Transit Oriented Development OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 3 To further facilitate the prioritization of higher density projects along existing transit routes of the Collier Area Transit (CAT), as expressed within Policy 12.10 of the Transportation Element, density increases may be requested, as identified further below, if a project complies with the following conditions: the project has direct frontage to an existing fixed transit route or on a proposed route as identified for funding on the Transit Development Plan; the project has a Future Land Use Map designation of Urban-Mixed Use District; the project provides for a transit stop along the project’s frontage or is within one-quarter mile of an existing transit stop; the project is proposing multi-family development and the project complies with the transit oriented design standards contained in chapter four (4) of the Land Development Code. A base of thirteen (13) units per gross acre may be requested. Bonus density may be requested through a commitment to provide for housing that is affordable. The maximum density shall not exceed 25 units per gross acre. This base and bonus shall not be combined with other density bonuses. 4. Density Conditions (Page 53) The following density condition applies to all properties subject to the Density Rating System. a. Maximum Density The maximum allowed density shall not exceed sixteen (16) dwelling units per gross acre within the Urban designated area, except for the following: When utilizing the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provision contained in Section 2.03.07 of the Land Development Code adopted by Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended on June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004; or the density bonus for Project Location on a Transit Route of the Density Rating System in which case the maximum allowed density when providing a commitment for Housing that is Affordable shall not exceed twenty-five (25) dwelling units per acre. LDC 1.08.02 – Definitions “Transit Core” means the area within the inner quarter-mile around a transit station. “Transit Oriented Development” (TOD) means a project or projects, in areas identified in the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), that is or will be served by existing or planned transit service. These designated areas shall be compact, moderate to high density developments, of multi-modal character, interconnected with other land uses, pedestrian orientated, multi-family and designed to support frequent transit service operating through the Collier Area Transit system on available roadway connections. ************************************************************************************* LDC 2.07.00 – Price Qualifying Program for Housing that is Affordable 2.07.01 – Purpose and Intent OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 4 A. Section 2.07.00 is intended to implement and be consistent with the GMP, § 163.3161 et seq. F.S, F.A.C., and the Stipulated Settlement Agreement in DOAH Case No. 89-1299 GM, by providing for price points of housing units that is affordable to gap-moderate-, low-, and very- low-income levels through the use of density bonuses which allow an increase in the number of residential dwelling units per acre allowed on property proposed for development, thereby decreasing the per unit cost of land and development. B. This objective is accomplished by implementing a Price Qualifying program which consists of a commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable. The purpose of the commitment is to provide increased residential densities to developers who guarantee that a portion of their housing development will provide price points of specific units that align as affordable to households of gap-, moderate-, low-, or very-low-income, thus expanding housing opportunities for households throughout the county. 2.07.02 – Program Criteria The following are required components of the commitment for a Price Qualifying Housing that is Affordable project. A. Price Qualification for Income Levels Served. The price points for all units dedicated as Housing that is Affordable within the project must be a ffordable to income levels as identified within the below chart. 1. Identify the total number of housing units within the development and the total number of units that are affordable, categorized by price points for the level of income, type of unit (single-family or multifamily, owner-occupied or rental), and number of bedrooms, required in the development. 2. The price associated with the Housing that is Affordable unit cannot exceed the thresholds established for the above income levels within the annually updated Collier County Housing Demand Methodology regarding for sale units or the annually updated Board approved Table of Rental Rates regarding rental units. B. Price Point Requirement. The commitment to the sales price or the monthly rent for the Housing that is Affordable units shall be specified to a time period of five years from initial date of sale or rent. 1. The commitment shall require an annual monitoring report be submitted to the Housing Operations and Grant Development Division for a period of five years from the final CO for the project to ensure pricin g does not exceed the thresholds established. Income Level as a percent of Median Income Gap (>120 - <140) Moderate (>80 - <120) Low (>50 - <80) Very Low (<50) OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 5 2. The conditions contained in the commitment shall constitute covenants, restrictions, and conditions which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property and the owner’s successors and assigns . C. Eligibility Requirement. Owners or renters within the Housing that is Affordable Project must be employed within Collier County as an Essential Service Personnel as defined in the Collier Local Housing Assistance plan or retired. D. Violations and Enforcement. 1. It is a violation of section 2.0 7.00 to rent, sell or occupy, or attempt to rent, sell or occupy, an affordable housing unit provided under the Price Qualifying program except as specifically permitted by the terms of secti on 2.07.00, or to knowingly give false or misleading information with respect to any information required or requested by the County Manager or designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is delegated to them by section 2.0 7.00. 2. The County Manager or designee shall have full power to enforce the terms of this section and any developer agreements, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned unit development (PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the rights, privileges and conditions described herein, by action at law or equity. In the event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be corrected within 60 days, the certificate of occupancy for all Housing that is affordable units within the development shall be withdrawn and the sanctions or penalties provided in the Housing that is Affordable commitment shall be pursued to the fullest extent allowed by law. E. Commitment. The commitment to provide for Housing that is Affordable shall be in the form of developer’s agreement, a PUD developers commitment or rezoning condition of approval, all of which are subject to the requirements of LDC section 2.07.00. ************************************************************************* 4.02.xx –Housing that is Affordable by Right in Commercial Zoning Districts ****************************************************************************** 4.02.xx –Housing that is Affordable within Activity Centers or an Interchange Activity Centers ****************************************************************************** 4.02.xx –Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Design Standards A. As expressed by Policy 12.10 of the Transportation Element and the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element within the Collier Growth Management Plan, higher density multi-family projects shall be prioritized along existing transit routes. B. All proposed multi-family projects that front on an existing Collier Area Transit fixed route or on a proposed route as identified for funding on the Transit Development Plan, are OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 6 designated Urban Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and satisfy the design standards identified below are eligible for 13 units per acre. 1. If proposed route on the Transit Development Plan has not been identified for funding, the applicant may coordinate with Collier Area Transit to secure funding needs. C. Design Standards for TOD. 1. The project must be multi-family and submitted as a Planned Unit Development. 2. A minimum of 50 percent of all units within the project will be located within one-quarter of a mile from a frontage access point. 3. The project shall provide vehicular, pedestrian and bike interconnections throughout the project to ensure multimodal transportation links to the project entrance, as well as adjacent properties, where interconnection to adjacent properties is possible and practicable. 4. Building Height. Not to exceed four stories, with a zoned height of 50 feet and an actual height of 60 feet. 5. Setback for Principal Structures to project boundaries and buffer requirement. a. Front Yard - Minimum 10 feet, maximum 25 feet. b. Side and Rear Yard - 50 percent of building height. When adjacent to any property occupied by, or zoned to permit, a single family dwelling setback to be provided at a one-foot (setback) to one-foot (height) basis. 6. During the rezoning process the project must coordinate with Collier Area Transit (CAT) to provide a commitment to develop a permanent transit stop along the project’s frontage or identify an existing stop within ¼ of a mile of the project’s frontage. 7. Eligible density. a. Baseline Transit Oriented Development – a maximum of 13 units per acre. b. Housing that is Affordable Transit Oriented Development – a maximum of 25 units per acre. D. Additional requirements for a Housing that is Affordable Transit Oriented Development. 1. A commitment that will contain the specifics of the price qualification for income levels served, time frame, eligibility requirements, and violations and enforcement as provided within LDC Section 2.07.02. 2. For units that are for sale, two-thirds (2/3) of the first 9 units of bonus density (6 units) above 13 units per acre must be made available at a price point affordable to the low or very low income level identified within the chart in LDC section 2.07.02.A.1. Two-thirds of the final 3 units of bonus density (2 units) shall be made available at a price point from any of the income levels identified within the chart in LDC section 2.07.02.A.1. OUTLINE INITIATIVE FIVE INCREASE DENSITY ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 12/8/2020 7 3. For units that are for rent , two-thirds (2/3) of all units above 13 units per acre must b e made available at a price point affordable to Low and/or Very Low income levels as provided for within LDC section 2.07.02.A.1 Initiative Marketing Brochure     This initiative focuses upon specific design and material requirements of the Land Development Code (LDC). The LDC describes the types of relief that may be granted as well as the criteria for design or construction of a project to offer housing that is affordable. This satisfies county goals and objectives to providing affordable housing for working families, while maintaining public health and safety standards as well as community appearance. Ten (10) cost-saving actions were identified through stakeholder input. County staff refined the list of actions, including the specific codes or policies that may be eligible for relief. A proposed project must also comply with requirements of the Collier County Impact Fee Deferral program or Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) program. Proposed changes to the LDC are: • Add a list of standards that define relief eligibility. This list would be designated as Section 4.02.39. • Modify language to allow cluster housing land use changes be an administrative approval procedure rather than the current, longer public hearing process, and when compatibility standards are met. This will allow a developer to start building housing units sooner. Cluster housing, or open space developments, helps save open space. Homes in this type of development are situated in groupings relatively close together, while larger areas of open space within the development form a buffer with nearby properties. These open spaces often become common ground that are often used for recreation, gardens and such. This requires changes to LDC Sections 2.03.02 and 4.02.04. • Mandate more frequent review meetings to shorten review times so that priority is given to and qualifying projects are approved more quickly. Requires altering the Development Review Fast Track Resolution 18-40. We are Improving Housing Choices for Working Families ON OCTOBER 24, 2017 The Collier County Board of County Commissioners accepted the Collier County Housing Plan as a blueprint for the County to increase the future housing supply and availability for the County’s working population. The following five (5) initiatives are from the recommendations made by the board for stakeholder/community feedback for the purpose of adoption through Collier County’s public hearing process. To maintain the State of Florida required comprehensive long range plan for Collier County. The GMP petitions are processed three times a year by being submitted to the transmittal and adoption evaluation process. These processes include recording research information for the specific GMP elements, the staff’s analysis, petition hearing by the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, notifying the public, and reviews by several state department/agencies. Housing is considered affordable if a family or individual spends no more than 30% of their income to live there. INITIATIVE #1. Regulatory Relief (Cost Maintenance) for Design and Construction of Residential Housing and Want to Hear from YOU ! THE PURPOSE OF THE GMP Collier County does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, source of income, familial status, disability, genetic information, age, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status in the access to, admission into, or employment in, housing programs or activities. INITIATIVE #2. Streamline Commercial Conversion into Modern “Live Work and Play” Communities Streamlining the process for developers who convert commercially zoned land to mixed use and residential uses by replacing the public hearing process with an administrative approval procedure. This supports the desirable result of housing located on or near commercially zoned sites throughout the county. Having residences closer to businesses enhances access and convenience to employment, healthcare, groceries and other daily needs and personal services. It also encourages residents to seek other modes of travel like walking and biking, and supports an overall thriving economy. The current Growth Management Plan (GMP) allows density up to 16 units per acre for such conversions, and the LDC allows a mix of uses in commercially zoned districts C-1 through C-3, however both require lengthy zoning processes. Proposed changes to the GMP include: • Add housing that is affordable by increasing densities at 16 units per acre as a part of the density rating system for conversion projects. Increasing densities is an incentive for developers and homebuilders as it allows them to provide more dwelling choices to the public, and increase their potential revenue. Affordability must be committed through an Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) Agreement, Developers Agreement, Planned Unit Development (PUD) commitment, or compliance with terms and conditions of the Impact Fee Deferral program. • Multiple proposed LDC amendments will establish the mix of uses and multifamily basis that will qualify affordable parameters as allowable uses in conventional commercial districts. Those projects will still be subject to criteria for public facilities as determined by an impact analysis and must meet compatibility standards to ensure the project has the public benefit of reduced intensity, or less traffic overall. INCOME LEVELS PERCENT OF MEDIAN INCOME Gap >120 to <140 Moderate >80 to <120 Low >50 to <80 Very Low <50 Collier County LDC 2.06.03 (Ordinance 19-02) INITIATIVE #3. Redeveloped Activity Centers to include Mixed-Income Family Housing The greatest need for affordable housing is in close proximity to employment, healthcare, groceries, and other daily needs and personal services. This initiative is to encourage housing in the County’s 20 Activity Centers. Current County programs normally provide housing at single-household income levels. This initiative is designed to stimulate housing within areas of up to 25 units per acre where households of mixed economic levels are served. Proposed changes to the GMP include: • Increase density from the currently allowable 16 units per acre to a maximum of 25 units per acre in activity centers, if a portion of the additional units are committed at prices that serve a mix of at least two income levels of the county’s defined affordability thresholds as seen in the chart above.CHARACTER IMAGEPROJECT #: 20149700-147 DATE: MAY 2018 GOLDEN GATE ACTIVITY CENTER COLLIER COUNTY, FL VANTAGE POINT VIEW COLLIER COUNTY CONTACT INFORMATION Collier County Community and Human Services Division 3339 East Tamiami Trail, Building H, Room 211, Naples, FL 34112 Phone: 239-252-CARE (2273) Email: housinginfo@colliercountyfl.gov Website: CollierCountyHousing.com PLEASE SUBMIT COMMENTS ONLINE AT www.colliercountyhousing.com. Go to About and click on Feedback. The form will go to Collier County Housing Operations staff. INITIATIVE #4. Expansion Density Recommendations for Work/Live Communities Strategic Opportunity Sites (SOS) are a new concept that recognizes larger development projects featuring corporate headquarters or similarly substantial employment centers. These locations represent key areas, with high potential to provide the greatest benefits in the wake of continued growth. The location of residential properties near these areas of employment are also encouraged. The best way to introduce this integrated pattern of development is to provide an incentive to developers. Proposed changes to the GMP include: • To establish the SOS as a future land use designation. This will allow a developer to seek this designation through a Future Land Use Map change, while meeting the necessary requirements and agreements. The density attained is subject to a new formula that is proposed to allocate the highest densities to projects that serve a mix of income levels and that accommodate lower income levels, allowing for more housing options that are affordable. • Allow developers to increase densities up to 25 units per acre as long as they show that 50 percent of the housing units qualify as affordable; demonstrate a mix of income levels; meet mixed-use ratios and follow design and buffering requirements. INITIATIVE #5. Increase Transit Route Corridors for the Benefit of Working Families withing the “Center City” Developments The location of housing that is affordable for working families is naturally beneficial to the transportation system, as well as those who live within a convenient distance. This initiative provides for an increased density incentive to developers as long as the housing project meets affordable eligibility; incorporates transit oriented design (TOD) elements and concentrates a majority of the dwelling units within a convenient walking distance, defined as an area covered by a 5-minute walk, or about 1/4-mile. Proposed changes to the GMP include: • Apply transit supportive density levels (minimum of seven units per acre) to market rate development that is designed to orient toward transit and stimulate housing that is affordable. With increased density in these locations, greater efficiencies in transit use may also be achieved. The principles of TOD also align with the potential for autonomous vehicles and other transportation advancements. • Change the Transportation Element to state that a priority is placed on locating higher density housing along transit corridors. • Change the Density Rating System to allow TOD market rate projects be eligible for increased density incentives. Specifically, up to 13 units per acre through PUD approval. Then, from 13 up to 25 units per acre through PUD approval and dedication that the additional units are committed at prices affordable to a range of income levels. October 9th, 2018 BCC Recap     Page 1 October 9, 2018 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB) Airport Authority AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 October 9, 2018 9:00 AM Commissioner Andy Solis, District 2 - BCC Chair Commissioner William L. McDaniel Jr., Dist. 5 - BCC Vice-Chair; CRAB Co-Chair Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1; CRAB Co-Chair Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3 Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE 3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER “PUBLIC PETITIONS.” PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD Page 2 October 9, 2018 WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. 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, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M 1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. Father Paul D'Angelo of St. John the Evangelist Catholic Church Invocation Given 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.) Approved and/or Adopted w/changes – 5/0 Commissioner Solis abstained from voting on Item #16A3 B. September 6, 2018 – BCC/Budget Hearing Meeting Minutes Approved as presented – 5/0 C. September 11, 2018 – BCC/Regular Meeting Minutes Approved as presented – 5/0 Page 3 October 9, 2018 D. September 20, 2018 BCC/Budget Hearing Meeting Minutes Approved as presented – 5/0 3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS A. EMPLOYEE B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS C. RETIREES D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH 1) Recommendation to recognize Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner, Growth Management Department as the September 2018 Employee of the Month. Recognized 4. PROCLAMATIONS (One Motion to Adopt all Proclamations) A. Proclamation designating October 20, 2018 as Children's Business Fair Day in Collier County. To be accepted by Michael Dalby, Nikkie Dvorchak, Madeline Young, Amanda Beights and Alex Breault . Adopted – 5/0 B. Proclamation designating October 2018 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Linda Oberhaus, Chief Executive Officer - Shelter for Abused Women & Children and Collier County Sheriff Kevin Rambosk. Adopted – 5/0 C. Proclamation recognizing Collier County Public School's 19th Annual Red Walk, to be held on October 19, 2018 at Lely Elementary School. To be accepted by Christa Crehan, Principal, Lely Elementary School and Craig Greusel, Program Director. Adopted – 5/0 5. PRESENTATIONS Page 4 October 9, 2018 A. Presentation of the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for Fiscal Year 2018 from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) presented to the Office of Management and Budget. To be accepted by Mark Isackson, Corporate Financial Planning and Management Services Director. Presented B. Presentation of the Collier County Business of the Month for October 2018 to The Immokalee Foundation, Inc. To be accepted by Noemi Perez, Executive Director; Laura Simmelink, Development Director; and Amber Barr, Program Services Director. Also in attendance is Bethany Sawyer representing the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce. PowerPoint presentation by Noemi Perez; Annual Report requested by Commissioners Added: C. Commissioner Solis announced the featured artist – Lynda Fay Braun 6. PUBLIC PETITIONS 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA A. Trent Dunn – Cannabis dispensaries B. Rae Ann Burton – Panthers in Golden Gate Estates C. Garrett Beyrent – Innovation Zone, Golden Gate Farmer’s Market 8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT To be heard at 10:00 a.m. (Per Agenda Change Sheet) A. Recommendation to direct staff to continue implementation of the Community Housing Plan (CHP) by taking necessary actions to: (1) Continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program; (2) Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications (including senior, veteran’s, Page 5 October 9, 2018 and special needs housing); (3) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions; (4) Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers; 5) Develop a process to identify and allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites; (6) Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors. (Cormac Giblin, Grants and Housing Development Manager; Community and Human Services Division) Motion to deny presentation recommendations for #1 - Approved 5/0; Motion to approve presentation recommendations for #2 - Approved 5/0; Motion to approve presentation recommendations for #3 - Approved 3/2 (Commissioner McDaniel and Commissioner Fiala opposed); Motion to deny presentation recommendations for #4 - Failed 2/3 Commissioner Saunders, Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner Solis opposed); Motion to accept recommendation as presented with exception of activity centers, staff to bring back recommendations - Approved 4/1 (Commissioner Fiala opposed); Motion to deny presentation recommendations for #5 - Failed 2/3 Commissioner Saunders, Commissioner Taylor and Commissioner Solis opposed); Motion to approve presentation recommendations as shown on the screen - Approved 3/2 Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner McDaniel opposed); Motion to approve presentation recommendations as shown on the screen #6 - Approved 3/2 (Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner McDaniel opposed) B. Recommendation to approve the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Strategic Marketing Plan for the Naples, Marco Island, Everglades Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB) and make a finding that this plan promotes tourism. (Jack Wert, Tourism Division Director) Motion to approve the Strategic Marketing Plan and that it supports Tourism - Approved 5/0 C. Recommendation to approve release of $250,000 from Tourism Division Emergency Advertising Reserves to support an integrated marketing and promotion campaign to mitigate the future negative visitor impact of the Red Page 6 October 9, 2018 Tide crisis in Collier County and make a finding that this action promotes tourism. (Jack Wert, Tourism Division Director) Approved - 5/0 D. Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between the District Schools of Collier County (District) and the Board of County Commissioners (Board), that supersedes the prior Interlocal Agreement and meets new reimbursement guidelines implemented by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), authorize the payment of 3,038,402.12 to the District for shelter and transportation cost incurred during Hurricane Irma, and authorize all necessary budget amendments. Dan Summers, Bureau of Emergency Management Division Director) Approved – 5/0 12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT 13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A. AIRPORT B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS A. Proposed BCC Future Workshop Schedule: February 5, 2019 BCC/Transit System Workshop at 9:00 a.m., February 5, 2019 BCC/Fertilizer Ordinance Workshop at 1:00 p.m. and March 5, 2019 BCC Land Use Map Workshop B. Commissioner Taylor – Adding a second review step regarding the CRA Master plan updates with respect to the LDC Regulations and The Overlay Requirements C. Commissioner Saunders – Drafting an ordinance to prevent Gas Pump Skimmers D. Commissioner Solis – Nationwide shortage of healthcare professionals and mental health facilities; Bringing back an ordinance creating the Behavioral Health Advisory Committee E. Commissioner Solis – Adjourned - Consensus Page 7 October 9, 2018 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Approved and/or Adopted w/changes – 5/0 Commissioner Solis abstained from voting on Item #16A3) A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer facilities for RaceTrac at Davis Boulevard, PL20160002277, accept unconditional conveyance of a portion of the potable water and sewer facilities, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of $18,093.40 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent. A final inspection to discover defects was conducted by staff on August 22, 2018, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found to be satisfactory and acceptable 2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer facilities for Vanderbilt Commons, PL20170000562, accept unconditional conveyance of the potable water facilities and a portion of the sewer facilities, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of $38,553.68 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent. A final inspection to discover defects was conducted by staff on August 28, 2018, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found to be satisfactory and acceptable Commissioner Solis abstained from voting during Agenda Changes 3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water facilities for Villages of Monterey Clubhouse, PL20170001728, accept unconditional conveyance of a portion of the potable water facilities, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Page 8 October 9, 2018 Bond in the total amount of $6,129.24 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent. A final inspection to discover defects was conducted by staff on August 27, 2018, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found to be satisfactory and acceptable 4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and unconditional conveyance of the sewer utility facilities for Collier Park of Commerce Phase 2, PL20160000500 and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of $5,216.45 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent . A final inspection to discover defects was conducted by Development Review staff on September 4, 2018, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found to be satisfactory and acceptable 5) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and sewer facilities for Hammock Cove Tract C, PL20170000348, accept unconditional conveyance of a portion of the sewer facilities, and to authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of $6,074.82 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent. A final inspection to discover defects was conducted by staff on August 30, 2018, in coordination with Public Utilities, and the facilities were found to be satisfactory and acceptable 6) Recommendation to approve and Authorize the Chairman to sign the Utility Facilities Quit-Claim Deed and Bill of Sale between Collier County and Minto Sabal Bay, LLC, in order to correct an error in the previously recorded Utility Facilities Warranty Deed and Bill of Sale for Isles of Collier Preserve Phase 8 – Dog Park, PL20180001856, in which the Developer mistakenly conveyed sanitary sewer facilities to the County even though no such facilities exist . 7) This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Abaco Pointe, (Application Page 9 October 9, 2018 Number PL20180001040) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. W/stipulations 8) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien with a value of $289,730.43 for payment of $680.43 in the code enforcement actions entitled Board of County Commissioners v. Irene Sylva Est and Rafael Rosas, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CESD20150002305 relating to property located at 141 20th Avenue NE, Collier County, Florida. Related to several structures erected on the property without obtaining Collier County building permits 9) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 1 for Johnson Engineering, Inc., for the “Sunshine Blvd. from 17th Ave. SW to Green Boulevard” LAP project, for the design of sidewalk and pedestrian bridge improvements in the amount of $27,604 (Project No. 33505). Due to an increase in work order assignments to cover the cost of a bridge hydraulic recommendation analysis for the pedestrian bridge, consisting of a bridge hydraulic and scour analysis report and a canal topographic survey 10) Recommendation to approve an agreement for $318,142 with Quality Enterprises USA, Inc. pursuant to Annual Contract “14-6212 Bridge Repairs and Maintenance” for repairs on Bridge 030149 (Bluebill Avenue over Naples Park Canal), Project Number 66066. To repair several spalled areas, cracking, pile corrosion and delamination referenced in FDOT reports 11) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to execute Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. 17-7128 in the amount of $29,028.35 with APTIM Environmental & Infrastructure, Inc., for additional professional engineering services as required for the “Wiggins Pass Channel and Doctors Pass Channel Dredging Project.” To provide (necessary) additional engineering services, regulatory agency coordination, and a time extension of 30 days to the existing contract to facilitate final engineering and the close out certification process Page 10 October 9, 2018 12) Recommendation to award a Work Order to Preferred Materials, Inc., for construction of the “Airport Road and Davis Boulevard (Phase2) - Northbound Right Turn Lane” project in the amount of $518,443.49 Project 60148). Specified under Contract #16-6663 13) This item was continued from the September 25, 2018 BCC Meeting. Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien with a value of $33,130.36 for payment of $10,000 in the code enforcement action entitled Board of County Commissioners v. AT&T Wireless Services of FL, Code Enforcement Board Case No. CEPM20150012708 relating to 1173 Sun Century Road, Collier County, Florida. For fines associated with a garage with roof damage 14) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (ITB) No. 18-7430 Landscape Maintenance Vendors” to Florida Land Maintenance d/b/a Commercial Land Maintenance and Superior Landscaping & Lawn Service, Inc. As detailed in the Executive Summary B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB), approve a Lease Modification for Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA office located at 3750 Bayshore Drive with 3750 Bayshore Drive, LLC and authorize the Chairman to sign. To secure short-term office space for the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA until a build-out of the new office space is completed, which is expected in the first quarter of 2019 C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with South Seas Northwest Condominium Apartments of Marco Island, Inc., to extend the lease term to maintain 800 MHz communications equipment operating at that location. Extending the lease term to October 14, 2021 Page 11 October 9, 2018 2) Recommendation to correct a scrivener’s error in the Executive Summary for Bid Number 18-7314 “95th Avenue North Public Utilities Renewal,” Project Numbers 60139 and 70120, awarded to Douglas N. Higgins, Inc., on June 26, 2018 as Agenda Item #11G. 3) Recommendation to terminate the Siemen’s Guaranteed Energy, Water, and Wastewater Performance Savings Contract assigned to the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD) by Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) for non-appropriation. Terminating a contract dated July 25, 2016 D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to approve the conveyance of a Raw Water Utility Easement along the eastern edge of the Gordon River Greenway to the City of Naples. An easement over a parcel of County-owned land necessary to construct, operate and maintain infrastructure 2) Recommendation to approve the FY18-19 contract with the State of Florida Department of Health (DOH) for the operation of the Collier County Health Department in the amount of $1,491,400 . Effective October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019 3) Recommendation to authorize Change Order No. 1 in the amount of 59,998.24 against a purchase order issued under Contract #17-7154 for Structural and Mechanical Pool Contractor with Omni Aquatics, Inc. To return the activity pool at the aquatic facility in Immokalee to fully operational and operate within the local, state and federal law regulations 4) Recommendation to approve two (2) after-the-fact grant requests to the Florida Communities Trust Grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection; one (1) application in the amount of 163,642 is to enhance recreational amenities available at Isles of Capri Neighborhood Park, and the other application in the amount of 735,000 is to purchase the Gore property which is desig nated as Strategic Habitat Conservation Area for Conservation Collier. Page 12 October 9, 2018 As detailed in the Executive Summary 5) Recommendation to approve an out of cycle Collier County Tourist Development Council (TDC) Grant Application for Beach Park Facilities in the amount of $200,000 for restroom improvements and a feasibility study for the construction of a Park Ranger Station at Barefoot Beach Preserve Park, authorize necessary budget amendment, and make a finding that the expenditure promotes tourism. For upgrades to the 27-year old facility 6) Recommendation to approve a Conservation Bank Agreement between Collier County and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and all documents necessary, to create the Pepper Ranch Preserve Conservation Bank, generating U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service panther habitat unit mitigation credits to mitigate for proposed impacts to panther habitat during future County projects and to authorize any Budget Amendments necessary to fund the new Pepper Ranch Preserve Bank Endowment Fund 673 in the amount of 253,600 for interim maintenance at the Pepper Ranch Preserve Conservation Bank. To provide 8,669 panther habitat unit mitigation credits for development of future projects at a cost savings of $1,077,123.25 7) Recommendation to adopt the Museum Division 2018 Strategic Plan. As detailed in the Executive Summary E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1) Recommendation to renew the annual Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (COPCN) for Ambitrans Medical Transport, Inc. to provide Class 2 Advanced Life Support (ALS) inter- facility transport ambulance service for a period of one year. To provide Advanced Life Support inter-facility transport services in Collier County by a private provider 2) Recommendation to approve a five-year agreement with Marsh ClearSight, Inc. in an annual amount of $138,000 for the purchase of Risk Management Information System Software (RMIS) and authorize the Chairman to sign Contract #18-7341. Page 13 October 9, 2018 To manage damage claims presented against the County in an efficient, effective manner and assure the standardization and continuity of the risk management processes through a common Risk Management Information System 3) Recommendation to accept a Federally-Funded Sub-award and Grant Agreement through the Florida Division of Emergency Management for reimbursement of expenditures associated with preparation and recovery from the Florida 30th Avenue Fire (Net Fiscal Impact: 82,964.96). Requires a 25% local share in the amount of $20,741.24 4) Recommendation to award Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) #18-7321, Gas and Diesel Fuel Multi-Agency Cooperative Purchase,” to Palmdale Oil Company, Inc., authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement, and terminate the award of #18-7406 “Emergency Fuel.” To provide gasoline and diesel fuel for County vehicles 5) Recommendation to approve a Florida Emergency Medical Services County Grant Application, Request for Grant Fund Distribution Form and Resolution for the funding of Training and Medical/Rescue Equipment in the amount of $63,545 and to authorize the necessary Budget Amendment. Resolution 2018-171 6) Recommendation to authorize routine and customary budget amendments appropriating carry forward budget in the amount of 8,944,843.63 for approved open purchase orders into Fiscal Year 2019. 7) Recommendation to approve the Administrative Reports prepared by the Procurement Services Division for change orders and other contractual modifications requiring Board approval. As detailed in the Executive Summary 8) Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the Procurement Services Division for disposal of property and notification of revenue disbursement. As detailed in the Executive Summary Page 14 October 9, 2018 F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS 1) Recommendation to award Solicitation No. 18-7434 for Pelican Bay Streetlight Pole Repairs to SPE Utility Contractors FD, LLC in the amount of $97,894 and authorize the Chairman to execute the attached agreement. To straighten 110 streetlight poles and replace four pathway bollard lights damaged by Hurricane Irma 2) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2017-18 Adopted Budget. Resolution 2018-172 3) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds) to the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Adopted Budget. Resolution 2018-173 4) Recommendation to award RFP #18-7281R, “Tourism Fulfillment and Call Center Services” to Faneuil, Inc., for $21,772.97, authorize the Chairman to execute the associated agreement, and make a finding that this action promotes tourism. To fulfill requests for information, answer incoming requests from toll-free numbers, publication responses and the Internet 5) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to Florida Sports Foundation in the amount of $25,000 to offset a portion of the operating expenses to host the 2018 Football University (FBU) National Championships in Collier County, authorize the County Manager to accept the award and process any budget amendments and make a finding that this action promotes tourism. The event will take place December 15-20, 2018 6) Recommendation to use Tourist Development Tax Promotion Funds to support the upcoming November 2018 Sports Tourism Events up to 17,800 and make a finding that these expenditures promote tourism. For the Paradise Coast Softball Invitational November 16-18, 2018 and Trophy Fish Bowl Lacrosse event November 17-18, 2018 Page 15 October 9, 2018 7) Recommendation to use Tourist Tax Promotion Funds to sponsor the 2018 Powerboat Nationals Formula 4 Global Championship Event October 27-28, 2018, approve reimbursement of operating expenses for this purpose, and make a finding that these event expenditures promote tourism. 8) Recommendation to approve Tourist Development Tax Promotion and Marketing funding to support the upcoming Winter Nationals Senior Softball Tournament on November 6-11, 2018 up to $6,105 and make a finding that these expenditures promote tourism. 9) Recommendation to approve the submittal of a grant application to Visit Florida in the amount of $70,000 for the Tourism Recovery Grant Program for Red Tide in Collier County, authorize the County Manager to accept the award and process any necessary budget amendments and make a finding that this action promotes tourism. 10) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners reviews and approves the proposed FY2019 Action Plan for Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager. As detailed in the Executive Summary G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Resolution authorizing execution of Joint Participation Agreement Contract No. G0E50 Supplement One with the Florida Department of Transportation for construction of a new terminal facility with associated entrance, parking, and related safety improvements at the Marco Island Executive Airport . Resolution 2018-174 H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) Recommendation to extend the 2018 Tax Roll at the request of Tax Collector Larry Ray. Page 16 October 9, 2018 Extending it past November 1 due to Value Adjustment Board petitions 2) Recommendation to approve the FY 2018 SCAAP letter delegating authority to Sheriff Kevin Rambosk to be the official grant applicant and contact person, or his designee, and to receive, expends the payment and make any necessary budget amendments of the FY 2018 of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) grant funds. 3) Recommendation to serve as the local coordinating unit of government for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s Federal Fiscal Year 2017 Edward Byrne Memorial, Justice Assistance Grant JAG) Countywide Program and (1) authorize the Chairman to execute the Certification of Participation; (2) designate the Sheriff as the official applicant and the Sheriff’s office staff as grant financial and program managers; (3) authorize the acceptance of the grant if and when awarded; and (4) approve associated budget amendments and approve the Collier County Sheriff’s Office to receive and expend the grant funds. 4) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and purpose for which the referenced disbursements were drawn for the periods between September 13 and 26, 2018 pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06. 5) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of October 3, 2018. K. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Golden Gate Beautification Advisory Committee. Resolution 2018-175: Appointing Norma R. Lees-Davis and re-appointing Ronald J. Jefferson to 4-year terms expiring October 6, 2022 2) Recommendation to reappoint a member to the Collier County Citizen Corps. Resolution 2018-176: Reappointing Barry Gerenstein to a 4-year term expiring November 5, 2022 3) Recommendation to reappoint two members to the Historic/Archaeological Preservation Board. Resolution 2018-177: Reappointing Elaine Reed and Eugene V. Erjavec, Jr. to 3-year terms expiring October 1, 2021 4) Recommendation to reappoint a member to the Lely Golf Estates Beautification Advisory Committee. Resolution 2018-178: Re-appointing Kathleen Dammert to a 4- year term expiring October 1, 2022 5) Recommendation to reappoint a member to the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee. Resolution 2018-179: Reappointing Annette Kniola to a 4-year term expiring October 13, 2022 6) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment for final compensation in the amount of$8,000 for Parcel 404RDUE, including all attorney and expert fees, in the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Jarrett Cox, et al, Case No. 16-CA-1313, required for the Golden Gate Boulevard Expansion Project No. 60145, (from 20th St. E. to Everglades Blvd.). (Fiscal Impact: $4,800) A 6,965-square foot perpetual, non-exclusive road right-of-way, drainage and utility easement 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - This section is for advertised public hearings and must meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from staff; 2) Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County Planning Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting; 3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the Collier County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the Board, prior to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items are scheduled to be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must be sworn in. Adopted — 5/0 Page 17 October 9,2018 Page 18 October 9, 2018 A. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Adopted Budget. Resolution 2018-180 18. ADJOURN Consensus INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383. October 9th, 2018 Executive Summary & PowerPoint     10/09/2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to direct staff to continue implementation of the Community Housing Plan (CHP) by taking necessary actions to: (1) Continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program; 2) Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications (including senior, veteran’s, and special needs housing); (3) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions via the Hearing Examiner; (4) Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers; (5) Develop a process to identify and allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites; (6) Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors. (Cormac Giblin, Grants and Housing Development Manager; Community and Human Services Division) OBJECTIVE: To implement new and modified approaches to address Collier County’s housing affordability issues. CONSIDERATIONS: Collier County has a statutory obligation to provide housing for its current and anticipated population, including those that are most vulnerable. Housing that is affordable is part of a community’s infrastructure and therefore impacts the entire community. First responders, health care professionals, teachers, and others have been historically priced out of the housing market. A vibrant and sustainable community needs to develop specific strategies to accommodate the housing needs of its workforce. In response to community concerns, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) commissioned the development of a CHP in March 2016 with a broad cross-section of stakeholders appointed in June 2016. In 2017, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) performed a panel review of the housing situation in Collier County. Among their conclusions is that Collier County needed to reframe its view of housing to meet better the needs of the 40% of the population (58,685 households) currently living in Collier County that are cost-burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing. This large segment of Collier County’s population is working and living here un-affordably. The community stakeholders presented the CHP to the Board on October 25, 2017. The plan includes approximately thirty (30) specific recommendations including housing for seniors, veterans, and those with special needs. The Board accepted the CHP and staff initiated an implementation schedule. This request is the third of a series of implementation actions to be presented to the Board. Some of the key recommendations include a continuation of work on a Mixed Income Housing Program, regulatory relief for certain affordable housing applications (including senior, veterans, and special needs housing), develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions, develop incentivization guidelines for mixed-income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers, develop a process to allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites and provide an increase in density in the CRA areas and along transit corridors. Specific recommendations include: A. Mixed-Income Housing Incentive Program - Direct staff to work with the development community, bankers, and other interested parties to develop Growth Management Plan (GMP) and Land Development Code (LDC) amendments that will create a market-based mixed-income housing program. Provide market incentives for the inclusion of housing that is affordable in new developments. The market chooses how to meet the goal with multiple options offered to 11.A Packet Pg. 43 10/09/2018 participants. Increased Density and Impact Fee Relief provides an incentive to the developer with more market-rate units. Seek a “Win/Win” outcome. B. Provide Regulatory Relief to Certain Housing Applications - Direct staff to review regulations and develop LDC amendments that will provide development relief to certain residential land use applications (including senior, veteran’s, and special needs housing) that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as housing that is affordable. Creating development incentives for developments that voluntarily include housing that is affordable will encourage the development of more affordable units. Staff will work with the Development Services Advisory Committee to explore and vet possible changes to the LDC that would provide regulatory relief and bring suggested amendments back for Board approval. C. Allow for Commercial to Residential conversions via Hearing Examiner - Direct staff to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will streamline the Commercial to Residential conversion process via the Hearing Examiner for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as housing that is affordable. This recommendation would seek to streamline the approval process for developments seeking to down-zone from existing Commercial uses to Residential, in exchange for those developments providing a portion of their residential units as housing that is affordable. Historically the vast majority of these requests have been approved by the Board. This process would be limited to properties located within Activity Centers or that are identified as “Commercial/Consistent by Plan.” The Board sets clear criteria for approval and staff carries it out via the Hearing examiner. Maintains public transparency. D. Develop incentivization guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing - Direct staff to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will encourage the inclusion of residential units in Activity Centers for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as housing that is affordable. Encourages residential uses near areas with existing infrastructure. Allows for housing that is affordable to be developed throughout the north/south corridors of the county. E. Develop a process to designate certain Strategic Opportunity Sites and allow for increased density (greater than 16u/a) - Direct staff to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will create a process for the creation and designation of Strategic Opportunity Sites allowing for increased density (above 16u/a) for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as housing that is affordable. A main recommendation of the 2017 ULI Study is that Collier County should allow for greater residential densities in order to mitigate high land and development costs. Strategic Opportunity sites would be designated by the Board as areas where higher densities are encouraged. A Strategic Opportunity Site may be attractive for a new corporate headquarters campus, a regional commercial center, or an institution of higher learning. F. Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency areas and along 11.A Packet Pg. 44 10/09/2018 transit corridors - Direct staff to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will allow increased density and other incentives in CRAs and along transit corridors for developments that voluntarily provide a predefined portion of their units as Housing that is affordable. To incentivize development in CRA areas and along transit corridors where infrastructure already exists. Locating housing that is affordable on major transit corridors and in CRA areas is a recommendation of the 2017 ULI study. CRAs typically need additional incentives to increase their property values and encourage new development. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no immediate and direct Fiscal impacts to approving the items in this Executive Summary. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of these policies, strategies, ordinances, and amendments will assist Collier County in meeting the goals of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: For those implementation actions that are Board approved, the County Attorney’s Office will work with staff to ensure that the resolutions, amendments to resolutions, ordinances (GMP and LDC) are approved for form and legality. Accordingly, this Item is approved to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - JAB RECOMMENDATION: To direct staff to continue implementation of the CHP by taking necessary actions to: (1) Continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program; (2) Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications (including senior, veteran’s, and special needs housing); (3) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions via the Hearing Examiner; (4) Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers; (5) Develop a process to identify and allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites; (6 ) Provide an increase in density in the CRA areas and along transit corridors. Prepared By: Cormac Giblin, AICP - Grants and Housing Development Manager; Community and Human Services Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. CHP Phase 3 Presentation Agenda 092818-1420 [Linked] (PDF) 11.A Packet Pg. 45 10/09/2018 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 11.A Doc ID: 6699 Item Summary: Recommendation to direct staff to continue implementation of the Community Housing Plan (CHP) by taking necessary actions to: (1) Continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program; (2) Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications (including senior, veteran’s, and special needs housing); (3) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions; (4) Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers; (5) Develop a process to identify and allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites; (6) Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopmen t Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors. (Cormac Giblin, Grants and Housing Development Manager; Community and Human Services Division) Meeting Date: 10/09/2018 Prepared by: Title: – Community & Human Services Name: Hilary Halford 09/12/2018 1:41 PM Submitted by: Title: – Community & Human Services Name: Cormac Giblin 09/12/2018 1:41 PM Approved By: Review: Public Services Department Kristi Sonntag Additional Reviewer Completed 09/12/2018 6:10 PM Community & Human Services Cormac Giblin Additional Reviewer Completed 09/17/2018 10:53 AM Community & Human Services Kristi Sonntag Additional Reviewer Completed 09/17/2018 12:19 PM Public Services Department Todd Henry Level 1 Division Reviewer Completed 09/18/2018 10:45 AM County Attorney's Office Jennifer Belpedio Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 09/19/2018 11:59 AM Public Services Department Steve Carnell Level 2 Division Administrator Review Completed 09/25/2018 10:36 AM County Attorney's Office Emily Pepin CAO Preview Completed 09/25/2018 1:45 PM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 09/25/2018 4:41 PM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 09/26/2018 10:56 AM Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 09/27/2018 8:48 AM Budget and Management Office Ed Finn Additional Reviewer Completed 10/01/2018 10:27 AM County Manager's Office Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 10/02/2018 2:01 PM 11.A Packet Pg. 46 10/09/2018 Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 10/09/2018 9:00 AM 11.A Packet Pg. 47 Collier County Community Housing Plan Presentation: Housing Plan Implementationn Phase 3 10/9/18 BCC 1 2 Housing Plan Implementation Direction 3Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Approvals February 2018 –Green “Foundational” 4Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Approvals May 2018 –Green “Enhancements” 5Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Approvals Through May 2018 -Green 6Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Response Model: Close the Gap Impact of Decisions Thus Far 7 Reduces units produced to 1215 Consideration Today –Yellow “Transformational” 8Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Consideration Future –Blue “Transportation” 9Regulationand Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Mixed Income Hsg with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Regulatory Relief Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Dev. Review and Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Adopt New Definition and Methodology Hire Housing Counselor Commercial to Residential Conversions Community Vision Housing Plan Implementation Items for today’s consideration Direct staff to continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications including senior housing) Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers Develop a process identify and allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites (over 16 units/acre) Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors 10 Response Model: Close the Gap At stake today 11 1 Mixed Income Incentive Program MARKET BASED SOLUTION 12 1-Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program Purpose -To provide market incentives for the inclusion of housing that is affordable in new developments 13 We… Understand this is not necessarily popular with all developers and regulators Recognize this as a solid, and increasingly utilized mechanism to develop new housing stock in a growing area in proportion to the influx of new residents Believe that a program can be developed that provides market incentives that has the potential to be accepted by all involved Ask for your consideration in hearing where we are going,and seek approval to keep working on this and bring back to you specific regulatory changes to create/enable such a program 14 National Interest is Surging, and… Complicated and Innovative Complicated because it aspires to harness the ever-changing dynamics of market rate real estate development to achieve fixed policy goals Innovative because it aims to balance often opposing points of view in communities regarding the roles and responsibilities of the private sector to help meet a public need within a free-market economic system 15 National Interest is Surging, and… Come together around the extent to which the policies are mandatory, voluntary, or somewhere in between (i.e. only applied in certain circumstances) Where you land is largely determined by the development incentives that attempt to mitigate or offset the economic impacts of the zoning Good news is Collier County has at its disposal a number of tools to optimize developer participation and spur the desired development of new affordable housing units 16 Mixed Income Housing Incentive Benefits County provides substantial incentives to produce a “Market-Based Solution” MARKET chooses how to meet goal with multiple options offered to participants Increased Density / market rate units County can provide qualified buyers with additional subsidies Fast Track all approvals –saves $ and time Available for Impact Fee Deferrals Maybe more A “Win/Win” proposition Provides “Revenue Positive” scenario for Developer Developer saves time Developer and County meet market need for housing units For Rental and For Sale Incentivizes Smart Planning/Design Balanced and measured approach Produces homes that are affordable in perpetuity Keeps pace with growth 17 Collier’s Comprehensive Plan Directs that a Mixed Income Housing Program be Explored 18 A Mixed Income Housing Requirement is Already in our Code for Rural Villages 19 2-3 units/acre of which 0.2 required to be Affordable = 7%-10% Required Recommendation Direct staff to work with the development community, bankers and other interested parties to develop GMP and LDC amendments that will create a market based mixed income housing program 20 2 Provide Regulatory Relief to Certain Housing Applications THAT ADDRESS HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AND TO INCREASE CERTAINTY 21 2-Provide Regulatory Relief to Certain Housing Applications that Address Housing Affordability Purpose -Incentivize the development of Housing that Is affordable by increasing certainty. 22 2-Provide Regulatory Relief to Certain Housing Applications that Address Housing Affordability Creating development incentives for developments that voluntarily include housing that is affordable will encourage the development for more affordable units. Possible examples of such incentives could include: Allow an increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for Assisted Living Facilities that increase the number of Medicare (affordable) beds Allow Cluster Housing for developments including Housing that is Affordable without a Conditional Use Provide Relief from some site design standards for developments including Housing that is Affordable (i.e.-Road/sidewalk widths, generators, design criteria, reduced parking standards, etc.) Staff will work with the Development Services Advisory Committee to explore and vet possible changes to the LDC that would provide regulatory relief and bring suggested amendments back the Board for approval. 23 2-Provide Regulatory Relief to Certain Housing Applications that Address Housing Affordability Benefits If certain reliefs are spelled out, developers increase certainty The relief incentives are to encourage construction of more housing that is affordable Any relief would need to maintain the health, safety, and welfare Public benefit because this is a priority of the BCC to make sure there is housing sufficient to meet the needs of the community 24 Recommendation Direct staff to review regulations and develop Land Development Code amendments that will provide Development Relief to certain Residential land use Applications that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as Housing that is Affordable 25 3 Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner 26 3-Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner Purpose-Increase certainty in the development process for the conversion of existing Commercially Zoned property to Residential including housing that is affordable. 27 3-Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner Commercial Zoning is widely considered to be one of the most intensive land uses, with Residential likewise being considered one of the least intensive (noise, lighting, traffic generation, etc.). This recommendation would seek to increase certainty and decrease time in the approval process for developments seeking to down-zone from exiting Commercial uses to Residential, in exchange for those developments providing a portion of their residential units as housing that is affordable. 28 3-Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner Historically the vast majority of these requests have been approved by the BCC This process would be limited to properties located in Activity Centers or that are identified as “Commercial/Consistent by Plan” 29 3-Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner Clear guidelines will be created to outline where and under what circumstances this will be allowed Offers certainty while maintaining transparency Staff will still do a thorough review and hold each application to the requirements in the code The Hearing Examiner will provide oversight to ensure guidelines are followed and neighborhood compatibility is maintained 30 3-Allow for Commercial to Residential Conversions via Hearing Examiner Benefits Increases certainty Promotes inclusion of Housing that is Affordable Board sets clear criteria for approval and staff carries it out via the Hearing Examiner 31 Recommendation Direct staff to develop Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendments that will increase certainty and in the Commercial to Residential conversion process for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as Housing that is Affordable 32 4 Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing IN FUTURE AND REDEVELOPED ACTIVITY CENTERS 33 4-Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers Purpose-To encourage that Activity Centers be built-out or re- developed as true mixed-use areas offering a broad range of residential products types and price ranges. 34 35 Activity Centers are located throughout the Urban Area of the County in locations where development is to be encouraged 4-Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers Since there is no requirement that Activity Centers include residential units, many activity Centers have been developed as strip retail centers and out-parcels without a residential component. Offering a mix of residential options within an Activity Center takes advantage of existing infrastructure, locating residential units near to employment centers and relieves traffic by offering internal capture and shorter trip lengths. Possible incentives include: Reduced Impact Fees, Greater Densities, Streamlined Approval Process, Concurrency waivers, lower preserve requirements, etc… Existing Activity Center model is 30 years old, time for study and re- evaluation 36 What Moderate Density Looks Like 37 Mercato Mixed Use –North Naples What Moderate Density Looks Like 38 10 units to the acre –Botanical Place (Bayshore Road) What Density Looks Like 39 Proposed Davis Triangle Development 4-Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers Benefits Encourages residential uses near areas with existing infrastructure Allows for Housing that is Affordable to be developed throughout the north/south corridors of the county 40 Recommendation Direct staff to Re-Evaluate Activity Center Zoning to modernize and encourage the inclusion of residential units for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as Housing that is Affordable 41 5 Develop a process to designate certain Strategic Opportunity Sites and allow for increased density GREATER THAN 16U/A) 42 5-Develop a process to designate certain Strategic Opportunity Sites and allow for increased density greater than 16u/a) Purpose-To designate certain strategic areas where the maximum residential density may exceed 16u/a. 43 Vision of Strategic Opportunity Sites 44 2017 ULI Panel Report BCC would designate sites in advance 5-Develop a process to designate certain Strategic Opportunity Sites and allow for increased density greater than 16u/a) Considerations- A main recommendation of the 2017 ULI Study is that Collier County should allow for greater residential densities (more than 16u/a) in order to mitigate high land and development costs. Strategic Opportunity Site’s would be designated by the BCC as areas where higher densities are encouraged (similar to the Activity Center concept), but at densities in the 20-25u/a range. Examples of a Strategic Opportunity Site may be a new corporate headquarters campus or, a regional commercial center, or an institution of higher learning. Strategic Opportunity Sites would be designated in the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map in order to reduce any negative NIMBY opposition to higher density development in the future. 45 What High Density Looks Like 46 30 units to the acre –Naples Square (Goodlette Rd and US41) 5-Develop a process to designate certain Strategic Opportunity Sites and allow for increased density greater than 16u/a) Benefits Increases certainty Reduces Costs Creates jobs/housing balance Reduces infrastructure needs elsewhere Fuels Economic Development 47 Recommendation Direct staff to develop Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendments that will create a process for the creation and designation of Strategic Opportunity Sites allowing for increased density (above 16u/a) for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as Housing that is Affordable 48 6 Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency CRA) areas AND ALONG TRANSIT CORRIDORS 49 6-Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors Purpose-To incentivize development in CRA Areas and along major transit corridors where infrastructure already exists 50 6-Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors Considerations- Locating housing that is affordable on major transit corridors and in CRA areas is a recommendation of the 2017 ULI Study. Allowing housing near transit reduces trip lengths and traffic from employees commuting from further away. CRAs typically need additional incentives to increase their property values and encourage new development 51 What Medium Density Looks Like 52 6.85 units to the acre –Bristol Pines (Collier Blvd) 6-Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors Benefits Increases certainty Incentivizes difficult to develop areas Locates Housing that is Affordable on existing infrastructure 53 6-Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors Direct staff to work with the CRA Advisory Boards to develop Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code amendments that will allow increased density and other incentives in CRAs and allonge transit corridors for developments that voluntarily provide a portion of their units as Housing that is Affordable 54 Housing Plan Implementation Items Summary of Today’s Items 10-9-18 1.Direct staff to continue work on a Mixed Income Housing Incentive Program 2.Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications (including senior housing) 3.Develop a streamlined process for commercial to residential conversions 4.Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed income residential housing in future and redeveloped activity centers 5.Develop a process to allow for increased density in Strategic Opportunity Sites (over 16 units/acre) 6.Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency CRA) areas and along transit corridors 55 Questions 56 Collier Housing Plan     Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 1 FINAL Collier County Community Housing Plan October 24, 2017 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 2 Collier County Community Housing Plan October 24, 2017 Table of Contents • Executive Summary • Plan Development & Community Participation Page 5 • Current Housing Conditions Page 8 • ULI Findings Page 8 • Cost Burden Page 8 • Jobs-Housing Imbalance Page 9 • Market Trends Page 12 • ULI Recommendations Page 14 • Vision for the Future Page 15 • Shared Language/Definitions Page 15 • Housing Demand Model (HDM) Page 18 • Housing Recommendations –Stakeholders Group Page 20 • Density and Certainty Page 21 • Housing Trust Fund and Stable Funding Sources Page 28 • Community Land Trust & Public Lands Page 41 • Transportation Enhancements Page 45 • Communication & Outreach Page 47 • Housing Response Model: Closing the Gap and Taking Action Page 51 • Implementation Plan/ Schedule Page 52 • Appendices Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 3 Executive Summary Collier County has a statutory obligation to provide for housing its current and anticipated population, including those most vulnerable. Affordable housing is part of a community’s infrastructure and therefore it impacts the entire community. First responders, health care professionals, teachers and others have been priced out of the housing market and have to commute long distances. A vibrant and sustainable community needs to accommodate its workforce so that those people who educate our children and save our lives can live near where they work, if they choose. In response to community concerns about the unmet needs, development of the Collier County Community Housing Plan was commissioned by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners in March 2016. An initial and on-going struggle in this endeavor has been achieving a common understanding of the definition of affordable housing, as well as how housing is tracked and reported in order to inform decision making. This plan recommends a new and simple definition to be in line with federal and state definitions, and focuses on the household income in determining whether or not housing is affordable. Under the definition, if a household spends less than 30% of their gross income on housing, then housing is affordable. The definition is inclusive of all populations including seniors and persons with special needs. Also, a decision is required as to the top income level to be considered affordable housing, and it is recommended that level be 140% of the Area Median Income, or $90,432 for a 3-person household in 2017. In early 2017, the Urban Land Institute performed a panel review of the housing situation in Collier County. Among their conclusions is that Collier needed to reframe its view of housing to better meet the needs of the 40% of the population (58,685 households) already living here that are spending more than what is affordable on housing. This large segment of Collier County’s population is living here un-affordably. With a common definition, an income cap, a focus on better meeting the needs of the cost burdened who live here, and an analysis of current market availability, a needs and response model has been developed. The needs model indicates a need for 1,665 additional units to be developed at various income levels in the next year. These units would house new entrants to the county, and also achieve a new “level of service standard” to reduce the existing cost burdened population by 1% to 3% of the population. “Housing is not a social issue, it is an economic issue.” -ULI Panel Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 4 The response model implements the six core strategy recommendations from the ULI Panel which are: Review regulation and governance to simplify, expedite and reduce cost of development; increase supply of rental and for-sale product for the determined income categories; maintain or restore existing supply, enhance transportation options; and increase communication and engagement concerning housing that is affordable. The key elements of the recommendations include increasing certainty in the process, reducing specified development costs and review times, enhancing existing incentives such as the affordable housing density bonus program and the activity center bonuses, implementing a mixed income ordinance with enhanced density and flexible in-lieu of options, adopting a non-residential linkage fee to garner sustainable revenue for a housing trust fund, creation of a community land trust and process for land donations, and significant improvements with respect to impact fee relief. The plan will address housing for seniors and those with special needs, as well as disaster recovery housing. All of these strategies and incentives are intended to function as a complete package in order to achieve their desire results. The response model developed indicates that the incentives and other programs can help Collier meet its objectives, but may still fall short. Extensive research was conducted, and the exhibits and support papers are available for detailed review on the background of plan elements. The plan is intended as a short and long range incentive program to address current and future housing needs, and will be evaluated periodically to determine the extent to which headway is being made. The Stakeholder Committee recommends this plan to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, and the Affordable Housing Committee and staff recommends this plan to the Board of County Commissioners. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 5 Plan Development & Community Participation: In March 2016, the Board of County Commissioners directed the development of a cohesive, inclusive plan to meet the housing affordability needs of the entire County. The creation of a Community Housing Plan (CHP) includes addressing the current and future housing affordability needs of Collier County as required by Florida State Statute 163.3177(6)(f)a, with input from a diverse group of community stakeholders. The goal was to help create and guide the development of a long term, comprehensive plan within eighteen (18) months, or by September 2017. The Board of County Commissioners approved the creation and appointment of members to a Community Housing Stakeholders Group on June 14, 2016. More than 35 Stakeholders, representing a broad coalition of members from major employers, developers and real estate professionals, to non- profits, advocacy groups, and others have meet regularly since the first meeting on July 25, 2016. They have spent countless hours researching and discussing options that could be utilized in Collier County to encourage the development of housing that is affordable to a wide range of incomes and households. The Housing Stakeholder Committee has worked to build public and private partner solutions to the housing affordability crisis. There has been extensive research and analysis of existing data and proposed methods and tools to address this critical community issue to encourage the development of a wider variety of housing opportunities affordable to a broad and diverse spectrum of Collier County residents. The Stakeholders committee and the County’s Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) have worked closely together and held more than 20 regularly scheduled meetings, 30 subcommittee meetings, and 5 public hearings since July 2016. The Community Housing Stakeholders Group has presented its recommendations to AHAC, DSAC, and other public and private committees to ensure that multiple voices are included in this community-wide process. Creating more housing that is affordable to a broad cross section of the community will help make Collier County a more sustainable, diverse, vibrant, and livable community in the coming years. FL Statues Chapter 163.3177 (6)(f) a.- Every local jurisdiction must plan for the provision of housing for all current and anticipated future residents of the jurisdiction. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 6 Collier County Housing Stakeholder Members & Contributors: Steve Sanderson, President and CEO, United Way of Collier County Michael Dalby, President and CEO, Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce Danny Gonzalez, President, Immokalee Chamber of Commerce Renee Thigpen, HR Director, Naples Community Hospital Allen Weiss, President and CEO, Naples Community Hospital Ian Dean, HR Director, Collier County School District Kamela Patton, Superintendent, Collier County School District Leo Ochs, Jr., County Manager, Collier County Government – as employer Tim Durham, Manager Corporate Business Operations, Collier County Gov’t Mike Boose, HR Director, Arthrex Reinhold Schmieding, Founder and President, Arthrex Darlyn Estes, HR Director, Collier County Sheriff’s Office Clark Hill, General Manager, Naples Hilton Hotel, Hotels/Restaurants Nick Kouloheras, President, Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Hsg Dev Steve Kirk, President, Big Cypress Housing, Nonprofit housing developer Russell Budd, CEO, PBS Construction, For profit housing developers Bill Bullock, Senior Vice President, Minto Communities Developer Kathy Curatolo, Exec Vice President, Collier Building Industry Association Bill Spinelli, Chairman, Titan Custom Homes/CBIA - Construction Industry Jamie French, Deputy Dept Head, Growth Management Dept, Collier County Robin Singer, Planning Director, City of Naples Tami Scott, Zoning Administrator, City of Marco Island Christine Welton, Exec Director, Hunger and Homeless Coalition of CC Michael Puchalla, Executive Director, HELP, Nonprofit Housing Counseling/Ed Oscar Hentschel, Executive Director, Collier County Housing Authority Angela Edison, Housing Director, Collier Cnty Housing Auth/SWFL Apt Assoc Barbara Melvin, Community Relations Officer, First Florida Integrity Bank Mary Waller, Director, Naples Area Board of Realtors (NABOR) Shirley English, CEO, Marco Island Area Association of Realtors Nancy Pelotte-Cook – Marketing Director, Lely Palm Retirement Community Dr. Jaclynn Faffer, Pres & CEO, Jewish Family & Community Services of SWFL Marianne Lorini, President and CEO of the Area Agency On Aging of SWFL Lydia Galton (Retired/Active Community Volunteer) Community At Large Alan Horton (Retired Naples Daily News) Community At Large Ed Morton (Retired NCH) Community At Large Mark Teaters, Golden Gate Estates Association Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) Steve Hruby, Chairman Taylor McLaughlin John Cowan Denise Murphy Mary Waller Scott Kish Joseph Schmitt Litha Berger Kristi Bartlett Dr. Carlos Portu Christina Apostolidis Other Contributors Sally Luken, Luken Solutions; Alan Leaffer, Citizen-at-Large; Gerald Godshaw, Collier Citizens Council; Mark Hahn, Home Care; Sheryl Soukup, Soukup Strategic Solutions; Leslie Reyes, Citizen-at-Large; Anthony Fortino, Fortino Construction; George Danz, Riviera Golf Est; Mary George, Community Foundation of Collier County Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 7 “From the panel’s perspective, the real need in Collier County is for action and implementation. This implementation will require political will and leadership. In addition, the community at large will need to prepare for and adapt to the growth that is certain to occur in the county.” – ULI Panel Report pg 7 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 8 Current Housing Conditions: Urban Land Institute (ULI) Findings In the fall of 2016, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) was hired to help Collier County develop a community-wide approach to address the local housing affordability challenges. The Board of County Commissioners had previously held affordable housing workshops in March 2015 and 2016 to address the housing affordability crisis which has continued to grow since the end of the Great Recession (2007-2011). Members of the ULI team spent a week in Collier County touring the community, meeting with more than 100 stakeholder representatives, processing data/information and holding a preliminary workshop with elected officials to offer recommendations and suggestions. The ULI Panel report titled, Collier County Florida January 29-February 3, 2017, resulted in a call to action with 35 specific recommendations and some startling statistics. In the opening of the ULI Panel Report the team stated that they were “…impressed with the time, the effort, and the quality of work that has been invested in this subject by the commissioners and Collier County staff.” However, the panel also stated that “From the panel’s perspective, the real need in Collier County is for action and implementation. This implementation will require political will and leadership.”(pg 7) Reframing Housing Affordability - Cost Burdened ULI focused on those families and individuals in our community who are “cost burdened”; meaning they spend more than 30 percent of their gross income on housing costs, which includes mortgage principal and interest, property tax, HOA fees, and homeowner’s insurance payments. In conjunction with this definition are those community members who are “severely cost burdened” meaning that they spend more than 50 percent of their gross income on housing cost. This population is the most at-risk. The ULI report states that “The advantage of using the cost-burden terminology is that it does not put the focus on income alone; instead, it examines income as compared to housing cost.” (pg 11) The Shimberg Center at the University of Florida estimated that forty percent (40%) of all Collier County households (58,685 households) were cost burdened in 2015. Of these 58,685 households, 29,342 were considered Severely Cost Burdened, spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. “There is no question that Collier County has a housing affordability problem. Part of the challenge stems from a significant lack of supply in terms of housing type and level of affordability throughout the county.” – ULI Panel Report “In 2015, 2 out of every 5 households in Collier County were cost burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing.” – ULI Panel Report Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 9 Figure 1. Cost Burdened Professions Growth Implications According to the ULI Report, “The county is expected to add 58,000 households over the next 23 years. If the local issue of cost burden is not addressed, then – at a minimum - 11,000 more households will experience severe cost burden (above 50 percent) than do households today.” (pg 16) Jobs-Housing Imbalance Impacts Economic Development and Quality of Life There is a Jobs-Housing imbalance in Collier County resulting in at least 17.4% of the workforce (approximately 40,000 people) commuting daily from outside of Collier County. These employees work in Collier but live in Lee, Charlotte, or other counties where they spend their wages on rent, a mortgage, purchasing groceries, gas, and other necessities. Many public- sector employees (Sheriff’s Office, County & City government, School personnel) and large segments of the private sector cannot afford to live in Collier County. Their daily commutes from neighboring counties add to the traffic congestion on the roadways and diminish quality of life and active citizen participation. The ULI report identified “one critical challenge for Collier County businesses is the ability to recruit entry-level professionals.” (pg 14.) According to the ULI, “having employees who reside outside of Collier County and who commute long distances for work means a high level of attrition for businesses. “There are multiple challenges that first responders, educators, and others with modest incomes face when wanting to live close to their jobs. For these employees, the inconvenience and cost associated with commuting results in a decrease in “take home” pay; all the while adding to an increase in traffic congestion. Providing access to housing close to jobs can reduce commuting time (increasing leisure time), reduce commuting costs (increasing take home pay), reduce traffic congestion, and reduce automobile emissions. According to a survey of Collier County BCC employees, 32% of the workforce drives more than 30 minutes each day to and from work- home with 5% of the workforce driving more than 60 minutes each day. – County survey 2016 Approximately 40,000 people commute daily from outside of Collier County. – US Census Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 10 The same holds true for those employers recruiting for hospitality and service sector employment. Resort and second-home communities require retail and service employees, but many of these employees are not able to live near their job due to a lack of housing that is affordable. Stores, hotels and restaurants cannot afford to pay high enough wages to allow their employees to live in affluent areas, and as a result, suffer from short- staffing, absenteeism and high turnover. The ULI panel report states that “Furthermore, when people who work in the county are commuting to adjoining municipalities to live, the county bears the costs of the roads without the benefit of receiving the tax revenue.” (pg 14) Figure 2. Sample Cost Burdened Employment in Collier County Source: ULI Collier Report 2017 Figure 3. 2009-2014 Employment Commuting Patterns in Collier Co. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013, American Community Survey According to the ULI research, there were an extremely small number of available units on the market for households earning 80-100% of area Annual Wage Range (Entry to Median) Median Gross Rent 2015 Median Home Sales Price Homes Priced at 50% of Median Price $1,020 / Month $405,000 $200,000 Health Care Registered Nurses $47,000-$65,000 24%38%19% Medical Assistants $30,000-$35,000 41%68%34% Emergency Technicians $28,000-$36,000 42%68%34% Education Teachers $44,000-$59,000 28%50%25% Teaching Assistants $22,000-$24,000 45%101%51% Public Safety Firefighters $39,000-$57,000 29%43%21% Patrol Officers $47,000-$59,000 26%41%21% Service Workers Maids/Housekeeping $18,000-$22,000 66%109%55% Massage Therapist $26,000-$55,000 37%44%22% Concierges $25,000-$31,000 48%78%39% Entry Level/ Mid Tier Professionals Human Resources Specialists $35,000-$55,000 31%45%22% Dental Assistants $33,000-$43,000 36%57%29% Administrative Assistants $22,000-$33,000 49%73%37% Commuting to Collier County for Jobs 20,313 employees out of 138,490 total Collier County Jobs commute from another county (2009-14) 14.7% of workforce commutes from another county into Collier Commute from: Lee, Hendry, Charlotte, Broward, Miami-Dade, Sarasota, Hillsborough, Highlands, Orange & Palm Beach Counties “Furthermore, when people who work in the county are commuting to adjoining municipalities to live, the county bears the costs of the roads without the benefit of receiving the tax revenue.”- ULI Report (pg 14) Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 11 median income in February 2017. Both the rent and for sale housing prices in Collier continue to outpace neighboring counties forcing employees to commute 30 to 100 miles each way, spending their wages in adjacent counties. Collier’s housing affordability gap will continue to grow as rents and for sale housing prices continue to trend upward year over year. Figure 4. “Availability Snapshot” February 1, 2017 Units on the Market for Households who make 100% or less of Area Median Income ($68,300) Housing Units Available Single Family - For Sale 125 Condo- For Sale 250 Single Family - Rentals 0 Multi-Family Rentals 23 Source: ULI Report 2/1/2017 (MLS & Apartments.com, Zillow.com, Craigslist.com, and others) Figure 5. Collier County Fair Market Rent Increases 2016/17 Collier County Rents Efficiency 1 bdrm 2 bdrm 3 bdrm 4bdrm 2017 Fair Market Rent $801 $973 $1,195 $1,606 $1,996 % chg from prior year +11.3% +14.3% +14.7% +15.5% +15.6% Source: Collier County Apartment Survey, HUD Figure 6. Collier County Median for Sale Housing Increases 2016/17 Multi- Family Single- Family Combined March 2017 Collier Median Sale Price $275,000 $422,000 $340,000 % change from prior year +7% +5% +5% Source: NABOR April 2017 Collier’s housing affordability gap will continue to grow as rents and for sale housing prices continue to trend upward year over year. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 12 Market Trends Collier County’s historical development pattern is low density, single family homeownership. Since its initial establishment, Naples and Collier County have focused on high-end second home communities, seasonal resort tourism, and the businesses that support this economic engine. As a result of this market driven pattern, large segments of the population have been underserved and priced out of the market. The County’s housing production is not sufficiently diverse with regard to size, tenure, location, and price points, to adequately reflect the social, economic, and age related diversity of our population. The result of these trends and policies is a significant disparity between the cost of housing and the incomes of the average person and the working poor. Furthermore, the members of the workforce with low to moderate wages, and members of the community on fixed incomes, have limited housing options. All of these historical development patterns, high housing cost, and other disparities limit Collier County’s ability to attract and retain a strong workforce and to sustain and expand our economy. The challenge is to embrace pubic policies and encourage changes in development trends to ensure that Collier County has a diverse, affordable housing stock that reflects the needs of our current and future population with regard to type, tenure, cost, location, safety, and accessibility. The community must begin to think differently as we plan for a vibrant, sustainable future, addressing the needs of multiple generations of renters and homeowners who provide the needed services that enhance our community’s quality of life. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s annual Out of Reach the High Cost of Housing publication, the gap between renters’ wages and the cost of rental housing continues to escalate. The rental housing market has continued to experience strong demand since the Great Recession, as homeownership rates have declined. “Household income has not kept up with the rising cost of rental housing. From the housing crisis of 2007 to 2015, the median gross rent for a rental home in the U.S. increased by 6%, after adjusting for overall inflation, while the median income for renter households rose by just 1% and median income for all households declined by 4% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). Demand for rental housing will likely continue to rise. Researchers at the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard predict an additional 4.7 million renter households by 2025 from household growth, even if homeownership rates stabilize.” (NLIHC Out of Reach 2017) The challenge is to embrace public policies and encourage changes in development trends to ensure that Collier County has a diverse, affordable housing stock that reflects the needs of our current and future population with regard to type, tenure, cost, location, safety, and accessibility. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 13 In addition, according to NLIHC, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, and other agencies “Six of the seven occupations projected to add the greatest number of jobs by 2024 provide a median wage that is not sufficient to afford a modest one-bedroom rental home.” According to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics, in 2013, 80.5% of the jobs in Collier County paid less than 80% of the area median income. Three years later, in 2016 that increased to 87.7%. As with other resort communities across the country, there is often a lack of housing that is affordable to rent or purchase for households who provide services in tourism, hospitality and to retirees. Housing that is affordable to households working and providing services to the community needs to become a part of the community’s infrastructure. Housing affordability initiatives in other resort communities have been researched with successful programs identified as potential solutions for the Collier housing affordability challenges. A key element of such initiatives is to educate residents and “change the narrative” to present affordable housing as a necessity and a shared public responsibility/part of the community’s infrastructure. Figure 7. Wells Fargo Housing Opportunity Index (Source: Wells Fargo Housing Opportunity Index) The existing housing stock of for sale homes are at prices very high relative to wage income levels, as shown in the above graph depicting data from the Wells Fargo Housing Opportunity Index. A Housing Opportunity Index (HOI) below 50 indicates an unhealthy housing to 61.4% of the jobs in Collier County pay less than $33,250 per year. Source: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Bureau of Labor Market Statistics, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Program (QCEW) in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 14 Regulation and Governance Increase, Maintain, or Restore Supply Enhance Transportation Options Increase Wages Communication and Engagement 7 member BCC Increase Density in AHDB program Bus routes near aff. development Government wages YIMBY and Volunteer Projects Simple Majority for AH Zoning Incl. Zoning with flexibility options Park and Ride System Minimum wage Directory of affordable housing for developers Increase Density at Strategic Sites Rental of guest houses / ADU Bus Rapid transit or express routes Myths and Facts Brochure Increase Admin Approvals Commercial by Transp, Jobs; Incr. density Implement Pathways Plan Marketing and Communication Plan Expedite Permitting Community Land Trust Promote Ride Sharing Options Hire Community Outreach Coord Reduce regs to reduce cost Use Publicly owned land Secure revenue source for transit Streamline application process Adopt SMART code (LDC) Reduce or waive impact fees Directory of affordable housing for consumers Reinstate Housing Trust Fund Dev Housing Education Program Dedicated Funding Source Housing Resources Guide Hire Housing Counselor Community Vision affordability relationship. This chart shows the gap between wages and for sale housing prices over the past three and a half years. ULI Recommendations The ULI Panel Report (Exhibit B) provides major recommendations organized around six core strategies with 35 specific recommendations. The six core strategies for housing affordability are:  Regulation & Governance  Enhance Transportation Options  Increase Supply  Enhance Wages  Maintain or Restore Existing Supply  Communication and Engagement The Board of County Commissioners provided direction to the staff and stakeholders to explore 27 of the specific recommendations in four categories as they develop the Community Housing Plan (CHP). The 27 recommendations reviewed by Stakeholders are shown below in green. Figure 8. ULI Recommendations IT IS THE OPINION OF THE PANEL that Collier County absolutely has a housing affordability problem. It is not a crisis yet, but if housing is not addressed, the panel believes that it will become a crisis. Given the growth projections for the county, the panel believes this problem will occur far sooner than expected. – ULI Report, pg. 37 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 15 Vision for the Future: All residents of Collier County have a diverse range of attainable housing options. (Housing Stakeholders Group, July 2017) Creating a Shared Language --- What is Housing Affordability? In an effort to develop a common understanding, we must have a shared language of standardized terms. Throughout the CHP the following terms will be utilized to describe the concept of “What is” and “Who needs” housing that is affordable. The goal is to move away from the term affordable housing in order to reframe the perception that housing affordability is only for very low income households, or even those with no income. Therefore, it has been determined that we will refer to our goal as meeting the housing affordability needs of the community. However, for purposes of definitions, and to utilize the standard nomenclature the term affordable housing will be used; but what is really being talked about is housing affordability. Affordable Housing - Housing is affordable to a household when a residential dwelling unit with monthly rent or monthly mortgage payment, including property taxes and insurance, is not in excess of 30 percent of that amount which represents the percentage of the median annual gross income for the household. In Collier County, affordable housing specifically includes the following income level targets for the area, and are based on income categories determined by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: (a) "Extremely low income" means households whose incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the median income. (b) "Very low income" means households whose incomes do not exceed 50 percent of the median income (c) "Low income" means households whose incomes are more than 50 percent but do not exceed 80 percent of the median income (d) Moderate income" means households whose incomes are more than 80 percent but do not exceed 120 percent of the median income (e) “Gap income” means households whose incomes are more than 120 percent but do not exceed 140 percent of the median income Approved Affordable Housing shall mean Affordable Housing that includes a long-term affordability restriction wherein the cost of housing and income of the household are known and monitored, for a specific period of time. Vision for the Future: All residents of Collier County have a diverse range of attainable housing options. - Housing Stakeholders Group, July 2017 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 16 Community Land Trust (CLT) - a vehicle to separate land from homes for the purpose of transferring title to a home without selling the land. The land remains with a nonprofit that holds title to the land and manages the ground leases. The homes can be sold to other income qualified buyers during a 99-year ground lease. A CLT is typically managed by a non-profit that provides permanently affordable housing units by acquiring land and removing it from the price of the home. Cost Burdened – households that pay more than 30 percent of their gross income on housing costs, which includes mortgage principal, interest, property tax, and homeowner’s insurance (PITI), or rent and utilities. Category Name 1 2 3 4 5 Extremely Low 30%$14,640 $16,740 $18,840 $20,910 $22,590 Very Low 50%$24,400 $27,900 $31,400 $34,850 $37,650 Low 80%$39,040 $44,640 $50,240 $55,760 $60,240 Moderate 120%$58,560 $66,960 $75,360 $83,640 $90,360 Gap 140%$70,272 $80,352 $90,432 $100,368 $108,432 Percentage Category Income Limit by Number of Persons Category Typical purchasing power for household size (3xIncome) Name 1 2 3 4 Extremely Low 30%$43,920 $50,220 $56,520 $62,730 Very Low 50%$73,200 $83,700 $94,200 $104,550 Low 80%$117,120 $133,920 $150,720 $167,280 Moderate 120%$175,680 $200,880 $226,080 $250,920 Gap 140%$210,816 $241,056 $271,296 $301,104 Percentage Category Category Name Efficiency 1 2 3 4 Extremely Low 30%$366 $392 $471 $543 $606 Very Low 50%$610 $653 $785 $906 $1,011 Low 80%$976 $1,046 $1,256 $1,450 $1,618 Moderate 120%$1,464 $1,569 $1,884 $2,175 $2,427 Gap 140%$1,830 $1,883 $2,261 $2,610 $2,912 Rent Limit by Number of Bedrooms (incl. utilities)Percentage Category Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 17 Housing Trust Fund (HTF) – is established to collect and disburse funds for the creation of affordable housing, including purchasing land. Locally collected funds dispersed using local guidelines and requirements Linkage Fees – a fee charged to non-residential development based upon the employment demand and affordable housing need created by new or re-development. Linkage Fees collected are placed in a Housing Trust Fund (HTF). Mixed-Income Housing – includes diverse types of housing units, such as apartments, town homes, and/or single-family homes for people with a range of income levels. Mixed-income housing includes both market rate and below market rate as determined by the needs of the local community. Collier County is proposing development of mixed-income communities targeted at low, moderate, and gap incomes along with market rate housing. Seniors and Special Needs- households that include persons that are elderly, disabled, at risk of being or are homeless, and/or have extremely low incomes. These special needs populations may include more specifically defined subgroups such as youth aging out of foster care, survivors of domestic violence, persons with severe and persistent mental illness, or persons with developmental disabilities. Severely Cost Burdened – households that pay more than 50 percent of their gross income on housing cost - mortgage principal, interest, taxes and insurance (PITI), or rent and utilities. Unrestricted Market Rate Housing – means dwelling units that are unrestricted for affordability, yet are valued on the open market at a given time with a fair market value making them potentially attainable to households with yearly incomes less than 140%AMI. In this category, there is no knowledge of whether the general affordable housing definition has been met, meaning the household income of the persons in the dwelling units and their actual housing costs are unknown. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 18 Collier County Housing Demand Model---What is the Housing Need? The Board of County Commissioners adopted a Housing Demand Methodology in 2015 that identified the need for additional housing units based upon projected population growth by income categories. This 2015 demand model only addressed future housing demand. The 2017 Housing Demand Model (HDM) has been modified to add information on the current supply and current shortfall of housing, as well as the number of cost burdened households, resulting in a projected total affordable housing units needed per year by various targeted categories. With an estimated 40% of the county population being cost burdened according to the Shimberg Center at University of Florida, reducing this percentage of cost burden families by just a few percentage points would bring Collier County more in line with other communities’ cost burden percentage. Collier County is ranked 12th highest in Florida for the number of households that are cost burdened. In looking at other Florida communities, many counties have between 36%-39% of their population being housing cost burden. Collier County should consider efforts to reduce its cost burden population by at least 3-5% in the coming years to be competitive with peer counties. Figure 9. Sample Cost-Burdened Counties State Rank County Households # Cost Burdened % Cost Burdened 2 Monroe 33,658 16,635 49.4% 6 Palm Beach 574,690 256,971 44.7% 7 St. Lucie 113,981 49,982 43.9% 10 Sarasota 181,668 76,613 42.2% 12 Collier 143,771 57,601 40.1% 14 Volusia 217,830 86,902 39.9% 16 Flagler 41,710 16,562 39.7% 17 Lee 268,614 104,709 39.0% 18 Pinellas 434,206 168,988 38.9% 19 Indian River 63,373 24,403 38.5% 20 Manatee 149,999 57,122 38.1% 24 Charlotte 77,358 28,173 36.4% 37 Hendry 11,916 4,039 33.9% 61 Glades 4,595 1,234 26.9% Southwest Florida 5-county region in green; All adjacent counties lower cost burdened Similar coastal communities in orange 57,601 Households are cost burdened in Collier County – of which 29,342 are severely cost burdened (spending more than 50% of their income on housing) Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 19 Collier County individuals or families that are cost burdened (more than 30%) or severely cost burden (more than 50%) have less income to spend on other necessities including food, health care, school supplies, and transportation costs. Using the updated 2017 Housing Demand Methodology shows a need for housing that is affordable at a variety of income levels in Collier County. Figure 10. Housing Demand Model Sources/ Notes: 1. NABOR (Naples) and MIAAOR (Marco) Collier County Inventory levels collected from July 10, 2017 2. University of Florida Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing- Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse 3. To determine the current population needs and future populations needs, the FL Dept of Labor, Occupation Report from 2016 was used which includes jobs located in Collier County 4. Collier County Property Appraiser 5. Includes Manufactured Homes1. (column #11)- NABOR (Naples) and MIAAOR (Marco) Collier County Inventory levels collected from August, 2017; note NABOR does not include private sales not approved for sale on the MLS 6. 2. (column #7)- University of Florida Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing- Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse 7. (column #8)- To determine the current population needs and future populations needs, University of Florida Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing- Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse 8. (column #5)- Collier County Property Appraiser 9. Note: There are 8,514 mobile home units in Collier County, of which 2,076 are located in District 5 (which includes Immokalee). A survey of mobile home parks has determined that the majority of mobile home units in Immokalee are utilized as migrant farm-worker housing, and many other mobile homes in the urban area of the county are located in age restricted, 55 and over communities. While the number of mobile homes in Collier County is significant, in total they make up less than 4% of the County’s total housing stock and they are encumbered by other restrictions that preclude them from serving as housing options for the greater population. The Housing demand model shows a need for 1,665 units at various income levels. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 20 Housing Recommendations The Stakeholders Group—How Do We Address the Housing Need? With the release of the final ULI Advisory Services Panel Report Collier County, Florida January 29-February 3, 2017 in June 2017 (Exhibit B), the Housing Stakeholders Group, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC), and staff have developed a long term, comprehensive Community Housing Plan with specific recommendations to the BCC and the community to address the growing housing affordability crisis that has been impacting the community for years. The Stakeholders formed five subcommittees to begin to gather data on the issues and identify tools and methods to address the identified strategies. Stakeholder Group Subcommittees: Density and Certainty Stable Funding Sources Community Land Trust & Public Lands Transportation Enhancements Communication & Outreach The Stakeholders recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners follow on the next sections. The 2017 Collier County Housing Demand Model shows a need for 1,665 new units that are affordable each year. Stakeholder Focus Density and Certainty Stable Funding Sources Community Land Trust & Public Lands Transportation Enhancements Communication & Outreach Stakeholder Focus Density and Certainty Stable Funding Sources Community Land Trust & Public Lands Transportation Enhancements Communication & Outreach Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 21 Density and Certainty This subcommittee focused on bringing certainty to the development process and increasing density. This subcommittee’s recommendations include: 1. Identify “Strategic Opportunity Sites” for Higher Densities A. Require Activity Centers to include residential development- When originally enacted in Collier County’s Code, Activity Centers were designed to include a mix of uses including residential development at higher densities as well as intense commercial and office uses. This would have several benefits including providing housing opportunities in/near commercial job centers and developing residential properties at higher densities providing diversity in the residential development pattern of Collier County. These residential units would not be restricted or monitored for affordability, but rather would serve to provide a diverse supply of housing types and options. The requirement that activity centers include residential uses in their development was removed from Collier’s Code decades ago. As a result, all activities center development to date has been focused exclusively on commercial centers; residential development around activity centers has maintained Collier County’s low density/gated community characteristics and the workforce needed for those job centers must commute from further away causing congestion on our roadway system. It is recommended that Collier County again require a residential component be included in the development or re-development of any exiting or newly created activity centers. B. Allow Higher Densities in Activity Centers & Strategic Opportunity Sites above the current limits (i.e. 20-25 units/acre)- According to the ULI Report, “density is key” to providing housing that is affordable. The ULI suggested densities in the 30-35 units per acre range. Collier County’s historic development pattern has led to extremely low density development that sprawls outward from the coast and from commercial centers. Although extremely rarely used or approved, if ever, density in Collier County is capped in the Comprehensive Plan to 16 units to the acre maximum. Density above this maximum can create opportunities for housing that is affordable to be developed. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 22 It is recommended that Collier County initiate a process to amend its comprehensive plan to allow for the maximum residential density to be increased to 20-25 units per acre at certain Strategic Opportunity Sites. Strategic Opportunity Sites will be identified by the Board based upon recommendations from Growth Management through the land use review process. These sites may build on the existing activity centers concept and be expanded to include new corporate headquarter sites or industrial areas, or major transportation corridors, in the urban area, eastern Collier, Immokalee and other appropriate locations. Housing that is affordable in Strategic opportunity sites could be designated for Essential Services Personnel (teachers, first responders, health care professionals, etc.). 2. Modify the existing Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) program to allow higher densities from 8 to 12 units per acre (See attached proposed amendment to the AHDB in the Appendix Exhibit C & C.1) The existing Affordable Housing Density Bonus program allows for a density bonus of up to 8 additional units per acre on top of a site’s base density. These bonuses, which have a land use restriction of 15 years, are available only in the County’s Urban Area, where development is encouraged. In Collier County, the base density in the urban area is 4 units per acre, with several large areas further limited to only 3 units per acre as a base density. Applying the maximum Affordable Housing Density Bonus program to these sites allows the density on those sites to only be increased to 11 or 12 units per acre. This is below the County’s maximum allowed density cap of 16 units per acre. It is recommended that the existing Affordable Housing Density Bonus Program be amended to allow up to a 12 unit per acre bonus, thus allowing development of housing that is affordable to be built up to the county’s maximum allowable density of up to 16 units per acre. It is also recommended to extend the AHDB on rental communities to 30 years. 3. Implement Mixed Income Housing Ordinance with local flexibility options (See attached draft ordinance in the Appendix Exhibit D & D.1) Policy 1.9 of the Housing Element of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan specifically tasks the County, to explore the development of a fair share affordable housing ordinance that shall require commercial and residential developments to address the lack of affordable housing. Urban Area- Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 23 To address this task and the housing affordability issue in Collier County, it is recommended that the county adopt and implement a locally designed and controlled Mixed Income Housing Ordinance. The proposed Mixed Income Housing Ordinance will require new residential development seeking approval by the Board of County Commissioners to address housing affordability. Developers have several options as to how to meet this requirement including 1) accepting a 30% density bonus and including the mixed income units onsite, 2) providing the mixed income units off site, 3) partnering with another entity to provide the mixed income units, 4) paying a fee in-lieu of providing the mixed income units, or 5) approval by the Board of County Commissioners of some other option to comply with the mixed income housing ordinance with a commensurate result. The proposed Mixed Income Housing Ordinance allows for a 30% density bonus (including bonus/additional market rate units) in exchange for providing 15% of the residential units as Mixed Income Housing. The mixed income units will be 5% at Low Income, 5% Moderate Income, and 5% Gap income. Ten percent of those mixed income units will be made available to seniors and special needs households. It is anticipated that this ordinance will create approximately 180 new units that are affordable each year at varying income level targets (including units for seniors and those with special needs). These units will be deed restricted and monitored to remain affordable for a specific period of time. Implementation of a mixed income housing ordinance would help ensure equitable distribution of housing that is affordable throughout all areas of the county. As stated, developers may choose to pay fees in lieu of developing the required affordable housing on site. In- lieu fees that are permitted within the mixed income housing ordinance are not intended to provide a revenue source for affordable housing. The fee in lieu is established at $127,000 per unit and calculated as the difference between the combined single-family and multi-family median sales price ($327,000- NABOR July 2017, Exhibit D.1) and that amount that is affordable to a household at the Moderate income level ($200,000). Funds which may be collected if a developer chooses this option would be deposited into the local affordable housing trust fund. This supports the primary goal and objective of the Housing Element, which is to provide new affordable housing units in order to meet the current and future housing needs of residents with very-low, low, moderate and gap incomes, including seniors and households with special needs such as rural and farmworker housing in rural Collier County. An exception to the Mixed Income Housing Ordinance is Towns and Villages developing under the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) overlay. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 24 Communities in the RLSA will have their own housing affordability requirements. Figure 11. PUD Residential Approvals 2007-2017 4. Establish or Increase Administrative Approvals A. Allow commercial conversion near targeted transportation and job centers at high density; using SDP approval only- Collier County currently allows the conversion of commercial sites to residential through a re-zoning process. Commercial zoning may be converted to residential at 16 units per acre. This process is rarely used due to the requirement that the site go through a full re-zoning process including public hearings. Downzoning a site from commercial zoning reduces the intensity of uses allowed on the site. As such the need for public vetting and approvals of such actions should be greatly mitigated. It is recommended that for developments proposing to include housing that is affordable through a commercial to residential conversion be approved administratively through the SDP process. B. Allow affordable housing densities by right- Currently the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Program is allowed to be applied as matter of right in the Immokalee area. “Density is Key” -ULI Panel PUD UNIT APPROVALS Example Mixed Income Housing Requirements/Units YEAR PUD Units Approved 5%10%15%20% 2007 3,271 164 327 491 654 2008 1,515 76 152 227 303 2009 548 27 55 82 110 2010 0 0 0 0 0 2011 2,080 104 208 312 416 2012 523 26 52 78 105 2013 145 7 15 22 29 2014 3,366 168 337 505 673 2015 325 16 33 49 65 2016 267 13 27 40 53 2017 (1/2 yr)610 31 61 92 122 2017 (Projected)1,220 61 122 183 244 2007-2017 (Projected) Total 13,260 663 1,326 1,989 2,652 Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 25 It is recommended that this provision be expanded to allow Affordable Housing Density Bonuses up to 4 units to the acre to be approved administratively throughout the urban area. C. In Senior Living Facilities require any request above a .45 FAR to include 20% of the beds as affordable/Medicare. D. Micro Housing – Create local development codes to suit small single family units. Study full impact and effects of allowing smaller units, including but not limited to LDC and GMP impacts, Impact Fee impacts, and future land use element impacts. 5. Expedite the Permitting and Approval Process; including zoning, LDC and GMP changes A. The current Expedited Permitting Process for Affordable Housing (Fast-Track) prescribes a certain number of review days depending on the action required. Rejections are then sent back to the applicant and resubmitted to be reviewed and either rejected again or approved. This cycle can repeat itself 5 or 6 or more times. Each time adding months to the project approval. Create a concurrent and interactive review to clear discrepancies in one meeting. It is recommended that the current Expedited Permitting Process be amended to include a concurrent and interactive review to clear discrepancies in one or two meetings between staff and applicants. 6. Allow cost-saving infrastructure changes - Case Study Several regulatory changes were considered and evaluated as to the costs they add to a development, their need, and the potential cost savings if the regulations were eliminated. A Case Study of a recent single family development applied some of these changes in an attempt to find the “real world” value of making them. The chart below shows a sampling of what the elimination or amendment of some of these regulations can do to the construction cost of EACH home. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 26 Figure 12. Cost saving regulatory relief Proposed Changes Cost Savings per Unit Limit application to 1 round of reviews at Planning level $1,091 Limit application to 2 rounds of review by Engineering $545 Allow for administrative approval for projects meeting established thresholds $909 Allow for additional density for affordable projects by right, i.e. Market rate projects in urban area = 4 units/acre, mixed income = 7/units/acre $1,818 Require sidewalks on only one side of the street $223 Waive requirement for generator at lift station $2,364 Total Savings per Unit $6,950 By adopting some of these regulatory reliefs the cost of each home could be reduced by almost $7000. According to the National Home Builder’s Association’s “Priced Out” report in 2016, every $1000 added or subtracted to the price of a home in Collier County either allows 189 additional households to afford to purchase a median priced home, or puts that home out of their reach. Applying that model to the $7000 in construction cost savings has the potential to make approximately 1,325 home in Collier County affordable to buyers. It is recommended that Collier County continue to explore and refine the list of regulatory relief items and present a full list to the Board for approval through the applicable LDC or GMP amendment cycles. 7. Amend the LDC to Adopt Smart Code A smart code is a unified land development ordinance template for planning and urban design. A form-based unified land development ordinance designed to create walkable neighborhoods across the full spectrum of development, from the most rural to the most urban, incorporating a transect of character and intensity within each. “Every $1000 added or subtracted to the price of a home in Collier County either allows 189 additional households to afford to purchase a median priced home, or puts that home out of their reach.” – NHBA Priced Out Report Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 27 Example: Figure 13. Smart Code Neighborhood Transect Zones Preserve East of Everglades Blvd. Golden Gate Estates Goodlette Rd-Collier Blvd. Pine Ridge Rd. US41 5th Ave S. Mercato Collier County currently implements a version of a smart code by using various elements of our Comprehensive Planning Process. The county is currently undertaking the re-study of four major elements of its comprehensive plan the results of which may move development to follow several elements of Smart Codes. Recommendation: Continue to study via the 4 restudy efforts, how housing affordability in Collier County could benefit from using a Smart Code. 8. Impact Fee Deferral Program Tindale Oliver recently conducted a study of Impact Fee Discount programs in counties and cities in Florida. The Tindale Oliver Impact Fee Discount report is attached as Exhibit E in the Appendix. Based on this study, it is concluded that Collier County’s current Impact Fee Deferral Program is already very advanced in comparison to other jurisdictions. The Impact Fee Deferral program has been in place since 2001. Impact fees are deferred on units earmarked for owner-occupied or rental housing for families with incomes up to 120% of Median Area Income. (3-person household earning less than $75,360 per year) However, further impact fee relief in consistently noted by the development community as a part of the remedy to achieve more housing that is affordable. Therefore, the following recommendations are made: It is suggested that the current Collier program be “fine-tuned” as follows: Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 28 • Increase the deferral period for Rental Developments from 10 years to 30 years. • Forgive Owner-Occupied deferrals after 15 years • Increase households served to 140% of Median Income (Gap Housing) • Add capacity to the program by increasing the percentage of collections from 3%, to 4% or 5%, of total collections of county impact fees. Since the 2005 ordinance update, the Impact Fee Deferral program has been capped at three percent (3%) of the total annual impact collections which represents a de minimus amount of the total. Reinstating the Housing Trust Fund Housing trust funds are established sources of funding for affordable housing construction and other related purposes created by governments in the United States (U.S.). The housing trust fund (HTF) is an example of a national best practice that Collier County currently has at its disposal but does not use. More than 700 HTFs exist nationwide, and they are often a critical element of a jurisdiction’s overall housing policy. One primary benefit of these instruments is the fact that there is local control over the allocation of the funds to match with the goals of the local jurisdiction. By reinstating the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (Fund), all voluntary donations or other revenue generated for affordable housing shall be deposited into the Fund. The Fund shall be maintained in an interest- bearing account and any interest derived from deposits in the Fund shall follow and remain within the Fun. Monies in the Fund, including interest and recaptured monies, shall be disbursed according to the eligible uses set forth and as approved by the Board and administered by the Community and Human Services Division. Awards from the Fund shall be made only at the discretion of the BCC. The Community and Human Services Division will act as the administrators of the fund and associated projects for the BCC. The AHAC will work with CHS staff to develop oversight protocols and specific eligibility criteria for BCC approval. (See Exhibits F, F.1 & F.2) [Sidebar Title] [Sidebars are great for calling out important points from your text or adding additional info for quick reference, such as a schedule. They are typically placed on the left, right, top or bottom of the page. But you can easily drag them to any position you prefer. When you’re ready to add your content, just click here and start typing.] Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 29 Figure 13. Proposed Uses of Housing Trust Fund Programs Developer Consumer Down Payment Assistance X Impact Fee Relief X X Land Acquisition/Pre Development Funding X Construction Loans X X Community Land Trust – land acquisition X Preserve existing affordable housing supply – For rehabilitating rental or owner occupied dwelling units X X Rental assistance X Local contribution for tax credit or SAIL applications X Disaster Recovery X X Priority scoring, or additional funds will be awarded to those projects that are mixed income, in activity centers, or on major transit routes (in particular on CAT routes). Additionally, 10% of all funds are set aside to benefit seniors and/or persons with disabilities. Many of these programs currently have, or will have, land use restrictions ranging from 15 years to 99 years depending upon the funding source requirements. A local funding source will allow for projects to receive “layered subsidies”, or multiple levels of assistance. The above list is not exhaustive, and the county commission by resolution may add or remove alternative affordable housing programs. It is recommended that the County reinstate its Housing Trust Fund. Stable Funding Sources The subcommittee focused its efforts on a variety of tools and methods to identify funding sources that are targeted to address Collier County identified needs. This subcommittee’s recommendations include: 1. Collier County’s HTF should be sustainable and predictable, given the long planning process involved in housing development. The county should keep in mind that what can make an HTF challenging is finding Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 30 viable, stable, recurring revenue sources. Other jurisdictions have funded their trust funds through sales taxes, real estate transfer taxes, linkage fees as part of the zoning ordinance, mixed income housing in- lieu fees, condominium conversion fees or demolition fees, and hotel and motel taxes. It is recommended to implement the following strategies to support the need for future housing that is affordable, and to the extent possible, address the existing backlog. Figure 14. Recommended Funding Sources Strategy Potential Revenue Include as a priority for lobbyists on staff or under contract with Collier County that the legislature appropriate all the Sadowski state and local housing trust funds for Florida’s housing programs. $2M Annually Adopt a Linkage Fee for Non-Residential uses $1/SF = $2M/yr (based on 2017 projection) Adopt an in-lieu of fee or donation of land in lieu of constructing required workforce units under the mixed income housing requirement $127,000/unit = $1,270,000/yr est. Sale proceeds from donated or surplus land designated for affordable housing Cannot assess Develop philanthropy in the form of cash or land donations Cannot assess Continue with Tax Increment Financing (Bayshore CRA), and consider similar structures for other CRA’s TBD for a new CRA Public/Private Partnerships Cannot assess Community Foundation/ other non- profits Cannot assess Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 31 Increase Funding from the Sadowski Act Fund One of the most highly recommended HTF funding sources is a real estate documentary stamp tax. However, in Florida, with the Sadowski Act Funding, this is already in use and not available for funding the local HTF. Instead, these funds are awarded to each county in the form of State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) funds based on an approved annual allocation. It is common knowledge that in most years, the state legislature does not fully allocate this funding, instead diverting some of it to meet other needs. The Local Housing Trust Fund already establishes a permanent source of local funding for affordable housing in Collier County, and is the single most effective source. However, legislation subjects this revenue to the appropriations process, which allows funds collected to be “swept” out of the trust fund and used for other purposes. For this reason, all of the revenue collected for affordable housing is not used for affordable housing. For example, of the $292.37 million in revenue available under a fully- funded scenario, only $137 million will be used for affordable housing programs. For Collier County, this means that of the $3.3 million allocation if fully-funded, the County will only receive $1.4 million. This is a significant shortfall in funding that otherwise would be and should be used to fund affordable housing. Therefore, to increase the ability to use this already established source, it is recommend increasing advocacy for full appropriation of the Sadowski Act trust funds. Non-Residential Linkage Fees Linkage fees “link” other forms of development with a community's needs for affordable housing. Linkage fees are typically charged to developers and then spent on affordable housing preservation or production through existing housing programs. Linkage fee ordinances are one way to leverage private markets to produce affordable housing, fund homeownership programs, or preserve existing affordable rental housing. Linkage fees help meet a housing need that may be produced when new development occurs. For instance, the development of an office or retail complex in an area will bring many employment opportunities to the area, including minimum wage jobs that may not pay enough so that a household can work and live in the same community – or even a nearby community that is connected to the workplace by affordable transit. Linkage fees, most Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 32 often charged to developers on a square foot basis, can then supplement an affordable housing funding program that targets certain areas. Figure 15 Proposed Non-Residential Linkage Fee Ordinance – (see draft ordinance in Appendix Exhibit G) (A) APPLICABILITY. All new non-residential construction occurring within the unincorporated area of the County shall be subject to the Linkage Fee in this ordinance at the time of issuance of a Building Permit. This includes additions to and redevelopment of existing properties, and the commercial and industrial portions of planned unit and mixed-use developments. This excludes churches, government buildings, educational institutions and Towns and Villages in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) of eastern Collier County. Towns and villages will have their own housing affordability requirements in their overlay which will be determined by conducting an affordable housing needs assessment and providing the required housing within their community boundaries. (B) LINKAGE FEE AMOUNT. All new commercial and industrial construction occurring within the unincorporated area of the County shall pay a Linkage Fee of $ 1 per square foot, and in accordance with the following: 1. For phased developments, the Linkage Fee shall be computed only for the square feet of development covered by the specific Building Permit. 2. Any Person who, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, agreed in writing as a condition of development approval to pay fees related to the shortage of Affordable Housing shall be responsible for the payment of such fees under the terms of such NON-RESIDENTIAL PERMITS Example Linkage Fee Requirements/Revenue YEAR Permitted SqFt $0.50/ft $1.00/ft $3.00/ft 2014 667,850 333,925$ 667,850$ 2,003,550$ 2015 1,647,162 823,581$ 1,647,162$ 4,941,486$ 2016 731,456 365,728$ 731,456$ 2,194,368$ 2017 (1/2yr)958,352 479,176$ 958,352$ 2,875,056$ 2017 Projected 1,916,704 958,352$ 1,916,704$ 5,750,112$ 2014-2017 (Projected) Total 4,963,172 2,481,586$ 4,963,172$ 14,889,516$ Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 33 agreement, and the payment of such fees by the Person will be offset against any Linkage Fees otherwise due under this ordinance at later stages of the development activity for which the fee was paid. Cities such as Jupiter, Winter Park and Coconut Creek have all implemented linkage fees in Florida. Commercial and high-end market rate residential development increase the need for employment of low wage workers who will be in need of affordable housing within the community. For example, in the San Francisco Bay area, one study shows that every high-tech job produces 4 other jobs across all income levels, including lower income jobs such as retail clerks and restaurant workers. A similar report shows that manufacturing jobs in Florida produce 2.5 additional jobs. High-end market rate residential development has a similar effect, in that residents of such development often demand services such as lawn care, maids, pool servicers and other lower-income jobs. Linkage fees are upheld by both federal and state law1. The legal basis of linkage fees is the two part Supreme Court test: • The nexus between what the government wants the landowner to do and a legitimate state interest. Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987); and • The requirement on the private landowner must be related “in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development.” Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 Linkage fees are generally charged on a per square foot basis. Rates in Florida vary from less than $1 per square foot to upwards of $35 per square foot. Linkage fees are set based on a balance between funding needed to meet a locality’s affordable needs and ensuring development remains financially feasible. A nexus study was completed for Collier County in 2006, which supports reasonable linkage fees ranging from $0.72 per square foot for residential to $43.46 per square foot for tourist properties. Fees are usually paid upfront at permitting. However, some localities allow payments to be made over time. Some also have allowable exceptions and exemptions for smaller developments or certain types of development. (Exhibit G) The basic steps to establish a linkage fee include: • Nexus and Feasibility Studies – in accordance with Nollan and Dolan, cities must first complete a nexus study to determine the actual impact of new development of various types on demand for Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 34 affordable housing as well as the maximum feasible fees development types can support in light of existing fees and other factors. • Implementation Plan – determine how the fees will be used, who will administer the fees, timing and basis for adjustments to the fees, and any alternatives offered for paying the fees (including developers actually building the housing) • Adoption – Draft and adopt the actual ordinance and regulations for the fee. The ordinance and regulations should be reviewed annually, and revised as economic conditions changed. It is recommended that Collier County adopt a nominal linkage of $1 per square foot of non-residential development (in line with other Florida jurisdictions). It is also recommended that Collier County complete a linkage fee nexus study to establish the legal basis for the fee. Mixed Income In-lieu of fees Such fees are generally established by one of two methods: • Affordability Gap Method – This method sets the fee based in the difference in purchase price or rent between market rate and what would be affordable to the target income level for the mixed income housing ordinance. For example, if the market or median home price is $400,000, and the target affordable price is $200,000, then the in-lieu fee would be $200,000 per housing unit required under the ordinance. • Production Cost Method – This method sets the fee based on the cost for the public to produce an affordable housing unit. For example, if it costs the public $200,000 to produce a unit. The method used is dependent upon the desired outcome. If the desire is to encourage developers to build the affordable housing, then the fee should be set high to serve a deterrent from utilizing the option. However, if the goal is to raise funds to support other programs, then the fee should be set lower so as not to deter utilization of the option. Other considerations would be application of the in-lieu fee i.e. should it be the same for each developer (should developers of homes costing in the millions pay the same rate as developers of lower-priced homes), or should it vary by location (should developers building in downtown or redevelopment sites, where it costs more to produce units, pay the same rate as developers in greenfield locations on the fringes). We recommend use of the affordability gap method. The general policy goal of mixed income housing is to encourage the production of affordable housing within higher-income communities, so that the lower-income Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 35 households can live in the communities where they work. The higher fees through the affordability gap method would tend to encourage production on site. However, the in-lieu fees generated would provide the level of funding needed to assist lower income buyers purchase homes or rent in those higher-income communities. (A) The mixed income requirements of the Mixed Income Housing ordinance may be satisfied by paying a $127,000/unit fee in lieu of developing the number of Units required. The fee for each unit is based on the affordability gap method. The total fee collected will be the per-unit fee for each unit type (for- sale or rental) times the number of units required under the mixed income housing ordinance. 1. The fees collected from these payments shall be deposited into the County’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund. 2. The fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the residential development. 3. The method of determining the fee shall be reviewed periodically as necessary to ensure that the purposes and intent of this ordinance are met. (B) The Mixed Income Housing requirements of this ordinance may be satisfied by donating land within the County’s boundaries in unincorporated areas in lieu of developing the number of mixed income units required by the Mixed Income Housing ordinance. The proposed land to be donated shall be subject to the determination by the Board of County Commissioners that it is: 1. Suitable for development; 2. Equivalent in value to the applicable fee in lieu; 3. The value of the land shall be determined by one appraisal commissioned by the County and paid for by the developer; 4. The value of the land to be donated may alternatively be determined by relying on the purchase price of the land provided it has been the subject of a purchase by a bona fide purchaser for value within the past year; 5. The conveyance of the land to the County or Community Land Trust selected to administer the Workforce Housing Program on behalf of the County shall occur no later than at the time of application for a building permit. (C) In no case will any cash or land donations be returned to the developer, once such transaction is completed. It is recommended that Collier County accept Mixed Income Housing opt- out fees in the amount of $127,000 for each required unit not produced Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 36 based on the “affordability gap” method (to be adjusted annually based on current data). (Exhibit D) Sale proceeds from donated or surplus land designated for affordable housing In 2006, the Florida Legislature enacted Section 125.379, Florida Statutes, wherein each county is tasked to triennially prepare an inventory list of all real property within its jurisdiction to which the county holds fee simple title that may be declared appropriate for use or sale for the benefit of affordable housing. The Board of County Commissioners must review the inventory list at a public hearing and revise it as they choose. Following the public hearing, the governing body must adopt a resolution that includes an inventory list of such property. The Statute provides possible options for appropriate usage of this property to benefit affordable housing. The property may be offered for sale and the proceeds, above any amounts reimbursed to County funds, are available for eligible uses. The land, or the proceeds from sale, may be used for one of the following activities: 1. Purchase land for the development of affordable housing. 2. Increase the Housing Trust Fund earmarked for affordable housing. 3. Sell with the restriction that requires the purchaser to develop affordable housing. 4. Donate to a nonprofit housing organization for construction of permanent affordable housing. 5. Make the property available for use for the production and preservation of permanent affordable housing. It is also viable that land may be donated to the County for purposes of housing that is affordable. If it is determined to sell that property, the proceeds would be added to the HTF. It is recommended that any residual sale proceeds from surplus property also be added to the Housing Trust Fund. Philanthropy in the form of cash or land donations Collier County is an affluent community and consequently it is appropriate to consider philanthropy as a revenue mechanism, be it in the form of cash or land. Collier would accept cash donations into the HTF, and accept land donations into the Community Land Trust for use as affordable housing, or make donated lands available for sale, placing the proceeds into the HTF. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 37 Collier would reserve the right to only accept lands that are unencumbered and appropriate for use in whole or in part for housing that is affordable. Collier would need to develop appropriate legal mechanisms and a method for creating documentation required by donors for tax purposes. It is recommended that that any cash or land donations for housing that is affordable be accepted by the county. Continue with Tax Increment Financing (Bayshore CRA), and consider similar structures for other CRA’s The Bayshore/Gateway Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was created by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on March 14, 2000 by Resolution 2000-82. The total area comprises approximately 1,800 acres with a wide range of residential and commercial properties. Funding for the CRA comes from Tax Increment Finance (TIF). TIF is a portion of the property taxes generated above what was received by the County prior to the CRA being established and does not result in any additional tax to the resident. Bayshore/Gateway Redevelopment Plan was approved on June 13, 2000 by Resolution 2000-181 to address deteriorating physical and economic conditions then prevailing within Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area. This approach for raising revenue for housing that is affordable could use with other CRA’s. It is recommended that the County continue using CRA funds to correct deteriorating physical and economic conditions, including housing affordability issues, and adopt a TIF for any future new CRAs. Backlog There exists not only the need for future development of housing that is affordable, but also a need to alleviate an existing backlog of demand. Local property tax revenue can be used as a permanent source of funding for affordable housing. In most cases nationwide, property tax revenue for affordable housing is raised by an affordable housing levy. A successful example is the Seattle Affordable Housing Levy, which has raised over $388 million since its first approval in 1981. The most recent re-approval in 2016, which was approved by 68% of the vote, stands to raise as much as $290 million over the next seven years. However, levies are an additional tax subject to renewal by voters. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 38 Figure 16. Additional Revenue Sources Strategy Potential Revenue Include use of funds for affordable housing with potential Sales Tax referendum/program with funds allocated to a Housing Trust Fund annually. Undetermined Establish a certain percentage or dollar amount from ad valorem taxes to be allocated to a Housing Trust Fund annually. Undetermined It is recommended that, if the Board of County Commissioners desires to make a more profound impact on the back-log of housing affordability issues, to move forward with one or both of the funding sources identified in Figure 16 above. Funds allocated from the General Fund should be provided on a one-to-one match for funding collected through the non- residential linkage fee. These sources would serve to spread the response to housing affordability throughout the County, and not only on new development. Additional Housing Programs and Initiatives The County may provide funding for housing rehabilitation/sustainability assistance, preservation, homeownership assistance, rental assistance, and special needs housing opportunities for low to moderate income households. The County will utilize Federal, State, and local funding sources to conduct activities associated with all housing and programs and initiatives. The rules and regulations associated with each Federal, State, and local funding sources will govern the use of such funds and shall be in accordance, where appropriate, with the following documents: • Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan (CDBG, HOME, ESG); • Local Housing Assistance Plan (SHIP); and • Applicable Federal, State and Local Policy and Procedures Manual All planning and policy documents will be made available on the County’s website and at the offices of the Community and Human Services Division. The availability of funds for the programs will be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation within the County or Request for Proposals issued by the County. Current County programs fall under these primary categories: Homeownership, Rental Housing, Special Needs Housing, Housing Sustainability, Fair Housing and Accessibility. Many of these programs have Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 39 a lien and/or land use restriction ranging from 15 years to 30 years in accordance with each programs guidelines and funding source requirements. A. Homeownership programs may include down payment assistance in the form of first or second mortgages, grants, sale of County owned property, donation of County owned property to eligible non-profits including CHDOs, financing to non-profit and for-profit developers for the construction of owner occupied units, and construction of single family homes. The County will also maintain programs that preserve homeownership including providing funding for the rehabilitation of owner occupied housing, promoting housing counseling and homeownership reservation initiatives. B. Rental Housing - Affordable rental assistance programs may include tenant based assistance, facility/project based assistance, security deposit and short-term rental assistance, financing to non-profit and for- profit developers for the construction of affordable rentals, donation of County owned property to eligible non-profits including CHDOs, and grants for new construction of affordable rental housing units. SHIP funds can be used to meet the SAIL local contribution requirement C. Special Needs Housing - The Community and Human Services Division of the County will ensure that all housing programs funded by the County include set-asides or priorities for special needs populations. Special needs populations include the homeless, veterans with a service connected disability, developmentally and physically disabled, and children aging out of foster care. Priority or set-aside may include units that serve specific special needs populations through access to support services and/or unit features that ensure accessibility. D. Housing Sustainability - The Community and Human Services Division will insure that funding priority and consideration will be given to housing construction projects that include “green” or sustainable features such as solar panels, rain water capture and storage, tank-less water heaters, high efficiently insulation and architectural features that enhance energy savings. Projects where a portion or all of the units are designated as smoke free will also be given priority consideration for funding. E. Fair Housing/ Accessibility - Any entity or individual receiving housing assistance or incentives through the County’s housing programs must comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 40 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 when applicable. No entity or individual that receives housing assistance from Collier County may discriminate or deny access to housing on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. F. Disaster Housing Recovery – Historically, funding has been allocated to Collier County by the State and Federal governments in response to declared disasters. Collier County was awarded over $14 million in state and federal disaster funding for Hurricane Wilma. This funding was expended for the course of seven years following to repair and replace housing units destroyed by the storm. It is anticipated that Collier County will received significant disaster funding as a result of Hurricane Irma. Collier County also maintains a Disaster Housing Strategy that was approved by the BCC in July of 2010. This strategy details specific actions, coordination, and responsibilities that are implements in post disaster housing recovery. Figure 17. Chart of Existing Grant Resources Resource General Uses Annual Revenue (Est) HUD- CDBG Infrastructure, land acquisition, purchase assistance $1.5M HUD- HOME Construction or rehab of units $350,000 FHFC- SHIP Purchase assistance, rehab or new construction $1.5M Community Land Trust and Public Lands This Subcommittee recommends specific publicly owned properties to pursue for housing development and the creation of a Community Land Trust (CLT). 1. Establish a dedicated land trust administered by a non-profit entity (public-private partnership) A. Accept donations of land in-lieu of the Mixed Income Housing requirement. B. Hold land in perpetuity (99 yr land lease) for the development and preservation of affordable housing stock. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 41 C. Acquire land using in-lieu of fees or other stable funding sources (See attached Community Land Trust information in the Appendix) D. Provide initial funding in the amount of $100,000 for establishment and development of a new Community Land Trust in Collier County. 2. Identify sources of land and process for incorporating parcels into the land trust 3. It is recommended that the BCC continue its current public policy whereby any property considered surplus land (without a designated use or which the designated use is no longer needed) must first be offered to any public entity for a use that is a public benefit. If there is more than one entity interested, the County evaluates and weights the level of importance and need of the agencies and allocates the land to the highest and greatest uses. If there are no interested parties, the parcel is sold through open bidding or included in a RFP for development. 4. It is recommended that the BCC adopt a new public policy that places priority on affordable housing in all future public land acquisitions and encourages the co-location of housing and public facilities. Community Land Trusts for Collier County Under traditional homeownership subsidy programs, the subsidized home can be sold at the market appreciated sales price, with recapture of the original subsidy upon resale. Because of market appreciation, the recaptured subsidy is wholly inadequate for the local government to get another family into homeownership. The local government or other subsidy provider must then expend an even greater amount of subsidy to provide a homeownership opportunity to the next homebuyer. It is this massive drain on already depleted public resources which is driving local governments to increasingly explore the community land trust option. Using a community land trust (CLT) is a way to stop losing ground both figuratively and literally. The nonprofit CLT retains ownership of the land to remove this subsidized housing from the speculative market so that the homes remain permanently affordable. The CLT approach results in permanent nonprofit ownership of the land, which is leased to lower- income households, who receive assistance to buy homes developed on the CLT land. The CLT transfers title of the house to an income qualified buyer but retains title of the underlying land. By excluding the price of the land (which in some parts of Florida, dwarfs the costs of the improvements), and arranging additional subsidies (such as SHIP) to assist the buyer’s purchase of the house, the overall purchase price is made affordable and the monthly mortgage PITI payments are often more affordable than renting. CLTs also Using a community land trust (CLT) is a way to stop losing ground both figuratively and literally. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 42 provide an excellent source of rental housing, often time in single family homes, which are attractive to families with children or elderly parents. In return for the significant subsidies required to develop this affordable homeownership opportunity, the CLT imposes resale restrictions on the improvements through the 99-year ground lease, which ensures that the property will remain affordable in perpetuity. The owner of a CLT home is required to sell to a similarly qualified buyer at a restricted price, determined by a resale formula found in the ground lease. The typical ground lease mandates a resale price based on the homeowner’s down payment, plus the sum of principal payments made on the mortgage, and limits appreciation to one quarter of what appreciation would have been for the property if owned in fee simple. By dramatically limiting appreciation, CLT homes remain affordable to new homebuyers without the need for significant additional subsidies. (Exhibit H) Governance and Operations The typical community land trust board is made up of three groups in equal representation: • Resident members – CLT homeowners • General members – residents of the community that do not own CLT homes • Public members – those who represent the public interest). Public members can include elected officials, municipal staff, and/or representatives from other local nonprofits. Boards range in size from less than 10 to over 20. The size and makeup of the Board will depend upon the specific goals of the land trust and the makeup of the community. The size and election process of the Board will be included in the Bylaws. In most cases, CLTs operate as independent organizations. In the early stage, staff may be comprised completely of volunteers. However, eventually paid staff will be needed to carry out the day-to-day functions of the CLT and implement the direction of the Board. Most nonprofit organizations start with either an Executive Director or Administrator. Starting with an Executive Director is to look for someone with long-term managerial skills or the potential to develop them. Starting with an Administrator usually calls for someone with more limited yet important organizational skills to carry on certain tasks and responsibilities for the short term until an Executive Director can be hired. Ultimately, a basic staff should include at least 3 individuals: an Executive Director to provide overall leadership and represent the organization in the community (including elected officials, other nonprofits, realtors, lenders, etc.), a Counselor/Educator who works directly with homebuyers and/or renters, and an Administrative Assistant to support the entire operation. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 43 Community Land Trusts in Florida Community land trusts began to emerge in Florida in the early 2000s in response to the housing boom and rapid rise in purchase prices at that time. There is no enabling legislation required for community land trusts. They are Florida nonprofit organizations, usually with section 501(c)(3) IRS tax exemption approval. However, community land trusts should employ the assistance of attorneys experienced in corporate and real estate law for both start up and operations. Current Status Community land trusts are now well-established in Florida. The table below summarizes the current state of several of the state’s community land trusts: Figure 18. Land Trusts in Florida Community Land Trust Name: South Florida Community Land Trust Neighborhood Renaissance, Inc. Community Land Trust of Palm Beach County, Inc. Year Founded 2006 2005 2006 Geographic Area served Broward and Miami-Dade Counties West Palm Beach Palm Beach County Number of Staff 4 6 2 Number of Ownership Units 8 13 29 Number of Rental Units 55 80 82 Anticipated Growth over next two years (through 2019) At least 6 additional homeownership units 36 rental and 25 homeownership (deed restricted per local government program) 32 ownership units Commercial property ownership and plans None owned at this time, but considering co- working or office space for non-profits None within the land trust Owns a small commercial space within a rental community Annual budgets for these CLTs range from around $800,000 to $1.6 million. Funding sources include local government grants (HOME funds), foundation grants, ground lease fees, bank grants and lines of credit, membership fees Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 44 and other charitable donations. It should be noted that of the three CLTs in the chart above, only one offers membership to the community and collects membership fees. With the resurgence of the housing market, the second wave of CLTs is developing in various communities throughout the state. Some communities are looking at regional community land trusts. The South Florida Community Land Trust stands to serve as the model for a regional CLT, with its expansion from Broward into Miami-Dade County. Also, the South Florida Community Land Trust Network serves as a model for regional CLT consortiums, as member organizations throughout south Florida are able to leverage resources to grow their individual footprints, expecting to reach a combined 374 units by the end of 2017. Recommendations for Collier County 1. A Community Land Trust in Collier County should be established to manage a proposed Mixed Income Housing Program established by ordinance, which includes mixed income and linkage fee requirements. 2. All donations of land in-lieu under the program would go to the Community Land Trust to hold in perpetuity for the development and preservation of a stock of housing that is affordable. 3. The Community Land Trust would also be responsible for monitoring compliance with the Mixed Income Housing Program ordinance, particularly adherence to restrictive covenants that require sale or lease of properties to income-eligible households at affordable prices. 4. Additionally, the County may decide to deed any surplus land suitable for affordable housing development to the Community Land Trust. 5. It is further recommended that the municipalities of the City of Naples and the City of Marco Island be encouraged to adopt similar initiatives or contribute themselves to the Community Land Trust. Public Lands Review Numerous meetings have been conducted at both staff and committee levels to review publicly owned lands where housing might be developed or co-located with government uses. The initial list of thousands of properties was reviewed and analyzed with these top four (4) properties being recommended for housing development through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Additional analysis for each site is available in Appendix Exhibit I. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 45 A. Bayshore CRA 17+ acre parcel is currently out for development proposals. Proposals were received on August 31, 2017. A Selection committee & CRA Board will review and make recommendations to the Board. B. Bembridge PUD - Public Utilities has performed a feasibility study to relocate Master Pump Station 313 from Countryside to the 5 acre Bembridge site. Public Utilities has the funds to reimburse Impact Fees for the parcel. Countryside was the original proposed site for MPS 313 expansion but the residents were opposed so the Bembridge site was offered as an alternative. Impact fee funds would need to be paid to acquire the parcel for housing. The Bembridge site was previously the subject of a workforce housing RFP Competition and extensive planning and design efforts have already been completed for the site. C. Randall Curve parcel is over 47 acres and was deeded to the County for use as a public park and has a Statutory Deed. With the development of a regional park in the area this site is not needed for a park. Mixed use development may be proposed for the site, of which housing that is affordable may be one component. D. Grey Oaks/Livingston Road parcel is 21 acres along the west side of Livingston Road and a part of the Grey Oaks PUD. The 21 acres owned by the County would need to be removed from the Grey Oaks PUD to be developed for housing. The site is central to jobs and employment centers. It is recommended that RFPs be developed for the construction of housing that is affordable on parcels B, C, & D above. Transportation Enhancements Transportation to and from employment centers in Collier, or outlying communities, puts a strain on the existing infrastructure based on the jobs- housing imbalance that exists in Southwest Florida. Currently, the average headway (the average interval of time between buses pausing at a given stop on a route) in Collier County is 1.5 hours, with the shortest headway at 45 minutes. For transit riders dependent on a bus service to get to work or to other services, the infrequency of the service can make transportation and access an increased difficulty. For riders who might have multiple stops or transfers, those headways can change what would be a short car ride into an all-morning or all evening commute. If directed effectively, however, the transit service can be an extraordinary asset for the Collier County workforce, potentially reducing the group’s commute and car ownership costs. According to the Federal Highway Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 46 Administration (FHWA), the average American family spends 19 percent of its household budget on transportation. For families that are in transit-efficient locations, this cost decreases to 9 percent; for those in auto-dependent communities, it increases to 25 percent. Thus, transportation costs can directly add or subtract substantial funds from families’ household budgets, thereby increasing cost burdens or providing more flexibility in household budgets. Recommendation #1: Integrate Bus Routes with Affordable Housing Locations 1. Activity: Identify transportation corridors for multi-family development to ensure such developments are supported by transit. 2. Activity: Implement park-and-ride systems throughout the County to incentivize use of public transit. 3. Activity: Explore bus rapid transit and express service lines to improved access to employment. According to the Collier County MPO’s 2014 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Study—a complementary report to the 2012 Comprehensive Pathways Plan—a survey of 478 respondents resulted in 62 percent reporting that they had felt “threatened for personal safety during bicycling or walking trips.” For Collier County to reduce transportation road costs, effectively move the workforce across the community, and create healthy avenues for residents to engage in civic activities, this number must be mitigated and the recommendations of both studies should be advanced. The Comprehensive Pathways Plan is being updated, with completion anticipated in mid-2018. The draft recommends aligning new pathways construction (bicycle and pedestrian facilities) with transit routes, stops and transfer centers and identifies bicycle/pedestrian Safety Focus Areas based on crash statistics. Steps toward enhancing the use of transit, bicycling, and walking for at least a portion of daily trips should be encouraged. Recommendation #2: Enhance Bike Lane and Pedestrian Systems 1. Activity: Implement the Comprehensive Pathways Plan for the county. 2. Activity: Enhance safety focusing on pedestrian and cyclist and vulnerable road users. With smart phone apps and online connectivity, fantastic and successful tools for ride sharing are available that can be conveniently and affordably accessed. The county should explore promoting such resources and working with nonprofits to promote convenient ride-sharing options for populations living in more suburban or remote areas, like the Estates, Ave Maria, or Immokalee. The New Orleans Regional Planning Commission sponsors one such rideshare platform, the New Orleans GreenRide, which uses a social media platform to connect riders and carpoolers. “…the workforce of Collier County needs a range of transportation options that align with and support a range of housing choices in a variety of areas.” –ULI Panel Report Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 47 Recommendation #3: Ride Sharing Options for Enhanced Mobility 1. Activity: Transit staff is encouraged to coordinate with nonprofits and other groups to Create Ride-Sharing Option for remote areas of the County. Collier Area Transit (CAT) is serving an increasingly vital need in the county as workforce demands intensify and traffic concerns grow. However, if the service is going to be able to keep up with the demands already placed on it, a critical element is that the service has a sustainable source of revenue it can leverage and depend on. Given the expenses of highways ($4.6 million per lane mile), prioritizing proactive investments in transit today could save the county significant funds in the future. In addition, given the growing bike and pedestrian needs of the county and the multitude of community benefits that those amenities provide, a revenue source should also be identified and provided for such additional capacity Recommendation #4: Revenue for Transit and Alternative Mobility 1. Activity: Establish Sustainable, Secure Revenue for Transit and Alternative Mobility. 2. Activity: Implement a Recurring Revenue Source for transit (i.e.: Mobility Fee; MSTU; etc.) to meet the operations demands. 3. Activity: Establish uniform standards to measure the impact of development on Transit; Transit and other forms of alternative transportation are critical for many renters. Renters are more likely than other households to depend on transportation modes other than their own cars to reach work, shopping, and other activities. This is particularly true for seniors, the disabled and those with low incomes. Seven percent of Florida households have no vehicle at home. However, this number increases to 14 percent for renters and to 18 percent for renters with incomes between 30 and 60 percent of AMI. The share of no-vehicle households continues to increase for extremely low income renters, especially older households, until a majority of ELI (Extremely Low Income) renters over age 75 have no access to a vehicle at home. As Collier County’s population continues to age there will be an increased need for affordable rental housing with access to transit, paratransit, and other forms of alternative transportation. “Providing a more integrated network of mobility not only provides workforce access but also provides access to healthier lifestyles. In addition, with estimated road costs averaging 4.6 million per lane-mile, identifying proactive approaches that will reduce congestion and stress on roadways will save the county significant funds in the future.” - ULI Panel Report (pg 29) Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 48 Communication and Outreach/Engagement The Communication and Engagement subcommittee has made recommendations to help educate the community on the need for and importance of housing that is affordable to a wide range of individuals and families that live and work in Collier County. There is a need to continue to communicate the need for more rental apartment availability…it appears that point can’t be stressed enough, particularly with millennial workforce. Their recommendations are: 1. Create an online, near-real-time updated Current Inventory of Affordable Housing Availability (purchase and rental) along with links to Information & Resources, outlining all available programs. 2. Recommend the County create an easy to find, one click “housing- focused” website briefly explaining and connecting currently available housing resources. Recommend that if the Commissioners don’t want to add staff that they contract with a 3rd party to keep up the website and provide a “human element” (“Housing Resource Specialist”) that focuses every day on helping citizens find housing solutions and opportunities. A. Develop & release an RFP (late fall 2017) for an agency to provide both a custom website and staffing to support the Housing One-Stop. The website development alone with the associated algorithms could cost close to $80,000, plus associated staff costs. B. Provide initial funding of $100,000 for development and nonprofit management 3. Develop a Marketing, PR & Communications Plan to continue to educate the community on who needs housing and is having trouble finding it; why do we need to address the situation; and what’s the impact of no action; and keep the public aware of efforts and impact. A. Educate residents and “change the narrative” to present affordable housing as a necessity and a shared public responsibility B. Create PSA’s, short videos and social media and other vehicles to continually educate the public on housing affordability issues. Show images of a nurse, teacher, bank manager, sheriff’s deputy, mid-level managers, etc. and explain that we need them, and they need housing that’s affordable. Images of the elderly and other working citizens. Have Dr. Weiss Affordable housing is an essential part of every community’s infrastructure. It is one of the cornerstones to creating a healthy, vibrant and sustainable community. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 49 (nurses & healthcare), Dr. Patton (teachers) and Sheriff Rambosk (sheriff’s deputies) make brief video statements on how housing challenges are beginning to impact their ability to recruit and keep staff, and that when those staff live outside our community, we lose their spending and their potential off-work contributions in our neighborhoods (coach, volunteer, youth leader, etc.). C. A marketing campaign involving surveying for baseline understanding, executing a marketing plan to raise awareness and understanding, and then post-marketing surveying to determine if we’ve moved the needle. The goal is to inform & encourage more citizens to feel more inclined to support such housing (Can I Be Your Neighbor? Yes in My Back Yard campaigns), and realize the benefit of being able to provide housing for a range of workforce needs that impact their lives and build community D. Begin a campaign to clarify what we mean by “affordable housing” and “workforce housing” – using both short videos and social media to define the issue and who it impacts. This effort could have a County component explaining the issue (not campaigning, but explaining), and a business component that would engage the private sector – for instance, engage the Chamber’s GAIN and Leadership Collier classes and alumni as the “face of workforce housing,” demonstrating the quality of our workforce members (who currently often can’t afford to live in Collier County). E. Plus, we need to show what 16-30 housing units per acre looks like, in terms of apartments, townhouses and homes. This seems to be a constant sticking point. Also, we learned how there will need to be more caregivers (the federal minimums are increasing) to take care of our aging (and increasingly income-constrained) population, yet we have a shortage of housing that would be affordable to caregiver staff. Can we assume they will live outside of Collier County and commute each day in large enough numbers to meet the demand? 4. Also consider solutions that don’t involve construction. For example, Hillsborough County offers assistance with down payments. Plus, some resort communities include connections to VRBO properties as an access to transitional housing that’s affordable (an owner may be willing to do a 1 year rental, at an overall lower price than the seasonal rate, but making the same amount of money as a 6-month rental). Anything that could be Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 50 done to provide more awareness of properties that are already in existence. Most Critical Need and Combination of Strategies The need for affordable rental housing is one of the major challenges for our community. Businesses that are recruiting for professionals or those employers that hire seasonal health care or hospitality employees, have difficulty finding vacant rental units for their permanent relocation, or seasonal employment. Existing rental communities have a very low vacancy rate of 3%-4% which is insufficient to accommodate population growth or current residents in need of a new rental units. This current situation also imposes huge burdens on renters if units are taken out of service such as an apartment complex fire (Bear Creek, April 2017) or a natural disaster such as Hurricane Irma. The County currently administers some State & Federal grant programs that target rental housing. In the 1990’s and early 2000’s there were a number of apartment communities built utilizing programs including Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), State Apartment Incentive Loan (SAIL) program, Federal Home Loan Bank Board funding and other resources. However, since the mid-2000’s we have not seen new rental apartment communities come online as the county’s population continues to grow. In addition, apartment communities built utilizing LIHTC and other programs regularly convert to market rate housing after the subsidies and use restrictions expire (30ys+/-). We have recently “lost” five apartment communities whose subsidies have expired and five more communities’ subsidies will expire between 2022-2028. Each apartment community that converts to market rate has the ability to impact 50 to over 250 households. To accommodate population and associated employment growth, many of the strategies proposed in this plan will help to increase the supply of much needed rental housing. These strategies include the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB), Mixed-Income Housing, Community Land Trust (CLT), Linkage Fees, local Housing Trust Fund (HTF), Impact Fee Discounts, and other programs. Many of these programs are intended to be layered to provide sufficient incentives for developers to build much needed rental housing. Utilizing the Affordable Housing Density Bonus program (AHDB), rental developments are built at higher multi-family densities. The Mixed Income Housing requirement will produce units at various income ranges to be included in market rate communities, with a set aside for seniors and special needs, or opt to build a housing development off-site. Funds in the local housing trust fund (HTF), including linkage fees, percent of sales tax/ad valorum, and donations, could be used to provide a local match to aid apartment developments competing for state and federal funding, thereby boosting their chances of award. In addition, rental developments could be built on land owned by a non-profit community land trust (CLT) which would result in long-term (99 years) affordability. Together, all of these programs, Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 51 and others, will help the county increase the supply of rental housing that is affordable to accommodate its future population and employment growth. Closing the Gap In an effort to address the housing affordability crisis in Collier County, local government and the business community must partner to quickly implement some short term, medium, and long term initiatives. To paraphrase the ULI, now is the time for action. The future sustainability, livability, vibrancy, and quality of life of our community is at stake. The following table demonstrates how this plan addresses the current and future need for housing that is affordable for our workforce and low-income seniors and special needs populations. Figure 19. Housing Response Model Figure 18. Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 52 Implementation Plan/Schedule The Community Housing Plan recommendations to be undertaken are: Immediate Action • Approve the Community Housing Plan • Adopt New Definition of Affordable Housing – Housing Affordability • Adopt new Housing Demand Methodology • Direct staff to advertise Mixed Income Housing Ordinance • Commission a nexus study and direct staff to advertise Linkage Fee Ordinance • Amend the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) program • Reinstate the Housing Trust Fund and adopt funding sources • Advocate for full funding of the Sadowski Housing Trust Fund • Adopt a policy to address housing that is affordable in future public land acquisitions. • Prepare a Request for Proposal (RFP) making County owned sites available for housing development. • Adopt amended Impact Fee Relief program Short Term (1-3 Years) • Partner with a local nonprofit organization on the creation of a Community Land Trust and provide financial assistance of $100,000 for the first two years. • Create a concurrent zoning review/approval process to reduce the cost of affordable housing construction and expedite new housing • Develop a marketing & communications plan and expand educational programs including household budgeting • Update the Land Development Code to include new housing programs and definitions • Update the inventory of affordable housing units regularly • Fund the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) through local initiatives • Develop guidelines to require mixed income residential housing in activity centers • Adopt public policies regarding use of County owned land • Provide administrative approvals of certain affordable housing applications Collier County Community Housing Plan- 10/16/17 - Page 53 • Provide an increase in density in the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) areas and along transit corridors • Continuously review and monitor the LDC and Growth Management Plan to update and ensure the goal of increasing housing affordability is being met • Develop an administrative process for commercial to residential conversions • Build Developer Capacity • Build Housing Development Corporation Capacity Long Term (4-10 years) • Continue to conduct an annual review of the Housing Trust Fund (HTF) and report on expenditures and accomplishments • Review and adjust the mixed income housing, Linkage Fee, and Density Bonus programs as needed to balance the needs of residents, developers and the current market • Continue to monitor all housing initiatives to ensure that the goal of increased housing affordability is being met • Continuously review and monitor all affordable housing incentive programs to ensure they are on track and meeting goals • Continuously review and monitor the affordable housing inventory, marketing & communications plan, and other educational tools and programs to ensure the goal are being met ULI Collier Housing Assessment  A ULI Advisory Services Panel ReportA ULI Advisory Services Panel ReportCollier County Florida January 29–February 3, 2017 Collier_Cover.indd 2 5/17/17 11:17 AM Collier County Florida Expanding Housing Affordability January 29–February 3, 2017 A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report2 About the Urban Land Institute THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE is a global, member- driven organization comprising more than 40,000 real estate and urban development professionals dedicated to advancing the Institute’s mission of providing leadership in the responsible use of land and creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide. ULI’s interdisciplinary membership represents all aspects of the industry, including developers, property owners, investors, architects, urban planners, public officials, real estate brokers, appraisers, attorneys, engineers, finan- ciers, and academics. Established in 1936, the Institute has a presence in the Americas, Europe, and Asia Pacific regions, with members in 76 countries. The extraordinary impact that ULI makes on land use deci- sion making is based on its members sharing expertise on a variety of factors affecting the built environment, includ- ing urbanization, demographic and population changes, new economic drivers, technology advancements, and environmental concerns. Peer-to-peer learning is achieved through the knowledge shared by members at thousands of convenings each year that reinforce ULI’s position as a global authority on land use and real estate. In 2016 alone, more than 3,200 events were held in 340 cities around the world. Drawing on the work of its members, the Institute recog- nizes and shares best practices in urban design and devel- opment for the benefit of communities around the globe. More information is available at uli.org. Follow ULI on Twit- ter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram. Cover photos: Wilhelm Rosenkranz (top); Beth Silverman (bottom). © 2017 by the Urban Land Institute 2001 L Street, NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20036-4948 All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole or any part of the contents without written permission of the copy- right holder is prohibited. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 3 About ULI Advisory Services THE GOAL OF THE ULI ADVISORY SERVICES pro- gram is to bring the finest expertise in the real estate field to bear on complex land use planning and development projects, programs, and policies. Since 1947, this program has assembled well over 600 ULI-member teams to help sponsors find creative, practical solutions for issues such as downtown redevelopment, land management strate- gies, evaluation of development potential, growth manage- ment, community revitalization, brownfield redevelopment, military base reuse, provision of low-cost and affordable housing, and asset management strategies, among other matters. A wide variety of public, private, and nonprofit or- ganizations have contracted for ULI’s advisory services. Each panel team is composed of highly qualified profes- sionals who volunteer their time to ULI. They are chosen for their knowledge of the panel topic and are screened to ensure their objectivity. ULI’s interdisciplinary panel teams provide a holistic look at development problems. A respected ULI member who has previous panel experience chairs each panel. The agenda for a five-day panel assignment is intensive. It includes an in-depth briefing day composed of a tour of the site and meetings with sponsor representatives, a day of hour-long interviews of typically 50 to 100 key community representatives, and two days of formulating recommendations. Long nights of discussion precede the panel’s conclusions. On the final day on site, the panel makes an oral presentation of its findings and conclusions to the sponsor. A written report is prepared and published. Because the sponsoring entities are responsible for significant preparation before the panel’s visit, including sending extensive briefing materials to each member and arranging for the panel to meet with key local community members and stakeholders in the project under consider- ation, participants in ULI’s five-day panel assignments are able to make accurate assessments of a sponsor’s issues and to provide recommendations in a compressed amount of time. A major strength of the program is ULI’s unique ability to draw on the knowledge and expertise of its members, including land developers and owners, public officials, academics, representatives of financial institutions, and others. In fulfillment of the mission of the Urban Land Institute, this Advisory Services panel report is intended to provide objective advice that will promote the responsible use of land to enhance the environment. ULI Program Staff Thomas W. Eitler Senior Vice President, Advisory Services Beth Silverman Senior Director, Advisory Services Paul Angelone Director, Advisory Services Steven Gu Associate, Advisory Services James A. Mulligan Senior Editor David James Rose Editor/Manager Sara Proehl, Publications Professionals LLC Manuscript Editor Betsy Van Buskirk Creative Director Deanna Pineda, Muse Advertising Design Graphic Designer Craig Chapman Senior Director, Publishing Operations A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report4 Acknowledgments ON BEHALF OF THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE, the panel would like to thank our sponsors, the Board of Coun- ty Commissioners of Collier County—Penny Taylor, Donna Fiala, Andy Solis, Burt L. Saunders, and William L. McDan- iel Jr. The panel would also like to thank the city of Naples, the city of Marco Island, Everglades City, the Collier County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, and the Commu- nity Housing Plan Stakeholders Committee for inviting the panel to examine housing affordability challenges in the county, and it thanks the community at large for being so warm and welcoming. Special appreciation goes to Kimberly Grant, director of Community and Housing Services; Cormac Giblin, Grants and Housing Development manager; Steve Carnell, head of Public Services; County Manager Leo Ochs; and the rest of the county staff members for the time and effort they have devoted to the project. In addition, the panel expresses its appreciation to Steve Hruby, Nick Kouloheras, and the other members of the affordable housing committee for their assistance and support throughout the engagement. The panel also thanks ULI Southwest Florida, which will continue to be a local resource for Collier County moving forward. Finally, the panel would like to thank the approximately 90 residents, business and community leaders, and repre- sentatives from the Greater Collier County community who shared their perspectives and insights during the panel’s stakeholder interviews. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 5 Contents ULI Panel and Project Staff ...............................................................................................................................6 Background and the Panel’s Assignment ..........................................................................................................7 Study Area and Surrounding Context .................................................................................................................9 Current Conditions ........................................................................................................................................11 Vision: What Do You Want to Be When You Grow Up? .....................................................................................17 Implementation ..............................................................................................................................................20 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................37 Appendix A: Implementation Schedule ............................................................................................................38 Appendix B: Examples of County Housing Initiatives .........................................................................................39 Appendix C: City of Austin, 2014 Robert C. Larson Policy Leadership Award Winner .........................................40 About the Panel .............................................................................................................................................43 A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report6 ULI Panel and Project Staff Panel Chair Philip Payne Principal and Chief Executive Officer Ginkgo Residential Charlotte, North Carolina Panel Members Hilary Chapman Housing Program Manager Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Washington, D.C. Ian Colgan Assistant Executive Director Oklahoma City Housing Authority Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Joanne Fiebe Florida Center for Community Design and Research School of Architecture and Community Design, University of South Florida Tampa, Florida Lacy McManus Director of Program Development Greater New Orleans Inc. New Orleans, Louisiana John Orfield Principal BOKA Powell Dallas, Texas Cassie Wright Project Manager Urban Ventures LLC Denver, Colorado ULI Project Staff Beth Silverman Senior Director, Advisory Services Steven Gu Associate, Advisory Services Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 7 COLLIER COUNTY HAS BEEN DESCRIBED as “unique” and “one of the most beautiful places in the world.” Although the community is unique, the issue of housing affordability is not. In fact, virtually every commu- nity in the nation is, to some degree, struggling with this issue. It is especially true in retirement and resort commu- nities, which have significant numbers of service workers and high real estate values. The issue of housing affordability is not new. The panel is impressed with the time, the effort, and the quality of work that has been invested in this subject by the commission- ers and Collier County staff. Many of the panel’s recom- mendations mirror and ratify the work that has already been done. From the panel’s perspective, the real need in Collier County is for action and implementation. This implementa- tion will require political will and leadership. In addition, the community at large will need to prepare for and adapt to the growth that is certain to occur in the county. Not all of the panel’s recommendations will be popular within the community at large, but the panel believes such recom- mendations are essential to the long-term viability and sustainability of Collier County. An integral part of this strategic vision will be developing a plan that ensures that affordable housing will be available to all of the county’s citizens. The Panel’s Assignment There is no question that Collier County has a housing affordability problem. The highly desirable area is home to millionaires and billionaires from around the world. The county also has a sizable second-home retirement com- munity. Like many affluent resort communities across the United States, those influences have created a develop- ment pattern that caters to select segments of the com- munity. The local economy is focused on retail, hospitality, services, and agriculture; however, high housing costs have priced out much of the workforce needed for the county to function. As a result, large numbers of employ- ees are commuting long distances to and from work, and employers are having an increasingly difficult time recruit- ing and retaining workers. Community leaders are seeking strategic recommendations on how to address the issues surrounding housing affordability in Collier County. In March 2015 and again in March 2016, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) held an affordable housing workshop. The BCC has also received several recommen- dations for programs and incentives to address housing affordability in Collier County, including establishing an affordable housing trust fund, providing even greater density incentives to support affordable housing develop- ment, and providing inclusionary zoning with pay-in-lieu-of options. The larger Collier County community has come Background and the Panel’s Assignment Although Collier County is the site of multimillion-dollar homes, it faces a significant housing affordability problem. Part of the challenge stems from a significant lack of supply in terms of housing type and level of affordability throughout the county. BETH SILVERMAN/ULIBETH SILVERMAN/ULIMARIAMICHELLE A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report8 Collier County circa 1930–1945.BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY together around this issue. In October 2015, the United Way sponsored a community-wide forum about affordable housing. The Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce’s Board of Directors has also established a work group to address this issue. Collier County has invited the ULI Advisory Services panel to help the county develop a community-wide approach to address housing affordability issues. Collier County has asked the panel to focus on the follow- ing key questions: ■■Why is it important for the county to have a balanced supply of housing, in terms of type, tenure, attainability, access, and distribution? ■■According to key stakeholders, including residents, what are the major obstacles to producing and sustaining affordable housing and workforce housing in Collier County? What can be done to mitigate those obstacles? ■■What are the stakeholders’ perceptions of affordable and workforce housing and of the existing tools and programs in place to support it? What are stakeholders’ recommendations for change? ■■How can public policy encourage the redevelopment of underused areas of the developed coastal area that includes affordable and workforce housing while ensur- ing that such housing will also be a component of new development in the urban and rural fringe areas. ■■What policies, strategies, and best practices have worked in places similar to Collier County that the panel would recommend that the county implement as it produces affordable housing units in the county’s urban and rural areas? Summary of the Panel’s Recommendations It was evident to the panel during its interviews with com- munity stakeholders; its review of comments compiled from a countywide, online, public survey; and its multiple study tours throughout Collier County that much work has already been done to address housing affordability chal- lenges. The panel hopes this report not only will serve as a blueprint for implementation, but also will help solidify an ongoing strategy to meet the county’s spectrum of housing affordability needs. With such goals in mind, the panel’s primary recommendations include the following: ■■Create a vision for the future of the community. ■■Recognize that housing affordability affects all segments of the community. ■■Increase the county’s supply of affordable housing (in- cluding rental housing) by adding to the current supply and by maintaining existing affordable units. ■■Adopt a smart code that distinguishes between the urban and rural parts of the county. ■■Reactivate the Affordable Housing Trust Fund—and use it. ■■Recognize that transportation is part of the housing affordability solution. Develop solutions that link housing with access to transportation options. ■■Establish transportation corridors to target mixed- income, multifamily housing development. ■■Consider establishing an enhanced minimum-wage ordinance. ■■Raise public awareness, educate, and communicate with the community about housing affordability. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 9 Located in southwest Florida, Collier County is the largest county by land area in the state. The panel’s study area encompasses the entire county. However, key focus areas within the study include the city of Naples, the urban area, the rural lands, the Estates area, and the Immokalee area.ULI COLLIER COUNTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST END of the Florida peninsula, Collier County is the largest county by land area in the state. The county contains a variety of differ- ent communities including the city of Naples, inland Im- mokalee, and Marco Island, as well as four large nationally protected environmental areas. According to the 2010 census, the population breaks down to 65.7 percent non- Hispanic whites, 25.9 percent Latino, 6.6 percent African American, and 1.1 percent Asian. This diverse community, both geographically and ethnically, makes Collier County unique when compared with similar tourist destinations. However, this diversity has also led to housing issues throughout the county. Key Focus Areas Although the county was examined at large, the panel was asked to focus on the following key areas: ■■The city of Naples is an incorporated municipality bordering the Gulf of Mexico on the west and the unincorporated Collier County urban area on the east. Naples measures just 14 square miles and has some of the highest housing costs in the country. The limited number of commercial areas consists primarily of retail centers and financial institutions. ■■The urban area is located between the city of Naples and the rural lands (which run from the coast to about ten miles inland). Most of the housing, commercial, re- tail, and other services are located and permitted in this area. The urban area is characterized by large, planned, gated communities and by strip-mall developments. ■■The rural lands and the Estates area are located between the urban area and the more environmentally sensitive areas to the east. The Estates area is largely composed of platted, subdivided lots that range from Study Area and Surrounding Context 1 1 1 1 17 17 19 19219A 27 27 27 301 301 41 41 41 441 441 92 98 98 98 TollTol l 275 4 75 75 95 95 Biscayne NP Everglades NP Big CypressN PRES L. Istokpoga L. Kissimmee L. Okeechobee Ki s s i m m e e R .Peace R.St J o h n s R . FLORIDA BAY GULF OF MEXICO ATLANTIC OCEAN Charlotte Harbor Whitewater Bay BREVARD BROWARD CHARLOTTE COLLIER DADE DE SOTO GLADES HARDEE HENDRY HIGHLANDS HILLSBOROUGH INDIAN RIVER LEE MANATEE MARTIN MONROE OKEECHOBEE PALM BEACH PINELLAS POLK ST. LUCIE SARASOTA OSCEOLA Boynton BeachCape Coral Fort Myers Fort Pierce Margate Port Charlotte SarasotaBayshore Gardens Belle Glade Englewood Homestead Immokalee Key West Naples Port St. LucieSarasota Springs Tamiami Venice Fort Lauderdale Hollywood West Palm Beach Miami Immokalee area Collier County Florida Gulf o f Mex ico Urban area City of Naples Rural lands/Estates area A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report10 about one acre to more than 20 acres. During the Florida Land Grab of the 1950s, land parcels were divided and sold, creating the largest subdivision in the world with tens of thousands of home sites. Designated as privately owned, single-family lots, the Estates area’s commercial and retail opportunities are limited. West of the Estates are the rural lands, which are primarily farmland and environmentally sensitive areas that are designated for future cities and towns. The first town to be built in this area is Ave Maria. Once the project is built out, it will have up to 11,000 residences and 1.7 million square feet of retail, office, and business park uses spread across its 4,000 acres. Ave Maria is located at the intersection of Oil Well Road and Camp Keals Road in eastern Collier County. The main entrance—on Oil Well just west of Camp Keals—leads to the town center. ■■The Immokalee area is an agricultural center of the county. It is located in the northeast section of the county and is characterized by residential, commercial, and industrial development. A significant percentage of the affordable housing units available in Collier County are located in the Immokalee area. Habitat for Humanity development projects, such as Carson Lakes and Faith Landing, are built here, as are other affordable housing developments, including Hatcher’s Preserve. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 11 Current Conditions AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS MANY definitions and perceptions. Oftentimes, the multitude of definitions and opinions creates confusion when people are attempting to both study and solve issues of housing affordability in any given community or geography. Many definitions of afford- able housing refer to a percentage of area median income (AMI) as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Other definitions are careful to delineate between “affordable” and “workforce” housing— often defined as above or below 80 percent of AMI. Regard- less of the definition used in the affordable housing industry, for most people what represents “affordable” is more of a gut feeling that is influenced by their daily context. Throughout the study process, the panel consistently heard about Collier County’s housing affordability problem. However, the panel also perceived that there is a lack of clarity and agreement about the definition of affordable housing, which is causing poor communication, misunder- standings, and misaligned goals relative to the topic. Ac- cordingly, the panel recommends reframing the terminology of housing affordability around the concept of cost burden. Reframing the Idea of Housing Affordability HUD defines “cost burdened” as the following: Families who pay more than 30 percent of their gross income on housing costs, which includes mortgage principal and interest, property tax, and homeowners insurance payments. Other definitions add other housing costs, such as utilities, condominium or homeowners association fees, and ongo- ing maintenance or repairs, but the overall concept is that if a household is paying more than 30 percent of its gross income toward housing, then that is a concern, and from a policy standpoint, such cost may need to be addressed. The advantage of using the cost-burden terminology is that it does not put the focus on income alone; instead, it examines income as compared to housing cost. Therefore, it has a localized outcome that recognizes the different housing markets that exist nationally, regionally, and even within a single city or county. The 30 percent cost-burden threshold has been around for several decades. The idea was originally established by the 1937 National Housing Act, which also created the public housing program. At that time, eligibility to live in public housing was based on income limits, rather than maximum rents; a tenant’s income could not exceed five to six times the rent. Since the late 1930s, the 30 percent income limit for rental housing has been reevaluated and The Center for Urban Pedagogy, a New York City nonprofit organization dedicated to using the power of design and art to increase meaningful civic engagement, created the guidebook What Is Affordable Housing? with pictures and diagrams to help explain affordable housing issues in New York City.THE CENTER FOR URBAN PEDAGOGY 12 A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report Glossary of Housing Affordability Terms Affordable housing: Generally, a home or apartment occupied by a household that pays 30 percent or less of its gross income toward its mortgage or rent. The term is also widely used to refer to housing that is subsidized or rent-regulated and that is occupied by a household that is “low-income” (see later). The term used in this manner can be limiting—there are growing numbers of households that are within a range of incomes, that live in unsubsidized or unregulated market-rate housing, and that have a problem with “housing affordability” (see later). Area median income (AMI): The median household income of each metropolitan statistical area (MSA) adjusted for family size. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) publishes AMIs annually. AMI is used to determine the eligibility of applicants for most housing assistance programs. Extremely low-income housing: Per federal regulations, a household whose income does not exceed the higher of the federal poverty level or 30 percent of AMI (see earlier). Housing affordability: Refers to the ability or the lack thereof of a household to meet its housing expenses with a reasonable and sustainable share of its income, generally spending no more than 30 percent of gross income on housing costs, without regard to the household’s income or whether the household lives in subsidized, rent-regulated, or market-rate housing. Housing cost burden: Per the federal government, refers to a household having to pay more than 30 percent of its income for housing and possibly having difficulty affording other necessities such as food, clothing, transportation, and medical care. A housing cost burden is “severe” if housing costs consume more than 50 percent of a household’s income. Low-income housing: Per federal regulations, a household whose income does not exceed 80 percent of AMI (see earlier), adjusted for family size. Mixed-income housing: “Mixed-income” has a twofold meaning. In accordance with federal housing policy, HUD defines a mixed-income building as “comprised of housing units with differing levels of affordability, typically with some market-rate housing and some housing that is available to low-income occupants below market-rate.” In accordance with widely held housing industry practice, a mixed-income neighborhood consists of a variety of household incomes and opportunities for meaningful interaction, including parks, schools, and shopping. Moderate-income housing: Per federal regulations, households whose incomes are between 81 percent and 95 percent of AMI. The government may establish income ceilings higher or lower than 95 percent of AMI on the basis of an analysis of prevailing levels of construction costs, fair market rents, or unusually high or low family incomes. Naturally occurring affordable housing: Generally, housing that is “affordable” to “low-income” and “moderate-income” (see earlier) households that is not currently federally subsidized or rent-regulated. Preservation: Generally, providing the necessary physical improvements and financial capital to enable a currently occupied rental property to remain “affordable” (see earlier) and in decent condition for a sustained period of time. Preservation programs can also target owner-occupied housing, thereby providing assistance to homeowners that allows them to make improvements to their homes and to remain in them. Public housing: Rental housing owned and operated by local housing authorities that primarily serves “extremely low-income” (see earlier) households. Roughly 2.6 million people live in the nation’s 1.1 million public housing units. Very few public housing units have been built in recent years. Supportive housing: Generally, “affordable housing” (see earlier) combined with social services to assist vulnerable populations, such as the homeless, the disabled, the addicted, and the elderly. Very low-income housing: Per federal regulations, a household whose income does not exceed 50 percent of AMI (see earlier), adjusted for family size. Workforce housing: Generally, housing that is “affordable” (see earlier) to households earning between 60 and 120 percent of AMI (see earlier). In high-cost areas, incomes may be as high as 150 percent of AMI. Some definitions exclude owner-occupied housing. Source: ULI Terwilliger Center for Housing. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 13 Table 1: Cost Burden in Collier County Burden for Three-Person Household Earning 30 to 150 Percent of Area Median Income Annual household income Percentage of area median income Percentage of income needed to afford median rent* Percentage of income needed to afford median-price home** Percentage of income needed to afford median-price condo*** $20,160 30 61 149 101 $29,600 50 41 101 69 $47,300 80 26 63 43 $59,125 100 21 51 35 $65,038 110 19 46 31 $70,950 120 17 42 29 $88,688 150 14 34 23 Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; The 2016 Collier County Economic, Demographic & Community Profile; the American Community Survey. *Median gross rent is $1,020 per month, as defined by the Shimberg Center in 2015. **Median sales price is $405,000, including mortgage and interest at a 20 percent downpayment for 30 years, plus estimated homeowner’s insurance, property taxes, and flood insurance. ***Median sales price for condominiums and townhouses is $257,000, including mortgage and interest at 20 percent downpayment for 30 years, plus estimated homeowner’s insurance, property taxes, and flood insurance. adjusted several times, ranging from 20 to 30 percent at any given time. In 1981, the housing burden rate for rentals was rees- tablished at 30 percent of gross annual income. Gradu- ally, this limit was extended to homeownership. In the mid-1990s, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would purchase mortgages only if their principal, interest, tax, and insur- ance (PITI) payments were 28 percent or less of the borrower’s gross income for a conventional loan and 29 percent for a loan insured by the Federal Housing Admin- istration. Since that time, almost all cost-burden limits for housing have been around 30 percent of a household’s gross income (https://www.census.gov/housing/census/ publications/who-can-afford.pdf). Used in conjunction with the 30 percent cost-burden threshold is severe cost burden, which includes house- holds that pay more than 50 percent of gross income toward housing costs. Those households are the most at risk—regardless of locality. Defining the Cost-Burden Problem In 2015, Collier County had a population of 343,802 and 140,131 households. The Shimberg Center at the Univer- sity of Florida estimates that of the 140,131 households, 58,685 (40 percent) were cost burdened in 2015—mean- ing they spent more than 30 percent of their gross income on housing. Of those 58,685 households, 29,342 were considered severely cost burdened —meaning they spent more than 50 percent of their gross income on housing. This finding means that two out of every five households in Collier County are cost burdened, with one in five severely cost burdened. During the study tour, the panel observed that in several communities multiple cars were parked in front of each home, thus supporting the theory that people are living together in order to afford the high cost of housing in the county.BETH SILVERMAN/ULI A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report14 However, the issue of cost burden may be larger than the numbers indicate. Not all of the households counted in the census are year-round residents, and most of those part- time households have incomes that support their residence in the county, which is a second residence. Therefore, it is likely that the actual percentages of cost burden are substantially higher among residents who live in the county year-round. To better understand the meaning of “cost burdened” in Collier County, the panel analyzed the correlation between household income and housing prices or rental rates. In 2016, the estimated AMI for Collier County was $65,700, and the average household size was 2.47. For a snapshot of the cost-burden issue, see table 1. Who Is Cost Burdened in Collier County? The people who are cost burdened in Collier County are crucial to the local economy. They provide key public safety, education, and health care services to the com- munity’s residents. In addition, they are responsible for the high-quality lifestyle that makes Collier County such a special place. Examples of workers in the cost-burdened category include the following: ■■Health care: Nurses, medical assistants, senior service providers ■■Education: Teachers and other school employees ■■Public safety: Police officers, firefighters ■■Service industry workers: Wait staff, hotel staff, retail and trade salespeople, golf course employees, land- scape maintenance workers ■■Entry-level or nonprofit professionals: Bank tellers, social workers, office managers, government employees Not every person in those fields will have difficulty finding housing that is affordable. For example, dual-income households have increased purchasing power. However, people receiving entry-level and median income rates in health care, public safety, and professional sectors are more likely to experience a cost burden than are the people holding executive, management, and supervisory positions. Also, single-income households, which can include one- to four-person households, are more likely to experience a cost burden or even a severe cost burden when living in Collier County. Table 2 provides a representative sample of employment positions in Collier County and what people in such posi- tions can afford in the local market. Across the board, the ability to afford houses priced at the median sales price from 2015 was low. The ability to afford rental units at the median gross rent (plus utilities) was more reasonable, with affordability attainable for some of the people holding professional positions. During the panel process, the panel heard many stories regarding how difficult it is to recruit service industry work- ers, particularly those who work at the resorts and hotels, including housekeepers, front-desk staff members, and golf course attendants. The panel’s analysis of cost burden for those jobs indicates that there is substantial cost burden for such workers unless they share living space or commute long distances. One critical challenge for Collier County businesses is the ability to recruit entry-level professionals. Mid- and upper-level professionals in public safety, education, government, and health care can afford a wider range of housing. However, such is not the case for entry-level professionals, who often end up living far away from their source of employment (particularly in Lee County). Having employees who reside outside of Collier County and who commute long distances for work often means a high level of attrition for businesses. Furthermore, when people who work in the county are commuting to adjoining municipali- ties to live, the county bears the costs of the roads without the benefit of receiving the tax revenue. Collectively, the employment sectors that are the most at risk to incur a significant cost burden represent more than 50 percent of the local labor force. But beyond that, the sectors represent the core of county, public safety, Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 15 and education services, and those services support the background of the lifestyle, health, and overall vitality of the county. Other important groups of residents with substantial needs include low- to moderate-income seniors, both those who live independently and those who require services; residents who require mental health treatment and various other services; and very low-wage earners. Those resi- dents face virtually no supply of housing or no continuity in being provided social and health services. Most experience long wait lists at the few available housing sites, and many have to be relocated outside of the county to areas with a greater concentration of housing and services. Going Beyond the Root of the Problem If one is to understand the full spectrum of housing afford- ability, it is critical to examine the aspects of the challenge that go beyond housing costs. Those additional crucial factors include added housing costs, housing supply and availability, transportation costs, and future growth implications for the county, and such factors are examined in further detail in the following sections. Added Housing Costs In Collier County, housing affordability for homeowners (and especially first-time homeowners) means more than Table 2: Estimated Cost Burden for Households Headed by Selected Wage Earners Profession Annual wage range (entry to median) Housing cost as percentage of gross income Median gross rent 2015 median home sale price Health care Registered nurse $47,000–$65,000 24%38% Medical assistant $30,000–$35,000 41%68% Emergency technician $28,000–$36,000 42%68% Education Teacher $44,000–$59,000 28%50% Teaching assistant $22,000–$24,000 45%101% Public safety Firefighter $39,000–$57,000 29%43% Patrol officer $47,000–$59,000 26%41% Service workers Maid and housekeeping $18,000–$22,000 66%109% Massage therapist $26,000–$55,000 37%44% Concierge $25,000–$31,000 48%78% Entry-level/midtier professional Human resources specialist $35,000–$55,000 31%45% Dental assistant $33,000–$43,000 36%57% Administrative assistant $22,000–$33,000 49%73% Housing cost accounts for less than 30 percent of gross income (not cost burdened) Housing cost accounts for 30 to 50 percent of gross income (cost burdened) Housing cost accounts for 50 percent or more of gross income (severely cost burdened) Sources: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; The 2016 Collier County Economic, Demographic & Community Profile; the American Community Survey. A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report16 just taking into consideration PITI. Utilities and home- ownership association fees also come into play when determining housing affordability and cost burden. After interviewing several area stakeholders, the panel believes that the percentage of cost-burdened Collier County households is even higher than outlined in the earlier section. One reason the percentage is higher is that many households cannot afford a 20 percent downpayment, which means they must pay private mortgage insurance, thus reducing the amount of home they can afford. In addition, almost all areas of Collier County require flood insurance, which adds a substantial monthly cost on top of all the costs just described. Moreover, Collier County has one of the highest homeowner insurance rates in Florida. Availability When one considers cost burden and affordability, one must also consider availability and quality. Housing units at the bottom of the cost spectrum often are made up of a high percentage of units with quality and maintenance concerns. If one considers the total number of units existing at differ- ent rental and sale prices, availability of those units at any given time can significantly constrain access to housing that is affordable. The panel took a “snapshot” of units available on the market using readily accessible, publicly available portals to find housing (Zillow.com, Trulia.com, Apartments.com). Using the income bands of 25 different employment categories, the panel looked to see how many units were available below the cost-burden threshold of 30 percent (table 3). The analysis provided several interesting results. Although a reasonable number of condominiums were available (but no additional homeowners association fees were considered in the analysis, which may have resulted in fewer options), very few single-family homes were for sale, and there were very limited rental options, which indicated a particularly constrained rental market. For any worker or single-income household with income between 80 and 100 percent of AMI, options were extremely limited, to say nothing of those households making less than 80 percent, which represent a substantial percentage of workers who are cost burdened. Transportation Crucial to the cost-burden conversation is the combination of housing cost and transportation cost. According to data from the Center for Neighborhood Technology, households at 90 to 100 percent of area median income can incur housing and transportation costs of 75 percent of their gross income. That figure is 61 percent for households between 100 and 120 percent of AMI. Furthermore, de- pending on the distance from employment and other activity centers, transportation costs for Collier County households can fluctuate wildly. In some cases, households may incur 5 to 10 percent more in transportation costs if they are located farther away from employment and other services. Growth Implications In a county expected to grow significantly in population by 2040, what does that finding mean for the future? The county is expected to add 58,000 households over the next 23 years. If the local issue of cost burden is not addressed, then—at a minimum—11,000 more households will experience severe cost burden (above 50 percent) than do households today. Given ever-rising real estate values and a seemingly bottomless demand for higher-end homes and rentals, the likelihood of both the number and percentage of cost-burdened households increasing is high. Table 3: Collier County Housing Market Snapshot Units Affordable for Households Earning Less Than 100 Percent of Area Median Income Housing type Number of units Single-family, for-sale homes 125* Condominiums 65–250** Single-family rentals 0 Multifamily rentals 23 Sources: Zillow.com; Apartments.com. *3.8 percent of inventory on multiple listing services **Priced at $120,000 to $175,000 Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 17 THE PANEL TOURED KEY AREAS of Collier to get a comprehensive look at the county. The panel also inter- viewed more than 90 stakeholders during this process, reaching out to residents, elected and appointed officials, business leaders, real estate developers, and nonprofit leaders. From the study tours and interviews, the panel did not hear a strong consensus regarding the path forward for Collier County. However, several common themes and community values were frequently raised. Those traits are both existing and aspirational: some have already been im- plemented across the county (such as the Blue Zone and the commitment to beautification), while others are indica- tive of recent concerns and current shortcomings (such as economic development and traffic). The common themes and community values include the following: ■■Maintaining Collier County’s reputation as a premiere tourist destination ■■Growing and maintaining a strong real estate base and retaining steady values ■■Retaining a safe and healthy community ■■Enhancing and sustaining a visually attractive and aes- thetically pleasing community with character ■■Ensuring an efficient transportation system ■■Diversifying the local economy What the Future of Collier County Looks Like Collier County’s current debate on housing affordability is not a new one. The panel heard repeatedly about the community’s reservations regarding another discussion on housing affordability—the topic has been widely discussed for many years—with the Great Recession and housing downturn halting past efforts. These on-again, off-again discussions reflect the cyclical nature of this issue and the related concern it raises. Today, with new interests and partners realigning around the housing issue, a variety of pathways and solutions can be explored. Considering the overall values raised by community members, the panel believes two key scenarios Vision: What Do You Want to Be When You Grow Up? Collier County is home to pristine beaches and enviable weather; it also boasts a mix of urban, suburban, and rural land use patterns. Nonetheless, the panel believes that Collier County does not have a vision for what it wants to be in the future. (Left to right: Ave Maria, Naples’s iconic beaches, and the panel’s public reception.)BETH SILVERMAN/ULIBETH SILVERMAN/ULIBETH SILVERMAN/ULI A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report18 face Collier County: a future with action and a future with- out action. A wide range of options and interventions exists within this dichotomy and will produce varying outputs and results. The scenarios presented next are intended to illustrate specific certainties that the panel believes will be inevitable under current conditions. The Future of Collier County without Action on Housing If county leaders choose not to respond to the current housing needs, it is likely that the current market condi- tions and trends will continue to advance and evolve. Local employers will continue to have difficulty hiring and retaining key employees in the county, which will create a “brain drain” out of the community and into neighboring jurisdictions, such as Lee County. Not only does this market condition place a strain on employers’ ability to hire and retain high-quality talent, but also it means more workers and middle-class laborers will be commuting greater distances, thereby increasing transportation con- gestion and mitigating quality of life and civic engagement. In addition, Collier County’s local economy will lose tax revenue as incomes earned in the county leave to neigh- boring jurisdictions because out-of-county employees tend to spend a greater portion of their income by going to gro- cery stores, restaurants, and dry cleaners in their residen- tial communities. Therefore, Collier County will continue to sustain the burden of influx infrastructure strain, while receiving no tax revenue from it. Those conditions create an intensified landscape of competition between counties, instead of mutual collaboration for the betterment of the region. With no action on housing, Collier County will be forced to create reactionary policy and will have more dif- ficulty when guiding future growth of the county. The Future of Collier County with Action on Housing Conversely, if the county takes appropriate action and intervenes, the aforementioned trends could be redirected in a more financially and economically sustainable direc- tion for the county. Although the panel report will identify the specific strategies for all residents of Collier County, having a proactive policy right now will redirect the current housing and demographic trends and will create positive benefits for the county. The local economy will benefit by retaining a self- sustaining employment base in which people can work in Collier County’s Sheriff’s Department, public schools, hotels, and restaurants and can live in the county. The benefits include an increase in tax revenue generated by the in-county residents, a lesser strain on existing transportation infrastructure, and an increase in the qual- ity of life for this vital segment of the community. Also, employers will have a better chance of attracting and retaining talented and skilled workers in the county, which will improve the overall quality of life in the county and will build a stronger middle class. With the growing aging demographic, a proactive policy will make the county a more hospitable place for longtime residents to age in place and to receive health care. Also, keeping this older demographic in the county will generate county tax revenue from the group’s use of local pharma- cies, grocery stores, and specialized medical services. By taking a proactive approach toward addressing housing, Collier County can develop a vision that expands on and enhances the existing unique qualities of the county. Why a Vision Is Important The panel believes that the overall priorities of the county lack a collective vision; without such a vision, aligning and prioritizing government processes and policies will be challenging. Collier County is still facing near-certain changes—with or without a unifying vision—particularly regarding the incoming population and real estate growth. If one considers the expectations around building growth and residential influx, the problems facing the county today will be amplified in the coming years, thus exacerbating the current pain points (traffic, workforce, costs). In short, the status quo in Collier County will work only for a limited number of people and for a limited amount of time. The Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 19 As part of the study, the panel met with community stakeholders, including residents, business and community leaders, and other representatives from the larger Collier County community.BETH SILVERMAN/ULIpanel feels strongly that without proactive management, the anticipated growth will erode the very qualities that attracted people to the county in the first place. The panel recommends that the creation of a vision for Collier County should come from the county itself, as a self-directed exercise, and should be inclusive of all stake- holders. However, to ensure the exercise and the results have the desired effect, the panel provides the following elements that the county should include in its vision: ■■Provide key considerations around quality of life for all residents, as well as how to improve and maintain it. ■■Provide a range of housing options that are accessible to the full spectrum of consumers. Housing options should be economically and geographically diverse throughout the county, as well as having a range in sizes and types such as single-family homes and rental apartments. Additional key factors to consider when providing hous- ing options include the reasonable proximity to jobs, schools, amenities, and transportation choices. There should also be an inclusive mix of income levels in dif- ferent neighborhoods. ■■Grow and sustain a thriving economy that includes qualities such as livable wages, job opportunities that provide pathways to wealth creation and upward mobil- ity, diversified industries, and a diversified workforce. ■■Provide accessible, multimodal transportation options that safely and efficiently connect all residents to jobs, amenities, and services. In addition, provide clear directives to governing entities to help align policies and processes with the envisioned future for the county. A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report20 THE PANEL IS IMPRESSED WITH the planning and study that has already been completed regarding housing affordability in Collier County. The panel’s recommenda- tions reflect and endorse much of the work that has al- ready been completed. However, what is abundantly clear to the panel is that action and implementation are crucial to creating sustainable solutions. Implementation of the panel’s recommendations will require sincere action, tremendous political will, and strong leadership. For addi- tional reference, the panel has created a proposed imple- mentation schedule to provide a blueprint for how to move forward on the recommendations described throughout this section in the short, medium, and long term. (See ap- pendix A.) The panel’s major recommendations are organized around the following six core strategies to address housing afford- ability: ■■Increase supply; ■■Maintain supply; ■■Regulate and govern; ■■Enhance transportation options; ■■Enhance wages; and ■■Engage, market, and educate. Increase Supply How can Collier County meet its current and future hous- ing needs? One approach to achieving the goals is by adding housing that is affordable to households with a wide range of income levels. There is good news to share: several strategies include simply making improvements to existing procedures and vehicles rather than creating new programs entirely. There is no need to reinvent the wheel when existing structures already support the development of more affordable housing. The Housing Trust Fund The housing trust fund (HTF) is an example of a national best practice that Collier County currently has at its disposal but does not use. More than 700 HTFs exist nationwide, and they are often a critical element of a jurisdiction’s overall housing policy. Collier County’s HTF should be sustainable and predict- able, given the long planning process involved in housing development. The county should keep in mind that what can make an HTF challenging is finding viable revenue sources. Other jurisdictions have funded their trust funds through sales taxes, real estate transfer taxes, linkage fees as part of the zoning ordinance, inclusionary zoning in-lieu fees, condominium conversion fees or demolition fees, and hotel and motel taxes. The best and most common revenue source for a county HTF is a document record- ing fee, which is a fee paid upon filing various types of official documents with a state or local government. This fee is one of the few revenue sources that most counties can commit to, and the panel recommends Collier County consider this approach. Development Incentives The county’s existing developer incentives have clearly failed to transform existing development patterns and allow for greater production of housing that is affordable to a broad range of low- to moderate-income households. Any developer incentives need to be reasonable, be flex- ible, and allow for creative partnerships to produce new, affordable homes. The panel strongly recommends that the county put increased emphasis on multifamily rental Implementation Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 21 housing as a means of addressing its affordability housing situation. Multifamily rental housing is the most cost- effective way to provide housing that is affordable to the average working person. The panel recommends that existing density bonuses be reassessed to allow for and provide incentives for more mixed-use development and greater efficiency of land use throughout the county. This recommendation will be dis- cussed in greater detail later in this report, but the current density bonus program needs revision to allow for higher densities to ensure that additional mixed-income, mixed- tenure (rental as well as homeownership) developments are financially feasible. Examples of this type of increased den- sity include Bayfront and Naples Square, at more than 20 to 30 units per acre rather than the average 2.5 units per acre in other residential communities. The density can also be flexible to allow for complementary adjacent uses and to reflect different preferences in the urban and rural areas. Impact fees are an often-cited source of frustration to those creating both market rate and affordable housing products. Not only are high impact fees an impediment to new construction of affordable housing, but also they can be erratic and can be an ineffective way to raise revenue. During periods of high growth, they can produce lots of cash, but during slow periods of growth, the revenue provided by such fees falls, sometimes precipitously. County Housing Trust Fund Dedicated Revenue Sources Revenue Source County Trust Funds Document recording fee Arlington County, Virginia; 9 New Jersey counties; 54 Pennsylvania counties; 39 Washington counties Property tax Kalamazoo County, Michigan; King County, Washington Inclusionary zoning in-lieu fees Sonoma County, California Tax increment funds Alameda County, California Delinquent property tax penalties and interest (land bank) Toledo/Lucas County, Ohio Real estate transfer tax Columbus/Franklin County, Ohio Hotel/motel tax Columbus/Franklin County, Ohio Developer impact fees/proffers Fairfax County, Virginia Food and beverage tax Dade County, Florida Sale of foreclosed properties Traverse City, Michigan (now expired) Sales/use tax Summit County, Colorado General funds North Valley/Chico, Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Santa Barbara County, Sonoma County, and San Luis Obispo County, California; Tompkins County, New York (with Ithaca and Cornell University); Arlington County, Virginia; 24 counties in Iowa Source: Housing Trust Fund Project, Center for Community Change, 2016. An example of existing density that allows for a mix of uses in downtown Naples along Fifth Avenue.CHARLIE ANZMAN A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report22 Inclusive Housing Strategy: Tysons Corner, Virginia A sprawling edge city begins to remake itself as a more walkable, sustainable place, with transit-accessible, mixed- income housing at its core. Fairfax County, Virginia, home to 1.1 million residents, is the most populous county in the Washington, D.C., region and is one of the most prosperous in the nation, with a median household income of nearly $113,000. The county’s development since the 1960s and its image today have been shaped by the growth of Tysons Corner, a roughly 1,700-acre area originally marked by the intersection of state Routes 7 and 123. For a half century, “Tysons” has epitomized the commercially successful suburban employment center and retail destination, which is dominated by large office buildings occupied by white-collar companies and high-end shopping malls. Tyson’s enormous economic success—it was the nation’s 12th- largest central business district as recently as 2014—came over time with substantial costs in the form of traffic congestion and sprawling development. The number of homes and apartments fell far behind the number of jobs; investment fell short of needs in cultural amenities, green space, and schools; and transit options were limited. Tysons’s very economic model came into question. For local business leaders and elected officials, the future of Tysons depends on whether it can reinvent itself as a more complete community. Under the rubric of a “Transforming Tysons” plan, Fairfax County has established goals to be met by 2050: increase the number of Tysons residents to 100,000 (from 19,000 today), double the number of jobs to 200,000, and ensure that at least three-quarters of the new growth is within a half-mile of Metro stations (four stations opened in the Tysons area in 2014). Fairfax County also intends Tysons to be a mixed-income residential community—a place where construction and service workers, teachers, and others in need of more affordable housing can afford to live. To achieve that goal, the county has ambitiously expanded a longstanding county policy that has been a national model for promoting inclusionary housing development. Equity Strategies, Results, and Challenges Since 1990, the county has generally required residential development projects (excluding high rises) to set aside a share of units (generally 5 to 12.5 percent) for households earning 50 to 70 percent of the Washington metro area median income. Developments receive a density bonus— permission to increase the size of the project—to help mitigate the economic cost of delivering the below-market units. This affordable dwelling unit (ADU) program has generated more than 2,500 affordable units to date, with about an equal mix of rental and for-sale housing. Research indicates that Fairfax County ADU homes and apartments are overwhelmingly located in low-poverty neighborhoods and in areas with schools comparable to those in places without ADUs. Research also indicates that the program has not deterred developers from delivering profitable projects in the county. By state law, the ADU program does not apply to high-rise buildings— precisely the type of development the county wants to see near transit in the Tysons transformation plan. Recognizing that this exemption would undermine the opportunity to provide a wider range of housing choice in Tysons, the county expanded its inclusionary policy so it could be applied more effectively in the area. As a result, 20 percent of all high-rise units in Tysons must meet affordability requirements, albeit at higher income levels than the ADU program. Though low- and mid-rise buildings are still covered by the ADU program, their developers are encouraged to meet the higher standard as well. As of June 2016, 356 affordable units had been delivered in Tysons. Future development up to allowed densities could result in the creation of as many as 4,200 units in the area. Tysons will also generate funding to support affordable housing through payments that office, retail, and hotel development projects must make in return for receiving county approval to build at greater densities—generally either a one-time contribution of $3 per square foot or annual payment of $0.25 per square foot for 16 years. As of 2014, this policy was projected to generate more than $64 million for investment in affordable housing in Tysons through a trust fund. The capacity of Tysons to become a more equitable community is interlinked with its evolution into a denser, more walkable area and with its careful use of inclusionary development practices and incentives as that evolution occurs. Researcher Christopher Leinberger, whose work has suggested that more-walkable urban places can advance an array of social-equity outcomes as well as deliver superior economic returns, has noted of Tysons: “Many of the neighborhood associations surrounding [Tysons] became supporters of increased density because of the promised walkable urban future. NIMBYs (not in my backyard) became YIMBYs (yes in my backyard).” The Tysons inclusionary housing policy is not perfect. In exchange for requiring a higher percentage of inclusionary units than under the existing ADU program, the county raised the income levels of eligible families, reflecting the realities of development feasibility. To serve families with very low incomes, the county will need to offer development subsidies through the trust fund and other sources. And while the Tysons policy appears to be working well for rental apartment buildings, it has proven more problematic for for-sale projects. In November 2016, the Washington Post reported: “County leaders are considering relaxing the 20 percent expectation for high-rise condominium projects, after developers complained that it will make it harder to secure financing for their typically smaller buildings.” The county worked with the development community to revise the policy to reflect market conditions that had changed since it was put in place, and the first condominium project was recently approved. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 23 Case Study: Palm Beach County Workforce Housing Program Palm Beach County’s Workforce Housing Program requires all new developments of more than ten units to provide units for households earning 60 to 120 percent of AMI in exchange for additional density allowances on a sliding scale. Developers have the flexibility to meet the affordable housing requirements by paying an in-lieu fee, building units off site, or purchasing and deed restricting market-rate units. To date, more than 1,400 affordable or workforce units have been approved as part of 36 developments. In addition, nearly $900,000 of in-lieu fees have been collected from three developments. The program was established in 2004 but gained traction in the market only after 2009, when the county made substantial revisions as a result of recommendations by the real estate industry, including homebuilders and realtors. An evaluation of the program found that the county’s incentives fully offset the cost or lost profit incurred by developers in providing the affordable and workforce units. The high fee structure, however, reflects the limited sources available to Collier County to support develop- ment of all types. The panel recommends a review of the impact fee structure to consider how to better incentivize developers to build a spectrum of housing types and sizes. Further, the panel recommends that the current impact fee deferral program cover all types of income-restricted hous- ing, regardless of whether it is single-family, multifamily, senior, or special needs housing. National Best Practices In addition to enhancing existing tools to create affordable housing, the panel recommends tailoring several national best practices to Collier County’s unique characteristics to supplement the county’s ability to meet current and future housing needs. Inclusionary zoning (IZ) is an approach to add to the supply of affordable housing options by linking the zones to the creation of market-rate housing. IZ programs have been used across the country since 1972 and vary greatly in terms of their structure and requirements. Given the under- use of the existing density bonus program, the county needs to consider a more proactive approach to increase the supply of housing options for all of its residents. Although IZ programs may not produce a high volume of units, such programs have the unique ability to provide the choice to residents to live in communities with better access to transit, jobs, and schools. IZ programs can be flexible in implementation to fit the needs of the county and to fit different project types. For example, the county may want to allow for the provision of inclusionary units to be produced off site; the payment for units through a fee-in-lieu arrangement to the HTF; or the creation of partnerships between for-profit and nonprofit developers so the units best fit the respective business models and expertise. Mitigating the cost of land—something that is fixed, limited, and a significant challenge to all developers in Collier County—can be addressed through vehicles such as a community land trust (CLT) and through a program to designate public land for public goods, such as affordable housing. CLTs are nonprofit, community-based organiza- tions whose mission is to provide affordable housing in perpetuity by owning land and leasing it to those who live in houses built on that land. Although CLTs may have a broad mission, their primary role is providing successful homeownership opportunities for generations of lower- income families. A related approach to the CLT is to consider a ground lease structure. This approach both dramatically reduces the cost of the land to the developer and helps ensure long-term affordability for the housing built on that site. The city of Naples has used this approach in at least two instances at the Jasmine Cay and Carver Apartments. The panel also recommends that the county immediately undertake a review of the current land inventory to identify parcels that may be available for housing development A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report24 opportunities. This review can be accomplished using a cross-agency strategy, and the county should find ways to engage with community stakeholders to identify possible sites and building intensities. A related part of using public land for public good is to colocate affordable housing with the renovation or creation of new public facilities. One suc- cessful example includes building affordable housing for seniors adjacent to a new public library at a development called the Bonifant in Silver Spring, Maryland. It is not the sole responsibility of either the government or the private sector to provide for the housing needs of all residents in Collier County. The best way to produce housing effectively that meets a broad, rather than narrow, range of housing needs is through effective public/private partnerships. Elements of effective public/private partner- ships include creating a shared vision, clear roles and responsibilities, consistent and coordinated leadership, and frequent communication. Repurposing Vacant and Underused Retail Space Another unique opportunity for Collier County to add to its supply of affordable housing is to take advantage of existing vacant and underused retail sites along major transportation corridors through a conversion to multi- family residential buildings. This effort would accomplish several goals simultaneously, including these: ■■Returning underperforming buildings to the tax rolls and generating revenue for the county, and ■■Providing an option for rental apartments along existing transportation corridors without the need to create new infrastructure. The county’s regular rental housing surveys have found va- cancy rates in multifamily rental buildings to be extremely low, at 1 to 2 percent, thus indicating a significant unmet demand for rental housing options. Maintain Supply One of the most cost-effective and efficient means of providing affordable housing is to maintain the existing supply. The National Housing Trust finds that renovating an existing property can be one-third to one-half as expensive as new construction. Renovating older properties does not require new land for development, takes advantage of existing infrastructure, and reduces construction waste. Collier County has an existing renovation code available to developers looking to refurbish existing properties, and the county should encourage its use through incentives mentioned previously, such as through expedited permit- ting and inspections and by reducing or deferring the associated fees. The county can identify opportunities proactively by track- ing properties with expiring affordability covenants (using resources such as the National Housing Preservation database) to ensure that existing rental properties remain affordable for the long term. The county should also explore implementing a right of first refusal to purchase The Bonifant in downtown Silver Spring, Maryland, is a transit- oriented development for lower-income seniors that is adjacent to the new Silver Spring library and within walking distance of transit and bus lines. The panel strongly recommends that the county take an inventory of vacant and underused commercial parcels that might be available for housing development. DAN REEDBETH SILVERMAN/ULI Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 25 (either by the county or by a nonprofit partner) expiring use properties so the county can prevent the loss of any housing that is affordable to low- and moderate-income residents and that might result in displacement. Regulate and Govern After a review of existing regulations, interviews with stakeholders, and an understanding of current market conditions, the panel determined that the county faces inherent difficulties, unnecessary costs, and a lack of predictability to developing affordable housing projects. Al- though internal and external market forces play a large role in the success of the projects, the county could reduce approval times and costs while increasing predictability in the review process in three steps: ■■Update regulations to encourage affordable housing development in desired areas. ■■Permit higher densities in urban areas for projects with affordable housing by-right. ■■Revise the governance structure, and streamline the process. Review and Revise the Land Development Code Good codes are the foundation on which great communi- ties are built. When done well, codes make it easier for a community to implement its vision. However, the current Land Development Code (LDC) does not consistently sup- port and encourage growth in already existing urbanized areas of the county (those areas generally west of Collier Parkway). Many of the LDC’s ordinances are geared toward large-scale, planned-unit developments (PUDs) on greenfield sites. Conversely, smaller-scale redevelopment and infill sites in already developed areas of the county are challeng- ing to consolidate, may need to address adjacent uses and neighborhood concerns, and often require additional Inclusive Housing Strategies: Pasadena, California Pasadena (population 140,000), a southern California city renowned for its high quality of life, faces formidable challenges in providing affordable housing in an expensive market with high land costs and a limited amount of developable property. Sustained price appreciation has made housing unaffordable—even for households earning more than $100,000 annually. Through an array of incentive-based programs, including an inclusionary housing ordinance (IHO) and a density bonus, the city has supported development of more than 5,000 transit- oriented housing units since 2001, including 1,370 units of affordable and workforce housing. The Housing Incentives Fee Program, adopted by the city council in 2004, incentivizes production of affordable housing by providing developers with significant reductions in impact fees, building permit fees, construction taxes, and transportation fees. The city adopted its density bonus ordinance in 2006, which provides developers of housing projects that include affordable units with a bonus in the number of units that may be constructed on a site. Pasadena has emphasized links to transit by clustering mixed-use projects near light-rail stations, major corridors, and employment areas. Because of efforts to encourage transit-oriented development, the majority of residential and mixed-use projects built during the 2000s were located within a half mile of a transit stop or employment center. More than 50 percent of the affordable units produced under the IHO were developed along such major corridors. Two large IHO projects have been developed close to Gold Line light-rail stations, and a third project (totaling 212 units) is forthcoming. In addition, Pasadena’s efforts to promote affordable housing have extended beyond simple subsidies to encompass community outreach. According to William Huang, the city’s housing director, “The success of affordable housing is rarely only financial. Even if funding is secured, gaining public acceptance is a prerequisite.” A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report26 The Bayfront Naples development is an example of successful and appropriate density and mixed-use development in Collier County. SUE ELIAS density to make them financially feasible. Because of the way that current codes are written, PUDs generally have been more predictable to entitle and have fewer barriers to obtaining funding. Although difficult to develop, projects in the urban areas of the county can yield great benefits by placing residents near existing transit, employment, shopping, and other daily needs and by reducing strain on existing infrastructure. Even though Collier County routinely amends portions of its LDC, consideration should be given to initiating an effort to overhaul the code by implementing a Smart Code, also known as a Unified Development Code (https:// transect.org/codes.html) to encourage the development of affordable and mixed-income housing. Smart Codes are designed to differentiate between more urban and rural conditions that reflect the different characteristics and priorities found across the county. Unique standards for the different tiers of density encourage a more diverse development pattern while encouraging affordable housing in a mixed-use, pedestrian-scaled environment. In a Smart Code framework, all regulatory standards are combined into one streamlined document to prioritize environmental protection, high-quality design, and compatibility with existing patterns of development. The focus of the urban tier should be to stimulate and accommodate infill growth while encouraging affordable housing. This focus can be accomplished through residential density bonuses, mixed-use height bonuses, reductions from parking requirements, modifications to buffer and landscape requirements, and other incentive- based measures. In addition to the county’s creating a Smart Code, several LDC revisions could make it easier to develop affordable dwelling units in urban portions of the county: ■■Reduce parking standards: Consider establishing standard percentage reductions in minimum parking requirements for urban portions of the county where there are more transit services, where opportunities exist to walk to shopping and employment, and where shared parking opportunities exist to promote efficient site design and reduce development costs. Typical parking standards for multifamily housing in more urban areas range from 1 to 1.5 spaces per unit. ■■Create well-defined compatibility, building mass- ing, and buffer standards: The panel heard about several recent development applications in which com- patibility with adjacent existing communities has fueled distrust between existing neighborhoods and developers. The conflicts are in part due to a lack of clear expecta- tions as to what is required by the LDC. For infill develop- ment projects that include affordable housing, this lack of certainty causes an unnecessary burden on developers while at the same time residents have concerns about property values and existing views. As an example, Okla- homa City created a development guide (http://planokc. org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/planokc_Chap2_ DevelopmentGuide.pdf; page 71) that focuses on urban design solutions for compatibility related to building scale and site design. It provides clear expectations to both the existing neighborhoods and developers as to what should be expected when designing the site and massing of buildings. Those types of standards can also help set community expectations if it is determined that redevel- opment of nonfunctioning golf courses is appropriate. ■■Permit guest houses as accessory dwelling rental units: There are a number of existing guest homes, pre- dominantly in the eastern portions of the county and the Estates, that—if permitted to be used as rentals—could have an immediate effect on the supply of affordable Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 27 rental housing. Additional rental income could also have a positive effect for families who own the units. Although effects on transportation, schools, and other facilities should be considered, these units have already been constructed, are occupied, or have been occupied in the past. Making them legal to lease allows code enforce- ment to better regulate the units while limiting exploita- tion of renters. ■■Encourage smart-site infrastructure: According to a number of interviewees, the panel heard that several onerous land development requirements add unneces- sary expense to overall project costs. The requirements further exacerbate challenges to providing affordable units in projects. Examples include requiring sidewalks on both sides of the street, right-of-way commitments, utility spacing, and other requirements that are more burdensome to on-site development than are the neigh- boring Lee County standards. Target Certain Activity Centers for Significantly Higher Density with the Provision of Mixed- Income Housing Collier County currently has high concentrations of housing in particularly low-density areas of the county. A healthy mixed-income community has higher densities to promote a walkable environment but not high concentrations of low-income housing in one place. Mixed-income com- munities are a market-based approach and include diverse housing for people with a range of income levels. Mixed- income communities are healthier than homogenous, low-income neighborhoods because they prevent blight, support upward mobility, and help retain property values. The panel recommends the following two approaches to achieve these goals: ■■Strengthen the Affordable Housing Density Bonus (AHDB) Program: The current maximum residential densities permitted in Collier County are generally 16 units per acre within specified activity centers of the county when affordable housing is provided (excluding transfer of development rights opportunities). Although maximum buildout of density is frequently not achieved in large PUDs, smaller infill sites in the western urban portions of the county need additional density to be financially viable. This need was confirmed during the panel’s interviews where developers consistently stated that to provide affordable housing on site, the number of residential units allowed per acre should be significantly increased. For example, 30 units per acre may be a more realistic maximum density to properly incentivize market-rate developers to provide affordable housing. In addition, to properly capitalize on infrastructure, mini- mum densities should be provided for residential units per acre. Bonus density is even more important given the approximately 9 percent of unentitled land. Finally, the AHDB program is logistically challenging for market-rate builders to administer. ■■Identify strategic opportunity sites: As illustrated in the map above, the panel also recommends that the county consider further density increases in limited urban areas of the county such as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA where high-quality transit facilities along transportation corridors are provided. Streamline the Project Approval Process when Affordable Housing Is Provided Land use decisions are largely decided by the five-member Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) by a super- majority rule. According to developers, land use attorneys, planners, and other land development professionals, a great deal of uncertainty exists in knowing whether or not a zoning application will be approved because it takes only two board members to veto a project. For projects that in- clude affordable housing, this lack of certainty is a key im- pediment to project viability. In addition, although all board members are charged at looking at the county, no at-large board members are specifically charged with overseeing regional and countywide issues. The panel recommends considering adding two at-large board members, making the new BoCC a seven-member board, and reducing the super-majority to a five-out-of-seven approval process. If adding new BoCC members is not feasible, the panel recommends reducing the super-majority requirement to a A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report28 simple-majority, which will provide greater certainty. For ex- ample, Hillsborough County, Florida, has a seven-member board with three at-large board members. Although there is an expedited construction permit review process, the panel recommends this process be expanded to include comprehensive plan amendments and zon- ing approvals. Comprehensive plan amendments could also be reviewed concurrently with a zoning change for projects that include affordable housing. This change to the project approval process could also be extended to include a concurrent processing of a zoning application and site plan. Consideration should be given to increasing the number of administrative approvals that do not require BoCC approval that will streamline the process and provide greater certainty. Although not strictly related to incentivizing affordable housing, Fairfax County, Virginia, provides concurrent processing (see www.fcrevit.org/publications/download/ DevelopmentInCRD_CRA.pdf) for comprehensive plan amendments and zoning applications as an incentive for redevelopment of older areas of the county. Enhance Transportation Options Collier County, the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organiza- tion (MPO), and the city of Naples have done extensive public outreach and planning for alternative mobility op- tions in the county. From the Collier County Master Mobility Plan (2012) and MPO’s Comprehensive Pathways Plan (2012), there are clear strategies and recommendations for enhancing transportation access across the county. In ad- dition, there are policy frameworks—such as the complete streets, the existing community movements including the Naples Pathways Coalition, the community Blue Zone, and the various committees and task forces that are informing a range of government entities. Those efforts have created an exemplary foundation of outreach and data to inform and to guide the implementation of a thorough alternative transportation system. Such assets and engagements are critical in the context of housing affordability, because transportation costs and convenient, efficient access to jobs seriously affect the attainability of housing and the overall viability of a community. For instance, even if housing is affordable, the costs of transportation can outweigh the financial benefits of those price points. In addition, the very workforce that most directly benefits from accessible and efficient transportation systems serves as the backbone of the Collier County economy: thus, it relegates this workforce to commutes of several hours or to life-threatening conditions (via bike and pedes- trian commutes), and it inhibits this group’s productivity and employment access. Whether it is a bank teller driving to work in Naples, a landscaper riding his bike to a gated community, a waiter taking a bus to a local restaurant, or a teacher walking to a neighborhood school, the workforce of Collier County needs a range of transportation options that align with and support a range of housing choices in a variety of areas. By enacting and implementing many of the recommenda- tions that the plans call for, not only will Collier County be a more accessible community, but also it will be a healthier and more fiscally conservative area. As the aspirations and The panel created a conceptual framework to help identify activity centers and transportation corridors with a higher density of mixed-income housing development. Activity centers are denoted by red squares and transportation corridors by purple lines.JOHN ORFIELD/ULI Pine Ridge Road Ta m i a m i T r a i l Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 29 To enhance transportation, the panel recommends the adoption of many of the strategies and recommendations from the Collier County Master Mobility Plan (2012) and the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization Comprehensive Pathways Plan (2012).COLLIER COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY tenants of the Blue Zone Project espouse, active lifestyles are the key to healthy living. Providing a more integrated network of mobility not only provides workforce access but also provides access to healthier lifestyles. In addition, with estimated road costs averaging $4.6 million per lane mile, identifying proactive approaches that will reduce congestion and stress on roadways will save the county significant funds in the future. For all of those reasons, creating greater synergies between housing and transportation decision making and investments is vital for Collier County. Although the panel applauds the efforts of past plans and initiatives, it strongly recommends leveraging the engagement and resources already in place to create a robust multimodal transporta- tion system that better connects labor, jobs, services, and amenities to housing. It is time to act on the work of the past several years and to implement. In keeping with the plans and efforts mentioned previously, the panel recommends that Collier County specifically pursue and prioritize the following recommendations in an implementation phase. Integrate Bus Routes with Affordable Housing Locations Currently, the average headway (the average interval of time between buses pausing at a given stop on a route) in Collier County is 1.5 hours, with the shortest headway at 45 minutes. For transit riders dependent on a bus service to get to work or to other services and the MPO’s ameni- ties, the infrequency of the service can make transporta- tion and access an increased difficulty. For riders who might have multiple stops or transfers, those headways can change what would be a short car ride into an all- morning or all-evening commute. If directed effectively, however, the transit service can be an extraordinary asset for the Collier County work- force, potentially reducing the group’s commute and car ownership costs. According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the average American family spends 19 percent of its household budget on transporta- tion. For families that are in transit-efficient locations, this cost decreases to 9 percent; for those in auto-dependent communities, it increases to 25 percent. Thus, transporta- tion costs can directly add or subtract substantial funds from families’ household budgets, thereby increasing cost burdens or providing more flexibility in household budgets. In light of the budget realities, the panel recommends implementing the recommendations of past planning efforts and aligning affordable housing investments and bus routes to the greatest extent possible, specifically considering and including the following: ■■Identify transportation corridors for multifamily development: In keeping with best practices from com- A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report30 munities such as Charlotte, North Carolina, Collier County should identify specific corridors that connect to major job centers and that incentivize specific zones for further multifamily development. By linking residential growth to the transit system, the county will relieve stress on the transportation system by encouraging transit ridership and by creating more effective commutes for the work- force in affordable locations. ■■Implement park-and-ride systems: Park-and-ride is a term that describes a traffic management practice where drivers leave their cars in parking lots of identified commercial centers (typically on the outskirts of urban areas) and travel to the job or employment centers on public transportation. Given the significant footprint of development across the county, as well as the potential for additional neighborhoods such as Ave Maria develop- ing in the rural lands area, working with commercial centers to create a park-and-ride system would take congestion pressure off the internal traffic corridors and would provide workers living in outlying areas with simpler commutes to job centers. Already, circulator routes provided by the Collier Area Transit System (CATS) provide circulator services to and from major commercial centers, like the Super Walmart. The panel recommends consideration be given to enhancing, modifying, and marketing those routes as park-and-ride opportunities. In addition, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) already operates many park-and-ride facilities across the state, thus facilitating vanpool and carpool options. ■■Explore bus rapid transit and express service lines: Recognizing that there are specific areas of greater tran- sit ridership, CATS should explore the creation of either bus rapid transit or express routes to link specific areas to job centers via an express, limited-stop route. This approach is in keeping with the effective best practices that CATS has already established around many of its bus lines. The opportunity now is to enhance what is in place and to create demand-driven transportation lines serving workers. Las Vegas, another tourism dependent economy with a wide geographic footprint, has imple- mented bus rapid transit and express service lines across the region to directly connect tourism workers to key areas of the city, including downtown and the Strip. Not only is the service successful, but also it is widely used by the workforce to access jobs and housing. Enhance Bike Lane and Pedestrian Systems According to the Collier County MPO’s 2014 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Study —a complementary report to the 2012 Comprehensive Pathways Plan —a survey of 478 respondents resulted in 62 percent reporting that they had felt “threatened for personal safety during bicycling or walking trips.” For Collier County to reduce transporta- tion road costs, effectively move the workforce across the community, and create healthy avenues for residents to engage in civic activities, this number must be mitigated and the recommendations of both studies should be advanced. Steps toward this goal include the following: ■■Implement the Comprehensive Pathways Plan for the county: Advancing the thorough recommendations of past studies is a meaningful next step in this process, but specific prioritization should be given to the “crash corridors” and “crash clusters” identified in the safety analysis. Case Study: Arlington County, Virginia In Virginia, Arlington County’s Special Affordable Housing Protection District (SAHPD) identifies neighborhoods with existing affordable housing within the county’s metro corridors. The goal of the SAHPD is to retain affordable housing opportunities (through preservation or replacement) in the county’s high-cost transit corridors. In instances where redevelopment is proposed within those districts, developers can achieve higher densities if they include one-for-one replacement of existing affordable housing as part of their project. (One-for-one replacement has been interpreted as replacing the number of bedrooms or the gross floor area on a one-for-one basis.) Replacement can occur either on site or at a similar location off site. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 31 ■■Enhance safety for transit mobility: The recommen- dations of the 2014 “Safety Study” should be prioritized and funding should be allocated for the full implementa- tion of key safety issues, including continuing educa- tion for traffic engineers and law enforcement officers, application of the FHWA’s bike and pedestrian best practices, and continued integration of best practices in engineering design. In addition, the panel recommends addressing lighting, street signage, and public awareness for bicyclists and pedestrians. ■■Hire a bike and pedestrian coordinator for the county and leverage expertise at FDOT: To take full advantage of the recommendations and work already completed, a specialized coordinator should be hired at the county level to advance bicycle and pedestrian priori- ties, including reviewing future roadway projects for bike and pedestrian enhancements and safety considerations. In New Orleans, a bike and pedestrian coordinator was able to advance the implementation of more than 100 miles of on- and off-road bike lanes after the project was embedded in the local Department of Public Works through a grant from the local utility company and sup- port from the Louisiana Public Health Institute. Establish Sustainable, Secure Revenue for Transit and Alternative Mobility CATS is serving an increasingly vital need in the county as workforce demands intensify and traffic concerns grow. However, if the service is going to be able to keep up with the demands already placed on it, a critical element is that the service has a sustainable source of revenue it can leverage and depend on. Given the expenses of highways ($4.6 million per lane mile), prioritizing proactive invest- ments in transit today could save the county significant funds in the future. In addition, given the growing bike and pedestrian needs of the county and the multitude of com- munity benefits that those amenities provide, a revenue source should also be identified and provided for such additional capacity. Create Ride-Sharing Option With smartphone apps and online connectivity, fantastic and successful tools for ride sharing are available that can be conveniently and affordably accessed. The county should explore promoting such resources and working with nonprofits to promote convenient ride-sharing options for populations living in more suburban or remote areas, like the Estates, Ave Maria, or Immokalee. The New Orleans Regional Planning Commission sponsors one such ride- share platform, the New Orleans GreenRide, which uses a social media platform to connect riders and carpoolers. Enhance Wages For several decades, middle- and lower-middle-class wages across the United States essentially have been stagnant while housing costs have risen significantly. This trend has resulted in increased pressure on affordability of housing. One effective option to address this issue is to increase wages. The panel has identified two possible options for Collier County. An example of the successful and well-used bike lane infrastructure along 15th Street, a major downtown corridor in Washington, D.C.ELVERT BARNES A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report32 Metro New Orleans GreenRide links commuters with carpool matches in the New Orleans metropolitan region. REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF NEW ORLEANSFirst, government employees are one of the largest groups affected by housing affordability issues in Collier County. On the basis of cost burden for this group, the panel rec- ommends the county consider enhancing wages for county employees. Even modest increases in salary for this group can have a profound impact on its ability to afford housing within the community. Second, the panel recommends instituting enhanced minimum wage ordinances. Several U.S. cities including Albuquerque, New Mexico; Flagstaff, Arizona; Malibu, California; Miami Beach, Florida; Portland, Maine; and Washington, D.C., have attempted to address the issue of housing affordability this way and are seeing positive results. In virtually all cases, the ordinances call for a mod- est immediate increase in the minimum wage followed by a series of incremental steps spread over a period of three to five years that ultimately lead to a mandated minimum wage of $13 to $15 per hour. Engage, Market, and Educate Beyond moving ideas into action, education and com- munication also are critical pieces of a comprehensive and successful strategy for implementing housing affordability. If one is to combat the often false and confusing myths regarding what affordable housing is, what it might look like, and what unintended consequences it might create, it is crucial to educate the entire community about the full range of benefits that a balanced supply of housing brings, Denver Transit-Oriented Development Fund The Denver Transit-Oriented Development Fund was established in 2010 with $13.5 million in debt capital to create and preserve affordable housing along current and future transit corridors in the city and county of Denver. In 2014, the fund was expanded to serve the surrounding seven-county region and is now capitalized at $24 million. Borrowers may use funds to purchase, hold (for up to five years), and develop sites within a half mile of fixed-rail transit stations or a quarter mile of high-frequency bus stops. The fund has closed 11 transactions totaling nearly $16 million, with a pipeline of more than 900 permanently affordable units and more than 150,000 square feet of commercial and community space. Returns to capital providers (public agencies, foundations, financial institutions, and community development financial institutions) are generally 2 to 6 percent. DANIEL TOBIAS Denver’s new Regional Transportation District rail system has eight rail lines servicing 53 stations along the north, east, southeast, southwest, and west rail corridors. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 33 The Center for Urban Pedagogy created an online map to help educate users on the many facets of affordable housing and to allow them to explore the income demographics of any New York City neighborhood.CENTER FOR URBAN PEDAGOGYto raise awareness, and to make affordable housing a vis- ible problem to everyone. Bolster Existing Programs and Processes The county government has already developed an afford- able housing database that tracks for-sale and rental units throughout the county. However, the panel recommends enhancing this database to include and track new units coming online and to include their sunset dates so that the county has a clear understanding of the supply of afford- able units in real time. This information should include comprehensive details, including addresses, bedroom sizes, square footage, rental rates, for-sale rates, and neighborhood location. An en- hanced database will also help ensure that the community has a credible source of real-time information that shows that affordability is spread throughout the county and not concentrated in any one district. By improving existing housing information online, the county will create a robust information portal for exist- ing and prospective residents to learn about the county’s housing programs and any workshops or events related to housing in the county, ensuring that residents have the right information to make housing decisions. The panel also recommends that existing housing applica- tions are streamlined for residents and handled directly by the county instead of by individual developers. During the panel’s review, it heard from the development community that developers are responsible for accepting income veri- fication applications, which they are simply not qualified to manage. This process should be administered either by the county or an administrator managed by the county, such as a private or nonprofit lender. Raise Awareness and Communicate with the Entire Community Although the links between housing affordability and communications may not be immediately obvious, public awareness, communication, and an overall education cam- paign can help ensure that ongoing efforts around housing affordability succeed. The panel has seen a tremendous number of plans and technical recommendations, but un- less they are being communicated to the public at large in a clear and concise manner that is understandable by all, such efforts will go nowhere. To start, the panel recommends that the county develop a comprehensive marketing and communications plan that appeals to a wide variety of audiences: the current and potential residents, the business community, the local community organizations, and the proven donors within the community. The plan needs to appeal to people who are seeking housing, to people who support housing afford- ability, and to those who are skeptics. The message should be tailored around those three key audiences and the lan- guage used should be culturally sensitive, age appropriate, and multilingual. Ideally, the strategies will include written, verbal, and visual approaches. The key to the program’s success is the hiring of a cre- ative, community outreach specialist. This person should be a full-time county employee and engaged in public A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report34 One of the many community workshops conducted in the Park View and Pleasant Plains neighborhoods in Washington, D.C., as part of the community engagement video project SEE/ CHANGE DC.SEE/CHANGE meetings, neighborhood events, and other aspects of countywide community engagement. The key to com- munity outreach is for it to occur where people already are. People will not go out of their way to go to those types of meetings; the meetings must be brought to them. For example, the outreach specialist should hold the same workshop on three different dates and times to ensure those with atypical work schedules can still participate and be engaged. Create a Residential Toolkit The county should create a residential toolkit to address three constituencies: seekers of affordable housing, supporters of affordable housing, and skeptics of affordable housing. Seekers of affordable housing. Building on an enhanced online inventory discussed earlier, the panel also recom- mends the county create an affordable housing directory for those residents seeking housing. The directory will list both rental and for-sale opportunities and will draw from the county’s live online database. However, because not everyone is comfortable with (or has access to) the internet, the panel recommends two options for this database: ■■ A web-based platform, and ■■ A printed document that is updated periodically (e.g., quarterly). The panel understands that a housing resources guide is already in place, but it recommends including a resource guide that is for first-time homebuyers and that includes information about housing assistance for downpayment programs, information about renters’ assistance, and information about other community resources available to the public. The purpose is not only to provide information about how someone can afford housing, but also to provide information in a way that allows people to become engaged in the community and connected with their community. In addition, the panel strongly recommends the county employ a housing counselor or expand existing housing counselors’ current responsibilities. The housing coun- The panel recommends that Collier County think creatively about community engagement, marketing, and education strategies. Volunteer programs such as planting projects related to new housing developments and YIMBY (yes in my backyard) campaigns are great ways to raise awareness of and to engage the larger community in housing affordability issues.PERRY ROSEDENVER HOUSING AUTHORITY Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 35 Case Study: SEE/CHANGE DC Though not specifically about housing, SEE/CHANGE DC is an example of a successful, creative, community engagement project to encourage community building and foster dialogue about rapid neighborhood change. Something similar in Collier County could help create discussion about housing and community and could give greater visibility to housing affordability challenges. What it is: The video art project puts a human face on how population change and revitalization are affecting two Washington, D.C., neighborhoods: Park View and Pleasant Plains. When: During fall 2016, video portraits of community members were projected in storefronts and on street corners along a main corridor— Georgia Avenue, N.W., in the Park View and Pleasant Plains neighborhoods. Who: SEE/CHANGE DC was imagined and produced by the Pink Line Project + Citizen Innovation Lab, created by Composite Co. and BellVisuals, and funded by the D.C. Office of Planning (OP) and the Kresge Foundation. How: SEE/CHANGE DC is part of OP’s comprehensive creative placemaking initiative: “Crossing the Street: Building DC’s Inclusive Future through Creative Placemaking” grant from the Kresge Foundation. The grant is intended to “promote community-building in neighborhoods that are experiencing rapid demographic and social change, to engage residents in conversations about the future of the District as OP embarks on an update of D.C.’s Comprehensive Plan, and to demonstrate or test select placemaking recommendations articulated in OP’s neighborhood plans and District Department of Transportation transit corridor studies and livability studies.” In December 2015, OP released a request for applications seeking qualified curators and project managers to work with OP and other District and community stakeholders to define and implement temporary creative placemaking projects. Curators were selected in early 2016 and projects, such as SEE/CHANGE DC, were implemented during 2016. For further information, see www.seechangedc.com. SEE/CHANGE DC is a creative video project that uses community engagement as it inspires community building and fosters conversation about neighborhood change.SEE/CHANGE SEE/CHANGE SEE/CHANGE selor should collaborate with the community engagement specialist and other relevant county employees to create a robust educational program around what cost burden means. Also, it is essential for the housing counselor to develop programs and resources around household bud- geting and wealth creation that will help residents improve their financial management. Supporters of affordable housing. Collier County is privileged to have an engaged and effective philanthropic community. But the county needs to figure out how to get the group involved in affordable housing issues. The panel recommends partnering with the philanthropic community around specific fundraising campaigns, such as spe- cific housing development projects or facade or exterior improvement programs. In addition, the county should A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report36 partner with the philanthropic community to develop fun and creative community volunteer projects and programs to raise awareness and bring the community together. Examples include planting projects related to new housing developments, public art initiatives, “welcome wagon” programs, and “yes in my backyard” (YIMBY) campaigns. Those types of programs can go a long way toward bring- ing the community together. Skeptics of affordable housing. Do not leave out the skeptics of affordable housing. The panel recommends creating a “myths and facts” brochure (available in a printed format and on the county’s housing website) to help debunk myths and perceptions related to negative implications that are often falsely associated with afford- able housing (e.g., increased traffic, crime and density, de- pressed property values). In addition, creating a workhouse media campaign could be another valuable approach to community-wide education about housing affordability and whom it affects. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 37 IT IS THE OPINION OF THE PANEL that Collier Coun- ty absolutely has a housing affordability problem. It is not a crisis yet, but if housing is not addressed, the panel be- lieves that it will become a crisis. Given the growth projec- tions for the county, the panel believes this problem will occur far sooner than expected. All of the panel’s recommendations are intended to help the city and the county provide housing that is affordable for the full range of incomes found within the community. First and foremost, the panel believes the county needs to immediately come to a consensus and establish a clear vision for the county about how to move forward. Does the county want to remain a community that primarily relies on tourism and retirement, or does it want to diversify its economy? Does the county want to limit growth, or does it want to embrace it? Regardless of the answers, it is—in the panel’s opinion—essential that the county address the issue of housing affordability. This approach needs to be a priority. Housing affordability is essential to creating and maintaining a vibrant, sustainable community. Although the county may well have some time to imple- ment the panel’s recommendations, time is of the essence. Failure to act now will put at risk the very things that make Collier County so special. Maintaining paradise is both a privilege and an obligation. Conclusion A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report38 Appendix A: Implementation Schedule Implementation Schedule Added Supply Regulation and Governance Communication and Education Strategies Short Term 0 to 3 years Review existing land inventory for possible affordable housing development sites, including commercial sites for conversion. Develop a cross-agency strategy to consider other public facilities. Identify and vet funding sources to reinstate Housing Trust Fund (HTF). Draft additions to the Land Develop- ment Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan to include inclu- sionary zoning and expand expedited permit review process for all affordable projects. Permit guest houses as rental units. Revise the LDC to include a smart code that makes it easier to create mixed- income developments. Identify strategic opportunity sites for density increases such as the Bayshore Gateway Triangle Community Development Area. Create an expedited and/or concurrent comprehensive zoning plan approval process. Offer administrative approvals for certain applications. Develop inventory of affordable housing units and update regularly. Develop a marketing and communications plan. Employ a housing counselor. Expand and enhance educational programs to ■■Explain housing affordability ■■Explain cost burden ■■Assist residents (renters and homeowners) in household budgeting. Medium Term 3 to 5 years Implement an inclusionary zoning program. Implement an expanded fee waiver/ deferral program. Fund HTF to take advantage of other financing vehicles (LIHTC, AHP, etc.) to support affordable housing development. Develop a process for commercial-to- residential conversions. Plan for additional increased density in certain activity centers with the provi- sion of mixed-income housing. Add at-large Board of County Commis- sioners members and/or reduce the super-majority rule. Continue to refine and update affordable housing inventory. Update and refresh the marketing and communications plan as needed. Update and refresh educational tools and programming as needed. Review and refine resources and tools available to the housing counselor. Long Term 5 to 10+ years Conduct an annual review of HTF levels and report on fund expenditures. Adjust the inclusionary zoning program to balance the needs of residents with those of developers and the current market. Continuously review and monitor inclusion- ary zoning program, expanded fee waiver/ deferral program, and commercial-to- residential conversions process to ensure that the goal of increasing the availibility of affordable housing is being met. Continuously review and monitor the LDC and revisions, strategic opportu- nity sites, and updated comprehensive zoning plan approval process to ensure that the desired goal of increasing the availability of affordable housing is being met. Continuously review and monitor affordable housing inventory, marketing and com- munications plan, and educational tools and programming, as well as resources and tools available to the housing counselor, to ensure that the goal of increasing the availability of affordable housing is being met. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 39 Private funding for housing development and services: Santa Clara County, California (www.housingtrustsv.org/) Mobilizing owners and resources to preserve existing affordable units: Cook County, Illinois (www.preservation- compact.org/) Utilizing publicly controlled real estate to support mixed- income development: Arlington County, Virginia (https:// projects.arlingtonva.us/plans-studies/land-use/public- land/) Helping low-income families access opportunity neighbor- hoods: King County, Washington (https://www.kcha.org/ about/education/) Inclusionary zoning: Palm Beach County, Florida (https:// uli.org/larson-policy-awards/robert-c-larson-award- finalists-palm-beach-county-florida/) Appendix B: Examples of County Housing Initiatives A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report40 Appendix C: City of Austin, 2014 Robert C. Larson Policy Leadership Award Winner City of Austin ORGANIZATION City of Austin, Texas YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION 2000 AFFORDABILITY 100 percent of units affordable to households at or below 80 percent of median family income (MFI), with 12 percent serving house- holds at 30–50 percent of MFI NUMBER OF UNITS PRODUCED 18,406 WEBSITE http://housingworksaustin.org/ www.austintexas.gov/department/ imagineaustin 2 0 1 4 W I N N E R Austin, Texas, has adopted a multifaceted approach to address the challenges of providing affordable housing in the vibrant and steadily growing city. Outstanding programs include a voter-approved bond program and a city ordinance to incentivize the development of affordable housing. These efforts have yielded 18,406 units since 2000. Austin (pop. 885,000), the capital of Texas, is a national leader in job creation, education, and research, and offers residents a high quality of life with an array of recreational and cultural amenities. Over the past two decades, in the face of rapid and steady population growth attracted to the city, Austin has also encountered corresponding increases in residential rents and home prices. To overcome the resulting squeeze on affordable housing for low-income households, Austin has pursued a multifaceted package of housing programs. These tools include the Housing Trust Fund, the Housing Bond Program, developer incentives, public/private partnerships, and impact statements. • Housing Trust Fund (2000). Since 2000, the Austin City Council has directed $8.8 million in local funds to the Housing Trust Fund (HTF). The city dedicates to the fund 40 percent of incremental tax revenues derived from private sector developments built on designated city- owned property. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 41 • Housing Bond Program (2006). When 63 percent of voters approved an allocation of $55 million, Austin for the first time in its history used general obligation bond funding for affordable housing. Through May 2012, the Housing Bond Program had created or retained 3,055 housing units, of which 73 percent are affordable to households earning 30 to 50 percent of MFI. DEVELOPER INCENTIVES • S.M.A.R.T. Housing™ (2000). S.M.A.R.T. Housing is an incentive program designed to encourage accessible, mixed-income development by providing development fee waivers and an expedited review process for developers who set aside 10 percent of housing units as affordable (S.M.A.R.T. stands for Safe, Mixed-income, Accessible, Reasonably priced, and Transit oriented.) Units must also meet the Austin Energy Green Building Program minimum energy efficiency rating. The program has produced 15,351 units affordable to households earning 80 percent of MFI or less. • Vertical Mixed Use (2007). Commercial design standards provide a density bonus and parking standards exemptions in exchange for 10 percent of housing units in mixed-use developments being designated as affordable. These units must be maintained as affordable for 40 years for rental, and 99 years for ownership. The program has produced 41 units to date. • University Neighborhood Overlay (2004). A density bonus and entitlements are provided to developers who set aside housing as affordable in the University of Texas at Austin campus area. Two tiers of affordability are required—10 percent of units for households earning at or below 80 percent of MFI, and 10 percent of units for households at or below 65 percent of MFI. To date, 117 units have been constructed at 50 percent of MFI, ten at 65 percent of MFI, and 357 units at 80 percent of MFI. • The Downtown Density Bonus Program (2013) and the East Riverside Corridor Program (2013). Height-density bonus programs encourage production of affordable “Because of GO Bond funding, the City of Austin has reaped direct and indirect benefits including increased income (through wages), increased local taxes (both property and sales), and increased local jobs.” Betsy Spencer Director, City of Austin Neighborhood Housing and Community Development A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report42 housing in downtown Austin and in a neighborhood recommended for a future high-capacity transit route. • Transit-Oriented Development (2009). Affordable housing goals have been established through individual station-area plans for areas within a half mile of the Capital Metro commuter rail stations. The overall goal is for 25 percent of all new housing units in the transit-oriented development areas to be occupied by households earning at or below 80 percent of MFI for homeownership or at or below 60 percent of MFI for rental. PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS • Robert Mueller Municipal Airport Redevelopment (1996–present). In a key public/private partnership for the city, the Mueller development when complete will have about 1,200 housing units affordable for households earning at or below 80 percent of Austin’s MFI for ownership and 60 percent of MFI for rental. • Private Developer Agreements—Case by Case. The city continues to negotiate the inclusion of affordable housing in development agreements with market-rate developers to bring affordability into developments that otherwise would be unaffordable to low- and moderate- income households. These units must remain affordable through 2020. IMPACT STATEMENTS • Affordability Impact Statements (2000). Required by Austin’s S.M.A.R.T. Housing™ ordinance, an affordability impact statement (AIS) is prepared by a city staff member for all proposed city code amendments, ordinances, and other proposed changes to identify any potential impacts on housing affordability. To date, Austin has issued more than 150 affordability impact statements. Austin’s multifaceted approach to meeting the city’s need for affordable housing—from zoning to streamlining development approvals, transit, and green construction—provides an effective way to consider housing needs in a variety of contexts. While individual programs have an impact, it is the combination of tools that is most powerful, reflecting commit- ted leadership from the city as well as the willingness of Austin residents to step up and vote for bonds for affordable housing. “Austin’s commitment to providing affordable housing is strong, and our citizens expect the City of Austin to take action on this critical issue. I believe Austin’s affordable housing bond votes were successful in 2006 and 2013 because Austinites wanted to see affordable housing in all parts of our city and believe we all benefit from providing affordable housing for low income families.” Mandy DeMayo HousingWorks Austin Austin, Texas For more information about the Terwilliger Center Awards,see www.uli.org/terwilligeraward. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 43 Philip Payne Panel Chair Charlotte, North Carolina For more than 25 years, Payne’s primary focus has been the development, acquisition, rehabilitation, and manage- ment of middle market (workforce) multifamily housing. During his career, Payne has been involved in more than $4 billion in multifamily related transactions. Payne is currently the chief executive officer of Ginkgo Residential, which was formed in July 2010. Ginkgo provides property management services for multifamily properties in the southeastern United States and is actively involved in the acquisition and substantial rehabilitation of middle market multifamily properties. He is a principal in Ginkgo Investment Company, which was formed in July 2013 and which invests in multifamily properties in the southeastern United States. From 2007 to 2010, Payne served as the CEO of Babcock & Brown Residential. Before joining Babcock & Brown Residential, he was the chair of BNP Residential Properties Trust, a publicly traded real estate investment trust that was acquired by Babcock & Brown Ltd.—a publicly traded Australian investment bank—in February 2007. In addition to his duties at Ginkgo, Payne is a member of the board of directors of Ashford Hospitality Trust, a New York Stock Exchange–listed real estate investment trust that is focused on the hospitality industry. Payne is a trustee and governor of the ULI. He is a mem- ber of ULI’s Responsible Property Investing Council (found- ing chair); is a former cochair of the Institute’s Climate, Land Use, and Energy Committee; and currently serves as a member of the advisory board for ULI’s Center for Sustainability. He is a member of the National Multifamily Housing Council. Payne received a BS and a JD degree from the College of William & Mary in Virginia. He has written for various pub- lications and spoken at numerous conferences on a variety of topics including real estate investment trusts, securi- ties regulations, finance, workforce housing, responsible property investing, sustainability, and resilience. Hilary Chapman Washington, D.C. Chapman is the housing program manager for the Met- ropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG). At COG, Chapman collaborates with regional leaders to solve the challenges of homelessness and affordable housing and provides research and analysis to support local hous- ing policy and practice using a regional solutions-based framework. As the lead staff person for two technical committees on housing and homelessness, Chapman collaborates with COG’s other departments to integrate housing consider- ations into related fields of health, transportation, and the environment. In her role as lead staff person for the Home- less Services Committee, she helps coordinate the annual regional homeless enumeration that takes place during the last week of January each year, and she is the principal author of the committee’s findings, “Homelessness in Metropolitan Washington.” Chapman collaborates with COG’s housing and planning partners, serving as an advisory board member for the Northern Virginia Affordable Housing Alliance, a participant and convener of the Greater Washington Housing Leaders Group, and a planning member for the Housing Association About the Panel A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report44 of Nonprofit Developers’ annual meeting. She participated in the ULI Washington’s Regional Land Use Leadership Institute and is active in ULI’s Housing Initiative Council. She also volunteers weekly at a program site in the District of Columbia with the Homeless Children’s Playtime Project. Before joining COG, Chapman spent nearly a decade as an affordable housing developer, working with public housing authorities nationally primarily through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s HOPE VI program to redevelop its most distressed housing units. She had direct responsibility for the construction of more than 250 afford- able housing units and the planning and financing of more than 1,000 more. She also served the government of the District of Columbia as a Capital City Fellow. Chapman holds a master’s degree in city planning from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and an under- graduate degree in sociology from the College of William and Mary in Virginia. Ian Colgan Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Colgan is the assistant executive director of the Oklahoma City Housing Authority, one of the largest public housing authorities in the country with 3,100 public housing units and more than 4,000 housing choice vouchers. Colgan leads all real estate development, planning, and policy initiatives for the authority. He was previously the assistant planning director for Oklahoma City, where he spearheaded the production of the city’s Comprehensive Plan, Downtown Planning Framework, and several commercial district plans, as well as the creation of two new tax increment finance districts. Colgan was also formerly principal with Development Concepts Inc., a redevelopment consulting firm that is based in Indianapolis, Indiana, where he prepared market- based studies and redevelopment plans for communities throughout the Midwest and Southeast. Colgan holds a master’s degree in urban planning from the University of Washington, a master’s degree in business administration from Anderson University, and a bachelor’s degree from Kalamazoo College. He has been a member of ULI since 2012 and participates on the Urban Revitaliza- tion Product Council. JoAnne Fiebe Tampa, Florida Fiebe is a research faculty member and adjunct instruc- tor at the Florida Center for Community Design and Research—a statewide research center at the University of South Florida’s School of Architecture and Community Design. Through her work at the Florida Center, Fiebe provides design expertise, performs applied research, and manages community engagement programs to address urban challenges related to the built environment. Fiebe has 13 years of experience in both the public and private sectors while managing a range of urban design and planning projects. Before coming to the Florida Center, she worked for the Fairfax County Office of Community Revitalization on long-range planning, economic develop- ment, and policy for transit-oriented development districts in the Washington, D.C., metro area. Her previous experi- ence included managing entitlements for large residential and mixed-use projects at several development firms. For the past seven years, she has served on the board of a nonprofit urban design collaborative, the Urban Char- rette, which cultivates knowledge of leading urban design practices to build vibrant cities. She also teaches graduate courses at the University of South Florida about city plan- ning and sustainable urban development. Fiebe earned her degrees in architecture from the Uni- versity of Miami and a master’s of urban and community design from the University of South Florida, where she also worked at the Center for Urban Transportation Research and coauthored a study on transit and bicycle lanes. She has been published in the Transportation Research Board and in the National Civic Review, and her research was cited in the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. In her career, Fiebe has led more than 20 public planning projects including over a dozen community engagement Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 45 charrettes. She participated in ULI’s Regional Land Use and Leadership Institute and was a resource team member for two Mayor’s Institute for City Design programs. She is a member of the American Planning Association and the Urban Land Institute, is LEED accredited, and is a certified charrette planner. Lacy McManus New Orleans, Louisiana As the director of program development for Greater New Orleans (GNO) Inc.—the economic development alli- ance for the ten-parish New Orleans region—McManus is responsible for relationships and for the coordination between product and business development. McManus has positioned the organization’s workforce and environ- mental and resilience initiatives as catalysts for wealth generation in southeast Louisiana. In this role, she acts as a liaison between GNO Inc. and private philanthropies, business community stakeholders, government agencies, and nonprofit partners to ensure that GNO Inc.’s programs create a thriving regional economy. Specifically, McManus oversees GNO Inc.’s Coalition for Coastal Resilience and Economy, a business-led advocacy campaign for holistic coastal restoration in south Louisi- ana. She also coordinates GNO’s workforce development programs, including an award-winning outreach series to local educators, as well as ongoing engagements with regional higher-education institutions. In 2015, she worked with the state of Louisiana and New Orleans to bring in more than $233 million in resilience funds to the region through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban De- velopment’s National Disaster Resilience Competition. On the federal front, McManus serves on GNO’s policy team advancing reauthorization of the National Flood Insur- ance Program through the Coalition for Sustainable Flood Insurance. She also represents GNO on the Housing NOLA Leadership Team and CONNECT Coalition. Before joining the GNO staff, McManus was the special initiatives manager with the nonprofit organization the Center for Planning Excellence, where she oversaw an innovative transportation, land use, and housing policy and advocacy campaign. She has branding and communica- tions experience from several years living and working abroad in both Auroville, India, and in Paris, France. She is an active member of the Junior League of New Orleans, a board member of the public transit advocacy organiza- tion RIDE New Orleans, an alumna of the 2016 Emerging Philanthropist of New Orleans class, and a lead mentor to entrepreneurs in the Propeller small business incubator. McManus holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Georgia’s Grady School of Journalism, a master’s degree in global communications from the American University of Paris, and a master’s degree in business administration from Tulane University. John Orfield Dallas, Texas Orfield is both the product and a proponent of the collaborative style that BOKA Powell exemplifies. The 40-year-old planning and design firm, which is based in Dallas, specializes in corporate and commercial office, higher education, hospitality, urban living, and senior living. A LEED-accredited professional, Orfield is an expert in urban planning and sustainability. His 35 years of design experience includes landmark workplace, academic, luxury hotel, and residential projects across the United States and Mexico. Growing up in an artistically inclined family, Orfield devel- oped an interest in exploring the kinship between archi- tecture, film, and dance—art forms he sees as related in their portrayal of human experience moving through space and time. He has sought out collaborative environments or created them on the spot in design firms and universi- ties from New York to Indianapolis to Mexico City. Orfield considers every project a partnership, not only between the architect and the client, but also with the site itself. He sees this contextual approach as one reason there is no recognizable BOKA Powell “style”—only spaces that A ULI Advisory Services Panel Report46 benefit their surroundings as the result of a very intentional design process. Orfield’s recent projects include major projects for South- west Airlines, including the carrier’s corporate headquar- ters master plan, the 1.1 million-square-foot “Wings” Office Building, the Flight Training Center and Garage, and the 500,000-square-foot Training and Operations Support Center at Dallas’s Love Field. Other projects include the Texas A&M West Campus student housing complex, which is designed to accommodate 4,000 students in College Station, Texas; the Venue at the Ballpark, which is a 241- unit apartment complex overlooking the Birmingham Bar- ons ballpark; the Hotel Ajax, which is a boutique hotel and condominium project in Telluride, Colorado; and multiple corporate and commercial office projects for Hillwood and Cawley Partners in North Texas. Orfield’s higher education portfolio includes more than 5.5 million square feet of university architecture, including student housing and academic buildings. He has designed corporate headquarters campuses for Accor, Daimler Chrysler, Mercedes-Benz, and Computer Associates. While a vice-president at Browning Day Mullins Dierdorf Inc., he completed the iconic 400,000-square-foot Eli Lilly Corporate Center in downtown Indianapolis. In 1996, Orfield joined Dallas-based architecture and plan- ning firm HaldemanPowell+Partners. Now known as BOKA Powell, he became a partner and owner in the practice in 1999. Earlier, Orfield was a vice president at Indianapolis- based Browning Day Mullins Dierdorf Inc. from 1988 to 1994. He worked in numerous architectural intern positions in Houston, Texas; New Haven, Connecticut; and New York City, including an undergraduate internship with Mitchell Giurgola. He earned a master’s degree in archi- tecture and building design from Columbia University in 1987. He earned his first bachelor’s degree in architecture in 1980 and a second bachelor’s of architecture in 1982 from Rice University in Houston. A lifelong educator, Orfield was a member of the fac- ulty of the University of Houston College of Architecture from 1984 to 1986, where he earned the Excellence in Teaching award. He also held an appointment as a visiting professor at the Universidad de las Americas in Puebla, Mexico, from 1994 to 1995. Cassie Wright Denver, Colorado Wright is the project manager for Urban Ventures LLC, a real estate company that is dedicated to creating healthy, sustainable communities. In her position, Wright works on all aspects of real estate development: from land acquisi- tion to project construction. She tests the financial feasibil- ity of projects, actively participates in the site planning and design processes, develops marketing and sales related materials, and closely interacts with project partners. In addition, Wright consults on real estate projects that focus on the relationship between the built environment and healthy living. In this role, she researches and implements best practices and health-based programming to foster community development that promotes social cohesion and positive wellbeing. Currently, Wright is involved with the land development of Aria Denver, a 17.5-acre, mixed-use, mixed-income project that will include more than 450 units and a commercial component. Upon completion, Aria Denver will promote healthy living with community gardens, production farms, a food-producing greenhouse, pocket parks, outdoor fitness equipment, and pathways integrated into the site. Aria Denver is part of Cultivate Health, a partnership among neighboring Regis University, the surrounding neighbor- hoods, and more than a dozen nonprofit organizations. Funded in large part by the Colorado Health Foundation, Cultivate Health is providing infrastructure enhancements and programming that promote an active lifestyle, increase access to healthy food, and offer integrated health services. Wright is co-manager of the Colorado Health Foundation grant and is managing the implementation of three major infrastructure projects (i.e., production farms, improved bicycle facilities, and neighborhood wellness loop) that are included in the Cultivate Health initiative. Collier County, Florida, January 29–February 3, 2017 47 Wright is also actively working on the Aria Cohousing proj- ect. Cohousing communities are intentional, collaborative neighborhoods that combine private homes and shared spaces. In cohousing, residents actively participate in the design and operation of their neighborhoods while sharing common facilities and good connections with neighbors. Aria Cohousing is the redevelopment of a 35,000-square- foot convent into 28 condominium units and shared community spaces including a community dining room, kitchen, multipurpose room, guest room, and sunroom. Finally, Wright is project manager for STEAM on the Platte, a 3.2-acre, mixed-use project in Denver’s abandoned, industrial corridor along the Platte River. In its first phase, STEAM will feature the conversion of an existing 65,000-square-foot industrial warehouse into office space and the creation of a courtyard and promenade that con- nects to the river’s edge. Wright holds a master’s degree in city planning from the University of Pennsylvania and a bachelor’s degree in soci- ology and anthropology from St. Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota. She serves on the nonprofit board for Soul Spring, as well as on the Mile High Connects Advisory Council. A ULI Advisory Services Panel ReportA ULI Advisory Services Panel Report♼ Printed on recycled paper. 2001 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 www.uli.org Collier_Cover.indd 1 5/17/17 11:17 AM COLLIER BLVDTURNER RIVER ROADSR 29INTERSTATE 75 IMMOKALEE RD OIL WELL RD COLLIER BLVDTAMIAMI TRL E CR 846 SR 82 LIVINGSTON RDSR 29 NSAN MARCO RDTAMIAMI TRL NDAVIS BLVDGOODLETTE RD NPINE RIDGE RD EVERGLADES BLVD NRADIO RD GOLDEN GATE PKY DESOTO BLVD SLOGAN BLVD NSANTA BARBARA BLVDDESOTO BLVD NVANDERBILT BEACH RD GOLDEN GATE BLVD EVANDERBILT DREVERGLADES BLVD SAIRPORT PULLING RD CORKSCREW RDGOLDEN GATE BLVD W CO P E L A N D A V E S9TH ST NS 1ST STN 15TH STB A L D E A G L E D R N B A R F I E L D D R GREEN BLVDOLD US 41LAKE TRAFFORD RD RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD WILSON BLVD NN COLLIER BLVDS BARFIELD DRCOUNTY BARN RDS COLL IER BLVD BONITA BEACH RD 111TH AVE N COLLIER AVENE W M A R K E T R D W WILSON BLVD SW MAIN ST WIGGINS PASS RD 9TH ST SSEAGATE DR I-75 S I-75 NSR 29Tamiami TRL E Oil Well RD Immokalee RD Collier BLVDEverglades BLVDSR 82 CR 846 E Livingston RDDesoto BLVDSan Marco RDAirport RD NTamiami TRL NSR 29 NWilson BLVDDavis BLVD Pine Ridge RD Radio RD Logan BLVD NVanderbilt Beach RDVanderbilt DRGoodlette-Frank RD NRandall BLVD Golden Gate PKWY Camp Keais RDCorkscrew RDSanta Barbara BLVDGolden Gate BLVD E 9th ST NOld 41Bald Eagle DRN Collier BL V D Westclox ST Thomasson DR E M a i n S T Bayshore DRSmallwood DRI-75 NI-75 SBayshore DRI- 7 5 S I-75 SI-75 SI-75 N °HENDRY COUNTYMONROE COUNTY LEE COUNTY HENDRY COUNTY 2012-2025FUTURE LAND USE MAPCollier County Florida DETAILS OF THE RLSA OVERLAY AREA ARE SHOWNON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TITLED:"COLLIER COUNTY RURAL & AGRICULTURAL AREA ASSESSMENT STEWARDSHIP OVERLAY MAP" BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVECOUNTY PARK DELNOR- WIGGINS STATE PARK CLAM PASSCOUNTY PARK CLAMBAYNRPA ROOKERY BAYNATIONAL ESTUARINERESEARCH RESERVE CITYOFNAPLES TIGERTAIL BEACHCOUNTY PARK CITY OF MARCO ISLAND COLLIER-SEMINOLE STATE PARK CAPE ROMANO PORTOF THEISLANDS CAPE ROMANO - TEN THOUSAND ISLANDSAQUATIC PRESERVE EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK CHOKOLOSKEE PLANTATIONISLAND EVERGLADESCITY COPELAND BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL PRESERVE FAKAHATCHEE STRAND PRESERVE STATE PARK FLORIDA PANTHER NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SOUTH GOLDENGATE ESTATESNRPA BELLEMEADENRPA NORTHBELLEMEADENRPA IMMOKALEE CORKSCREWSWAMPSANCTUARY CREWNRPA LAKETRAFFORD R 25 E R 26 E R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E T 46 ST 47 ST 48 ST 49 ST 50 ST 51 ST 52 ST 53 SR 25 E R 26 E R 27 E R 28 E R 29 E R 30 E R 31 E R 32 E R 33 E R 34 ET 46 ST 47 ST 48 ST 49 ST 50 ST 51 ST 52 ST 53 S!"#$75 !"#$75 !"#$75 !"#$75 !"#$75 !"#$75 !"#$75 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 Æþ41 GOODLANDGulfofMex i c o 0 1 2 3 4 50.5 Miles J ?EXEMPTAREA PREPARED BY: BETH YANG, AICPGIS/CAD MAPPING SECTIONGROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTFILE: FLU_2022_0122.mxdDATE: 1/21/2022 GOLDEN GATE Veterans Memorial BLVD R 32 E R 33 E R 34 E (1) THIS MAP CAN NOT BE INTERPRETED WITHOUT THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWITH MANAGEMENT PLAN.(2) THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES INCLUDES NUMEROUS MAPS IN ADDITION TO THIS COUNTYWIDE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THESE MAPS ARE LISTED AND LOCATED AT THE END OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT.(3) MOST SUBDISTRICTS AS DEPICTED MAY NOT BE TO SCALE. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES DEPICTS THESE SUBDISTRICTS TO SCALE.(4) THE CONSERVATION DESIGNATION IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS AREAS ARE ACQUIRED AND MAY INCLUDE OUTPARCELS. (5) REFER TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND THE IMMOKALEE ARE MASTER PLAN FOR FUTURE LAND USE MAPS OF THOSE COMMUNITIES. NOTE : RURAL FRINGEMIXED USE DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL / RURAL DESIGNATION AGRICULTURAL/RURAL MIXED USE DISTRICT Conservation Designation Estates Designation FUTURE LAND USE MAP ADOPTED - JANUARY, 1989 AMENDED - JANUARY, 1990 AMENDED - FEBRUARY, 1991 AMENDED - MAY, 1992 AMENDED - MAY, 1993 AMENDED - APRIL, 1994 AMENDED - OCTOBER, 1997 AMENDED - JANUARY, 1998 AMENDED - FEBRUARY, 1999 AMENDED - FEBRUARY, 2000 AMENDED - MAY, 2000 AMENDED - DECEMBER, 2000 AMENDED - MARCH, 2001 AMENDED - MAY 14, 2002(Ord. No. 2002-24)AMENDED - JUNE 19, 2002(Ord. No. 2002-32)AMENDED - OCTOBER 22, 2002(Ord. No. 2002-54) AMENDED - FEBRUARY 11, 2003(Ord. No. 2003-7)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 9, 2003(Ord. No. 2003-43)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 10, 2003(Ord. No. 2003-44) AMENDED - DECEMBER 16, 2003(Ord. No. 2003-67)AMENDED - OCTOBER 26, 2004(Ord. No. 2004-71) AMENDED - JUNE 7, 2005(Ord. No. 2005-25)AMENDED - JANUARY 25, 2007(Ord. No. 2007-18)AMENDED - DECEMBER 4, 2007(Ord. No. 2007-78,79,81)AMENDED - OCTOBER 14, 2008(Ord. No. 2008-57,58,59) AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 13, 2011(Ord. No. 2011-26)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 13, 2011(Ord. No. 2011-27)AMENDED - JANUARY 8, 2013(Ord. No. 2013-14)AMENDED - MAY 28, 2013(Ord. No. 2013-41)AMENDED - JUNE 10, 2014(Ord. No. 2014-20) AMENDED - FEBRUARY 10, 2015(Ord. No. 2015-13)AMENDED - APRIL 14, 2015(Ord. No. 2015-26) AMENDED - JUNE 9, 2015(Ord. No. 2015-32)AMENDED - JULY 7, 2015(Ord. No. 2015-42) AMENDED - MAY 24, 2016(Ord. No. 2016-15)AMENDED - JUNE 13, 2017(Ord. No. 2017-22)AMENDED - DECEMBER 12, 2017(Ord. No. 2017-46)AMENDED - MAY 8, 2018(Ord. No. 2018-23)AMENDED - JUNE 12, 2018(Ord. No. 2018-30)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 11, 2018(Ord. No. 2018-42)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 25, 2018(Ord. No. 2018-48)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 24, 2019(Ord. No. 2019-21)AMENDED - OCTOBER 8, 2019(Ord. No. 2019-33) Neutral Lands Sending Lands Receiving Lands Rural Industrial District Rural Settlement Area District RURAL COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT Corkscrew Island Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict AMENDED - JUNE 9, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-15)AMENDED - JULY 14, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-21) Meridian Village Mixed Use Subdistrict Vanderbilt Beach Road Mixed Use Subdistrict AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 22, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-25) OVERLAYS ANDSPECIAL FEATURES Area of Critical State Concern Overlay Airport Noise Area Overlay Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Area Overlay North Belle Meade Overlay Incorporated Areas Coastal High Hazard Area NC Square Mixed-Use Overlay AMENDED - OCTOBER 13, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-31)AMENDED - OCTOBER 27, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-34) AMENDED - NOVEMBER 10, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-42)AMENDED - MARCH 1, 2021(Ord. No. 2021-08) AMENDED - OCTOBER 27, 2020(Ord. No. 2020-36) AMENDED - APRIL 27, 2021(Ord. No. 2021-17)AMENDED - SEPTEMBER 28, 2021(Ord. No. 2021-32) RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK SUBDISTRICT COMMERCIAL MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT Hibiscus Residential Infill Subdistrict Livingston Road / Radio Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Vanderbilt Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict Collier Blvd Community Facility Subdistrict Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Mini Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict East Tamiami Trail Commercial Infill Subdistrict COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BUSINESS PARK SUBDISTRICTRESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK SUBDISTRICT Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict Livingston / Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Industrial District BUSINESS PARK SUBDISTRICTRESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARK SUBDISTRICT Livingston Road / Eatonwood Lane Commercial Infill Subdistrict Livingston Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Seed To TableCommercial Subdistrict Vanderbilt Beach CommercialTourist Subdistrict COMMERCIAL MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT Livingston Road / Veterans Memorial Blvd. Commercial Infill Subdistrict Orange Blossom / Airport CrossroadsCommercial Subdistrict Davis-Radio Commercial Subdistrict Logan Blvd./Immokalee Rd. Commercial Infill Subdistrict Germain Immokalee Commercial Subdistrict Greeway - Tamiami Trail East Commercial Subdistrict Bay House Campus Commercial Subdistrict URBAN DESIGNATION MIXED USE DISTRICT BUSINESS PARK SUBDISTRICTOFFICE AND INFILL COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICTPUD NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE CENTER SUBDISTRICTRESIDENTIAL MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDISTRICT Urban Residential Subdistrict Residential Density Bands Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict Vanderbilt Beach / Coller Blvd. Commercial Subdistrict Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict Goodlette / Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict Livingston Road / Veterans MemorialBoulevard East Residential Subdistrict Ventana Pointe Residential Overlay Immokalee Road Interchange Residential Infill Subdistrict Creekside Commerce Park East Mixed Use Subdistrict AMENDED - OCTOBER 26, 2021(Ord. No. 2021-36)